First, the need to communicate bad news early, and to address its consequences is critically important. As someone once said, "Communicate good news early and often; communicate bad news even faster" (although usually best in private). Making this happen requires that the PM be on top of expected outcomes, pace of completion, and communication channels. The "0-50-100 Rule" helps with this process, as does defining the completion criteria.
Second, and related, focus on outcomes/output, not input. Energy and time on task is lovely and certainly contributes to completing work. The job of the PM, however, is to assure progress toward completion, as observed by production (output).
Third, the Earned Value process and related measurement processes certainly allow for a more data-driven discussion with sponsors, customers, and/or team members. The process only means something, however, when the team defines and agrees on the outcomes, completion and quality criteria, and budget realities.
In chapter 13, the recurrent theme of effective communication appears again. Also, the solutions to the list of common project problems feels like "agile PM" by another name. Perhaps both approaches are really only separated by the assumptions at the beginning. Agile takes as an article of faith that change will happen, and it is usually unknowable at the outset. Working through quick cycles and re-assessing routinely allows for quick response to those changes. More traditional approach seems to take the path of figuring out as many potential problems in advance (based on experience or expertise) and then planning contingencies to manage them.
In either case, quick response to issues and the willingness to hear contrary opinions is a significant part of the solution.
Perhaps the over-arching lesson is that projects succeed or fail mostly due to human, not technical issues.
dh
No comments:
Post a Comment