Evaluate frequently & terminate fast – project selection for the new decade

If your organization has a consistent project intake & selection process, kudos to you.  But if your intake process happens only once a year, is mostly focused on hard dollar consuming or capital-oriented projects or takes more than two weeks to complete, my condolences.

Let’s look at each of these practices in turn:

1. Annual project selection: I am a strong proponent for strategic planning and the need for organizations to try to establish a medium-long term initiatives plan that looks beyond the next quarter but you cannot expect that projects identified at the beginning of your fiscal year will still all be valuable and prioritized appropriately by the third or fourth quarter of that year.   The frequency of portfolio reviews needs to be tuned to how often reasonable project requests are submitted.

2. Don’t purely focus on hard-dollar or capital-intensive projects.  In nearly all services organizations and a significant percentage of product organizations, resource availability is a primary bottleneck to throughput and a critical source of project schedule risk.  Given this, your project selection process needs to consider all projects especially those that consume internal resources.  You might be better off initiating a project that costs money, but can be mostly delivered using external resources (assuming of course, this project will deliver real business value!) instead of one that costs little but consumes critical internal resources.

3. If your project selection process takes more than two weeks to complete from the moment that reasonable project requests have been submitted, you are encouraging the genesis of “stealth” projects.  In addition, since most strategic projects have time sensitivity, the longer your governance committees spin their wheels in making decisions, the greater the likelihood that the market viability or business benefits of these projects will be reduced.  I am not advocating impulsive decision making – what I am recommending is a combination of a consistent, objective approach to evaluate projects in a rapid fashion, combined with a stage gate process that is able to kill off poorly performing or low value projects in a timely manner.

Traditional approaches to project intake & selection are losing their value unless you happen to be work for a company that operates as a monopoly (or at worse a very limited oligopoly).  Of course, even a monopoly situation won’t help if the market for your products or services is shrinking.

Categories: Project Portfolio Management | Tags: , , | 2 Comments

Post navigation

2 thoughts on “Evaluate frequently & terminate fast – project selection for the new decade

  1. itorganization2017

    I consider a positive and useful metric to be the number of projects that get killed. We all know the dirty secret that projects have a way of keeping going, even when all project participants and even key stakeholders know the project is not going to deliver the value that was initially expected or that justifies the expense.

    A healthy project management process, and a healthy portfolio management process is proactive in weeding out projects in flight that are no longer justified.

    Like

    • kbondale

      Absolutely spot on – one of the first questions I ask all of my clients when learning about their PPM maturity is whether their project funnel becomes a tunnel or whether there are exit ramps!

      Thanks for the feedback!

      Kiron

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: