Triple Constraints Under Attack!

There's been some discourse recently on project management sites about whether the venerable Triple Constraints are still valid measures for determining project success. Here's a few thoughts:

First, they are not measures for success as much as they are parameters for project planning, scheduling and control. There is still plenty of value in using this model as a way of communicating to project sponsors and stakeholders that the constraints influence project decisionmaking and tradeoffs.

The Triple Constraints do not influence the quality or validity of the project's business case. Nor due they on their own take into account the fact that a project can be late and overbudget and still be perceived as wildly successful.

The triple constraints are just tools. They are valid in helping the PM and sponsor shape basic planning, scheduling and control issues and problems. However, these are not true measures of project success. A project can deliver on all three as well as agreed-to scope (which, by the way, is represented by the size of the triangle - don't tell me otherwise, I will argue with anyone on this forever!), and still be a failure if the business case was not valid or changed mid-project, or if the end users are unable to use the perfectly-executed project deliverables.

New ways of assessing a project add dimension to the evaluation and planning processes. They also, however, raise the debate of the role of the project manager. I do not completely agree with the ongoing movement that posits that PMs should be justifying their projects, making their business cases, etc. That's the sponsor's job - the PM helps. This is where the additional dimensions of project success and evaluation can help all involved to do their jobs more effectively.

Completed my master's degree

This is purely a celebratory post: This past Saturday I completed my master of science in project management at UW-Platteville and graduated from the program. It's great to be finished! I'll be teaching in this program over the summer and hope to maintain my association with this fine project management master's degree program for a long time.

Great Software firm, Madison PMI PDD and Teaching Updates

Smart PDF Converter Pro: I highly recommend this software and this company (SmartSoft). I was looking for software to convert a scanned PDF to an editable Word document. Long story short, I bought this software online - quick, seamless process. Turned out it did not do what I thought it did, which they quickly acknowledged, and they directed me to other software that would do what I needed - not theirs. Since I already have Adobe Acrobat Pro, I asked them for a refund, which they turned around in less than an hour.

High points - their software, although it did not meet my specific need, was great otherwise. Their tech support and customer service was great. They had no qualms pointing me to another source to get what I needed, and they issued a prompt refund, no questions asked. What a great firm! http://www.pdftodocconverterpro.com

Madison PMI PDD
So a couple of weeks ago, I attended and spoke at the Madison (WI) PMI Professional Development Day. It was held at Madison's Monona Terrace, which for those of you not familiar with Madison, is on the shore of Lake Monona and is a Frank Lloyd Wright-designed venue - neat place. They/we had some good keynotes, including the state's current CIO (Oskar Anderson) and the CEO of Tenrox, Rudolf Melik. Nice to see several old and newer colleagues including some folks who were at my talk at PMI-Milwaukee.

I also had the chance to be in Buck Joseph's morning session. Buck is an emeritus professor at UW-Madison, and for years taught the Persuasion and Influence Skills for Project Managers course in the UW-Madison Exec Ed Project Management certificate program. I was fortunate to have him as an instructor in the mid-90's in this capacity. Buck's style and reputation are well-known, and his presentation was standing room-only.

Now, had I known earlier that Buck was presenting at the same time as me in the afternoon, I would have been semi-depressed all day. Fortunately I did not realize this until after lunch. When I taught in the UW-Madison project management program's week-long, two- course sessions, I used to teach Managing Multiple Projects as the second course of the week and sometimes followed Buck. Talk about a hard act to follow. I received good evaluations, but one participant went as far as to say that no one should have to teach after Buck Joseph. He's that engaging and fun.

So, Buck's 3 PM session opposite mine was packed, and mine was a bit sparsely attended, as I suspected would be the case. At least with Buck's reputation, I can safely assume it was because so many people wanted to see Buck!

Teaching Updates
I am teaching a course in Project Quality Management for UW-Milwaukee on May 5 - 6. First time teaching this course for UW-M, and I am updating a fair amount of the material for this session.

UW-Platteville has asked me to teach in their M.S. in Project Management program this summer, and so I will be teaching a course called Interpersonal Skills for Virtual and Co-Located Teams. Since this is my first go at this in the UW-P program, Jeff Hathaway, another instructor, will be working with me. It is great to be graduating from UW-Platteville and then having the opportunity to get back into the program as an instructor.

Jim's response and other matters...

Jim Rapoza was kind enough to respond to my e-mail. He points out that for many people who need the kind of help with project management that good tool can provide, new processes introduced through these new tools can provide needed assistance.

In other news - initial feedback from PMI-Milwaukee last week was good. They had a nice crowd, and are at a new venue (Panos) since I last presented to this group. Next week is Madison PMI's Professional Development Day, where I am presenting "Losing Your Religion" again.

Gantthead is in the midst of a major push to expand their social networking capabilities. I am not a huge fan of this whole social networking deal, but within the context of a project management-specific site like Gantthead, it works for me.

March 3 issue of eWeek - Jim Rapoza's article on PM software

In the March 3 issue of eWeek, Jim Rapoza reviews some SAAS project management software, and states that "over the years, we've seem many interesting applications that have attempted to bring new methods and processes to project management..." There's more to his introductory generalizations, and I think Jim's point is that MS Project has been so dominant that not much innovation has been successful in the PM software arena.

The article prompted me to e-mail Jim, and to post here and elsewhere on one of my favorite soapboxes: Process before tools. As practitioner and academic in the PM field, I must again state to all that project management starts with development of good and repeatable process and then looks for the appropriate tools to automate and streamline a good process.

A good PM can excellently manage projects with a whiteboard and an abacus. Most PMs I know still consider Excel to be the ultimate PM tool. Many, many people make the mistake of thinking that because they have selected and implemented MS Project (or some other PM software) they are "doing project management."

My point - the article seems to infer that new PM software applications should drive change in the way projects are managed - not so. Good project management practices are independent of software. The software selected should support a PM specialization/practice area or organization's successful processes, not determine or drive them.

Jim's article talks about how one of the new programs (LiquidPlanner, which I really like the look of) addresses project management's general intolerance for uncertainty despite constant experience that the dates and estimates we PMs give with such confidence are in fact given with varying degrees of uncertainty. This is not by choice.

Project management does not generally tolerate uncertainty because the people paying for projects do not tolerate it. The key here is that there are process efforts in place, especially around software development planning, scheduling and control, that emphasize experiential estimating. These new tools seem to support this, but development of good process is still king.

Once project sponsors learn to accept some inherent uncertainty and PM processes evolve to manage and communicate this effectively, then the software can help support and streamline the management process. Software cannot and should not drive the way projects are managed.

Upcoming Speaking Engagements

I'll be presenting "Losing Your Religion" at the Madison/South-Central Wisconsin PMI Chapter's Professional Development Day on April 18. My colleague David Antonioni will be presenting his Stakeholder Management Framework as well, so it will be a reprise of our presentations in Sydney.

I'll be presenting on "Improving Organizational Project Management" April 2 at PMI-Milwaukee. Very kind of PMI-Milwaukee to have me back - they are a great chapter with well-attended meetings.

If you are in the area, look forward to seeing you there.

My paper - PMI Asia-Pacific Global Conference

In case anyone is interested, I've posted the paper I presented at the PMI Global Conference in Sydney last week. Here's the link - it's on my website.

http://www.sdbworks.com/APGC_2008_paper.htm

I'll be delivering this same presentation in April at the Madison, WI PMI Chapter's Professional Development Day. I am currently working on paper and seminar proposals for PMI's 2009 GCs and SeminarsWorld. It would be great to get to another GC as a presenter, or as a seminar presenter.