Comparison of Project Management Methodologies, Project Management Success Factors and Failures - Case Study Example

Project Management Portfolio Summary The following provides an overview of PRINCE2, a project management method developed to realise business needs and provide flexibility in managing various types of projects. It also includes a comparative analysis between PRINCE2 and PMBOK and discussions regarding their similarities and differences, usefulness and advantages. An analysis of project management case study involving a large construction project is also provided in the last part including discussions of identified success factors, project management failures, and lessons learned. Table of Contents Contents Contents 2 1. Part 1 – Overview of Prince2 PRINCE2 is a project management methodology that is more focus on the business case or the rationale and justification for the project derived from the different aspects of the business itself. This project management methodology also provides not only flexibility in managing different types of projects but effective mechanism to enhance use of resources, application of skills, and delivery of services. These include product-based planning (product description, structure, and flow), change control (changes to deliverables, improvement of products, revision to meet requirements), and quality review (assessment and approval of product quality) techniques (PRINCE2, 2002: Foreword; 277). PRINCE stands for Projects In Controlled Environments that is basically a structured approach to project management which was developed in 1989 by CCTA and somewhat an enhanced version of Simpact Systems’ PROMPTIL, a standard project method being used by UK government for their IT projects from 1979 to 1989 (PRINCE2, 2002:1). Similar to other project management approaches, PRINCE2 is also designed to reduce project failures caused by different factors such as the inability to determine a workable business case, lack of attention to quality, inadequate stakeholders’ participation, insufficient planning and lack of control over the project’s stages, and others. Aware of good and tested project management practices, PRINCE2 incorporated several advantageous principles that include recognition of a project as a finite process with start and end, effective management as key to success, and the impact of stakeholders’ commitment to the success of the project (PRINCE2, 2002:1-2). However, although project management approaches agree on several objectives and principles, PRINCE2 has a number of benefits that a single structured method can bring. For instance, PRINCE2 is a project management that can be learned and repeated over and over again, a method that can be enhanced through experience, stakeholder participation is guaranteed, aware and react to problems in a timely manner, proactive and flexible enough to accommodate unexpected changes or turn of events (PRINCE2, 2002:2). Almost everything in PRINCE2 is defined including the life span of the project, the business products to generate, the activities and resources required to produce the products, and responsibilities of each and everyone in the organisation. PRINCE2 believed in the strong connection between the project and a particular business context, the role of project in achieving a specific business objective, the momentary nature of each project and its life cycle (PRINCE2, 2002:7). PRINCE2 work on two important aspects of a project, the life cycle mentioned earlier and the life of a product or “life span” that extends to the end of the product’s useful life. For instance, the project life cycle serve as the path and sequences required to produce and hand-over the product for use thus it is concern with life span that in reality start from conception to operation of the product (PRINCE2, 2002:7). PRINCE2 take into account four important project management levels that are reflected in PRINCE2 Process model. These include corporate or programme management that is responsible for setting the business context, directing a project level responsible for decision making and project direction, managing a project level that is generally for the appointed project manager’s handling of day-to-day activities, and managing product delivery, the lowest of all levels and responsibility of team managers. According to the PRINCE2 manual, these levels interact following hierarchy of control from the highest to lowest and vice-versa. For instance, higher level processes control lower level processes so they can function effectively while lower level input enable higher level management to realistically plan and control the project (PRINCE2, 2002:22). The main considerations being applied before any project can start in PRINCE2 as shown in Figure 1 include necessity or the presence of a business requirement demanding execution of the project, the roles and responsibilities of people that will be involved are clear, commissioning of the project is fully considered, and the existence of completed Initiation Stage Plan. Moreover, the triggering mechanism provided by PRINCE2 for project initiation is the Project Mandate which in essence will be provided by the highest level of management mentioned earlier – “corporate or programme management”. The purpose of having an authorized initiation is to ensure control of the process and existence of all necessary resources and information to effectively start a project (PRINCE2, 2002:25). In directing and controlling the stages of the project, PRINCE2 requires higher level management to provide a clear definition of the project, authorise funds, commit resources, and communicate with external stakeholders. Note that the “directing” function is exclusively for the Project Board or corporate level and therefore there is no involvement for the Project Manager yet (PRINCE2, 2002:69). Control of the project on the other hand comes immediately after the project start. This