As I began brainstorming for this blog assignment I realized that most of the projects I have been a part of have had some scope creep. Yet upon further analysis it seemed that the amount of pre-planning and monitoring throughout the project dictated the amount of scope creep.
Most recently I experienced scope creep in a project that was initially designed to prepare instructors for the next school year and complete summer work hours. As an online high school instructor I am required to work throughout the summer even though my students are on summer break. This usually means that myself and other instructors have summer projects that involve reflecting on the previous year and preparing for the coming year. This year our summer project was suppose to be the creation of course guides that could be used as a study resource for students. This course guide would include the timeline for courses, the topics covered each week, required readings, lecture recordings, supplemental resources, and major assignments.
The pre-planning for this project included a course guide template, a timeline of check-in meetings, and a discussion amongst instructors of what additions or changes would strengthen the usefulness of the course guides. Yet two weeks before the summer projects were to begin we were told that half of the curriculum that we would be utilizing in the coming year would be changed but not available until near the end of the summer. This left everyone scrambling to try to figure out how the course guide project could be adjusted and the project leader ended up making different accommodations for each individual instructor. The project is to be presented next week and after chatting with other instructors it seems that this once dynamic project will not live up to the expectations set at the start of the project.
In this course I now see how the scope creep could have been avoided, leaving the project results uncompromised. I believe the first change I would make would be the amount of pre-planning. I would have involved all the stakeholders, including the curriculum team, from the start of the project. This pre-planning would have also allowed for the identification of potential risks and the creation of contingency plans. Next, I would have established a very clear plan for monitoring the project and for instructors to report their status throughout the project timeline. Lastly, I probably would have been flexible enough to completely change the project and project goals, especially because changing the project was an option. The point of the summer project was to help instructors to prepare for the coming school year and if a different project would have become more beneficial the project should have been changed.
Thank you.
Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E. (2008). Project management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects (pp. 1-21). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Stolovitch, .H, "Monitoring Projects" [video format] Retrieved from Lecture Notes Online Web site: http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=5364556&Survey=1&47=7136420&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=1&bhcp=1
Elizabeth,
ReplyDeleteI know I get pretty, um, ‘pessimistic’ (to put it kindly) when I feel like I’m working on a project that is doomed to fail. Ok, honestly, I don’t handle this sort of situation nearly as well as I would like to.
Disagreeing with aspects of a project, I think, is perfectly normal. But was this a case where you felt from the beginning that the project was not going to work out? If so, how did you handle it? Or was this a case where you were aware that there were issues, but were optimistic that things would work out in the end?
In our text, Portney, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer and Sutton (2008) provide a lot of guidelines for how a project manager should handle scope creep. These guidelines emphasize the importance of communicating with team members, and in a video Dr. Stolovich (n.d.) advised the project manager to have brainstorming meetings with team members, where issues are outlined and solutions are collaboratively developed.
When you described the root cause of the issues in your project – not involving the curriculum team in the planning phase, and not monitoring the project properly – it sounds as though ‘communication’ is at the heart of the issues. Do you think pulling the team together to brainstorm would have helped in this case? Or do you think that no amount of brainstorming would have fixed this issue, and it would have been better to have been notified early that this wasn’t going to work and switch to a different summer project?
- Patrick
References:
Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E. (2008). Project management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Stolovich, H. (n.d.). Project Management Concerns: Locating Resources. [Video]. Retrieved from http://mym.cdn.laureate-media.com/Walden/EDUC/6145/05/downloads/WAL_EDUC6145_05_A_EN-CC.zip
The Importance of Pre-planning
ReplyDeleteThis year’s summer project certainly had great potential for your students so it is unfortunate the plans were not followed through to fruition with the stakeholders.
Considering projects are an annual process, you would assume the plans had been approved by all parties prior to implementation. Your team appeared to have communicated the plans effectively among yourselves, but the stakeholders appeared to have followed their own agenda.
When defining projects the project manager needs to know the background of why the project was authorized, understand the scope of the project and identify the strategies as to how to complete the project (Portny et al, 2008).
Given you experience scope creep on most of your projects (which is normal according to Portny et al. 2008), do you believe a lot of it could be reduced by having a solid statement of work in place along with contingency plans and a risk management plan? It would be frustrating to work on projects every year knowing the stakeholders ‘change’ their minds as to what should be included in the programs.
I agree with you that changing the project was probably the best option for this year given this year’s project will not be as ‘dynamic’ as originally planned. Thank you for sharing your experience!
Reference
Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E. (2008). Project management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Hi Elizabeth,
ReplyDeleteThe first thing I think of with your project is that it should have put off, and a different project would have been more suited for this summer. I understand that courses have to be updated regularly, but if there is an actual curriculum change in the works it could really make all of the work and resources put into this project to be in vain. It makes me think of our textbook’s statement that one sure way to not deal with an issue is pretending it isn’t there (Portney, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer, Sutton, & Kramer). To me the elephant int the room when holding any meeting on this project would be the question of “are we just wasting our time”? I was on a panel of four teachers rewriting our district tests for U.S. History about six years ago when I was teaching high school. If there was talk of curriculum change, I would have been very uncomfortable putting in all of that extra work.
I agree that a good amount of preplanning can only help. It may even lead to schedule changes if moving it to the next summer is actually a viable possibility.
Reference:
Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E. (2008). Project management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects (pp. 1-21). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Hi Patrick, Tracy and Clint,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your comments, suggestions and support. This was one of the unfortunate project situations where the project was not noticeably doomed from the beginning and I was not in a position to be included in the decision making process. As Patrick suggested, I do think that brainstorming could have helped with the scope creep and preventing the scope creep but again unfortunately it would have only worked if leaders would have implemented the solutions that were created.
It seems like besides pre-planning more effectively the leadership needed to do more to encourage the project team and ensure that whatever needed to be done to adjust to scope creep would have been accomplished. As Portny et al detailed (p.306-307), “Four factors encourage a person to become and remain motivated to achieve a goal:
1. Desirability: the value of achieving the goal
2. Feasibility: the likelihood that the goal can be achieved
3. Progress: how things are proceeding as you try to reach your goal
4. Reward: the payoff you realize when you reach the goal
(Portny, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer, Sutton, Kramer, 2008).
I think by simply implementing these encouragement tools any decision the leadership made- working through major scope creep or changing the project- would have been accepted more readily by the project team and would have had more chance of completing a successful project.
Thanks.
Elizabeth
Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E. (2008). Project management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects (pp. 1-21). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.