From a Static to a Dynamic Vision of Project Schedules – and Avoid a Common Waste of Effort

Most project management people use the project schedule as a static tool. They look at the latest update, consider the latest network of tasks and available floats. Rarely if ever do they refer to previous updates to check how things have been changing – and even more rarely in any kind of systematic way. This is a pity as there is much more meaningful information available from the same data by moving to a dynamic vision – and it’s quite simple and easy to do! Our new White Paper “From a Static to a Dynamic Vision of Project Schedules: Why Conventional Usage of Schedules is a Real Waste of Time and Resources Compared to the Value it Easily Could Provide” [2012-26] provides useful insights of how to simply benefit from a dynamic view.

How successive snapshots can give a good idea of the trajectory…What do you wait for for applying this principle to your project schedule?

A project is a dynamic endeavor in multiple dimensions. Static scheduling is exactly like if we tried to apprehend the dynamics of a bouncing ball with regular snapshots – and just looking at one snapshot only. This is a highly limited view – we can probably measure the distance to the goal but we have no information whatsoever about how the ball is evolving dynamically in space.
What can we infer from a series of snapshots compared to just looking at one snapshot? We can have much more information: we can measure not only a position in space, but also speed, rotation, and all sorts of dynamic parameters. We can get a much better understanding of the forces at play and how they interact.
By knowing such dynamic parameters like speed, we can extrapolate the system dynamics into the future with a good confidence and thus, anticipate reaching our goal and identify potential problems.
Measuring dynamic parameters provides much richer understanding of the actual situation.

Not only is it possible to have this dynamic information, but it is already available in the project systems. And it is not used! What a waste of time and effort collecting progress information and not using it!

Maximize the usage of the tedious but necessary process of getting information to update the schedule – spend more time (in proportion) making sense of it for the sake of sound decision-making and anticipation!

Read our new White Paper “From a Static to a Dynamic Vision of Project Schedules: Why Conventional Usage of Schedules is a Real Waste of Time and Resources Compared to the Value it Easily Could Provide” [2012-26], which gives some straightforward hints as to how to extract much more value from the information already available. Grab the opportunity – become dynamic schedule readers, and anticipate problems before they are apparent in the static view of the project!

Fundamental Insights on Minimizing Complex Project Risk for a Single Project

In the White Paper “Take Risks, but Take Risks the Right Way: Reframing the Opportunities and Risk Process for Complex Projects” [2012-11], we showed what the main drivers of the risk of Complex Projects are interdependence of contributors and deliverables, and natural variability in the schedule. What are then the actions that can actually best improve significantly project execution risk? Our new fundamental White Paper “Fundamental Insights on Minimizing Complex Project Risk for a Single Project” [2012-25] describes ground-breaking insights about risk management, and how they can be applied practically.

Are you ready for the Domino effect?

The previous paper “The True Risk of Complex Projects” [2012-24] explains the particular drivers of project outcome variability, and their statistical properties. Project outcome variability becomes a risk when it leads to decreased profitability, or delayed delivery.

These fundamental insights show us what are the two levers that can be used to decrease the risk in large, complex projects in a systemic way:

• Decrease complexity;
• Minimize the natural variability of the delivery from the contributors, or, if not possible, its effects.

It is possible to decrease the system complexity and to minimize the effect of natural variability through a series of organizational and planning measures. The paper describes in detail what can be done.

In addition, a major insight of our new understanding of complex projects risk is the primordial role of low probability, high consequences events that often drive of the overall risk. Preventing as much as possible these events needs to be a key focus. And this issue is generally not addressed by traditional project risk management.

Many of those practices are practices which we know are being applied pragmatically by seasoned project managers and organizations, based on their experience. Because we now understand how they participate to diminish project risk, these practices can be applied in a much more systematic and conscious way. In particular, those actions that aim at decreasing complexity and that aim at preventing major events of low probability are areas where considerable improvements can easily be brought in organizations.

Read our new fundamental White Paper “Fundamental Insights on Minimizing Complex Project Risk for a Single Project” [2012-25] and diminish risk in your Complex Projects.

