Monday, 07 September 2009 00:00

Project Inception or Birth?

Rate this item

(0 votes)

The term 'Inception Phase' is often used to signify a project's beginning. Isn’t it really the birth? There are many similarities between a project's lifecycle and this familial analogy.

Inception happens much earlier with a glass of wine, maybe two. That first thought, “Hey, wouldn’t it be neat if we had a…” Complete the sentence to fit the situation. It is at this point that the ball gets rolling, so to speak, and someone decides to invest some time to explore the possibility of making something happen. The originator courts the business manager, selling the concept of the idea, until there is approval to move forward. Voilà! It is conceived. Someone commits to carry and nurture the project, allowing it to incubate and mature into a viable form that can properly benefit the organization as a final product. After the proper gestation, the project is born and has a team assigned. This is the transition that many methodologies errantly label inception.

The project team provides the parental guidance to help the project’s product grow to the point of self-sufficiency. As the product grows, so do the trials and tribulations; the last few months of the project, the adolescent stage, are rife with complications, drama and scope creep. The customer asking, “Why can’t I have one of these? All the cool kids have one.” The stress increases the closer the project gets to completion. Will the product pass all its requisite tests to qualify it for graduation to a released product?

With product release, comes graduation. The acknowledgment that the project’s product has passed all its tests, fulfilling the graduation requirements, includes the ceremonial pomp and circumstance surrounding the release. The project team, now empty nesters, are left to do the retrospectives; reflecting upon what they did right and what they could have done differently. They capture their recollections for future teams, providing them the opportunity to avoid the same pitfalls on other projects. Projects, however, like people come up with new and imaginative ways to cause their team’s grief and anguish. Some new teams simply disregard the advice, doomed to execute the same mistakes.

The product continues through its life until retirement and end-of-life, which are often nearly coincident.

The Reason

Why is this analogy important? Why should anyone care if it is called inception or birth? For a number of reasons. The biggest is that the project starts long before the team that develops is involved. People initiating the project need to understand that supplier involvement is crucial. With their early involvement, comes the understanding of the premise that the project’s value is based upon. This knowledge gives the project team the data to choose the right methodology, the right technology and have the guidance to know the rigor in which to build the product.

How to Help

A Guidance Team, a small group of Project Managers and Architects, can provide this benefit. They counsel the customer at the real inception phase on the risks and technologies to help maintain expectations. They then follow the project through its incubation period and into its infancy, guiding the scope, maintaining a focus on the original goals and providing an project audit function to maintain project’s intent. The result is a reduction in project failures.

This is discussed further in this months article in the PMI Portland Newsletter.

Read 8038 times

Tagged under

Related items

Filling Execution Gaps: How Executives and Project Managers Turn Corporate Strategy into Successful Projects

What Filling Execution Gaps Covers

Filling Execution Gaps

by Todd C. Williams
ISBN: 978-1-5015-0640-6
De G Press (DeGruyter), September 2017

Project alignment, executive sponsorship, change management, governance, leadership, and common understanding. These six business issues are topics of daily discussions between executives, middle management, and project managers; they are the pivotal problems plaguing transformational leadership. Any one of these six, when improperly addressed, will hex a project's chances for success. And, they do—daily—destroying the ability companies to turn vision into value.

Check it out on Amazon or the Filling Execution Gaps website

Without the foundation of a common understanding of goals and core concepts, such as value being critical to success, communication stops and projects fail.

Without change management, users fail to adopt project deliverables, value is lost, and projects fail.

Without maintaining alignment between corporate goals and projects, projects miss their value targets and projects fail.

Without an engaged executive sponsor, scope increases, goals drift, chaos reigns, value is lost, and projects fail.

Without enough governance, critical connections are not made, steps are ignored, value is overlooked, and projects fail.

Too much governance slows progress, companies cannot respond to business pressures, value drowns in bureaucracy, and projects fail.

Without strong leadership defining the vision and value, goals are not set, essential relationships do not form, teams do not develop, essential decisions are not made, and projects fail.
Filling Execution Gaps: Building Success-Focused Organizations

Executives define vision, strategy, and goals to advance the business. Projects enable companies to meet those goals. Between strategy and projects, there is a lot of work to be done—work that lays the foundation for project and operational success. Through experience and research, six common gaps exist in organizations that inhibit project success—an absence of common understanding, disengaged executive sponsors, misalignment with goals, poor change management, ineffective governance, and lackluster leadership.
Get Recognized as a Leader: Four Core Leadership Actions

Leaders make decisions. This requires a core set of actions to gather the best information, hear out the concerns of others, and making a decision that everyone will follow—even if there is not unanimous agreement with the decision. Although there are hundreds of actions leaders must take, there are four core actions that all great leaders do—listening, dialog and discussion, selling a vision, and eliminating blame. This session will discuss those actions in a roundtable format that we call a "What Would You Do?" session. In these sessions, the presenter acts as a moderator spending 10 to 15 minutes per topic working with the audience talking about what the action is, how to best do it, and hearing from the group on how they have carried out the action. This brings significant audience interaction, involvement, and broader education.
Process Mapping

<p>Sorry, your browser cannot display frames!</p>

Process is at the core of any business. It makes work predictable, repeatable, and transferable. Without it we cannot scale our businesses. However, process can be a bane to making progress. Processes that work for a $10 million company have difficulties supporting a $30 million company. Trying to scale them to a $300 million company will not only fail but not address the issues that larger companies have that were never dreamt of in a smaller organization. Processes need to be discarded, revamped, and built—all of that without creating an overburdening bureaucracy.

Anytime you need to go someplace, you first have to know where you are. Processes are never static and your company's current state is probably far from where you think it is. Hence, the first step is mapping out you company's current state followed by defining the future state. This is more than a logical map of the process; it must also include physical maps. Whether your process is solely to provide a service (say, website development) or physical (say, manufacturing) there are logistical issues that complicate the process flow. Without fully understanding those nuances, future state processes will not reach the desired efficiencies.

For more information about process mapping fill out the form to the left and we will get in touch with you.
Success vs Culture
The other day a Latvian student contacted me for my views the connection between culture and success criteria—an important and intriguing topic. After working in Taiwan, Singapore, Korea, Japan, Israel, United States, and Canada, I wear many scars of both blatant and subtle cultural violations. I also know that within a culture one person's success is often another person's failure. So, after dispelling concerns about clicking on some random email link, I completed her survey (please feel free to take it yourself). In the process, I struck up a friendship with the student, Kristine Briežkalne, who is studying at Riga International School of Economics and Business Administration . She has some interesting views and presented me with a Venn diagram showing four frames to a project (business, client, project management, and growth perspectives) and how they intersected. As the diagram is part of her Master's thesis, I will let you ponder the how to label the overlapping areas (an eye-opening exercise).