When standard Project Management life-cycles are surprising

A few years ago, I created a project management software package called TrioProject. The package was quite good, but it had a major flaw. It used a Gate process approach, which was good. But it standardised the Gate processes… and to my great surprise, that proved to be a weakness. The standardised life-cycle was the flaw.

It came as a surprise to me, because I've been working on project management standards for decades. It was clear to me that, to improve project management, you need standards. But you have to standardise the right thing. If you over-standardise life-cycles, you are in trouble. I was in trouble.

I'm not the only person to make this mistake. Often, when I talk to PMOs, I discover that they've made the same mistake. I learn that they have a standard life-cycle such as 

• Charter
• Initiate
• Build
• Test
• Deliver and Deploy
• Close

So let's unravel this problem. Where did I go wrong?

A mixture of good and bad ideas

My first good idea was to use a Gate process. The Project is structured as a series of Stages, each separated by a Gate. This is a proven way of working. It splits the project into manageable chunks of work (stages). It allows the project board to control progress (gates).

My second good idea was to standardise the process. In this way, all projects follow the same path. This standardisation enables repetition, which is the basis for continuous improvement.

The flaw - my bad idea - was to over-standardise the process. Every project is different. So a standard life-cycle is overkill. It's a bad idea. The diversity of projects is enormous. In reality, many projects cannot and should not follow a standard process.

When standards become a problem not a solution.

Once you start down the wrong path, standards become a problem not the solution. If every project has to use a standard process then people hit problems:

• The process doesn't fit the project (square peg in a round hole)
• The project manager applies the process blindly, without enough thought

Some companies address these problems by multiplying the number of standards.

• One company used different life-cycles for different sized projects (small, medium, large).
• A building company used 3 standard processes, for construction, renovation and maintenance projects.

But multiple standards only complicate the problem, they don't solve the problem.

Faced with these problems, other companies give up on standard life-cycles.

How to ensure that standards are good news

The answer is not to reject standardisation. Standardisation is the foundation of continuous improvement and better project management.

But standardisation must recognise that each project is different:

• Yes, it's a good idea is to use a Gate process.
• Yes, it's a good idea to standardise the OVERALL process
• BUT it's vital to understand that each project is DIFFERENT

The way to achieve this is to use project design. For each project, the delivery must be designed, not standardised.

Delivery needs to be designed (not standardised)

Each project is different, and each project needs to be designed.

Project design is an early project activity which works out how to deliver the project. The project team works out how many stages are needed, and what those stages are.

That's the big challenge: every project must deliver differently.

During project design, the project team analyses project delivery and structures it appropriately. They understand their unique challenge, and design their unique solution.

So that's the source of the flaw in TrioProject. It was a mistake to over-standardise project delivery. You cannot decide in advance. Delivery should be DESIGNED and NOT STANDARDISED.

A sandwich of standardisation

The resulting standard project management life-cycle is a sandwich

• standardise the early parts of the project
• design delivery (recognising that each project is different)
• standardise the final parts of the project

This still provides the basis for a repeatable life-cycle. It allows for enough standardisation to enable continuous improvement.

Read my recent book to find out more about Project Design; and learn how to design your next project.

Traps to avoid

Before we finish, here is a reminder of the traps to avoid:

• don't standardise the number of delivery stages (for example 3 delivery stages)
• don't standardise the names of delivery stages (for example analysis, build, deployment)

A small project might need only one delivery stage. A larger project might need five delivery stages. A second large project might need five completely different delivery stages.

Build the Project Factory

To sum up, we standardise project management to give a basis of repetition. Standards provide the foundation for continuous improvement and for building a project factory.

But we also recognise that each project is different. We need to reconcile standards and flexibility.

In a forthcoming blog, I'll say more about the Project Factory. Watch this space.

Open the gate to more effective project management

For a team manager, one of the simplest and most effective ways to structure your team’s project management effort is to introduce gate-process methods. They are not rocket science, they are not state-of-the-art, but they work. If are manage a group of projects, and you want long-lasting improvements  in project management, then you should be looking at  gate-process methods. 

Gate process methods break a project into stages and gates:
    •    A stage is a block of work in a project (sometimes called a phase). It’s run by the project manager, and typically will be several weeks long, sometimes several months long.
    •    A gate is a decision point. The board makes a go / no-go decision, based on the work done in the current stage, the plan for the next stage and the overall viability of the project. It’s called a gate for a reason: if no-one opens it,  then it stays shut. That’s important. If the board don’t take a explicit decision to proceed, then the gate stays shut and no more resources should be used on the project. The project must stop.

Many best practice project management methods are gate processes. For example, Prince2 is built around stages, but Prince2 is flexible - it  allows for a variable number of stages. Prince2 doesn’t use the word “gate”, but it has end-of-stage decision points which are gates -  the project board must explicitly approved the next stage plan. Gated methods also are a part of best practice portfolio management guidance. In the same family as Prince2, the MoP guide (Management of Portfolios) highlights the importance of gated methods, saying that “quick wins can demonstrate the value of a portfolio management approach. The first steps commonly include applying staged release of funding so that investment of resources is associated with confidence in successful delivery. Also pay particular attention to a rigorous start gate…” 

Prince2 is a generic gate process method, applicable to any type of project. There are other gate process methods which are specific to various industries and project types.

    ❑    One of the most developed stage gate methods is PetroGate, a method used in the oil and chemical industries. For example, a major chemicals company starts all major investment projects with up to four stages and gates. Gate four is the key decision point - at this gate, the investment budget is approved.

    ❑    In IT, various IT methods for solution development such the v-model have been translated into stage-gate project management methods. For example, the IT project teams in a major bank used a stage-and-gate method to boost the reliability of the handover to operations at the end of the project. The final gates checked that the right work had been done prior the hand over to the support teams and the project closedown.

    ❑    In New Product Development, many companies implement a funnel approach to product development using stages and gates. They generate hundred of ideas and start lots of projects. Weak ideas or unprofitable products  fail to get beyond gate 1 or gate 2. If a hundred projects are started, perhaps only 20 or 30 get into prototyping and development and under 10 get though the final gate which approves the product launch in the marketplace.

    ❑    In the construction industry, gated methods are used. As construction projects can be long, some industry methods can have many stages (ten or more). But if it’s a renovation project, there may be fewer stages, and if it’s a demolition project, there may be only one or two stages.
   
Be careful when you deploy gate-process methods. Avoid the traps
    •    Each project is unique, you should not  force all projects into a rigid structure. 80% of your projects may follow your standard method, but 20% of your projects should definitely not (but could still use a generic gate-process approach such as Prince2)
    •    Understand overlaps. Stages are sequential, but some teams need overlapping “phases”. (Prince2 explains how to handle this, although in the current 2009 version the vocabulary it uses is confusing)

So if you are a team manager looking to boost project management efficiency, check out gate-process methods. One good starting point is Prince2, because it is a general purpose gate-process method, which you can tailor to your company or industry needs.  Take a look … open the gate to more effective project management.