Wright-time and Budget Criteria

8/4/2019 Wright-time and Budget Criteria

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/wright-time-and-budget-criteria 1/6

P e r g a m o n

International Journal of Project ManagementVol. 15, No. 3, pp. 181-186, 1997© 1997 Elsevier Science Ltd and IPMA. All rights reserved

Printed in Grea t Britain0263-7863/97 $17.00 + 0.00

PII: S0263-7863(96)00059-2

Time and budget: the twinimperat ives of a project sponsor

J Nevan WrightAuckland Institute of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand

T hi s pa per i s wr i t t en by a ma n who ha s nev er ma na g ed a pro ject , but who ha s f requent l y

empl o y ed pro ject ma na g ers . He ha s the t emeri ty to d i scuss wha t c l i en t s rea l l y wa nt . Ma ny

pro ject ma na g ers mi g ht be surpr i sed to l ea rn tha t t i me a nd co s t a re the tw i n i mpera t i v es o f

c l i en ts . ( It i s a s sum ed tha t pro ject s w i l l be co mpl eted mo r e o r l ess t o spec if i ca t i o n .) T he rea so n s

why pro ject s a re se l do m co mpl eted o n t i me a nd wi th i n budg et a re ex p l o red a nd sug g es t i o ns a re

ma de a s to ho w a pro ject ma na g er ca n mi n i mi ze the fa l l -o ut when these tw i n i mpera t i v es a re

no t met . I t is co nc l uded tha t the pro b l em l i es pa rt ly w i th a l a ck o f unders ta ndi ng o f the

co mpl ex i t i es o f a pro ject by spo nso rs a nd pa rt l y i n the ma nner i n whi ch pro ject ma na g ers

po s i t i o n themse l v es . I t i s reco mmended tha t pro ject ma na g ers sho u l d no t co ns i der tha t they a re

wo rk i ng fo r a ' c l i en t ', but ra ther tha t they sho u l d po s i t i o n themse l v es a s a mem ber o f the c li en t

g ro up , wo rk i ng f ro m wi th i n ra ther tha n f ro m wi tho ut . I t i s co ntended tha t i n th i s ma nner a

pro ject ma n a g er w i l l be in a bet t er po s i t i o n to g a in the a ccepta nce a nd unders ta ndi ng o f a ll the

s ta keho l ders o f a pro ject . Wi tho u t a ccepta nc e a nd the co o pera t i o n o f s ta keho l ders i t i s

co ns i dered un l i ke l y tha t a ny pro ject w i l l be co mpl eted nea r t i me o r do se to budg et . F i na l l y ,

i t i s co nc l ude d tha t fo r a v a r i e ty o f rea so ns se l do m wi l l a ny pro ject co me i n o n t i me a nd budg et .

I t i s sug g es t ed tha t i f co mmuni ca t i o n between the pro ject ma na g er a nd the o ther s ta keho l dersi s f ree a nd o pen then the pro ject ma n a g er ' s reputa t i o n , i ns t ea d o f su f f er i ng when the tw i n

i mpera t i v es o f t i me a nd budg et a re no t a ch i ev ed , mi g ht ev en be enha nced . © 1 9 9 7 El sev i er

S c i e n c e L t d a n d I P M A

Keywords: sponsor, tea m, tea m building, commun ication, stakeholder, time, bu dget

"Men, my brothers, men the workersever reaping something new:

That which they have done

but earnest of the things

that they shall do."Tennyson

I am no t a p ro j ec t mana ger , no r have I ever been one . O ver

t he year s , ho wever , I have emp l oye d p ro j ec t manage r s , and

as a ' c l i en t ' I know what I wan t . I wan t t he p ro j ec t com-

pleted to speci f icat ion , on t ime and wi th in budget .

F rom my exper i ence mos t p ro j ec t s a r e even t ua l l y com-

p l e t ed m ore o r l es s t o spec if i ca ti on , bu t se l dom on t i me and

wi t h i n budge t . Fo r me , and fo r every o t her ' c l i en t ' I have

spoken t o , t i me and budge t a r e t he t w in i mpera t i ves . Wh en

I made t h i s po i n t i n a paper p r esen t ed t o a C onference o f

t he P ro j ec t Managemen t In s t i t u t e , New Zea l and C hap t e r i n

Nov em ber 1995 t severa l de l ega t es exp ressed su rp r ise .

The genera l f ee l i ng was t ha t t i me and cos t were no t t heonly , or overr id ing , cr i ter ia . Indeed, th is i s so , but my

point i s that i t i s not for the pro ject manager to decide.

