The Project Firing Squad

By Patrick Gray

(Back to article)

Regardless of where your IT organization has progressed in the evolution from a utility-like service to a executor of business strategy, the bread and butter of most IT organizations is the successful execution of projects: non-recurring, limited duration activities designed around completing a defined task.

As organizations have grown savvier about project management, successful execution is on the rise, however choosing the right projects to deliver remains a challenge for many companies.

The risks around deciding on appropriate projects are myriad and not unlike any other large investment a corporation might make:

Other Articles by Patrick Gray

The Power of Process

Design for IT

Avoiding the Axe

Death By Deliverables

If you want to comment on these or any other articles you see on CIO Update, we'd like to hear from you in our IT Management Forum. Thanks for reading.

- Allen Bernard, Managing Editor.

FREE IT Management Newsletters

Indecision leads to missed opportunities, or a competitor outmaneuvering you while you side on the sidelines analyzing, pondering and pontificating. Poor decisions lead to bad investments, or an abundance of activity in one area at the expense of missed opportunities in another, potentially more important area.

In addition, nothing saps the morale of your people more than continuously making a decision then revisiting and revising that decision every week; bouncing your teams between objectives like larger and vastly more costly game of ping pong.

So, how does your organization ensure it effectively and efficiently gives a potential project a yea or nay?

Know Thy Portfolio

Most investors have a defined allocation model for their investment portfolio; placing a certain percentage of their assets in emerging markets, for example. An organization needs to have a similar allocation model for their project spending, funding a certain percentage of infrastructure projects, and a certain percentage of R&D-type projects for example.

While perfecting this allocation model is a large piece of work in and of itself, it is critical to providing a framework for choosing projects. Without a defined allocation model and knowledge of what is in your current portfolio, your organization is akin to the investor that picks the “flavor-of-the-month” stock or mutual fund based on someone else’s advice.

It is rare for this type of investor to succeed in the long run, nor will an organization that chooses projects based on articles in the IT rags, or what competitors are doing at that particular moment.

Once the allocation model is defined, any potential project can be analyzed to determine how it fits within the model, and the allocation model serves as the basis for choosing projects. With the model in place, the following three areas will help ensure your company effectively and efficiently selects projects for execution.

Well-Defined Selection Process

No one likes a rigged or vague process, where decisions are made in a closed room with unknown criteria, and a verdict is handed down without any understanding of the process that engendered it. Rather, subject each project to a group of standard selection criteria that everyone is aware of in advance.

Estimates on the project’s return, cost and resource requirements are obvious criteria, as well as how the potential project fits within the organization’s current project portfolio. Assessments of the project’s risk and impacted business units are also helpful.

The goal of a well-defined selection process is not to create demands for reams of documentation, but to require certain metrics that can be used to compare different projects on the same terms. This adds some rigor to the process of building a case for a particular project, and allows for an “apples-to-apples” comparison among different potential projects.

The “Firing Squad”

We’ve all seen the old cliché of “too many cooks in the kitchen” in action at some point in our careers, and chances are it appeared during the course of making a project-related decision. The most effective solution to this problem is limiting the number of people with a vote on a particular project, and making that group known well in advance of the actual selection or rejection of a project.

You need not create a tyrannical dictatorship, and input and commentary can and should be solicited from many people within the organization, but the final decision should fall to a small and defined group. This group should contain representatives from IT and the business, and preferably the C-level executives for all but the most mundane and routine projects.

The essence of this group is that it represent a cross-section of the corporation at large, not just IT and a few people outside IT with a vested interest in the project under discussion. In fact, the optimal “firing squad” equally represents each business unit of the company, since any project will take resources away from other business units’ potential projects. This group should also be a standing body familiar with the selection process, rather than an ad hoc committee thrown together at the last moment.

Make a Decision

When considering a potential project, the worst decision is always indecision. This may seem trite, considering there are always unknowns when deciding to move forward with a project or place it in the proverbial dustbin.

Whether it is external market factors, pending strategy changes, or Nostradamus’ latest predictions of an impending apocalypse, decision making in the corporate environment can be a difficult task. If your selection committee can not reach a conclusion, or hits a stalemate, the best alternative is to make a decision not to decide at this point.

How is this different from indecision? Indecision is a constant revisiting of the project under consideration, marked by waffling and repeated requests for more information and time for deliberation. A vote not to decide requires documenting the mitigating factors that are making the decision difficult, noting any changes in the internal or external environment influencing the decision one way or another, and selecting a timeframe in which to revisit the decision.

Once these items have been recorded, the project is shelved and no longer discussed; only being revisited after the selected timeframe has elapsed. If none of the factors or circumstances have changed, the project is eliminated from consideration or shelved for another defined timeframe.

As your organization perfects the art of the project firing squad, IT will grow to been seen as a reliable and fair arbitrator of projects. Guerrilla projects and “rogue” efforts by individual business units will gradually become a thing of the past, and the combined project portfolio will become greater than the sum of its constituent parts.

While the hard work of successfully completing these projects still lies ahead, you have stacked the decks in the organization’s favor by selecting projects relevant to the entire company, through a transparent and efficient process.

Patrick Gray is the founder and president of the Prevoyance Group, located in Harrison, NY. Prevoyance Group focuses on providing project performance consulting, which combines project management and process improvement to ensure large IT projects deliver organizational value. Past clients include Gillette, Pitney Bowes, OfficeMax and several other Fortune 500 and 1000 companies.