The True Risk of Complex Projects: Teachings from Statistical Theory

In our new White Paper “The True Risk of Complex Projects: Teachings from Statistical Theory” [2012-24] we draw on the knowledge of risk theory to explain why the risk of Complex Projects is significantly different from the risk of Simple projects. The interdependency of contributors, which is the mark of complexity, leads to mathematical properties of the resulting risk which is often overlooked by decision makers: higher probability of large failures, and a high influence of correlation.

Measuring Risk

The paper in itself is a bit for math geeks. Here’s the summary: everything that you were told about risk is wrong! As well as your intuition, repeatedly shaped by this wrong view of risk.

Without knowing much about the system other than it is a complex system with a lot of interdependent elements, we know the outcome probability distribution is a ‘power law’ curve. And such a statistical distribution will behave very differently from the usual Gaussian distribution: freak events do happen! It also explains why a single bad project can bring a project company to its knees: the reality of complex projects is that really disastrous projects occur far more often than predicted by common knowledge.

The consequences of this mathematically demonstrated situation are far reaching.
The traditional economic protection offered by aggregation of project risk at the organization level does not really work when it comes to complex projects.

Get these important insights in our new White Paper “The True Risk of Complex Projects: Teachings from Statistical Theory” [2012-24] and you’ll see the world of project risk under a very different light!

Release the Power of your People to Build the Organization you Need to Tackle Complex Projects

Total Quality Programs are applied with huge benefits since the 1980’s in the manufacturing environment. Numerous versions exist that have led to the development of standardized approaches like Six Sigma. Yet Total Quality is not yet widespread in project environments. In our new White Paper “Total Quality Programs in Project Organizations: Release the Power of your People to Build the Organization you Need to Tackle Complex Projects” [2012-22], we draw on Project Value Delivery’s extensive experience in the implementation of Total Quality Programs in project-oriented organizations to explain what it takes and what are the significant benefits that can be expected.

Are you ready to unleash the power of your people?

Total Quality is an approach that developed as the gains from more traditional quality systems (‘do-what-I-say’ conformance models based on procedures, etc.) reached their limits. There are numerous versions of Total Quality; however, it is best described as a mindset. The main change is from a top-bottom approach to quality to a bottom-up approach, recognizing that everybody can do worthwhile suggestions, and should be able to participate, and change the way of working. Companies that have implemented Total Quality programs have seen dramatic improvements in the consistency of the quality of their products, with an immediate impact on their bottom-line, as well as a much higher rate of innovation and a better suitability of their products to their customers; this has often resulted in these companies reaching the top tier of their markets.

Complex projects require processes that deal with this complexity, cutting effectively across departments and functions. Total Quality is one of the most effective and quickest ways to embed these processes in the organization.

While most Total Quality programs have been developed in the context of the Manufacturing Industry, there are ways to extend the same principles and processes to the project-oriented companies.

Total Quality should be viewed as a long term investment that will define a new culture in the organization, significantly improving its performance. Total Quality in your project organization is not an option.

Read our new White Paper “Total Quality Programs in Project Organizations: Release the Power of your People to Build the Organization you Need to Tackle Complex Projects” [2012-22] to know more about how to implement Total Quality in your project-oriented organization.

Rationalize Action Tracking: a Strategic Process for All Large Complex Projects

Large complex projects run a number of processes in parallel. They all produce numerous actions which prioritization and timely closure is essential to the success of the project. Still most projects do not centralize these actions and do not prioritize them effectively.

Shouldn’t you invest in a slightly better action tracking system?

Having a good grip on the actions to be taken and effectively prioritizing them would increase significantly the effectiveness of project leadership. Centralized action tracking and prioritization is a way to increase project management effectiveness significantly and that can easily be implemented. Our new White Paper “Action Tracking: a Strategic Process for All Large Complex Projects that Can Easily be Centralized and Rationalized” [2012-21] addresses this important project management issue.

In our consulting assignments we find again and again that these processes are not identified as important and are not managed accordingly:
Persons in charge are not aware of the actions there are responsible for, or forget that they need to take some action later in the project
People are left to themselves to prioritize the actions they are in charge of, which often leads them to choose to do the easiest first, which are not necessarily the ones that are critical for the project.