Shou l d t here be any h i n t o f a dev i a ti on f ro m t he ag reed t i me

f r ame o r budge t t hen it i s ve ry mu ch t he ' c l i en t ' s ' concern ;

rather than the pro ject manager , albei t wi th good in tent ions,

t r y i ng t o r emedy t he s i t ua t i on a l one , any concerns shou l d

be commun i ca t ed as soon as poss i b l e t o t he c l i en t .

To a genera l manager p ro j ec t managemen t appear s t o be

s t r a i gh t fo rward . The ve ry na t u re o f a p ro j ec t means t ha tthere i s a def in i te goal , a budge t and a time f ram e. Likew ise

when t he p ro jec t i s compl e t ed everyone kn ows t he ou t come.

We can a l l measu re i f t he j ob i s compl e t ed t o spec i f i ca t i on ,

t he cos t can be com pu t ed and i t i s ve ry obv i ous i f t he t a rge t

da t e has been met . I f on l y genera l manag emen t was t ha t

c l ea r cu t ! Wi t h genera l managemen t t her e i s a l ways more

t han one goa l and o f t en goa l s a r e compet i ng fo r r esou rces .

L i kewi se wi t h genera l managemen t t her e i s no se t t i me

f r ame. The bus i ness does no t f i n ish a t the end o f t he

f i nanc i a l year , t he show goes on year a f t e r year .

Up unt i l recent ly I put the b lame fai r ly and squarely on

p ro j ec t manage r s fo r no t keep i ng wi t h i n budge t and fo r no t

per fo rmi ng wi t h i n t he a l l o t t ed t i me f r ame. My argumen t

was t ha t t he p ro j ec t manager i n accep t i ng t he b r i e f , t ookresponsib i l i ty for the pro ject being completed to speci f ica-

t ion , on t ime and wi th in budget . Al l the essent ial elements

o f t he p ro j ec t were wel l known i n advance and had been

agreed by both par t ies : the so s ty led ' c l ien t ' and the pro ject

181



Time and budget: J N Wright

manager . Fa i lure to comple te a pro jec t on t ime and to

budge t could sure ly only be the pro jec t manager ' s fau l t ?

After a l l , is not the cl ient a lways r ight?

Positioning the project manager

I suggest that a contribut ing factor as to why project managers

ca r ry the b lame when the twin impera t ives of t ime and

budge t a re over -expended, begins wi th the way in which

they pos i t ion themse lves . P ro jec t managers t end to t ake a

subserv ient ro le to the pe rson or organi sa t ion employing

them. This i s c lea r ly demons t ra ted by the pro jec t manager

re fe r r ing to the sponsor o f the pro jec t a s the ' c l i en t . '

Admi t t ed ly , i f the pro jec t manager i s h i red f rom wi thout

the organisat ion , then th ere is some jus t i f icat ion in con-

s idering the sponsor as the cl ient , but even this can be

chal lenged. I would suggest that once the project begins

then an exte rna l ly appoin ted pro jec t manager should seek

to becom e in te rnal i sed , i . e. to becom e par t of the organi sa -

t ion for the dura t ion of the pro jec t . I f the pro jec t man ager

is appointed from within the organisat ion there is no val idreason why the pro jec t manag er should cons ider the sponsor

as a client.

The term cl ient suggests that one party in a t ransact ion is

in the posi t ion of having to be sat is fied or even placated,

' t he c l ien t is a lways r ight syndro me ' . The o ther pa r ty to the

t ransac t ion , the provider of a produc t or s e rv ice , has the

subservien t role of s t r iving to sat is fy. If a project ma nag er

refers to the sponsor as the cl ient then by implicat ion the

projec t manag er has accepted the subserv ient ro le of having

to s t r ive to sat is fy the cl ient .

Cons ider the provider and c l i en t re la t ionship in any o ther

type of commerc ia l t ransac t ion . In a manufac tur ing ente r -

prise the cl ient or end user is not normally in day to day

contac t wi th the fac tory manag er . T rue , wi th the concept ofin terna l cus tomers , fac tory pe rsonne l wi l l be encouraged to

th ink of the next pe rson in the process as the i r cus tomer o r

cl ient. 2 I t is not expected, how ever, that internal cus tom ers

wil l busy themselves with how the preceding s tep is being

carried out , they are only interes ted in receiving a product

which meets specificat ion. The same is t rue with a service

industry. With a service t ransact ion the cl ient is the

rec ip ient of the se rv ice and does not become involved in

te ll ing the pro vider of the se rv ice how to do the job , and

in mos t cases much of the work i s done in the ' back of f i ce '

away f rom the c l i en t . 3 But no mat te r w he ther a manufac-

turing or service organisat ion or whether cl ients are

in te rna l or ex te rna l , for mo s t comm erc ia l t ransac tions the re

is only one immediate cl ient to be sat is fied and Carlzon's

mom ents of t ru th (poin ts of contac t be tween pro vider and

cl ient) are few and short l ived. 4

The d i f fe rences be tween pro jec t manage ment and norm al

c o m m e r c i a l m a n a g e m e n t a r e s e v e r a l.

