|
• Illinois: 847-971-4986 • Connecticut: 203-315-2123 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We focus on companies that generate revenue through projects.
Project Management has become a major issue for companies where revenue growth depends on the rapid and timely completion of projects. It is well know that the plight of project managers is a thankless one. Despite their best efforts to both plan projects in detail and closely manage their execution, projects are inevitably late, over budget and deliver less than originally planned. |
|
|
The perceived solution to these failures has been to place more emphasis on precise planning, improving project management skills, closer management and measurement of each step in a project. Unfortunately this approach only exacerbates the situation. When these changes don’t improve performance top management often feels compelled to become even more involved in the details of planning and controlling projects, further compounding the problem.
Four major policy issues We have identified the four major policies that are the core reasons why projects fail to meet expectations. The first is the tendency to start projects as quickly as possible. The logic is that since projects are invariably late, they should be started as soon as possible. Actually the opposite is true. We learned this lesson year’s ago in applying TOC to manufacturing operations. Since production orders were often late, managers tended to release work orders as early as possible. The result of having too many jobs in the pipeline was that it became very difficult to maintain priorities. When people have the opportunity to choose which job to do next they often don’t know what is best for the company. In addition local measurements impact choices further distorting these decisions. In manufacturing when the release of work was choked, jobs took less time and more often met delivery dates. The same phenomenon exists in project management. Reducing the number of projects in the pipeline actually shortens the time to complete projects and improves on time performance.
|
As simple as this policy change sounds , it’s typically difficult to implement and maintain since the prevailing attitude is to do the opposite. We have developed a variety of exercises that are helpful in convincing managers and those involved in executing projects that a different policy should be followed. When the policy is changed the results inevitably speak for themselves solidifying its ongoing use.Projects generally fall into two broad categories. 1. Projects focused on developing new products or services thatproduce additional and often substantial new revenues. Often the "first to market" wins the day even when later market entrants have superior features or lower prices. 2. Projects that improve internal operations and are only indirectlyconnected to generating additional revenue. We work primarily with companies whose projects fall into the first category. The reason is very simple, completing more of these projects with the same resources and completing them on time has a significant impact on the competitive status and financial results of a company. These are the "long lever" improvement opportunities. Our approach differs from others in that we believe the solution lies in having management focus on a few key issues rather then trying to micromanage hundreds of details.
We encourage those interested in understanding more about the other policy changes needed to successfully manage projects to contact us.
|
|
Return
to top of page |
|