Search This Blog

Tuesday, 6 June 2017

The fit between published theory on project management and personal practice as a result of my participation in the ActiveBeing project 2014-15

I was involved in a group task together with five other colleagues in which we were expected to come up with a project plan for ActiveBeing. This was a project for introducing a French company into the UK market. The project planning task included creating a budget, defining activities to be undertaken, scheduling, and creating a risk management plan. This report discusses this experience in comparison to established project planning and management theories learnt so far and conclude with an overview of skills that I will need to develop into the future.

Project planning requires that the project teams have a clear picture of the entire project management process from the beginning to the end (Horinem, 2013). A reliable project plan should be sufficient to guide the entire project management process including elements such as the budget, the list and schedule of activities, the risk management plan, and the communication plan (Kerzner, 2013). In our project plan, we failed to create a schedule for activities and also failed to create an effective communication plan. Communication plans are important project implementation tools. They provide a framework for identification of anomalies and resolving them in the shortest time possible (Larson, 2011). They should also outline a management control plan outlining the powers of each of the project team members, the authority allocated for problem solving, and procedure to be followed if unforeseen events arise (Kerzner, 2013). These elements were not provided for in our project plan hence it was largely incomplete. However, the project plan did have good provisions for the budget, the work breakdown structure, and the risk management plan as explained in the sections below.

The budget for our project plan was broken down reflecting the amounts needed for each of the elements of the project including sections of the premise design as well as activities to be involved in the project. The total budget amounted to £194,757.32 which was broken down into other elements. For instance, the advertising fee was estimated at £25,000 while launch event costs were estimated at £100,000. Budgeting processes can be top-down or bottom-up depending on what is considered first.  

The bottom-up budgeting process is one in which the aggregate budget is derived from the sum total of the activities (Harin, 2007). In real scenarios, the project managers are presented with overall estimates for the budget limits within which to operate. However, the actual budgeting process can be done by focusing on the activities and allocating budgetary estimates to each of the activities as a way of getting the exact budget estimate (Horinem, 2013). It is a preferred approach to budgeting as it compels the project manager to think through each of the activities, its necessity, and its contribution to the overall project before allocating budgetary estimates which would also determine the level to which the activity would be emphasised in the project (Harin, 2007).
In our group experience, we used a combination of top down and bottom up budgeting processes. We had a rough estimate on how much we’d need to spend in the project but mostly focused on each of the activities to make budgetary allocations that would ensure each of the activities generated the results desired.

For effectiveness in planning, the project manager should create a work breakdown structure detailing the activities to be undertaken and sub-activities under them (Jugdev and Mathur, 2006). These WBSs help in envisioning the project in its entirety and promotes comprehensiveness in planning (Harin, 2007). In our project exercise, the main activities were identified as project management, design, purchase, construction, and testing. Each of these main activities was divided into its constituent components to facilitate the envisioning of the project in its entirety.

WBSs should be accompanied by activity schedule where the project is envisioned as a process where each activity is implemented at its scheduled time (Kerzner, 2013). In scheduling, the project manager lists all the activities to be undertaken, determines the duration needed for each activity, and determines the predecessor activities to be completed before such an activity is commenced. Scheduling in project management is mostly done using specialised software that produces a detailed Gantt chart (Ford and Bhargav, 2006). This kind of chart provides a pictorial representation of the flow of activities to be undertaken in a project. The software used can also be applied to indicate the resources that will be required for each of the activities. This means that it is possible to create a resources plan indicating when resources will be needed. It is a feature that complements the budgeting process where the project manager is not only aware of the budgetary allocation but also of when the money will be needed to acquire the resources (Harin, 2007). This is a feature that can be used to keep the cost of inventory low and ensure that materials are purchased just in time for use in project implementation.

In our project planning experience, we did not come up with an activity schedule or Gantt chart. This means that our perspective in the project planning exercise was limited with no information on the expected flow of events from the time the project is commenced to the time the project is completed.

Risks are inevitable and they refer to the likelihood that an undesired occurrence with arise in the course of project implementation (Horinem, 2013). The project manager must be able to anticipate these risks and come up with a way of managing them to ensure that project implementation is not derailed. Risk is managed in four most common ways including: risk transfer, risk mitigation, risk avoidance, and risk acceptance (Larson, 2011). The approaches proposed for risk management fell under these approaches of risk management.

The mitigation strategy refers to taking measures to minimise damage after the risk has arisen. This was the dominant approach taken by the group. For instance, the risk of fire during construction would be countered by conducting timely evacuations to limit any fatal injuries that could arise. Similarly, the risk of food poisoning of crew would be mitigated by swiftly taking the patients to the hospital with speed. While this approach to risk management can be effective, other risk management approaches ought to have been considered.

In my opinion, risk avoidance would be a better strategy to employ in the scenarios above. In risk avoidance, the project team ensures that factors that can lead to the risk arising are identified and eliminated or significantly diminished (Kerzner, 2013). If this strategy had been applied to our project planning exercise, the risk of food poisoning would have been avoided by diligence in quality inspection in the cafeteria. The cafeteria services could also be outsourced to reliable service providers with extensive experience in the field and whose record in food safety has been established. Similarly, a risk avoidance strategy could have been applied against the risk of fire during construction by conducting regular inspection to ensure that flammable products and conditions that can result in fire breaking out are eliminated.

The least common approach is risk acceptance where project teams accept a risk as unavoidable and preparing to face the consequences or make the best out of the situation (Larson, 2011). In our experience, one such risk was the risk of costs escalation. This would be countered by asking for the sponsor to inject more funds or seek alternative sources of funding for the project.

When assessed in retrospect, the list of risks that could arise was quite extensive covering many of the risks. However, there was little creativity in proposing risk management measures. For instance, risk transfer was not used for any of these risks. Risk transfer is done where a supplier bears the full cost of a risk arising (Larson, 2011). For instance, the cafeteria services could be outsourced and the service provider would take full responsibility in the event that food served causes food poisoning.

The project planning exercise undertaken in the ActiveBeing project largely conformed to the theory of project planning and the framework for the main components. It provided a clear work breakdown structure and a good risk management plan. These were important elements of getting a comprehensive view of the project and the events that are likely to arise in the course of project implementation. However, a number of important elements were not put into consideration. These include lack of a work schedule or Gantt chart, and lack of a communication plan. The project plan also failed to recap the project scope for clarity on what the project is all about.

From the concluding remarks above, the project planning exercise can be said to have only partially reflected on the project management theories that relate to project planning. There’s therefore need to review the project plan and provide for the missing elements in order for it to be complete. From a personal learning perspective, I have learnt much about project planning; especially from the weaknesses observed in the group exercise. This will be important practical experience to be invoked in future studies of a similar nature.



Ford, D.N., Bhargav, S., 2006. Project management quality and the value of flexible strategies. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management 13(3), pp. 275-289
Harin, E., 2007. Project management in the real world. Swindon: The British Computer Society
Horine, G., 2013. Project management: absolute beginner's guide. 3rd Ed. Horine Indianapolis, IN: Que
Jugdev, K., Mathur, G., 2006. Project management elements as strategic assets: preliminary findings. Management Research News 29(1), pp. 604-617
Kerzner, H., 2013. Project management: a systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling. New York: Senior Executive Director for Project Management, the International Institute for Learning

Larson, E.W., 2011.  Project management: the managerial process. 5th Ed. New York : McGraw-Hill Irwin

No comments:

Post a Comment