The vast majority of us have to live in a world of finite resources.
This is true at all levels of human activity - an individual, team,
project, group, company, conglomerate, or nation. By
definition, this implies that trade-offs and choices are part of our everyday
life, more so, in the world of project management. Be it small or
large, simple or complex, all projects require a constant stream of
decisions on resource-related issues. And here, resources include the
traditional parameters such as time, material, people and money.
However, underlying the above parameters are the two pillars of quality
and scope.
The development organization has the constant desire to
deliver the most elegant solution. And projects are, therefore, managed
to ensure this. On the other hand, the business side of the
organization may have other parameters by which they measure the success of
the project. This, in turn, may demand that the project be
managed differently. So, while engineers may think that zero defects should
be the hallmark of any delivery, business may need projects to
be delivered to a specific date in order to ensure that the product hits
a market window.
A common fallacy amongst project teams is to try and identify
every risk in a project and then manage what they think are the most
important at that point in the life cycle of the project. This is neither feasible
nor necessary. If one can live with a risk, why try and mitigate it?
This article introduces the reader to ideas on how to
manage projects based on what is vital to a project. Every project must have
so called "Key Success Factors" (KSFs) that all stakeholders in the
project agree to. All parts of the organization must then work
towards ensuring that the project operates in a way to optimize the KSFs. |