F i r s t , t he pro jec t manager wi l l no t be making a produc t

for , or interact ing with, jus t one cl ient . For a project

manager the re wi l l a lways be severa l s t akeholders , and inmany cases the outcome of the pro jec t , e spec ia l ly where

change m anagem ent i s involved , wi l l of t en a f fec t the whole

organisat ion. Certainly there wil l be a sponsor who is

somet imes known as the pro jec t d i rec tor . But th i s one

person cannot be said to be the cl ient . The sponsor wil l be

only on e of the s takeholders in the project .Secondly , the re wi l l no t be jus t a few shor t mo ments o f

t ru th . The pro jec t man ager wi l l , for the dura t ion of the pro-

ject , be cont inuously interact ing with several s takeholders .

Thi rd ly , w hen the pro jec t i s over , i f the pro jec t mana ger

182

was appoin ted f ro m wi th in the organi sa t ion , he / she i s going

to have to l ive with the end users and, ind eed, be one of the

end users . In short , the project manager in this sense,

becomes h i s or he r own c l i en t .

The advantages of working f rom w i th in and as pa r t of an

organi sa t ion as aga ins t working f rom wi thout ( in a sub-

servient role fo r the cl ient who has to be sat isfied), must be

obviou s . Ins tead o f being an outs ider l imited to sat is fyingone person the pro jec t manager can now be pos i t ioned as

be ing par t of the organi sa tion , w orking wi th mem bers of

the organisat ion to achieve a goal beneficial to al l . Once

accepted as pa r t of the organi sa t ion com munica t ion bar r i e rs

wi l l b reak down and i t wi l l become eas ie r for the pro jec t

mana ger to expla in the purpose and benef i ts of the pro jec t.

The s p o n s o r

Cer ta in ly the re has to be one foca l pe rson for the pro jec t

manager to repor t and look to for suppor t and as s i s t ance .

P ro jec t managers do not work in a vacuum. They ma y have

been re l i eved of o the r dut i es to manage a pro jec t and to ldto concentrate on the project to the exclus ion of al l e lse .

How ever , l ike any fi e ld of human endeav our they wi l l no t

be able to do i t a l l by themselves . They wil l need resources

and s t rong and vis ible support . Therefore, le t us cal l that

foca l pe rson the pro jec t champion o r the sponsor but not the

client.

P ro jec t managers draw the i r human resources f rom

various departments and discipl ines within the organisat ion

and of t en a l so f rom wi thout the organi sa t ion . I f a manager

of a depar tment who i s ca l led upon to ' l en d ' re sources for

a project is not ful ly support ive of the project , then

resources may only be made ava i l ab le grudgingly and a t a

t ime sui table to the lending department . Likewise the

ca l ibre of the loaned resource may b e suspec t. Then too theperson be ing ' l en t ' may be more concerned wi th the i r

pr im ary job , and consequent ly p lace more impor tance on

looking a fter that job (and incidental ly their own interes ts)

ra the r than the requi rements of the pro jec t . Thi s l ack of

com mi tm ent to a pro jec t wi l l be mo re l ike ly to ex i st i f the

percept ion i s that the i r ' r ea l ' boss (not the pro jec t manager )

is less than vi tal ly interes ted in the outcome of the project .

Lack of suppor t by personne l f rom other d iv i s ions does

not a lways mean tha t people a re de l ibe ra te ly , or even

maliciously, creat ing difficul t ies . Often lack of support

de r ives f rom pres sures in the i r own d iv i s ion and a pre -

occupa t ion wi th o ther 'more impor tant ' p r ior i t i e s . In

addi t ion, Eddie Obe ng 5 found that there w il l be ins tances

where some people wil l have a ves ted interes t in the fai lure

of a pro jec t . T he reasons for th is can inc lude j ea lousy ,

r iva l ry , l ack of apprec ia t ion of the a ims of the pro jec t , o r

s imply an avers ion to change . Turner 6 al so d i scusses

individual personal object ives , including hidden agendas

and covert object ives . Such agendas and object ives include

manag ers us ing a pro jec t to widen the i r sphere of inf luence ,

people res i s t an t to change and people wishing to pro tec t

the i r jobs .Whatever the os tens ib le reason for l ack of in te res t or

support for a project , the real reason wil l be t raceable back

to a l ack of s t rong and v i s ib le suppor t by senior manage-

ment . I t is , therefore, essent ial that senior management

promotes the pro jec t and i s s een to be ac t ive ly doing so .Forem an and M oney 7 desc r ibe th is a s ' i n t e rna l mar ke t ing ' .

