Project Management Improvement Project (Phase 1) Milestone Review
(Friday, March 3, 2006)
Disclaimer
This example is based on a real project. However, this version is changed to present an example as described in the DoIT Project Management Framework. It is not a true representation of the final report for the Project Management Improvement project.
Background: DoIT's Project Management Improvement Project emerged as a result of DoIT Executive Leadership's commitment to improving DoIT processes and procedures by developing project management standards. A task force was formed to lead the project. The project delivered a Project Management Framework via a Web tool called Project Management Advisor (PMA), which includes many components of the framework as well as templates and examples of project management deliverables to be used at DoIT.
Attending: person1, person2, and so on.
What went well?
Team Composition
- There was a broad cross section representing various DoIT groups.
- Members participated in discussions that had divergent views and worked through to agreement, developing a (Project Management) framework that can be used in DoIT and modified as needed.
- Teamwork and enthusiasm was evident and endured (despite roadblocks).
- There was a dedication to the goals of the project and improvement of DoIT Project Management.
Communication
- Overall communications went well – not only DoIT wide, but also at Department level.
Project Pace, Momentum and Support
- The project pace was about right – it wasn’t so ambitious that it was unrealistic. We met often enough to keep momentum, and not too often.
- Having the review team engaged in the process was helpful.
- Progress, process and deliverables were shared regularly with Senior Management. This kept them in the loop, and kept the momentum of the project going.
- The momentum of the project as well as confidence in the core team’s ability to set direction and make decisions continued during a significant leadership change in the CIO office.
- Customer (stakeholder, i.e., review team member) buy-in was attained because they were actively involved.
What could have been improved?
Team Composition
- The nature of this topic and at times the different and conflicting visions individuals held was reflected in team attitudes.
Communication
- The quantity of documents and communication was overwhelming at times, and difficult to keep up with.
- The emails containing documents and MyWebSpace links were overwhelming at times.
Project Pace, Momentum and Support
- There was the normal lack of cohesion and direction at the beginning of the project, but in addition there was confusion in goals or subject matter early on.
- Funding, people and time resources were not adequate.
- Resources were not always available, resulting in a few people carrying the lion’s share of the work.
Development Practices
- The timing of this project should have preceded other project management improvement developments.
- The rollout strategy (timing) was affected somewhat by conflicting visions of team members.
Themes that emerged?
Team Composition
- Quality people who were dedicated, articulate and fun resulted in a quality team.
- Role clarification and adherence was needed.
Communication
- Communication was effective regarding who/what/where/when/how.
- Information management was a challenge.
Project Pace, Momentum and Support
- The momentum was steady, sustainable, and was at an appropriate pace for some.
- Staff resources, including funding, was limited.
Development Practices
- Deliverables were well thought out, realistic, and achievable. They were usable, scalable and complied with industry standards.
Recommendations for the next phase?
Team Composition
- Keep the same team throughout the process.
- Role clarification at the beginning of each phase is needed.
- Team members need to have the skill set appropriate for the project.
Communication
- Document management and sharing needs attention. It is important to share, but not overwhelm.
Project Pace, Momentum and Support
- An agreement of objectives is needed from the stakeholders.
- Develop a plan for when the project ends addressing funding and resources to continue work on the project deliverables:
o Framework
o Tool to deliver framework (i.e. PMA)
o Workshops
o Pilot testing
o Training plan
Survey recommendations/improvements?
- Online survey is appreciated
- The ‘NA’ and ‘Neither Agree/Disagree’ choices on the survey form are either redundant or not appropriate.
- Add quality of product and quality of process measures.
Facilitated by: person 1, person2, Post-Project Reviews (PPR) Project Management http://doitnet.doit.wisc.edu/teams/project_management/
Email: / , phone: (608) 262-xxxx / (608) 262-yyyy
5.2 Example – Post Project Review Report, v1.1 Page 1 5/26/2006