I have been debating with myself on whether to create more sample Practitioner papers. It seems that the APMG website has gone down to just one sample, although I thought that we had two. Another thought – the new style Practitioner exams are easy to be marked by computer, ensuring a rapid turn-round, but do they show the same level of in-depth knowledge of the method that the old essay-style papers used to do, e.g. the creation of a product-based PBS and PFD?
I am in the process of re-reading and updating my book, “The Essence of PRINCE2” and “The Art of PRINCE2 Survival”, not only to keep me thinking, but I think that it’s time that I looked afresh behind the words that describe the method. I’m not convinced that all of the authors of the 2009 version were fully ‘au fait’ with every part of the method that was rewritten, and some of it is not that easy to simply implement. I’ve also never had feedback on my suggested simplified Issue/Risk Register. For me it worked well. Any experiences out there?
Just had a nice quote from someone who bought this book:
I have a new book on the market, PRINCE2 Rollout Approach. In it I suggest a way of approaching all those live projects that are not currently using PRINCE2. Why let them run on without the PRINCE2 control and structure? Will they give you warnings of problems that might affect quality, budget or delivery date? The book offers a staged, painless way to add just those PRINCE2 features that will bring benefit to these projects; no overkill, no huge upheaval. If you know of a company that is implementing PRINCE2, help yourself to this practical advice.
I thought the newer thinking was that there was a rectangle with four elements, time, cost, scope and quality. Moving any one of them will affect at least one other and may affect all three others. I would make two points for PRINCE2. If you are using PRINCE2 correctly, there is no way in which ‘a junior person’ can commit the project to any extra work. All changes must go through the change procedure, and the impact analysis will show to the Change Authority what the effect would be on cost, time, scope quality, benefits and tolerances – all this before a decision is made. If the junior tries to carry out the extra work without telling anyone, this would soon be clear by the Team Manager reviewing the time and cost used.
Another corner of the rectangle is quality. I’m sure most of us know that the first thing that workers turn to when time gets short is cutting the amount of time spent on quality checking. PRINCE2 builds quality and its checking into a project from day one, and the Quality Register will soon identify any effort to slip an untested product under the wire. Go with PRINCE2. You know it makes sense!
Is there too much documentation at the end of a project? Should we not plan to check if the company got the expected benefits? Is it wrong to discuss with the Project Board how well/poorly the Project Manager did what was defined in the Project Initiation Documentation? Should we not pass on any lessons learned to other projects? Should we not document any unfinished business? Project Managers may be anxious to move on to the next ‘challenge’ (or piece of income), but it’s hardly being bureaucratic to say that you must tie up the loose ends and bring the project to a controlled close. There are too many unfinished projects where the Project Manager has moved on to avoid the ‘dirty’ parts of actually finishing a project.
Maybe the idea of bureaucracy stems from the PRINCE2 organisation structure – or, rather, the incorrect idea that every project has to have at least one person for every role. However many times the manual makes the point about the option to combine roles where sensible, there are still those who immediately envisage a large overhead of Team Managers, Project Support and Project Assurance staff, etc. If the size and criticality of the project needs it, then we may need (and use) all these people. But in many other cases we can combine roles. It’s just a matter of common sense.
Do we need an Exception Report? – remember, no-one says it has to be written. Should we advise the Project Board that one or more of their tolerance limits is under threat? Should we do this as soon as we know about it? Of course we should. Have a look at the information that PRINCE2 suggests should be made available to the Project Board when an exception situation arises. It all looks sensible and necessary.
So where do we look for this bureaucracy – at End Stage Reports? Surely we have to submit to the Project Board an assessment of how we performed in the current stage, what the Project Plan, the Business Case and the risk situation now look like before it will think of approving the next Stage Plan?
So, the next question is do we need a Project Brief AND Project Initiation Documentation? Is this not duplication? If you consider a five year project and the extra information that is created in the Project Initiation Documentation, I don’t believe it is duplication. The Project Brief information forms part of the Project Initiation Documentation, but we add lots of good things – controls, strategies, a refined Business Case and Risk Register etc. If you have a small project or work in an environment with lots of small projects, you may think of combining the processes, Starting up a Project and Initiating a Project. This would appear on the face of it to cut out the Project Brief, but the information is still needed for the Project Initiation Documentation.
To start a project PRINCE2 suggests that a Project Brief is put together from a Project Mandate. Presumably the ‘too bureaucratic’ lobby is happy that whoever wants a project should provide a Project Mandate – or whatever name they wish to give to the information about what they want the project to do, etc. Notice that I didn’t say ‘write’. Many Project Mandates have been word of mouth. So isn’t it necessary to ensure that all the information that you need is there before you dive in? I’m not saying that every bit of specification should be known before a project starts. The Product Description of the Project Brief says what information should be available and my experience says that this is sensible. Remember, if the Project Mandate has all the information you need, then, as the manual says, it becomes the Project Brief without any further work. But you do need to check that it is all there. Often it isn’t.