In shor t , i t cannot be over emphas i sed tha t a l l involved

wi th in the organi sa t ion have to be aware of the objec t ives

and the impor tance of the pro jec t. In today ' s c l imate of



open management th i s would not s eem to be a s t a r t l ing

suggest ion, but in real i ty projects are often not given s t rong

and v i s ib le suppor t by senior manag ement . I f suppor t f rom

the top i s made obvious then the doubte rs and re luc tant

providers of resources wi l l become les s doubt fu l and l es srelucta nt. 5,s

I t is genera l ly accepted tha t no pro jec t m anager i s going

to succeed i f they a re not openly suppor ted by senior

manag ement . 5'6 Likewise no pro jec t m anager i s going to

succeed wi thout the en thus ias t i c and mot iva ted suppor t of

the mem bers o f the pro jec t t eam.

Team building

The re are two levels of team in a project . Firs t , there is the

projec t t eam i t s e l f which has to be welded toge ther and

enthused w ith the objects of the project , and secondly , there

is the wider total organisat ion team which has to be

convinced of the va l id i ty of the pro jec t .

When senior management commi tment i s ev ident the

motiv at ion and the enthusing o f the f i rst team , the pro-jec t t eam, would seem to be a re la t ive ly s t ra ight forward

task. Ini t ia l ly each individual in the project team can be

expec ted to fee l some sense of an ti c ipa tion and mot iva-

t ion because they have been s ingled out for the pro jec t .

Mot iva t ing the whole organi sa t ion i s a fa r grea te r cha l l enge

and may inc lude a s epara te change management pro jec t

i f the va lues and cul ture o f the organi sa t ion a re be ing

chal lenged.

To m aintain the ini tia l sense of enthusia sm within the

projec t t eam, the pro jec t man ager in the ro le of t eam leader

wi l l have to be en thusias ti c , comm unica te goa l s and objec -

t ives c lea r ly and genera l ly show leadership . Tampoe 9

descr ibes an approach ca l ledaction-centred leadership,

th e

bas i s of which i s tha t i f p ro jec t manag ers a re to com ple te

a pro jec t success fu lly they mus t be able to man age the t eam

as a whole and mana ge the indiv idua l s of the t eam. Ac t ion-

centred leadership ident i f ies three overlapping object ives of

t e a m m a n a g e m e n t :

• achieving the task;

• group maintenance needs ;

• mee t ing individual object ives .

The impo r tance of in te rac t ion among t eam mem bers ,

" to l ea rn how each t eam m emb er th inks and ac t s ' ' ° i s

genera l ly accepted by behavioura l i s t s a s a requi s i t e for

t eam bui ld ing . L ikewise Turner a l so addres ses the i s sue

of pro jec t t eam build ing , and adds tha t " the pro jec t

manager should encourage people to work in t eams , and

to interact with others in the organizat ion. This is not

jus t confined to the project team, but should cover al l

depar tments and groups involved in the ch ang e" . 6 Turn er

sees f rank communica t ion as be ing the mos t e f fec t ive

way to s t imula te t eam deve lopment and in te r -group

coopera t ion .

In pract ice, however, i t is important that enthusias t ic

members do not communica te mixed s igna l s out s ide the

team. Thus the t eam leader mus t be ca re fu l to ensure tha t

mem bers of the t eam a re fu l ly br ie fed and unders tand and

accept that for important issues the team leader fulfi ls

Mintzberg ' s negot ia tor and spokesperson ro les . " In shor t ,wi th in the t eam open and f rank comm unica t ion i s c ruc ia l i f

the t eam i s to becom e uni f ied , but i t is of equa l imp or tance

that external ly the team leader is the representat ive of the

team as spokesperson and negot ia tor .


Communicat ion with sponsor

Idea l ly the sponsor (or champion) should be moni tor ing the

progres s of the pro jec t so that any devia t ion of t ime or cos t

can be ident i f ied early and correct ive act ion taken. This

means tha t the sponsor needs regula r repor t s by the pro jec t

manager . Weekly repor t s would seem to be sens ib le .

