Here are the new rankings from the "Top 10 Obstacles to Project Success" survey. We received appreciation for our ongoing efforts, and confirmation from participants that our list captured the essence of the obstacles to project success faced by Project Managers, Team Leaders, Program Managers, and Senior Management. Here are the results listed in order of frequency;
#1: Changes to project scope (scope creep) Same as last year!
#2: Insufficient time to complete the project (up from #8 last year!)
#3: Resources are inadequate (excluding funding)
#4: Inadequate project testing
#5: Critical project tasks are delivered late
#6: Key team members lack adequate authority
#7: Insufficient project funding
#8: Critical requirements are unspecified or missing (down from #2 last year!)
#9: Key team members lack critical skills
#10: Project sponsor is unavailable to approve strategic decisions (down from #3 last year!)
We've had some interesting changes between the 2008 and 2009 surveys. Obstacles such as the Challenging Schedule, Invisible Requirements, and most notably, The Disappearing Sponsor have moved in their ranking.
What do you think causes these obstacles? What are some potential solutions?
Upcoming blogs; We have interesting information to share about how the obstacles were ranked by individuals from different regions of the world, early detection symptoms, and mitigation strategies.
We want to hear from you feel free to comment!
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Playing "Hot Potato in a culture of blame" seems to be the norm in project management environments these days. Have you ever been on a project where mistakes weren't made? Let's grow up! If you've been doing this long enough, you know what I am talking about. How about we focus less on WHO is to blame, and more about fixing issues AS SOON as they appear? Addressing issues such as scope creep requires the Project Manager to reveal that problems exist. If that is the equivalent to committing project management suicide, then a project's success is nothing short of dumb luck.
WELL SAID "GetReal"! I love it! Lets prescribe Project Reality Checks!
Understanding the environment that a Project evolves in is TANTAMOUNT to success, and a fundamental CAUSE (no doubts) of all or most of the obstacles listed in the Top '10'.
Lou G
Some have said corporations are societies in and of themselves. They have their own cultures and behaviors. Personally, I've found many organizations to exhibit protectionist behavior (especially these days). I've found technology departments express this temperament a lot. Many believe this is due to how money and budgets are managed.
So, GetReal, the answer to your question is the same answer of 'how do you change a society'?
[Leadership Conch Shell Blows]
Much like a revolutionary effort, a change in society is stewarded through a call to arms (Leaders / leadership are the weapons of the day).
Top-level leadership needs to foster more effective relationships across corporate divisions and break down the master / slave relationship with the budget. They also need to sponsor behavior / societal change expectations downward.
Low-level leadership needs to bind together and drive out fear and replace it with managed risk, creativity, effective problem solving, accountability, motivation and communications. Muscle-memory needs to be built so ... the old adage; 'you play like you practice' rings true.
Finally (at least for this pontificated post); you've got to satisfy Maslow ... you've got to set up compensation to reinforce the behavior that's expected.
Here ye, Here ye! No taxation without representation. No work without motivation. ;)
And the motivational needs are so varied its unfathomable that any manager could know them without asking.
Then the managers live in their own hell, where protectinism thrives. And pretty soon believe that their own motivational factors drive everyones.
So, there you have it, once the manager loses his ability to communicate clearly, motivate optimally, and effectuate accountability their team shuts down, or at best looses effectiveness.
So, Lou ... how would you apply the Motivation / Accountability / Communication triage to changing an organizational society that exudes protectionist behavior. What are your thoughts about the disparate relationship (seemingly) between the funding organizations and the technology (or project) groups?
Heh, would you accept. "That all depends." Sorry.
The issue is complex. The answer's simple.
Lets take the disparate elements you proposed; Changing an organization's behaviour (culture) from protectionist (siloed?) to...'X'.
And then overlay...some gap whether it be small/large between fiscal, and technical management.
And you have a famous 2x2 graph! Someone extremely intelligent said to me, "1st thing you need in your powerpoint is a 2x2 graph."
So lets start there...
Across the X axis we'll measure from left to right Protectionist (Siloed) to Cooperative, and across the Y we'll measure from bottom to top Huge Gap between Fiscal, and Technical Management coordination, to No-Gap between Fiscal and Technical Management Coordination.
So, starting in the upper right quadrant you see organizations that are more cooperative than most, and have more synchronization between their fiscal, and technical management. The odds are this organization has personnel that is communicating effectively, properly motivated, and accountable...time to maintain those skill sets, and not let them fester.
Both the upper left, and lower right quadrants will need some help to stabilize them. One is more protectionist than most and the other less syncrhonized between the Fiscal, and Technical management than most. Both are probably having communication, or motivational, or accountability issues. In one case, or another, change is already brewing. There are probably alot of heated arguments, things are happening to shake up the 'ship' so to speak. Turn up the HEAT!!! Until the kettle speaks, the water's not ready, and this water's about the perk!
And finally, we have the lower left quadrant. All protectionist, and no synchroniation (your point, I think.) Well, here we have a stagnated organization. The lack of synchronization is like an anchor to any good initiative, and the protectionist attitude like wanna-be insurmountable obstacles. Here the question is... does the organization's management want the organization to progress? If it does, then, management needs to act. And the primary skill sets they have to utilize to eradicate the obstacles will be to communicate clearly, motivate effectively, and effecuate accountability.
Primarily because its mostly lacking.
So, in summary...(Thought I wouldn't get here eh?)... an organization faced with a protectionist attitude, and a disparate relationship between fiscal, and technical management groups WITH A PROJECT TO GET DONE, needs a project manager with unquestionably terrific skills at...
...Communicating Clearly
...Motivating Effectively
...Effectuating Accountability
A great project life-cycle suite of processes, and automation will help tremendously.
Failing that, the project in this case would be left to the ebb and flow of the environment created by these protectionist, and disparate advocates.
;0
Post a Comment