Project and Quality Management PM Lecture 1 Project Management: Define Project

 Learning Objectives (Lecture 1)

§    By the time you have completed this lecture, you should

able to:

§  Identify appropriate stakeholders

§  Demonstrate the need for and implication of prioritising trade- offs.

§  Define the requirement of initial planning, including the role that

managing scope plays in this.

§  Identify approaches to planning

§  Set up a basic project outline with stages and gates, with the

overview of process mapped out.

Feeling a little like this? 

How about this?

How Bad Are Our Projects?

§    Only 34 percent of all projects succeed.

§   The average project has a 43 percent cost overrun.

Definition of a Project

§    ‘Projects are unique, transient endeavours undertaken to achieve a
desired outcome’ (APM, 2004)
§    ‘A project is a temporary endeavour undertaken to create a unique product or service’ (PMI, 2004)
§    'A unique set of coordinated activities, with definite starting and finishing points, undertaken by an individual or organisation to meet specific performance objectives within defined schedule, cost and performance parameters' (BS 6079, 2000)
'A management environment that is created for the purpose of delivering one or more business products according to a specified business case' (PRINCE 2, 2009)

The 4-D Project Life Cycle

First Mistake

• Project managers beginning without knowing what the project 

Stakeholders

 

§   
Any individual             
or group with an interest in the project process or outcome

§    Internal and external

Internal VS external

Managing Stakeholders

Trade-offs in Project Management

Trade-offs in Project Management (Example 1)

§    Consider a major sporting event like the Olympics. Such a mega event starts with an opening ceremony at a scheduled date and time. Do you think it is possible to delay the opening ceremony by a day or even an hour?

 

Trade-offs in Project Management (Example 2) 

§    A medical equipment company announces that it will launch a new pace maker on a designated date. Just before the launch of the product, the company’s’ engineers realize that there is a small snag in the design that can increase the chances of malfunction by a factor of 0.01%. They believe that they will need another 6 months and additional $10 million to rectify the snag. Should the company delay the launch, given that the chances of malfunctioning are just 0.01% and the potential loss of $10 million?

Trade-offs in Project Management (Example 3)

§    A bulk mobile phone manufacturing company announced that it will launch their cheapest mobile phone for only $10. However, a few weeks before the launch, the company’s engineers realized that  they will need to use slightly older technology to meet the internal cost objective. They believe that the cost of the end product cannot be increased, and that the sales will not be impacted by using older technology. Should the company move forward with older technology given that it will reduce the quality?

Scope Management

QUIZ

§    What is scope creep?

a)           The correction of errors in the project plan that requires scope activities to be added or duplicated.

b)           The uncontrolled expansion to project scope

without adjustment to time, cost, or resources.

c)            Any change to project scope after the Project

Charter has been approved.

d)           Don’t know 

§    Claim we know everything

§  Works well for 'paint by numbers' projects

§    Acknowledge we know nothing

§  'wishful thinking'

§    Both of the above - the nearer the point in time, the

more we know about it

§  'rolling-wave planning'

§  50% rule

 

 

§     The criteria for passing the gates must be laid down in advanced

When projects can be stopped, they should be.

Process Mapping

Summary: The Define Phase

Reference and Further    Reading

§    Maylor, H., 2010, Project Management, Prentice Hall (chapters 4 and 5)

§    Useful reading:

Sutterfield, J. S. et al. (2006). A case study of project and stakeholder management failures: lessons learned. Project Management Journal, 37(5), 26-35