At a time when certain organizations successfully implement their projects, others still achieve only average results; studies suggest that average or poor results are a result of poorly planned projects.
So, how do you identify a poorly planned project? Let's see:
- Planning does not exist: By far the biggest problem with planning is the lack of plans, and this is a sin that is very easy to avoid. A person does not have to be an expert to be able to plan effectively. There are countless examples in which amateur-led projects were successfully completed simply due to the fact that all the people involved in the project discussed it at great length. If you need to choose between experts in planning who do not go into detail regarding the plan and amateurs who will go through a project thoroughly, I would suggest that you always choose the amateurs.
- Insufficient attention given to specific project activities: Some project plans are dependent on the idea that nobody in the project team will get sick, go to training, take a vacation, or simply quit. Key activities are generally underestimated—plans that are based on unrealistic assumptions are generally the worst ones. There are many variations of these. Some projects simply ignore the fact that it is necessary to create and (if for example, we take software products) set programs, convert data from old or previous versions of the program, to prepare for the transition to a new software solution, carry out detailed testing of the compatibility, and do all the other unexpected work that still exists in the project, but the majority of managers ignored this because it is was not part of the execution of the basic functionality. Sometimes, projects have been delayed because of trying to make up for lost time by reducing the time planned to test the products.
- Lack of risk management: For most projects, actively avoiding errors is essential. In most business environments, the word risk is generally not mentioned until the project is in deep trouble. A project manager who uses the word risk every day but does not include risk management in his plans is probably not doing his job properly.
- The use of the same project plan for each project: Some organizations develop their approaches and methodologies to manage projects, an approach known as the way we do it here. When organizations use this approach, any new project that is similar to the old project has a good chance of success. However, when a new project is not like the old project, the use of existing plans for the management of the project can be detrimental to the project. Good project plans always address the specific conditions in which the project grows. Most of the elements can be reused, but the project managers must carefully consider where a particular element of the previous plan can be applied in the environment of the new project.
- Simplified templates for project plans: No outside expert can fully understand the specific needs of the project as the people who are directly involved in the project - those who create the actual project plan - must adjust the expert's plan according to the requirements of their project. Experience has shown that project managers usually have enough knowledge to choose which parts of the templates can be used in a project.
- The project plan is not realistic: The usual approach to planning involves creating a project plan at the beginning of the project, which is then postponed somewhere on a shelf and collects dust during the rest of the project. As the project requirements change, the plan becomes incomplete and invalid, so that already somewhere the project purpose is lost, and there is no connection between the original and the actual project plan.
- An overly detailed plan too early in the project: Some managers of projects will try to anticipate the whole project and all activities related to it as early as possible. However, most of the project consists of constantly changing the set of decisions that affect the actual running of the project—one design phase creates dependency for another project phase, and so on. So, how do managers predict the future without a crystal ball? How do they try to plan activities that are almost unpredictable and are really just an exercise in bureaucracy, which is almost as bad as the complete absence of a project plan?
The more effort that is invested in the creation of a very detailed project plan in the early stages of the project, the more likely it is that the end result of the plan will be gathering dust on a shelf somewhere (mortal sin #6). While no one likes to throw away something that has had a lot of effort invested into it, managers sometimes try to foresee the reality of the project to adjust the previously defined plans with the current case scenario. I believe that good governance projects are like driving a car with the lights on at night. The driver can have a map that will tell them how to get from city A to city B, but the driver can only ever see in advance what car lights illuminate. For the medium-sized and large projects, it is necessary to make high-level project plans affecting processes from the start to the finish of the project. Detailed, micro-level plans must be developed at the stage of planning for the next few weeks, or if the project allows for it, using the just in time principle of planning:
- Planning post-completion tasks: A typical mistake that leads to projects being delayed is planning with buffer times, to compensate for a delay later in the project. The thinking behind this is that the team struggled at the start of the project, and so we had to learn from their mistakes. However, now that we have passed that stage, we know what to do and are able to quickly complete the project—wrong! Studies show that projects rarely make up for lost time—quite the opposite. Most projects continue to waste time during the entire course of the project. This error comes down to thinking that project teams make their most important decisions relatively early in the project—the time for adopting new technologies, new business knowledge, and new methodologies.
As teams continue to work on the project, the project is not accelerating; on the contrary, it slows down as the team deals with the consequences of incorrect decisions that were previously made, and so more time is spent correcting the consequences of these decisions. - Not learning from mistakes: The greatest mortal sin that someone can commit is not to learn from the mistakes that were made. Projects can last a long time, and human memories can become less vivid over time. By the end of a long project, it will be difficult to remember all the decisions that affected the project. One of the best ways to cope with this problem and thus prevent some other mortal sins from occurring is to conduct a structured project postmortem examination. A postmortem examination may not erase the sins that were made during the project, but it will certainly help to ensure that the same ones are not repeated in future projects.
Speaking of work tasks, it is essential that you do not confuse the difference between working tasks and activities. Although some sources separate their meanings, it is better to identify them and thus inherently simplify the understanding of what the project should do. So, what exactly is an assignment? A task is a unit of work that can be performed by one or two employees, taking no more than two weeks (at least according to one of the countless definitions). Where are these guidelines commonly used? If an assignment must be performed by more than two employees, it is probably a good sign that it should be broken into subtasks.
If an assignment lasts longer than two weeks, it will likely be more complicated to keep track the current task and whether it will successfully complete. So, why the emphasis on work tasks? Well, according to the theory of planning, well-defined work tasks will not only simplify the execution of the project but will also determine which resources they need and how long the project will ultimately take. The price of resources, or the cost of the project (depending on whether you are considering the time/material or a fixed-fee cost approach) are the two main things that you will discuss with upper management. Or with its direct manager, depending on whether you're doing well or the project is in trouble.