Economic Inequality: Tale of Two Counties Tale of Two Cities .
Tale of the Four Missing Metrics
15
The Tale of the Four Missing Metrics Focusing on the CONDITIONS for Success © 2013 Joe Hessmiller 1
-
Upload
joe-hessmiller -
Category
Leadership & Management
-
view
61 -
download
1
description
There are four 'super' measures that predict the eventual outcomes of projects; are the requirements/expectations clear, is the sponsor actively involved in the project, and are processes being followed? The fourth measure, rework probability, is a function of the other three measures (with a few additional factors).
Transcript of Tale of the Four Missing Metrics
The Tale of the Four Missing MetricsFocusing on the CONDITIONS for Success
© 2013 Joe Hessmiller1
Three Important CONDITIONS to Monitor
• Expectations Management • Sponsor Involvement • Process Compliance
To Minimize One Project Risk Factor
• Rework ProbabilityAt 40% of total project costs, Rework is the leading cause of projects running over budget and beyond schedule.
2© 2013 Joe Hessmiller
Managing Risk ESPR “The Missing Metrics”
The Four Missing Metrics
• SMART – Are expectations clear?
• SMPL – Is sponsor engaged?
• PAL - Are processes being
followed?
• PRPL – Are causes of
Rework being avoided?
3© 2013 Joe Hessmiller
SMART LevelTracks the clarity of assignments. The higher the SMART Level, the higher the level of understanding of what is expected. Therefore, less Rework and less management intervention required.
The SMART Level
8/10/2
010
8/21/2
010
9/1/2
010
9/12/2
010
9/23/2
010
10/4/2
010
10/15/2
010
10/26/2
010
11/6/2
010
11/17/2
010
11/28/2
010
12/9/2
010
12/20/2
0100.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
SMART IndexUpper Control LimitLower Control Limit
The SMART Level
4© 2013 Joe Hessmiller
SMART LevelMetric derived from participant feedback on the perceived Specificity, Measurability, Achievability, Relevancy and Timeframes for their assignments/deliverables.
SMART IndexWeek
SMART Index
Upper Control
Limit
Lower Control
LimitSpecific Measurable Achievable Relevant
Time-Based
8/10/2010 76.3 100 75 75 50 80 100 958/17/2010 76.3 100 75 75 50 80 100 908/24/2010 75.0 100 75 75 50 80 95 958/31/2010 82.5 100 75 80 70 85 95 95
9/7/2010 83.8 100 75 80 70 85 100 959/14/2010 82.5 100 75 90 70 85 85 909/21/2010 87.5 100 75 90 90 80 90 909/28/2010 92.5 100 75 100 90 80 100 9010/5/2010 88.8 100 75 100 90 75 90 95
10/12/2010 86.3 100 75 90 90 75 90 9510/19/2010 87.5 100 75 90 90 75 95 8510/26/2010 88.8 100 75 90 90 80 95 85
11/2/2010 92.5 100 75 95 95 80 100 9011/9/2010 92.5 100 75 95 90 85 100 95
11/16/2010 93.8 100 75 100 90 85 100 9511/23/2010 93.8 100 75 100 100 85 90 10011/30/2010 93.8 100 75 100 100 80 95 95
12/7/2010 88.8 100 75 90 90 85 90 9012/14/2010 92.5 100 75 90 90 90 100 9512/21/2010 95.0 100 75 95 95 95 95 9512/28/2010 92.5 100 75 90 80 100 100 100
Components of the SMART Level
The SMART Level
5© 2013 Joe Hessmiller
SMART LevelLooks like this project was back under control once the Relevance of the assignments were made clear to the staff.
8/10/2
010
8/21/2
010
9/1/2
010
9/12/2
010
9/23/2
010
10/4/2
010
10/15/2
010
10/26/2
010
11/6/2
010
11/17/2
010
11/28/2
010
12/9/2
010
12/20/2
01040.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
110.0
SMART IndexUpper Control LimitLower Control LimitSpecific MeasurableAchievableRelevantTime-Based
The SMART Level
SMART Level Influencers
6© 2013 Joe Hessmiller
SMPL Line
Tracks the participation level of the senior management and/or sponsor.
