project reviews 20100414 1 0
DESCRIPTION
Project Reviews - Why, what and howTRANSCRIPT
... experience
Programme Manager
Achieving Delivery
Systems Development best practices (SDLC)
Business Transformation
Client facing
Business methods and processes
• Establishing PMO: Developed, implemented and lead PMO Change operation, with appropriate procedures and commercials to provide internal improvements and profitable revenue stream.
• Large Programmes : Lead various programmes across multiple disciplines of up to 250 people.
• Best practices & Metrics : Developed and introduced an extensive metrics basis to development programmes to evidence the trends and results.
• Relationship Management : Rescued crashing projects – largely through success in relating to diverse and demanding stakeholders, both internal projects and external vendor.
• International : Worked across four continents and the various established cultures to deliver both business and technology change successfully.
• Conversions / Migrations : Extensive experience in migrating tranches of business and converting systems - largely in the financial sector. Both as an internal initiative and as an external vendor.
• Contracts : Successfully lead and represented major financial organisations in establishing and amending contractual terms.
• Business Process Re-engineering: Lead the successful establishing of business structures and processes to match strategic goals.
• Technical skill : Background of development from single address assembler through OOD.
• Sales : Represented third party outsourcing and software development organisations in sales related initiatives.
Gavin Berry
AgendaWhat is the case for Post Project ReviewsWhat have we (Industry) achieved in the last
10 yearsWhat is missing – and Reviews? Input to Post Project ReviewsWhen to have ReviewsHow to get the most out of ReviewsSome hints & ideas on the How T0Some Case Studies - Time PermittingQuestions
What is the case for Post Project Reviews: ResearchBoth Gartner and Forrester report that benefits realisation is not
occurring - (75% of programmes deliver no benefit; less than 30% measure benefits – Reiss 2004)
40% of projects fail to achieve their business case within 1 year - The Conference Board survey (2001)
51% [ERP] implementations unsuccessful - Robbins-Gioia survey (2001)
average project overrun of 40% pa - McManus, Wood-Harper (2004)
61% of projects fail - The KPMG Canada Survey (1997)
7 out of 10 IT projects fail - The OASIG study (1995)
ONLY 16.2% of projects complete on schedule and budget - The CHAOS report (1995)
ONLY 29% of projects complete on schedule and budget - The CHAOS report (2004)
What is the case for Project Reviews: Research FindingsSuccessful projects require:
User / Business involvementSupport from the top ExecutivesClear objectives and requirements that tie into
the business caseEffective project managementGood people Good disciplines and practices
What have we doneImproved Governance emphasising business
& executive involvement – PMI & Prince IIMore professional project management
through improved PM processes such as:
Gated process as outlined by Cooper, Edgett and Kleinschmidt
Report card – it has improved
B u t N O T e n o u g h
A key missing pieceCHAOS (2004) highlights that measuring &
achieving business benefits have lagged other improvements
Dilemma on how to Achieve Business Benefits
A key Missing piece – Project ReviewsOnly mitigation is project reviews looking at:
Why we are doing the project Review project Benefits against the Business Plan
How does the project deliver the benefits Review project scope against the business case
rationaleWhere do the benefits come from
Review the business case model
Paradigm ShiftTraditional View:
Project review to check the way the project was run
More Useful View:Project review to check we are [still] getting
what we want
Input to Project Reviews - StrategicIf the purpose for the project is business
benefit – we MUST have clearly articulated Benefits Case as a key referenceA model of costs and revenue, clearly showing
each component (Capex, amortisation etc; project resource costs; Sources of Revenue, assumptions and margins etc)
Business commitment to adjust business planTraceability between project scope and
business caseThis is a grid against which the project will
be reviewed
Input to Project Reviews - TacticalAssumption & Risk Register s
Not only must we assess the risks of delivery of the project, but also any risk to the current operation
Delivery plan & progress reportsCan we be sure that an accurate position is being
reflected in the formal reporting.PMO/GPO best practices / methodology
Are we sure that the various project artefacts have been produced and stored? This includes various hygiene factors.
Can we be sure that the organisations operating capability is protected (capital and people)?
