By
Bob Prieto
Senior Vice President
Fluor Corporation

Over the years I have read all too many project closeout reports, reports from turn-around managers on troubled projects, audit reports and project post-mortems. These reports have recurring findings that can be used to either guide effective management of a project or serve as a findings checklist for the auditor or other manager looking at a troubled project. Clearly an ounce of prevention is the desired course of action.

While the “findings” that follow are not all encompassing, they serve as a good framework for project managers, functional leads and corporate management to assess whether a particular project is suffering from or prone to one or more of the findings common to many troubled projects.

For turnaround manager’s and project auditor’s, it unfortunately will give them a head start in structuring their report!

Findings On A Troubled Project

1. Failing to Adequately Plan:
• Poorly defined objectives lead to weak planning
• Weak planning leads to inefficiency and rework
• Plan without the end clearly understood
• Plan not utilized or kept up to date
2. Weak Communications:
• Stakeholders not fully defined
• Communication plan for individual stakeholder groups not fully in place
• Frequency and completeness of communication does not meet stakeholder’s needs
• Communication plan and efforts not updated or fail to evolve through project lifecycle
• Communication approach provides insufficiently for “active listening”
• Project status not communicated frequently and in detail
3. Failing to Get Adequate Team Buy-in:
• Top down planning creates perception of “expediting”
• Limited team buy-in delays “front line” decisions, acceptance of responsibility and constructive suggestions and feedback
• Lack of required team skills may not be identified early on
4. Team Skills Don’t Meet Project Needs:
• Skill gaps not identified
• “Hope” adapted as a strategy
• Changed project needs not reflected in plan or team skills mix
5. No One is Responsible:
• Roles and responsibilities in project execution not articulated
• Control of “white spaces” not addressed
• Support mechanisms not identified or in place
• Penalty for “taking personal risks” outweighs penalty for “failing to take personal risk” (retribution vs. reward culture)
6. Performance Metrics not Effectively Used:
• “True Condition” of project (or portion) is not known
• Work performance metrics foster “debate on data” versus focus on performance improvement
• Accountability not linked to performance
• Communication and collaboration metrics not established for cross functional activities
• Importance of safety and quality to overall efficiency not addressed by metrics
7. Team Culture Not Defined, Communicated, Established or Supported:
• Negative behaviors are tolerated
• Difficulty of cultural change not appreciated
• Team building never completed
• Feedback mechanism to assess “team” performance not in place
8. Plan Not Sufficiently Developed:
• Notion that the “devil is in the details” is not heeded
• Planning not to a level that allows gaps, conflicts or opportunities to become apparent
• Planning assumptions not stress tested by detailed plan development
• Productivity, cost, schedule details based on “historical means” versus current or forecast “realities”
9. Failure to Fully Assess and Manage Risks:
• Quantitative risks not comprehensively assessed
• Over reliance on “factors” from prior projects without understanding differences between projects
• Event risks not adequately addressed
• “Known unknowns” not factored into risk analysis
• Management actions to mitigate or manage risks not developed or articulated
• Indirect consequences of risks not considered (Project disruption)
• Contingency planning and provision not vigorously done
• Plan to manage “unknown unknowns” (crisis planning) not done
10. Critical Path Not Understood:
• Project priorities and requirement for achievement not well developed
• Resources not allocated to clearly support critical path
• Intermediate milestones not clearly understood or communicated
• Events impacting or potentially impacting critical path not understood or communicated in a timely manner
11. Schedule Does Not Reflect Realities of Project:
• “Political” dates bear no resemblance to project approach or resource loading
• Morale impact of unrealistic dates and intermediate milestones not appreciated
• Project sequencing and decision time frames not understood
• External schedule drivers and constraints not adequately considered
• Interdependences not adequately reflected in project schedule
12. Quality Management Culture Not Built Into Project:
• Quality Plan not developed at outset of project
• Quality activities not flowed down into all project elements
• Quality requirements not extended throughout supply chain
• Timely identification of quality affecting issues does not occur
• Corrective action plans not developed or effectively implemented
13. Inadequate Project Management Skills:
• Required skills not clearly understood at outset of project
• Skill gaps not identified
• Inadequate training to close skills gaps
• Inadequate ongoing performance assessment of management skills
14. Dysfunctional Project Organization:
• No clear lines of authority
• Lack of empowerment
• Silos impede project performance
• Lack of timely information sharing
• Poor interpersonal relationships or lack of trust
15. Project Management Framework Systems Not in Place or Appropriately Utilized
• Necessary systems and tools not put in place at outset of project
• Framework systems are not adequately integrated and do not provide timely and comprehensive “view” of the project.
• Framework systems are not being utilized and local tools contain unintegrated information important to management of project and assessment of performance
16. Project Execution Lacks Rigor:
• Individual WBS elements or activities have not been rigorously planned
• Early and late start scenarios not considered
• Pre-conditions to undertaking an activity not well understood
• Decisions not made in a timely fashion
• “Paralysis by analysis” is accepted as substitute for informed risk taking
• Changes and their inevitable disruption are not managed
• Priorities “float” or no process for re-prioritization of project exists
• Resource allocation does not match stated priorities
• Resource hoarding tolerated
• Organizational or process silos not broken down
17. Project Execution Bottlenecks not Aggressively Addressed:
• Telltale signs of people, process or physical bottlenecks not recognized or ignored
• Unwillingness to deal with difficult people or change or failed processes
• Team member concerns have no effective channel to management level where they can be addressed
• Information is funneled or hoarded
18. Project Reporting Does Not Support Project Delivery
• Project reports focus on quantity of information versus quality of information
• Project reports do not track open item status and commitments at an appropriate level of detail
• Cross cutting project trends and issues not readily identified
19. Audit Process Not Used to Support Project Execution:
• Focused on playing “gotcha” instead of supporting project improvement
• Project team not involved in defining areas of audit, frequency, and areas of focus at outset of project to support their needs
• Not seen as valuable tool by project team
• Frequency of audits inadequate to provide input for timely course correction
• Expertise of audit team inadequate or not respected by project team
20. Training Not Viewed as an Ongoing Activity:
• Work Process implemented on ad hoc basis
• No consistency of approach
• No feedback loops to capture lessons learned or train best practices into team activities
• Evolution of skills and associated training needs over project life cycle not recognized
21. Inadequate Project Closeout:
• Lack of closeout plan and checklist
• Commissioning requirements not comprehensively addressed
• Financial closeout process and requirements not agreed to
22. Lessons Not Learned:
• Prior project post mortems not reviewed
• Lessons learned and best practices encountered during project execution not captured or communicated
• Inadequate attention to conducting a project post mortem