A Project Sponsor walked into a bar …
by jed simms on February 12, 2010
He was upset. His project was off the rails and he could not understand why.
They had defined the problem and found what was supposed to be the best software solution, from the company’s preferred supplier.
They had skipped defining the current state (‘as is’) so as to not waste time on the past.
They had defined the ‘to be’ to ensure minimal customisations and yet they were not being successful. The users kept finding things wrong with the new system.
The benefits, which looked great in the business case, were diminishing monthly.
The governance team was deserting him, sending proxies or resigning all together.
How it was all going to work and come together was still unclear. He had been asked by the CEO what his area would look like after the system was installed – he could not easily answer the question.
He was looking at both a cost and time overrun – but the remaining value hardly justified it.
When he asked why this was all happening, he was told that this is quite usual.
“There must be a better way,” he thought.
Another Project Sponsor walked into the bar …
She was happy. Her project was nearing completion ahead of time and under budget.
The first Sponsor asked her why she was so happy – how come she was so in control of her project?
“Simple,” she replied.
“We started with our end defined. We defined our desired business outcomes – the business end states we wanted to achieve.
“We analysed the current state in detail and then defined our new requirements in terms of simplified process – how we want to do business, complete and make money in the future.
“We developed a business case based on a set of change plans that would move us from our current state to the new end states with their attendant benefits and value.
“My governance team took on the role of protecting this value – religiously. No scope changes or deviations without a full value-impact analysis.
“Our list of desired business outcomes pulled the focus of the project together. Everyone, including the CEO, knows what the project is about, the end states we are delivering and what its measures of success are.
“The system solution was only selected after we rigorously tested that it could perform our new, simplified processes. The fact that it aligned with the technical architecture was a bonus.
“The few customisations we’ve allowed were individually cost/value assessed. Most were rejected as not worthwhile.
“The business has been involved since day-1, and this has generated a momentum for change.
“And we’ve already delivered over 20% of the benefits.”
“Isn’t that what you’ve done?” she asked brightly.
The first Sponsor ordered another drink. A big one!
Which project would you rather be associated with?
Which project sounds more like the ones you are currently associated with?
The difference is in how these projects were approached.
The conventional, cost control-based approach to projects too often leads to the first scenario – heartache, headache and frustration.
The new Project Delivery Science’s Value Delivery Management Programs’ value-based approach leads to the second scenario – less angst, effort and cost, plus more value.
There now is a better way.
And our new book explains what it is, how it works and why it works so well.
One comment
This is a pretty good examaple of what one typically finds in practice.
The key question is: how do you create the passion for the value based approach amongst the senior managers if you are not one of them? How do you get their ear?
I would be interested in your thoughts.
by Sam Lamba on July 2, 2010 at 5:24 pm. #