Interesting question, but it first requires some insight into what “important” is.
Let me suggest two dimensions of “important”:
1. The degree of impact something has on our ability to deliver a great outcome, and
2. Whether our assessment of that factor gives us a leading or a lagging indication of success.
Great. We now can look at this topic through the lens of a classic two-by-two matrix, like this:
And we might conclude that the answer to our big question should lie in the upper right quadrant, and secondarily perhaps in the lower right quadrant.
Or are we spending most of our energy on measuring, tracking, and managing other things? Well, let’s see…
Elsewhere I have written about seven key factors in project and programme success. Briefly, they are:
- Stakeholders are committed
- Business benefits will be realized
- Work and schedule are predictable
- Scope is realistic and managed
- Team is high performing
- Technical risks are mitigated
- Delivery organization benefits will be realized.
In my view, and especially as our projects and programmes are played for higher and higher stakes, three of those factors are of supreme importance to success:
- Stakeholder commitment
- Business benefits
- High performing team.
Furthermore, of the seven factors, only two can truly be assessed in a leading indicator fashion:
- Stakeholder commitment, and
- Business benefits.
All others present lagging indications, to a greater or lesser degree. That is, by the time enough time has elapsed to give a reliable read out, it can be difficult to “correctably” manage to a highly successful outcome.
So by this analysis, our two-by-two matrix looks like this:
Yet what do we measure, track, and manage mostly? Things, I suggest, in the lower left quadrant, especially:
- Work & Schedule (although really only if we are doing some sort of Earned Value Analysis) and
- Delivery Organization Benefits (and only to the extent of understanding the financial costs of delivery versus the promise).
*** Wait…what??? ***
So we only measure two of the seven factors, and those two are not the most critical, and in any case, are lagging indicators?
Yikes!!!!
Now, a word about measurement, because I can hear you protesting that it’s awfully hard to quantify Stakeholder Commitment, for one example.
It is possible, and frequently beneficial, to measure without significant precision. We do it all the time.
If you are driving in winter and are coming to a curve, you “measure” the road conditions to determine if the surface is ice-covered or bare. You don’t need to know the specific coefficient of friction between your tires and the road surface to decide whether you need to slow down. And yet the road condition is your leading indicator for successful navigation of the curve.
* * * * *
So back to our matrix, and our big question.
As a programme or project manager, where are you going to “up your game” in measuring, tracking, and managing for a successful outcome?
What does that look like?
And who do you look like, as a leader, not just a manager?
Good questions….
Comments