There are a number of procedural and technical issues that come up in most projects. And these also pose many complex issues, such as how to apply DMAIC, TACIM, LEAN, and PRINCE2 to various diverse projects and circumstances in order to achieve consistency and quality. For example, one issue for most projects is selecting the correct project set of project methodology and project estimates.  In this article, I’ll briefly discuss and deal with one of the most common, but important issues involving project-management procedures and methods, more specifically the appointment of project specific procedures. As on a prince 2 course with training.

So, what is the difference?  What are the implications of choosing “the right” project methodology?  Is it a good idea if a project manages its progress by empowering the Stakeholders?  In short, I’m more interested in how the project itself decides on where it needs to go, rather than whether certain business issues be really important.

The logistics of project management become that much more transparent when the Project Manager has authority to authorize and control, from the outset, procedures that are specific to a particular project. What you’re evaluating is the architecture you want to deploy for the project and how its procedures, processes, and policies relate to the goals of the project, rather than what has happened in the past, which isn’t really relevant.

So, how do you make sure a project can identify project-specific procedures? It is important to really understand the specific skills and capabilities a project manager needs to execute at various stages of a project and select a methodology that will allow you to either run the plans in the same way or to implement changes in an easy and transparent manner.

This may sound like a cultural shift, and it can be.  However, it really doesn’t.  All we want to do is assign specific procedures, no matter what, to one specific function of the project.  Everything else has to be scope-specific.

If a project operates on a very limited scale (e.g. client and vendor involvement at its PE Baker order, and no-one generally involved in the project), there are likely enough scope issues.  But if you really want to ensure consistency and quality within your projects – and we all do from time to time – you need the information system and decision-making procedures in place that will facilitate better project management.

I often ask audience members a question about project management and they’ll tell me what they need to do to improve their management practices.  It’s different to how I want them to think about project management.  Their ideas about “better” usually stem more from�themlogic rather than from practical, structured decision making.

Even with the application of a standardized methodology in the methodology definition, it’s a lovely vague idea.  They don’t even know who to send their proposals to!  And this leads to the most common fatal flaw in project management: projects, like individuals, are frequently driven at the wrong time, by the wrong people, and with a flawed application.

Causes of failure on projects include: problems with Invitation, Request for Information (RFI), and Requirement slate deliveries and other generic projects-dependent documents/requirements instead of using acceptable PRINCE2 or D definition methodologies by those responsible for formatting, validating, editing, and editing documents; no agreements or contractual commitments to meet functional and technical requirements; and contract terms, which are published at a tactical level, often avoiding Fixed price or price sensitivity issues in the detailed requirements section.

The underlying process or methodology for project-management is complex, almost impenetrable, and can only be standardized, if it is used across all significant projects. Many projects don’t have many people in tasks, and thus will not be able to dictate procedures based on the people who do the tasks.  Clarifying roles and responsibilities, ensuring clear responsibilities, setting realistic deadlines, and setting-up meetings are often not a part of any organization’s standard procedures.  Similarly, deadlines and project milestones are rarely set up, and hardly ever communicated to staff, let alone all stakeholders.

It is…) better to select an appropriate methodology and, from the outset, be able to apply that method to all your projects and to exactly control your delivery of the deliverables and resources to all projects.  By taking this proactive step, I hope you can prevent a more catastrophic disaster from occurring.