2. Purpose
•Defineprojects and project management
•Evaluate highly visible failed projects
•Describe the purpose of risk management
•Identify common sources of project failure
•Develop methods to address common failures
5. Definitions of Project Management
• "...a complex, non-routine, one-time effort limited by
time, budget, resources, and performance specifications
designed to meet customer needs
(Gray & Larson, 2008)
• "...a temporary endeavor undertaken to create a unique
product, service, or result.“ (PMI, 2008)
One-Time
6. Project Characteristics
Kerzner, 2009
Specific Objective with
Defined Specifications
Defined Start
and End Dates
Funding Limitations
Consume Human and
Nonhuman Resources
Multiple Disciplines
7. Operations vs. Projects
Operations Projects
Taking notes in class Writing a research paper
Recording sales into ledger Setting up sales kiosk for convention
Practicing a musical instrument Writing a new piece of music
Manufacturing the iPhone Designing the new OS
Attaching sales tags to merchandise Implementing a new RFID system
Adapted from Gray & Larson, 2008
17. Looking for Risk
• Variables
• Scope
• Budget
• Schedule
• ProjectTeam
• Stakeholders
• Internal Events and Environment
• External Events and Environment
18. Risk Register
Uncertainty Consequences Potential Time Performance Level
No Signature Project on hold until client signs 2% 3% 0%
UPS strike Product materials cannot be
shipped to product site and
must be hand delivered
25% 50% 10%
Current
development
server crashes
again
All new development and
modifications are halted until
server can be replaced
75% 25% 80%
High Risk
Moderate Risk
Low Risk
19. Contingency Planning
Event Affect on Project ActionsTaken
UPS strike Delays in shipping products to sites Fleet vehicles are available and
project team can deliver products
to individual sites.
Server Crash Stoppage of work in the test and
development environments
New server has been ordered
and the costs will be covered by
the IT department.
26. Sources of Project Failures
1. Project Champion
2. Process Shortcuts
3. Expectations
Management
4. Variable Lock-In
5. EstimatingTechniques
6. Optimism
7. Resource Assumptions
8. People Management
9. Adapting to Change
10. Insufficient Resources
Adapted fromWhitten & Bentley, 2007
27. Source 1: Project Champion
• Project is approved without a champion
• Champion leaves the organization
• Champion loses interest in the project
Effect Project ActionsTaken
28. Source 2: Process Shortcuts
• Skipping steps in the selected processes
• Incomplete or portly executed processes
• Ignore process altogether
Effect Project ActionsTaken
30. Source 4:Variable Lock-In
• Committing to initial estimates
• Estimates established without thorough analysis
• Estimates do not consider recent changes
Effect Project ActionsTaken
31. Source 5: EstimatingTechniques
• Estimates are influenced by internal/external pressures
• Estimates are based on uneducated estimates
• Estimates are based on padded hours
Effect Project ActionsTaken
32. Source 6: Optimism
• Project team does not evaluate affect of issues and risks
• Project team discounts true affect of issues and risks
• Project team assumes issues or time can be addressed later
Effect Project ActionsTaken
34. Source 8: People Management
• Project managers promoted without development
• Project managers value tasks over managing team
• Project managers value tasks over communications
Effect Project ActionsTaken
35. Source 9: Adapting to Change
• Change in organizational priorities
• Change to organizational processes
• Change in external environment
Effect Project ActionsTaken
36. Source 10: Insufficient Resources
• Insufficient funding or material resources
• Insufficient staff or missing skill sets
• Insufficient experience
Effect Project ActionsTaken
38. References
• Brooks, F. (1975). The mythical man-month. Reading, PA: Addison-Wesley.
• Gale, S. (2011). Failure rates finally drop. PM Network, 25(8), 10-11.
• Gale, S. (2013, April). Finding the competitive edge. PM Network, 27(4), 39-43.
• Gray, C.F., & Larson, E.W. (2008). Project management:The managerial process (4th
ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw Hill.
• Kerzner, H. (2009). Project management: A systems approach to
planning, scheduling, and controlling. NewYork, NY: Wiley.
• Project Management Institute (2008). A guide to the project management body of
knowledge (4th ed.). Newtown Square: PA:Author.
• Whitten, J.L., & Bentley, L.D. (2007). Systems analysis and design methods (7th ed.).
Boston, MA: McGrawHill /Irwin.
http://faculty.css.edu/bolson1/presentations/ProjectSuccess.pdf
Notas do Editor
Project management is used to bridge the gap between functional units and layers of management.
Bob knows the risks ahead of time and responds to risk as soon as risk is observed.Also, consider positive risk (opportunities)
After reading The Night Lives On by Walter LordDeemed unsinkable by one of the engineersNot enough life rafts (1/3 to ¼) but better than industry standardsToo fast through the ice fieldInsufficient testing by the captain before maiden voyageBefore going into case studies note the availability of government projects (gov is not the only incompetent organization)Note the case studies are simplified and offer one perspective because many issues existed
1989 Construction begins1990 Feasibility study found the baggage handling system was not feasbible1991 United Airlines contracted with BAE Systems to construct automated system for their concourse1991 DIA requests for full system resulted in only three bids; all rejected1992 DIA recruited BAE to build complete system1992 Budget cuts, expanded system for larger luggage (skis), changes to scope, etc.1993 Target missed, again, again, etc.1994 DIA demo disaster with BAE approval (smashed totes, clothes torn out, etc)1995 Airport opened without complete automated systemFinding: don’t let the system become the critical path16 months late at $1.1M per day (maintenance and lost revenue)
Virtual Case File and Communications upgrade 20009/11 required better case integrationMany restarts after many vendors4 CIOs and PM added only near the end of the project4/2005 project cancelled and replaced with Sentinal projectFinished internallyAfter 12 years with a cost of $621 million dollarsNo adherence to fixed budget, schedule, or scope (constant revisions)No strategic plan and continual funding and time
Bid won in late 1960s on only sketches (very little definition)Government reduced accountability and questions by breaking project down into smaller projects (building, roof, interior)Politics drove an initial low budget of $7M and drove cost-cutting measures, change in direction, and loss of contractorAfter 14 years, project was completed at a cost of $102M (1400% over budget)