When to complete ReviewsEvery time we change the target:
Change in BudgetChange in TimelineChange in scope
At regular pre-determined milestonesReviews have an inherent cost– like all other
costs – reviews must be deployed cost-effectively
On completionMeasure consistently against your agreed definition [of success] - Dr Walter Fernandez and Mr. Graeme Thomas
How to complete reviewsPreparation:
Agree with major stakeholders what aspects are to be emphasised in the review – Project Board / Steering Committee
Develop target groups on whom to focus the review
Develop a set of questions (matrix) that will address agreed review topics
Structure a collection approach for each group
Example Question MatrixSection Question Weig
htingSpon
sorS/
Holder
Team
Benefits 1 Are the Expected benefits quantified? H X
Benefits 2 Has a Benefits Realisation Plan (BRP) been developed? H X
Benefits 3 Have there been any changes in the expected benefits - if so what & why? H X
Benefits 4 Have any primary benefits been achieved as yet? H X
Budget / Cost 1 Was the project delivered within the allocated budget? H X
Communication 1 Was the level of communication between you and the Project Manager effective? X X
Communication 2 Were you kept sufficiently informed of the project’s progress? X X
Communication 3 How would you rate the level of communication within the project team? X X
Communication 4 Were the clients generally aware of new or modified work practices well in advance? X X
Deliverables 1 Were the project requirements clearly understood? H X X
Deliverables 2 Is the system/product operating as expected? H X
Deliverables 3 Was a Business Continuity Plan developed? X
Deliverables 4 Has a Service Statement been developed? X
Deliverables 5 Is the technical solution operating as expected? X
Implementation 1 Do you think the project was ready to go live when it did? H X X X
Implementation 2 Did the implementation process go according to plan? X X
Implementation 3 Was a contingency plan in place? X X
Implementation 4 Has the project been formally signed off by you and the Steering Committee? H X
How to complete reviewsCollection:
Collect and produce the analysis of the review over a short period of time (target 2 weeks)
Be open with c0ntributors on purpose and any actions
Provide for a mechanism to resolve uncertain responses
Output:Present to the Governance board firstOnce key actions have been agreed – present
to the contributors
Some hints & ideas on the How toAgree policy on Benefit realisation:
Full value in following financial year, orImmediate pro-rated benefit in first year
Business and their governance process then follow through on the realisation commitment.
Deferral and workaround log for any scope aspects that cannot be built and the business workaround to overcome the shortcoming. Doubles as benefit shortfall log.
Implementation Questionnaire for completion immediately after system implementation by line users. Measures any implementation disruption
Some hints & ideas on the How toCycle through the following for collection of
feedback on similar questions from IT teams:PM Conducts a “Lessons Learnt” sessionAnonymous questionnaires completedIndependent agent conducts “Lessons Learnt”
sessionsQuestionnaire for heads of business areas
post implementationReport Back sessions to both team members
and governance groups on outcome of “Lessons Learnt”
Review OutputConfirmation of the extent to which the project
deliveries will meet/have met expectations – by Review section e.g.:
Benefits Budget / Cost Communication Deliverables Implementation Issues / Other Overall Success Planning & Timelines
Quality Resources Risks Scope & ObjectivesSupportTraining
Documentation of lessons learned in the process – covering:Organisational ability to initiate & govern -
ORGANISATIONMethodology – how appropriate - PROCESSHuman capital – skills, capabilities and morale - PEOPLE
Reviews by Case – Organisation viewApple organisationNature of business: Hugely successful third party administration
outfit , predominantly in utilities and financial sector, FTSE100Business Culture: Directed by the financials, highly regulated
environmentProject Outline:
Contracted with world’s largest Life Assurer (WLLA) to support a financial product that was unknown and unsupported with a view to future business;
WLLA pushed Apples to implement capability for distribution window Systems settled down after 6 months – widespread data integrity
issues Any remedial activity would be unfunded Spend projected to exceed total revenue from WLLA Governance through main board
Reviews by Case – Organisation viewBanana organisationNature of business: Large Life assurer – no longer
tradingBusiness Culture: Politically driven, listed – but poor
performer, major shareholding by very successful organisation in different industry
Project Outline:Replacement Life Administration system for >1000 life
productsLack of confidence in own IT favoured off-the–shelf solutionProposal pitched to get support for desired optionApproved joint venture with successful US companyGovernance through committee
Reviews by Case – Organisation viewCherry organisationNature of business: Large Life assurerBusiness Culture: Results focussed, Listed in
financial services group, executive required to have personal holdings
Project Outline:Absorption of business from acquisition of
larger Life companyGovernance through accountable individuals
Reviews by Case – Organisation viewDate organisation Nature of business: Large Life assurerBusiness Culture: Traditional, Listed –
mediocre performer, culturally alignedProject Outline:
Continued development of strategic administration platform through regular releases (circa 4 per year)
Governance by business executive
How Reviews were done
Reference-Bus Case Rigorous (BlackHat) Lobbied vague Fit for purpose Thorough
Reference-Benefits Rigorous (Full model) No Quants Fit for Purpose Moderate
Reference-RAIDS Rigorous Unmonitored Moderate Rigorous
Reference-Plans Moderate Thorough Thorough Rigorous
When Reviewed Monthly / Milestone
Crisis / Challenge
Monthly / Concerned c/o
Crisis / Challenge
How Reviewed PM view PC SC view c/o personal Q’s 3rd Party/PM
Action Taken Unfettered Constrained Unfettered Uncertain
Questions
References Reiss 2004 – Overview of best practice.pdf Cooper et al 2000 – Making Programme management more effective
(Cooper, Edgett & Kleinschmidt, 2000).pdf The Conference Board Survey (2001) Robbins-Gioia survey (2001) The OASIG study (1995) McManus, Wood-Harper (2004) The CHAOS report (1995) The CHAOS report (2004) The KPMG Canada Survey (1997) Dr Walter Fernandez and Mr Graeme Thomas Dorsey 2009 – International journal on Governmental Financial Management -
using periodic audits to prevent catastrophic project failure.pdf Chris Sauer, Andrew Gemino, and Blaize Horner Reich (2007) - The impact of
size and volatility on IT project performance