Repor t s do not have to be long and de ta il ed , norm al ly a one

page summ ary of progres s should be suf fi c ien t . Ins i st ence

by the spon sor on week ly repor t s does not sugges t tha t the

sponsor should in te r fe re in the pro jec t or t ry to t ake over

the pro jec t . S imply put , a l though the pro jec t manager has

been charged with the responsibi l i ty for the project , the

spon sor obviou sly has a ves ted interes t . If nothing else it

is the sponsor who is paying for the project , so surely

the sponsor has a r ight to know i f th ings a re proceeding

according to p lan? (See Figure 1.)Converse ly , i f the sponsor does not want a weekly repor t

then i t i s in the pro jec t manager ' s own in te res t to make

certain that a report is furnished. A weekly report is for the

benef i t o f both pa r ti e s . Th e need for a weekly feedb ackshould be inc luded in the t e rms of re fe rence so tha t both

par t i e s know a t the out se t wha t i s expec ted and wha t to

expec t .

The benef i t s of a weekly feedback a re severa l :

• Firs t , i f the sponso r is eage r for the reports then i t wil l

show to the pro jec t manager tha t the sponsor i s s e r ious

and concerned wi th the progres s of the pro jec t . A sense

of urgency wi l l , t he re fore , be fos te red .

• Secondly , i t wi l l enable the pro jec t mana ger to ask ea r ly

for ex t ra resource .

• Thi rd ly , i f p roblem s a re know n and shared by both

par t i e s as they happen, or a s they begin to emerg e , then

there wil l be no late or nas ty surprises and no need forrec r imina t ions .

• Four th ly , the pro jec t mana ger wi ll feel encouraged to be

up-front and wil l feel less alone. Frequency and the

accus tomed regula r i ty of communica t ion wi l l in i t s e l f

he lp to break down bar r i e rs and to c rea te a sp i r i t o f

toge therness .

Figure 1 PROJE CT MANAGER: D on' t worry , everything is

going to plan. SPONSOR: Great! Your plan or mine?

183




T i m e o r m o n e y ?

It is at the stage when problems become apparent that the

project manager has to seek a ruling from the sponsor as to

what is more important: time or money.

It could be questioned why the relative importance of

time or money was not established at the outset. Indeed, it

is helpful if the project manager can determine the relativeimportance of either before the project begins. Perhaps not

unfairly, a sponsor will usually counter such a question (if

asked before the project begins) along the lines that the

project has to be achieved by a certain date and that the

resource, and the cost of resource, has been established so

as to achieve the target date. At this stage, before the

project has commenced, the sponsor is not likely to take

kindly to a suggestion that the project might take longer

than projected or that more money might be needed than

budgeted. In any event, even if the relative importance of

time and money could be established at the outset, circum-

stances change and where previously time may not have

been crucial or perhaps there was no shortage of funds, this

may not be the case at a later date. Project managers

cannot, therefore, assume that an overrun of time rather

than an overrun in cost, will be acceptable or vice versa.

Only the sponsor can rule on such issues.

If the sponsor determines that it is essential for the project

to be completed by a set date and there is no flexibility or

slack in the project, then extra resource and extra costmight have to be accepted. It is the project manager's

responsibility to find alternative methods and courses of

action in an endeavour to keep the extra cost to a minimum.

But by establishing that time is the crucial element the

project manager will be able to focus on how to remedy the

situation so that the project will be completed on time.

If on the other hand, the sponsor rules that cost is theoverriding factor then the project manager must point out

the problems and delays that will occur if no extra funds are

available. It is the project manager's responsibility to make

certain that the sponsor clearly understands the situation

and the ramifications of not making extra funds and resource

available.

Notification of projected delays or overruns in cost

should be reported before they occur. Such reports should

be in writing and should be receipted by the sponsor. Any

significant variation to the brief should be confirmed in

writing by both the sponsor and the project manager.

Because there is a weekly update of information the

sponsor will gain an appreciation as to what is happening.

As problems and delays become apparent the projectmanager will not feel a reluctance to discuss the need for

additional resource or for extra time. Indeed, if it becomes

apparent in the weekly reports that extra resource is going

to be necessary it could well be the sponsor who makes the

offer of help before the project manager has to ask.

In the above, terms of reference and the brief are alluded

to. The initial drafts of the terms of reference are the

sponsor's responsibility. It is up to the sponsor to define the

objectives of the project. The brief should be a jointresponsibility of the sponsor and the project manager.