The solution is to centralize and rationalize actions, using a central actions database that regroups all actions from all the project processes. Nowadays it is simple and easy to do.

What is really key in the process is to make sure that the actions that are really important for the success of the project are effectively implemented in a timely manner. To achieve that it is important that the project management team has a view at any time on what are the top 5 or 10 actions that need to be taken at the present moment. These actions will receive proper attention, and once closed, can be replaced by the next action in line. In our consulting assignments we generally encounter weak prioritization processes, and one of our main contributions is often to challenge the project management team to determine its actual priorities.

Ensuring that the project team is effectively working on what’s really important at the present moment is all what will make the success of the project.

Read our new White Paper “Action Tracking: a Strategic Process for All Large Complex Projects that Can Easily be Centralized and Rationalized” [2012-21]

Unleash Significant Project Value by Overcoming the Contractual Scare

Most projects in the construction industry use a Contract as the basis for the scope. In addition, the Contract rules the relationships between the Contractor and the Client. As any tool, a Contract can be used both in a productive and a negative way. In Project Value Delivery’s experience, Contracts are too often used in a way that impedes project success. It is mainly because changing any provision of the Contract induces fear in organizations. In our new White Paper “Unleash Significant Project Value by Overcoming the Contractual Scare” [2012-20] we uncover why and how to overcome the contractual scare.

Overcome the contractual scare and get into real business relationships

When unexpected events happen (which always occurs in a Large, Complex Project), most of the times, both parties behave as if they wanted to use the Contract so to take the maximum advantage of its clauses, barring cooperation in the face of difficult problems. This results in more or less overt confrontational situations which suck the energy out of the project teams and prevents a smooth execution of the project.

Most of the times, behaviors in contractual discussions fall back in the fear of participants to appear weak in the face of their organizations, or even the fear of giving the impression to transgress integrity principles by being too kind to the other party.

Being successful and overcoming the Contractual Scare all boils down to giving enough authority to the project managers (the parties’ representatives). There is only one remedy: make the parties’ representatives effectively accountable for the success of the project, and give them the authority to decide what it takes within a clear framework.

Overcome the contract scare, be entrepreneurial, give authority to where it belongs to increase the success of your large, complex projects.

Read our new White Paper “Unleash Significant Project Value by Overcoming the Contractual Scare” [2012-20].

The Economic Justification of Proper IT tools to Support a Large, Complex Project

Following our White Paper on “How to Build Quickly and Cheaply the System Infrastructure You Need to Execute a Large, Complex Project” [2012-08] we have received numerous questions about how to justify the Return on Investment of such investment.

Will you capture the upside generated by a clever project systems setup?

A new PVD White Paper [2012-19] “The Economic Justification of Proper IT tools to Support a Large, Complex Project” demonstrates that even in the context of a single, stand-alone Large, Complex Project, the Return On Investment is so significant that it is difficult to justify not to implement the right systems – and that actually it would be extremely dangerous not to do it.

In this White Paper we put down some numbers for a mock large project and how much it would cost to setup a minimum IT infrastructure that would respond to its needs. Benefits of appropriate systems are twofold:

• direct improvement of productivity
• indirect performance improvement through accurate dashboard and situation measurement, resulting in lower ‘Cost of Non-Quality’.

All in all, while the systems investment might be of the order of 1 to 1.6M$, the return on investment is at least ten-fold.

Moreover, it would be extremely dangerous to start a Large, Complex Project without a minimum infrastructure: the risk is to lose completely the control of the project. Investing in a minimal IT infrastructure is nowadays necessary and easy to justify.

The romantic days of the lonesome and heroic project managers that could keep a total overview and control of the project on an Excel spreadsheet are gone; they will fade in mythology as the cowboys did. The era of the high-performing structured project team, supported by powerful IT systems to address complexity, has come. Don’t resist – and face inevitable extinction.

Read our new PVD White Paper [2012-19] “The Economic Justification of Proper IT tools to Support a Large, Complex Project”