When we wake up in the morning we enter the day with a set of assumptions about ourselves, our environment, and the world around us. So too when we undertake projects. I’ve just returned from the latest NDIA IPMD meeting in Washington, D.C. and the most intriguing presentation at the meeting was given by Irv Blickstein regarding a RAND root cause analysis of major program breaches. In short, a major breach in the cost of a program is defined by the Nunn-McCurdy amendment that was first passed in 1982, in which a major defense program breaches its projected baseline cost by more than 15%.
(more…)earned value management
Let’s Get (Technical) — The Crux of Predictive Measures
For many years since the publication of my various papers on technical performance measurement, I have been asked to update my perspectives. Over the years I largely declined, mostly this was due to the fact that I had nothing of importance to add to the conversation. I had staked out what I believed to be a reasonable method of integration between the measurement of technical achievement in human effort and the manner in which the value of that achievement could be documented, along with a reasonable model of technical risk to inform us of our ability to achieve success in the next increment of our technical baseline. A little background may be helpful.
(more…)Synchroncity — What is proper schedule and cost integration?
Much has been said about the achievement of schedule and cost integration (or lack thereof) in the project management community. Much of it consists of hand waving and magic asterisks that hide the significant reconciliation that goes on behind the scenes. From an intellectually honest approach that does not use the topic as a means of promoting a proprietary solution is that authored by Rasdorf and Abudayyeah back in 1991 entitled, “Cost and Schedule Control Integration: Issues and Needs.”
(more…)I Can’t Get No (Satisfaction) — When Software Tools Go Bad
Another article I came across a couple of weeks ago that my schedule prevented me from highlighting was by Michelle Symonds at PM Hut entitled “5 Tell-Tale Signs That You Need a Better Project Management Tool.” According to Ms. Symonds, among these signs are:
a. Additional tools are needed to achieve the intended functionality apart from the core application;
b. Technical support is poor or nonexistent;
c. Personnel in the organization still rely on spreadsheets to extend the functionality of the application;
d. Training on the tool takes more time than training the job;
e. The software tool adds work instead of augmenting or facilitating the achievement of work.
(more…)Keep Away from Runaround SOO — The Pitfalls in Contracting Objectives
I recently ran into an agency where the rule of thumb in contracts is only to use Statements of Objectives, also known as SOO. This is a different animal than the usual Statement of Work (SOW) and Performance Work Statement (PWS).
The SOO, according to DAU’s Acquipedia “is used in solicitations when the Government intends to provide the maximum flexibility to each offeror to propose an innovative approach. That portion of a contract that establishes a broad description of the government’s required performance objectives.”
(more…)I Can See Clearly Now (The Risk Is Gone) — Managing and Denying Risk in PM
I just returned from a project management conference, and among a very distinguished venue of project management specialists, one of the presentations that really impressed me by its refreshingly candid approach was given by Dave Burgess of the U. S. Navy Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) entitled “Integrated Project Management: ‘A View from the Front Line’.” The charts from his presentation will be posted on the site (link in the text on the first line). Among the main points that I took from his presentation are:
(more…)