Seven ways a project (plan) can fail and foredoom a project
The primary goal of a project plan is to deliver the best tradeoff between reality and commitments—to satisfy as much of its requirements as possible while making and keeping realistic commitments given real constraints of time and money.
What’s a failed project? One that doesn’t meet its commitments for—
- Products or services that perform as specified by the customer
- On time
- Within budget
This article specifically addresses software projects but the points made apply to any kind of work plan.
Why do projects fail?
Many—perhaps most—software projects that fail do not fail in software development.
Many projects fail before software development actually begins.
They fail because their plans are defective. In that sense, they are planned failures.
Failure in planning is planning to fail
Seven Ways a Project (Plan) Can Fail
- The project isn’t sufficiently estimated and scheduled
- The plan does not sufficiently address project risks and mitigation.
- The plan does not sufficiently address project resource requirements
- The plan does not sufficiently address timely acquisition of knowledge and skills
- The plan does not sufficiently address stakeholder involvement
- The plan proceeds without strong commitments by all stakeholders
- The plan is not maintained throughout the project life cycle
The keyword here, in case you didn’t notice, is sufficiently.
The project isn’t sufficiently scoped, estimated and scheduled
Project scope is the framework for the plan. The goal is to identify all stakeholders (see below), the business goals that will be addressed, the conceptual product architecture and the work to be performed.
The work plan is typically developed as a hierarchical work breakdown structure (WBS) that shows the tasks to be performed in each area of software engineering and support. It is (or should be) based upon the envisioned product architecture.
Mistakes often made here (in no particular order):
- Inadequately detailed planning
You don’t want to wait until the end of the current phase (or cycle) to find out how well your estimates are tracking against actual results. Once you have sufficient size and complexity data from a phase, you should plan the next phase at the lowest practical level of detail—tied to specific work-product components (requirements, designs, code, test plans et al). Unfortunately, you can only do this by phase (or cycle for spiral or agile lifecycles).
This leads to the next possible mistake.
- Prematurely detailed planning
Work plan details depend on and correspond to available product metadata.
You can’t plan detailed work for software product requirements analysis without actual requirements. With requirements in hand, you can scope the features and functions (however named) that will reviewed, clarified and modeled by the initial analysis phase of the project. You won’t have the analysis work products you need to do a detail plan for product design until analysis produces them.
As the saying goes, you don’t know what you don’t know.
Detailed planning is only indicated for the next phase or cycle of the project. Anything more is speculation not planning.
This is one reason project planning must be reiterated at project milestones to use newly developed work product metadata—specifically size and complexity. Until you can quantify how much work will be performed and its level of complexity, you can’t plan detail tasks to do the work.
- Failure to develop estimates for work product size and complexity
This is one of the most common defects seen in software project planning. Aside from lines of code—and that only rarely—very little work product sizing is estimated. Every software work product in every phase—regardless of methodology—offers some basis for sizing and assessment of complexity. Work product size and complexity drive—or should drive estimates for work effort.
- Confusion of work effort and work duration
Many projects estimate effort in terms of calendar time—days, weeks, or months.
Effort measures how much human effort it will take to do the work. Duration is how long the work will take.
It takes longer then one week for one full-time resource to expend forty hours of effort on a task.
Effort should be estimated; duration should be derived.
Effort should be estimated based upon size and complexity. Balancing effort with resource availability should yield the correct duration.
- Failure to use objective models for effort estimation
As mentioned previously, work size and complexity should be the principle parameters for estimating effort. An estimating model should use historical or industrial data for comparable work whenever possible.
The plan does not sufficiently address project risks and mitigation.
Nothing is without risk. Project risks can include hurricane season, timely availability of resources, volatile and changing business requirements, and timely completion of related projects, among other thing. Virtually every aspect and section of the project plan may pose risks that require monitoring and mitigation.
Risks should be itemized, quantified, and prioritized for their potential impact, probability of occurrence, and timing. Work to monitor the risk and mitigate the impact should be planned and resources allocated on a contingency basis. If you don’t do this, you increase the risk that your project will be late and or over-budget.
The plan does not sufficiently address project resource requirements
You can’t develop a realistic project schedule without knowing two things: work effort estimates and available resources to do the work.
This process can founder on the myth that resources are available full time to do the work. Therefore, a forty-hour estimate for effort becomes one week on the schedule. Resources are never available full time. There are myriad ongoing overhead tasks and events—time and status reporting, production system problems, staff meetings, employee events et al—that interrupt time on task. For lack of anywhere else to report the time, team members report it against assigned project tasks and slippage ensues.
A realistic plan devises an algorithm for computing realistic availability metrics. Depending on the organization, real availability is likely to be in the 60-80% range.
The plan should also identify specific non-routine equipment and software resources along with the effort and time required to assimilate and integrate them into ongoing project work.
The plan does not sufficiently address timely acquisition of knowledge and skills
Typically, a project team is assigned because proven individual and team skill sets are a good match for a project. In the ever evolving and rapidly changing IT landscape that will not always be a given. Minimally, project planning should assess skill needs and skilled-resource availability and plan time and resources for closing any gaps.
The plan does not sufficiently address stakeholder involvement
Project stakeholders may include customers, users, other business and IT organizations, other systems, other projects, vendors, and the project team.
Strong stakeholder commitments are critical to project success.
The plan should document:
- Stakeholders and specific commitments
- Specific roles and responsibilities, tied in to specific scheduled events in the plan
- Time, effort, and resources needed to ensure timely stakeholder involvement
The plan proceeds without strong commitments by all stakeholders
Without formally documented organizational commitments, authorized by appropriate levels of management, a project can flounder and founder through no fault of the project team.
The plan is not maintained throughout the project lifecycle
Project planning is too often regarded as a preliminary front-end to the project lifecycle. A dynamic instrument, the plan changes on a daily and weekly basis based upon actual work performed and actual events—planned or unplanned. That assumes ongoing monitoring and timely feedback on every critical component that has been cited in this post.
If you estimate it, you need to track it and revise your estimates as needed based upon actual results.
The planning process should be reiterated at prescribed milestones in the project lifecycle, at completion of phases in a traditional waterfall lifecycle, or thread-completion in a multi-threaded waterfall cycle, or completion of a cycle in a spiral or agile lifecycle. At each point, there is new and expanded software product metadata and verification data that will enable a greater level of detail in the next phase or cycle of development.
There is much overlap between project planning and project monitoring & control and project management encompasses both processes throughout the life cycle of the project.
A shorthand way of saying all this is that a project can fail because there is no appropriate planning process. An appropriate planning process anticipates and satisfies all the potential causes of failure cited above.