T e r m s o f r e f e r e n c e

The terms of reference contain the objectives of the project.Ideally the terms of reference should begin with a tightly

worded, almost terse statement such as: 'To shift premises,

to build a bridge at XYZ, to gain ISO 9000 accreditation,

184

to introduce Total Quality Management'. Unless the aim

can be precisely identified in a few short words it would

suggest that the sponsor or the sponsor's organisation is

not clear as to exactly what they want achieved. As Turner

says, "The development of the project's definition is vital

to its s u cces s . ' ' 6 The terms of reference should also

include a background, give the scope, identify key steps for

the completion of the project, suggest dates for each stage,define the overall target completion date and the total

budget amount. It is vital that the terms of reference should

also state to whom the project manager is responsible. Andas stated above the terms of reference should specify

weekly reporting by the project manager.

Finally, the terms of reference should be dated and

signed off by both the sponsor and the project manager. The

importance of sound terms of reference is such that no

project manager should ever sign them until fully satisfied

that all the points as listed above are adequately covered.

Michael and Burton8 stress that terms of reference must

always be signed off, formally approved on paper, "a nod

is not good enough." If the sponsor does not providewritten terms of reference then it is incumbent on the

project manager to draft up terms of reference and to get

them signed off. Few sponsors are likely to take exception

to this as such action denotes a professional approach and

right from the start will set the tone and show that the

project manager means business.

T h e b r i e f

The brief follows on from the terms of reference. The terms

of reference establish the overall scope, budget and time

frame; in short the three key elements of the project. The

brief requires greater depth than the terms of reference.

The brief identifies what has to be done to make theproject happen. The brief is done in at least two stages. The

aim is to get reasonably accurate estimate of resources and

details of key steps or tasks and the skills required for each.

The brief will also endeavour to establish for each step

costs, time and precedence. It is likely that the brief will

also consider responsibilities and authorities for the supply

of resources. The brief should not be limited to the above

but should include any issue that will affect the successful

outcome of the project. One of the key issues is likely to

be communication and education of the internal market.

Establishing the brief is usually considered to be the pro-

ject manager's job. However, seldom will a project manager

be able to amass all the information needed without thegoodwill of various managers and departments of the

organisation. If a project manager can establish early who

are the real stakeholders in the project then those people,

plus the sponsor, should be involved in contributing to the

brief. Knowing who the stakeholders are is of primary

importance to the project manager.

E stab l i sh i n g s tak e h o l d e r s

Who are the stakeholders? Stakeholders are any individuals

who have an interest in the outcome of the project. Obeng5

says that a typical project will have some stakeholders who

will support it and some who oppose it. He recommends

asking "who is impacted by what this project is trying toachieve?" Once stakeholders are identified, especially

those who are less than enthusiastic concerning the outcomeof the project, then it would be a wise move to target those

people and to find out in a non-confrontational way their



concerns . I f these people can be pe rsuaded to see the

benef i ts and encouraged to as s is t in f raming the wording of

the br ie f, then fu ture t rouble might be aver ted . Somet im es

conce rns ar e val id and i t is as wel l to know o f these

problems a t the out se t . But usua l ly suspic ion of a pro jec t

wi ll a r i s e f rom a l ack of unders tanding of the t rue purpose ,

or then aga in i t might jus t be a re luc tance to change . A s

Mach iavel l i said in 1513, ~2 "I t m ust be consid ered that

the re i s noth ing more d i f f i cu l t to ca r ry out , nor more

doubt fu l to success , nor m ore dangerou s to handle , than to

in it i at e a new order o f th ings ." For m anagem ent of changesee Sche in 13 and Carn all. ~4

Som e pro jec t manage rs might f ind wr it ing a br ie f and

involv ing o thers in the f ramin g of the br ie f t ime consuming

and onerous . But as every so ld ie r knows the t ime spent in

reconna i s sance i s never was ted .

One mus t not look upon those who a re doubt fu l of thep r o j e c t a s ' t h e e n e m y ' . T h e p r o j e c t m a n a g e r m u s t b e

a t t empt ing to pos i t ion her o r h im se l f a s pa r t of the organi s -

a t ion and b e a iming for the suppor t of a l l s t akeholders . In

the long run the pro jec t ma nager wi l l need a l l the he lp andgoodwi l l tha t can be mus te red . Everyone spoken to in the

course of a p ro jec t should be con s idered a potent i a l a l ly . I f ,

howev er , the re a re so me who can not be won o ver , i t is jus t

as impor tant to know who they a re and wha t resu l t ing

problems a re l ike ly to occur .