is where the Project Manager commences work within the agreed delivery limit. These include control and, monitoring of work, managing risk and resources, and taking corrective actions necessary to keep the project on track (PRINCE2, 2002: 93-94). Managing Product Delivery or MP is associated with the controlling stage and generally focus on managing third parties such as suppliers, sub-contractors, and others. These include checking and accepting services or materials being delivered by third parties, monitoring and quality control, and resolving problems arising from third party participation (PRINCE2, 2002:126). Managing Stage Boundaries is one of the most beneficial aspects of PRINCE2 as it is not only focus on delivering business benefit but ensure that each stage is completed within specifications. For instance, the following stage of the project is planned according to the lessons learned and outcome of the current stage thus more accurate and realistic in terms of risk and business case. Moreover, if higher management based on the information provided for the current stage, determined that the project is no longer viable it can hold the initiation of the next stage until the problem is resolved. Defining and managing stage boundaries enable important and timely changes to occur such as revision in the project plan, modification or refinement in project management strategy, and so on (PRINCE2, 2002:134). The later stages of PRINCE2 project management method is somewhat typical of project closing procedure and they are not considered a stage but activities to ensure that all objectives and aims set out in the beginning of the project were met (PRINCE2, 2002:151). PRINCE2 is somewhat a versatile project management methodology and as evidenced by its detailed and practical approach to managing projects, it is easy to understand and implemented. However, success of PRINCE2 is highly dependent on people, resources, and careful execution of project stages thus commitment at all levels is critical. 2. Part 2- Comparison Between PRINCE2 and PMBOK Both PRINCE2 and PMBOK recognised the important of incorporating proven, innovative, and advanced practices in managing projects. They also have similar perception on the temporary and unique nature of the project and the importance of having the project undertaken with the participation of all levels of the organisation (PMBOK, 2000:4). Since both project management approaches have similar principle, they all value the importance of project stages and life cycle, stakeholders, organisational, economic, and environmental influences, and project management skills to the success of the project (PMBOK, 2000:11). Similarly, they both believed that project management is critical in controlling and monitoring project processes, teams, interactions between processes, and so on (PMBOK, 2000:35-37). PMBOK and PRINCE2 in terms of actual project management are somewhat similar in approach. Although PMBOK used different wordings and separate sections for project integration, scope, time, cost, quality, HR, communication, and risk management they are in essence the same as PRINCE2. For instance, PRINCE2 is very clear about the relationship between time, cost, and quality including people, communication, and managing risk when it laid down the fundamental principles behind the creation of Project Management Team (PRINCE2, 2002:31). Moreover, PRINCE2 emphasized the importance of delivering the product to the “agreed time, cost and quality parameters” in the primary objectives of directing project (PRINCE2, 2002: 68) and therefore in harmony with PMBOK’s objectives. More importantly, Project Integration Management in PMBOK is in essence coordinated efforts between different levels of management. For instance, PMBOK’s Integrated Change Control is coordinated changes across the project that include considerations on the relationship between processes that PRINCE2’s “Change Control” and “Process Model” can also provide (PRINCE2, 2002:21). PMBOK never highlighted the phrase “Business Case” and in fact there is no section dedicated for this purpose. However, this does not necessarily mean it is not interested in the value of business case as it is actually at the core of PMBOK’s project management approach. For instance, in Figure 3, one would notice that the core of the software development project is business requirements. Moreover, in Section 1 of PMBOK where it discusses its project management framework, it defines a project as means of implementing and realising business strategy (PMBOK, 2000: 4). It other areas of the guide, PMBOK in a way highlighted business case in terms like “capture business requirements” as proof of concept cycle (PMBOK, 2000:15), “business needs” in highlighting the importance of review before starting the next stage of the project. In fact, like PRINCE2, it is recommending a halt when the business need no long exists (PMBOK, 2000:30). In summary, both methods are useful and in fact can be considered the best methods ever created for project management. However, depending on the knowledge of the project manager, PRINCE2 may have a little advantage over PMBOK as it is more detailed. Moreover, since project management coordination with other stakeholders outside the organisation requires use of similar project management approach, PRINCE2 is more advantageous if the project is in the United Kingdom. For this reason, this report recommend PRINCE2 based on the facts that it is more detailed guidance and useful for project managers and stakeholders with limited knowledge about project management. However, it is important to note that PRINCE2 was originally for IT projects thus there may be some adjustment to be made if applied to other type of projects. 