Module 12

Spring 2010 closure

Compiled by Greg Kinney

MUDDIEST ITEM Q and A:
Question:
I wish they give more example about how EV relates to critical ratio
Answer:
These are complementary metrics, but there’s not a neat conversion.  Earned value is not synonymous with the cost of performing the work to earn the value.  If a bid has a schedule of values – say, if you’re paid by the quantities of gravel fill in a roadway – your bid price per cubic yard might be “loaded.”  You might have a high unit price for that item, but you cut back on unit costs elsewhere in order to be the overall low bidder.  (Contractors who do this are often betting that there will be more fill than the plans show because of conditions they think the engineers aren’t accounting for – and they’re often right.)  So the earned value for this item is disproportionate to cost.  Earned value is often more directly related to progress than to cost, but earned value is the economic valuation of that progress (how many dollars you earned for 10,000 cubic yards of fill) as opposed to the progress quantity itself (i.e., 10,000 cubic yards of fill).

Question:
The confused question is how a PM could effectively control human performance in a project environment. The most control tools introduced in this chapter focus on cost and budget control; however, human issues could be big sources to cause problems in project.

Answer:
You’re correct that the human factors aren’t really discussed in this chapter.  They are discussed briefly in Chapter 3 (“Selecting a Project Manager”) and in Section 4.8 (“Human Factors and the Project Team” which discusses team dynamics and conflicts), but there is much more to study about this subject than you find in this text. 

The thing to realize is the project control metrics seek to be objective.  Negative results may well result from human issues, but there are systemic and environmental factors that may be causing human beings to fail.  The results of project monitoring and control activities tend to be flagging the fact that there is a problem, and often they help identify where exactly the problem is in terms of the project plan or budget.  But these tools don’t in themselves fix the problems – humans must figure out how.  And human beings must figure out how the problems came to be, whether it’s a human issue or some systemic issue.

Question:
The muddiest part of this chapter was how to use the critical ratio. I can see where it comes from, the calculation. But it seems like too much of a summary. Either a process is having budget problems, or having schedule problems. They both seem like independent problems that must be examined. But maybe I am not getting the concept.  
Answer:
The critical ratio is an aggregated metric to be used in conjunction with other metrics such as schedule variance.   You don’t need to use it if you don’t like, but it is a tool.
Just a quick response on a point you’re making:  budget and schedule problems aren’t independent.  There is a high degree of correlation between the two.  But you need to examine them separately as well as together.

Question:
The muddiest item relates to the discussion of control or creative activities. Trying to control creativity essentially stymies the creative process. But the author states that the process is controllable. How does the manager know if the control system is undermining the creative process?
Answer:
I don’t know if I could improve on the book’s discussion.  Project controls must be applied with a relatively delicate touch to the creative project; I think the key is a PM who is creative in his or her own right, so is appreciative as well as inspirational and demanding.  If you have controller types – “bean counters” as it were – intruding on the process, there may not be good results.  But without doubt, there is a need to exert some control on creative projects.   There have been some disastrous movie productions – “Heaven’s Gate” frequently gets mentioned – where budgets and schedules were far, far overrun.  Was there an offsetting creative benefit?  No.

Question:
I was surprised that the postcontrol section did not explain the consequences of placing blame on the other functional groups that were involved in the project.  The section describes the PM’s duty to be protective (or self-preserving), but that isn’t the intent of the exercise – nor is it to hang someone else out to dry.  The more the report becomes about “who”, the less it becomes about “what” or “how”.  The intent is to apply it to future “what’s and how’s”.  
Answer:
I agree.  I am not opposed to holding people and groups accountable for their actions or inactions that contributed to failure.  But I am opposed to looking at accountabilities in a vacuum that does not take into account the overall environment.  So often these reflect system failures such as lack of definition in roles and responsibilities, lack of scope resolution, chronic under-resourcing and priority conflicts.  It is true that there is sometimes negligence or even “sabotage” but most often that isn’t the case.  It is just more productive to fix the system for the future than to focus on blame.  But it’s harder work, and often your hard-charging executives are more interested in quick action to “fix” problems by firing people.

Question:
The least clear thing I learned from this module was in relation to the list of characteristics of a good control system on Page 558.  One of the characteristics listed is “The system must operate in an ethical manner.”  What does that mean?  It seems control systems are objective, not subjective.  Can you give me an example of an unethical project control mechanism?  Legal versus illegal I understand, but ethical versus unethical? 
Answer:
To get some insight into this, look at the previous bullet:  “The control system must be truly useful.  It must satisfy the real needs of the project, not the whims of the project manager.”  And the following bullet which in part says: “Problems must be reported while there is still time to do something about them, and before they become large enough to destroy the project.”  If project controls are executed in an ethical manner, you are providing objective feedback to everybody in a timely manner while there is still time.  You are not altering your message to cater to the audience.   Examples of unethical control systems could be as follows:

• Due to negligence, inattention or simple manipulation, a PM either doesn’t implement timely and objective project controls, or blocks them so that a good story is maintained for the longest time possible.   Then the company is victimized while the PM looks good.
• The PM is negligent about implementing project controls, but then when the bad news arrives, he goes on a witch hunt and holds people on a lower level responsible for blowing the budget/schedule.  This is deeply unethical when people at a lower level had no idea the project was in trouble.  (This is a disturbingly common situation in American business, by the way.)
• The PM applies unrealistic control metrics selectively, in a manner designed to undermine or get rid of people he doesn’t like.

None of this is illegal, but it is unethical.