The SMPL Line
Senior Management Participation Level
Attention Needed
8/10/2
010
8/21/2
010
9/1/2
010
9/12/2
010
9/23/2
010
10/4/2
010
10/15/2
010
10/26/2
010
11/6/2
010
11/17/2
010
11/28/2
010
12/9/2
010
12/20/2
0100.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
SMPLUpper Control LimitLower Control Limit
7© 2013 Joe Hessmiller
SMPL LineIn this example, the level of participation in meetings, surveys, and other activities is compared to the planned participation by senior management
Senior Management Participation Level
Components of the SMPL Line
8© 2013 Joe Hessmiller
SMPL LineIn this example, the components of the SMPL are shown separately to identify individual areas needing improvement.
Senior Management Participation Level
8/10/2
010
8/23/2
010
9/5/2
010
9/18/2
010
10/1/2
010
10/14/2
010
10/27/2
010
11/9/2
010
11/22/2
010
12/5/2
010
12/18/2
0100.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
SMPLUpper Control LimitLower Control LimitStatus Meeting Atten-denace RateAPO Response RateDecisions Made/Delegated RateConfidence Level
SMPL Line Influences
9© 2013 Joe Hessmiller
PALMeasures likely level of process adherence based on conditions that would tend to lead to ‘short cuts’ on process..
Process Adherence Likelihood
10© 2013 Joe Hessmiller
PALThis table shows how problems with EVA lead to likely abandonment of process until project gets back on track. May be OK, must be identified to be managed.
Process Adherence Likelihood
Components of PAL Line
11© 2013 Joe Hessmiller
PAL
This illustrates the various components of PAL.
PAL Line Influences
12© 2013 Joe Hessmiller
Project Rework Probability LevelPRPL LineTracks the ‘probability’ of Rework based on changes in the conditions that are known to cause Rework.
8/10
/201
0
8/24
/201
0
9/7/
2010
9/21
/201
0
10/5
/201
0
10/1
9/20
10
11/2
/201
0
11/1
6/20
10
11/3
0/20
10
12/1
4/20
10
12/2
8/20
100.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
PRPL
Upper Control Limit
Lower Control Limit
Attention Needed
The PRPL Line
13© 2013 Joe Hessmiller
PRPL Line
SME Involvement, Team Confidence Level, Technical Capability and Requirements Stability are components of PRPL Line.
Project Rework Probability Level (PRPL) Week PRPL
Upper Control
Limit
Lower Control
Limit
SME Involvement
Technical Capability
Requirements Stability
Confidence Level
8/10/2010 5.0 20 0 100 100 80 1008/17/2010 10.0 20 0 80 100 80 1008/24/2010 12.5 20 0 80 100 80 908/31/2010 22.5 20 0 70 90 70 80
9/7/2010 17.5 20 0 80 90 70 909/14/2010 16.3 20 0 80 90 75 909/21/2010 11.3 20 0 80 90 85 1009/28/2010 23.8 20 0 80 60 85 8010/5/2010 23.8 20 0 80 60 85 80
10/12/2010 23.8 20 0 80 60 85 8010/19/2010 18.8 20 0 65 90 85 8510/26/2010 21.3 20 0 70 90 70 85
11/2/2010 16.3 20 0 80 90 70 9511/9/2010 16.3 20 0 80 90 70 95
11/16/2010 16.3 20 0 80 80 80 9511/23/2010 16.3 20 0 80 80 80 9511/30/2010 17.5 20 0 80 80 80 90
12/7/2010 12.5 20 0 80 90 80 10012/14/2010 8.8 20 0 85 90 90 10012/21/2010 5.0 20 0 90 100 90 10012/28/2010 0.0 20 0 100 100 100 100
Project Rework Probability Level
Components of PRPL Line
14© 2013 Joe Hessmiller
PRPL Line
SME Involvement, Team Confidence Level, Technical Capability and Requirements Stability influence rework probability.
Project Rework Probability Level
8/10/2
010
8/21/2
010
9/1/2
010
9/12/2
010
9/23/2
010
10/4/2
010
10/15/2
010
10/26/2
010
11/6/2
010
11/17/2
010
11/28/2
010
12/9/2
010
12/20/2
0100.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
PRPLUpper Control LimitLower Control LimitSME InvolvementConfidence LevelTechnical CapabilityRequirements Stability
PRPL Line Influences
15© 2013 Joe Hessmiller
