In Capable Hands

From In Capable Hands by Glen Alleman (August 16, 2007) [Projects@Work - requires registration, but you can use Bugmenot]

“Simply controlling and measuring the expenditure of project resources — score-keeping — provides little value to the business in the inevitable presence of change and uncertainty. This is why capability-based planning is a helpful alternative to linear, or waterfall, project management methods. Here’s an introduction.”

Over the years the success rate of traditional project management methods applied to software development projects has been underwhelming. These traditional methods are based on a retrospective approach that measures variance against plan rather than providing a performance–forecast that can be used to guide projects in a chaotic environment. There are a number of programmatic control issues associated with IT projects that suggest a better approach is needed.

In using a linear project planning process — sometimes known as waterfall, but often derived from PMBOK-style planning processes — little attention is given to the forces that negatively impact the project. These project risks have no means of evaluation other than to acknowledge their presence, define mitigations and track the results. The impact on the business value of the capabilities of the system is not part of the project management process.

In this approach, avoiding or controlling change becomes the primary activity of project management. In this traditional model, change is undesirable. In the reality of business systems development, change is not only natural it is desirable. It is through change that the system can adapt to the needs of the business, which are themselves driven by external forces. These forces are rarely under the control of the project manager let alone the senior management of the business.

One project failure mode is when the participants and leaders of the project fail to recognize the difference between managing in the presence of change and managing change. It is managing in the presence of change that is a critical success factor of any modern business systems development.

An alternative approach is capability-based planning, which “… involves a functional analysis of operational requirements. Capabilities are identified based on the tasks required… Once the required capability inventory is defined, the most cost effective and efficient options to satisfy the requirements are sought.”

Measuring project and product maturity as a function of effort and time assures that project management adds value to the business. Simply controlling and measuring the expenditure of resources — score-keeping — provides little value in the presence of change. Capabilities–based planning provides a defined outcome that is not a final conclusion but lays the groundwork for the continued delivery of value. Objectives are reached and the operational value delivered when a defined capability is available for use. Features and functions describe the static and dynamic behaviors of a system, but they are not directly connected to the business strategy. Milestones indicate that a position in a timeline has been reached, but do not forecast what value will be delivered to the business or how this value is traceable to the needs of the user community. Capabilities provide the answer to the following question: in order to achieve our objectives, what capabilities must we possess?