Establishing parameters

Often a sponsor is not ful ly aware as to exact ly what i t is

they want . T here a re two ext remes o f pro jec t : one i s the

very tangible , such as bui lding a bridge; and at the other

end of the cont inuum the pro jec t might be as in tangib le as

' ins ta l l to ta l qua l i ty management ' . Of ten the reason tha t a

pro jec t manag er i s appoin ted i s because the sponsor knowstha t something has to be done but does not hav e e i the r the

exper t i s e or pe rhaps the t ime to do i t .

Not m any sp onsors wi l l be prepare d to admi t tha t they do

not know exact ly what i t is they are asking or that they

themse lves do not have the exper t i s e to do the job . Faced

wi th a problem and by s imp ly appoin ting a pro jec t manager

might mean the spo nsor wi l l cons ider the problem has been

solved even before the pro jec t begins . The mere ac t of

appoin t ing a pro jec t manag er wi l l mean a dec i s ion has been

made and i t i s now someon e e l se ' s concern . Such a sponsor

does not want to know o f problem s . But even when the

sponsor does not wish to abdica te respons ib i l i ty for a

pro jec t , hum an na ture i s such tha t the t endency o f thespon sor is to min imise the t ime, effort and difficul ty of the

projec t . Thus , i f le f t en t i re ly to the sponsor , the t e rms o f

re fe rence and the br ie f a re unl ike ly to g ive suf f ic ient we ight

to the level of diff icul ty and, thus , unless the project m anag er

is careful insufficient t ime and resource wil l be al located.

The pro jec t ma nager , in theory a t l east , does not have to

accept the brief as i t is wri t ten. But seldom wil l the project

mana ger , when agree ing to the brie f , be in posses s ion of al l

the fac t s. Indeed , pa r t of the pro jec t should a lways be to

es t imate wha t i s needed to make the pro jec t happen. Idea l ly

the a im should be to de te rmine exac t ly wha t wi l l be needed,but i t is not unt i l the project actual ly begins that special

requirements and prob lems wil l emerg e. E ven with a tangible

prob lem such as ' bu i ld a br idge ' where i t could be expec tedthat the quant i ties of materials , ma chinery and p eople needed

could be accura te ly de te rmined in advance , problems wi l l

arise . I t is only when there is a f lash flood and the foun-

da t ions a re washed away, or when i t i s found tha t the road


for t rucking in the supplies needs rebui lding, or when

anyth ing e l se tha t can go wrong does go wrong, tha t i t i s

real ised that with projects there is no such thing as

ce r t a in ty . I t fo l lows tha t any cos t budge t can only be an

est imate. Both part ies , the sponsor and the project manager,

should accept this a t the outset . This is why, once the

projec t i s underw ay, weekly mee t ings wi l l be so impor tant .

When problems a r i s e they should be repor ted a t the out se t

and not a l lowed to accumula te .

Any exper ienced pro jec t manager wi l l know tha t no

projec t wi l l ever be f ree o f problems and wi l l thus bui ld in to

the br ie f a s much s lack as possib le for each s t ep . I sugges t

tha t a good ru le of thumb i s to add a minimum of 50% to

every t ime es t imate , and 50% to the f ir s t e s t imate of the

budge t . Af te r a l l no one has ever been c r i t i c i s ed for

f in i sh ing ahead of t ime and be low budge t .

When I made my 50% sugges t ion a t the P ro jec t Manage-

ment Ins ti tu te Confe rence , New Zea land Chapte r I one

de lega te was heard to remark tha t obvious ly I had never

been concerned wi th compet i t ive t ender ing . The answer i s

no and yes ! No, I have never t endered for a pro jec t , and yesI have been involved many a t ime as the sponsor for a

pro jec t . I t would seem to me tha t to underes timate cos t s and

t ime when t ender ing , jus t to 'w in ' a pro jec t i s not in

anyone 's interes ts , certainly not the cl ient ' s , and certainly

it is not ethical.

Recommendations

To minimise over runs in t ime and budge t i t is recomm ended

that:

1 . every pro jec t should have a br ie f spec i fy ing t ime and

budge t ;

2 . the pro jec t manager i s involved in obtain ing da ta forthe brief , a cont ingency al lowance should always be

included.

To faci l i ta te the smooth running of the project i t is recom-

mended tha t :

1. s t rong and vis ible support is given by the sponso r to the

project ;

2 . the pro jec t mana ger i s pos it ioned as pa r t of the organi s -

at ion, working from within and not as a provider work ing

from out s ide the organi sa t ion;

3. the project manager ident i f ies al l the internal s take-

holders and gains suppo rt of those s takeholders .

