In this blog Thomas discusses the differing project approaches and their advantages and disadvantages.
When you define a requirement for change it is important to have a clear method for delivery or the business stakeholders may not fully buy into the change or may be unable to help properly if the information is not well structured and often a lack of understanding will ensue.
Key factors when choosing your project approach are often closely linked to budget and time available to undertake the change along with the resources available to run the project. This is because many organisations do not have a business change department to handle projects on behalf of the business-as-usual team. Often the team are drawn from the business-as-usual team, as they have no project skills incumbent in the business to draw upon and no great financial resource to hire a team for a one-off change. This then leads to poor outcomes as initial scope is not well defined and then the project is poorly managed leading to a lack of business benefits being realised.
The timeline for project delivery is key to the choice of method. We believe the amount of information known about the desired change is also important to the method chosen. Where full knowledge is in place a single implementation may be a better approach saving time and money. If you are rolling out a new technology, a phased rollout may be better as you are able to realise benefits along the delivery path ensuring scope is delivered in smaller work packages with clear outcomes and feedback for each package, this allows for more control in an environment with more uncertainties.
When working with vendors we always seek to have smaller deliveries in line with the Agile approach. This is key for smaller companies due to high costs of vendor implementations and often the case where off the shelf systems have nuances that require detailed analysis to navigate anomalies that maybe do not fit the business process. These need to be highlighted quickly to avoid the benefits being watered down post rollout.
We also choose our method based on the type of change being undertaken. If the change does not require significant IT shift, then using a method like Waterfalls where the plan is set-out at the outset and then executed means less overheads on daily meetings which are not required as information is not changing that quickly. An example of this would be rolling out a new HR Appraisal process across your company. In this instance you are likely to have a single plan that you run through function by function executing the same set of tasks and sign offs.
Whichever method is chosen it will influence the delivery process. However, the same outcome can be achieved using different methods. One is not better than another, it is about how you tailor the method to the situation to create the best business outcomes. This is where skilled project managers add value.
This is the oldest project approach and is where project methods really began. Created by Winston Royce in 1970, significant time is invested in planning the project out with scope, deliverables, risks, issues and much more. Often large organisations used this method as it has been embedded in their organisations. The key to this methodology is it is sequential and focusses heavily on the requirements gathering.
Agile is a methodology that emerged primarily due to the failure of Waterfalls to meet the needs of complex software delivery projects. It has been around since 2001 and doesn’t focus on top heavy requirements and is more iterative through its Scan > Analyse > Respond > Change framework. Essentially delivery of change is through small increments. This should increase likelihood of positive benefits realisation. A downside can be you need an overall and point in a strategy and sometimes being to iterative can lead to an incorrect end point. We believe the Agile method is best for the IT change delivery and having a strategic approach using the PRINCE method.
RAD is a delivery model like Agile, it prioritises quick technology releases to the user to enable fast feedback loops using strict requirements and delivery planning controls. Thomas used this in his earlier days in Financial Change Management roles. Excel Macro based models existed at the time of the Great Financial Crisis (GFC) and many of these were developed using RAD methodologies enabling traders to get very quick changes to their spreadsheets to calculate risk and other metrics. Thomas since then has used PRINCE and MSP to deliver strategic risk management systems with live risk calculation to meet the various new regulations post GFC.
The Hybrid method as it is named, combines approaches Waterfalls, Agile and RAD into a flexible yet structured methodology allowing for tailoring to the situation. Requirements are still quite detailed, but delivery is more flexible with iterations to allow for requirements and benefits confirmation during the overall project delivery. This is the actual approach that is used to deliver projects in most businesses even if they are not aware of it.
PRINCE2 (Projects IN Controlled Environments) is the most recent official project management methodology of the UK government. The concepts of PRINCE2 bring many upgrades to the Waterfalls methodology historically used by government organisations, however as with any approach the execution and quality of requirements is really the key determinant of benefits being realised quantitatively. Thomas is a PRINCE2 qualified Practitioner and has not yet found an organisation that has fully adopted the method into its business change day to day operations. Thomas has the experience, and the skill is to tailor the method, a key factor in PRINCE2. The method is rigid but flexible and the ability of work packages as the leader sees fit to separate deliveries brings elements of Agile to the PRINCE2 model. As previously noted Hybrid approaches bring together the various methods to drawn upon the best of all parts to deliver a hybrid approach suited to the business.
This methodology is a framework whereby large complex change can be broken down into manageable, inter-related projects. The skill of managing ongoing interdependent projects and manging resources across multiple projects are key outcomes of understanding and using the MSP framework. Thomas is an MSP Practitioner and has used these skills when delivering complex transformations in leading investment banking institutions while balancing the needs of many complex requirements including to meet the needs of both internal and external stakeholders.
Please contact us to find out how we can support your next project.