3. Analysis of Engineering Management Project 3.1 Background The engineering management project under study is a large wastewater project in Boston, U.S. The project includes planning, design, construction, and commissioning of $3.6 billion wastewater treatment system in the heart of Boston Harbour. It has five major components that include primary and secondary treatment facilities, remote headwork’s facility for pre-treatment, a 9.5 mile rock effluent outfall tunnel system, and on-island residuals processing facilities (Armstrong & Wallace, 2001:4). Due to the size of the project, the design and construction requires 32 design contractors and 133 external construction and support services that eventually require effective scheduling, coordination, and monitoring to ensure quality and avoid delays. Moreover, since the business case for this project is to resolve a long-time environmental concern, the time frame for such a large project is only nine years making work and material scheduling more difficult as well as cost control in a project situated in an island with narrow two-lane streets that cannot support massive construction traffic, limited space for construction support, and building off-site yard for equipment and manpower (Armstrong & Wallace, 2001:5). The WMRA or the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority take full responsibility for the project and selected and implement a project management approach with greater emphasis on construction management. Consequently, a Programme/Construction Manager was selected that will be responsible for the day-to-day management of the project. Controlling construction cost was achieved in part through design standardisation and logically sequenced construction packages. To avoid delays, the Construction Manager entered into a Project Labour Agreement with 15 International and 25 local unions so they can all work in harmony. The CM also undertook planning for site-wide construction support, procurement of services, and aggressive quality assurance. However, despite his efforts, the project experienced several setbacks including three years delay in the construction of Inter-Island Tunnel and five years late commissioning of the Effluent Outfall Tunnel (Armstrong & Wallace, 2001:12-18). 3.2 Analysis (Success, Failures, and Lessons Learned) Analysis of this large wastewater treatment project suggests that despite several successes the business case and other project management concerns were not actually considered resulting to a number of failures. For instance, prior to the commencement of major construction, the project team embarked on an “ambitious” (Armstrong & Wallace, 2001:19) goal of setting project management cost to less than 10% of the total project costs despite that fact there are significant number of owner-supplied services and contractors requiring extensive project management. Another is miscalculating the impact of having too many firms that needs significant period of adjustment before they can build a smooth and effective working relationship. Moreover, since MWRA adapted a multi-agency working approach, the roles and responsibilities of the project management team were not clearly defined resulting further confusion. Participation of some important stakeholders were not acquired operators of the previous facility did not participate in the operability input design and construction. More important, there was a number of start-up errors such as conducting design reviews after mechanical and electrical installations were already completed resulting to significant number of late change orders (Armstrong & Wallace, 2001:21). Success of the project management approach is most visible in its ability to control the budget, selection of in-house management team, and aggressive scheduling. For instance, the creation of special unit attracted several well-experienced and talented individuals who moved the project to its completion. The ability of project management to control a relatively large project using a extremely small team of experienced people working on a limited budget and generally effective stakeholder management of almost two hundred contractors and several communities around the island. Moreover, project management demonstrated its effectiveness in pre-construction planning as it was able to work effectively on highly constrained construction sites. Lessons learned from this project include the fact personal and professional qualities and attributes of a Project Manager do count and often contribute to the success of the project. Note that the CM in the project was aggressive and participating in almost all aspects of the project including value engineering, design review, construction schedule and budget control, stakeholder management, safety, auditing, quality assurance and control, and others. Another important lesson learned is the positive impact of implementing a number of cost control techniques and consistent review throughout the project. Delays in a project are inevitable particularly when other stakeholders are ignored and some environmental aspects of the work are taken for granted. Project management should be active and committed to take the project forward regardless of difficulties. Understand the importance of defining the roles and responsibilities of all stakeholders who will responsible in different aspects of project management at the earliest possible. More importantly, as PRINCE2 and PMBOK suggest, projects like the Boston Waste Water Project cannot succeed without a structured project method that guarantees quality, promote effective communication, eliminates confusion, demand clearly defined roles and responsibilities, attention to detail, and realisation of business needs. 4. References Armstrong W. & Wallace R, (2001), A Case Study of Construction Management on the Boston Harbour Project: Reflections at Project Completion, CMe Journal, pp. 1-22 PMBOK,(2000), A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge, US: Project Management Institute, pp. 1-211 PRINCE2, (2002), Projects In Controlled Environments, UK: Stationery Office, pp. 1-412 Read More