To improve communica t ion wi th the sponsor i t i s recom-mended tha t :

1 . the pro jec t man ager repor t s w eekly to the sponsor ;

2 . the pro jec t manager i s up f ront and keeps the sponsor

advi sed of problems and potent i a l problems ;

3. sponso rs show a l ively interes t in the progre ss of the

projec t and a re v i s ib ly suppor t ive of pro jec t managers ;

4 . pro jec t managers do not make as sumpt ions where t ime

or money i s involved;

5 . any major va r ia t ions to the br ie f a re s igned of f by the

sponsor and the pro jec t manager .

Conclusions

Projec t s range f rom the s imple s ingle exerc i se to a number

of complex in te r - l inked problems . P ro jec t s can l as t for

days , months or even years . Managing a pro jec t i s s e ldom

straightforward and requires special skil ls in com municat ion,

185




planning and motivation of others. Since projects are nearly

always one- off endeavours, seldom w ill there be a fit of past

experience or established procedures to guide project

managers. This paper has discussed the need for a close

working relationship between the project manager and

the sponsor and the other stakeholders of the sponsoring

organisation. However, equally important will be the need

for the project manager to generate enthusiasm within the

project team. People from various departments and from

different disciplines will often be required to work together,

and often individuals will see their first priority as being

with their parent department. Clearly commun ication with,

and motivation of, project team members will be a key

issue for the project manager.

Overall the way in which any project manager will be

judged by the sponsor is if the project is completed to

specification, on time and within budget. For a variety of

reasons, often beyond the control of the project manager,

seldom does a project come in on time and within budget.

This paper has been written with the aim of minimising the

fall out and, indeed, enhancing the reputation for profes-sionalism of the project manager when the imperatives of

time and money are not achieved.

R e f e r e n c e s

1. Wright, J N, 'Time and budget: the twin imperatives for a projectmanager ' Proceedings of the Inaugural Conference 1995 ProjectManagement Institute New Zealand Chapter Wellington, New Zealand

(1995)2. Bank, J, The Essence of Total Quality Management Prentice Hall,

New York (1992)3. Dale, B G, Managing Quality Prentice Hall, New York (1994)4. Carlzon, J, Moments of Truth Ballinger, Cambridge, MA (1987)5. Obeng, E, All Change! The Project Leaders Secret Handbook Pitman,

London (1994)6. Turner, J R, The Handbook of Project-Based Management McGraw-

Hill, Maidenhead (1993) 62, 867. Foreman, S K and Money, A H , International Marketing--Co ncepts,

Measurement and Application, Unpublished paper, The M anagementCollege, Henley-on-Thames, Oxon (1995)

8. Michael, N and Burton, C, Basic Project Management Reed Books,Auckland (1991)

9. Tampoe, M , 'Teams: the essence of successful project management'

International Journal of Project Management 7 (1989) 12-1710. Robbins, S and Mukerji, D, Managing Organisations New Challenges

and Perspectives Prentice Hall, New York (1994)11. Mintzberg, H, The Nature of Managerial Work Harper & Row,

London (1973)

12. Machiavelli, N, The Prince (Trans. Luigi Ricci, revised by E R PVincent 1952) New American Library of World Literature, NewYork (1513)

13. Schein, E H, Organizational Culture: A Dynamic View Josey Bass,San Francisco (1991)

14. Carnall, C, Managing Change Routledge, London (1993)

J Nevan Wright is a Master ofBusiness Studies (Massey), B Comm.(Victoria University Wellington),

Associate Fellow NZ Institute ofManagement. Nevan is currently aSenior Lecturer with the Auckland

Institute of Technology in New

Zealand. He is also a tutor for theHenley MBA Programme in NewZealand and for the last 3 years he

has spent several months of eachyear as a visiting member of Faculty ;at Henley, The Management College,

UK, tutoring in Management ofOperations. Prior to joining academia ....

5 years ago Nevan was a general manager and a director of severalmulti-national manufacturing companies based in New Zealand.Before this he served 9 years with the Royal New Zealand Air Force.Nevan is the co-author, with Ron Basu, of Total ManufacturingSolutions published by Butterworth and Heinemann, November 1996.Total Manufacturing Solutions discusses a project managementapproach to benchmarking to enable a manufacturer to achieveworM-class manufacturing status. Nevan has had several articles

and papers published in recent years on the subjects of corporate

culture, operations management and quality management. He is aJustice of the Peace, and an Associate Fellow of the New ZealandInstitute of Management. Spare time interests are golf, gardening and

family.

186

Wright-time and Budget Criteria

Documents

Transcript of Wright-time and Budget Criteria