In project execution, flexibility and agility is a key success factor. Requiring the completion of intermediate deliverables adds constraints to execution, which can sometimes have significant negative consequences on project success. Whether prescribing or executing, avoid as much as possible to introduce intermediate constraints. Our new White Paper 2013-18 explains why, and what are alternatives.

Intermediate constraints can be a significant aggravating factor to projects facing unforeseen circumstances. Intermediate constraints are mostly an obstacle to flexibility. They can only be considered when they respond to certain characteristics.

In any case, introducing intermediate constraints almost certainly will have a consequence on the project cost during project execution. This cost can be evaluated from the risk of additional overall duration of utilization for those resources which are mobilized at the time of the intermediate constraint delivery.

Intermediate fixed constraints are often the scourge of project execution. They are often introduced by stakeholders or as a way to apparently control the project. Make sure to avoid as much as possible this trap – or, alternatively, make sure to get compensated fairly for the additional risk this creates to your project execution. Understand better this issue and how to approach it in our new White Paper 2013-18.

This post and the associated White Paper have been updated in April 2014 following discussions on this blog and on LinkedIn groups to change the terminology ‘intermediate milestone’ to ‘intermediate constraint’ and make our idea clearer. The ‘milestone’ terminology triggered a different understanding than the one really intended.