|
Register NOW
for our upcoming public workshop
and you pay only $1000
Project Management Training Simulation
March 29-31
Use promotion code:
special1000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A Few Words from Jesse
Dear Fissure Friends, 
We recently received a request from our local PMI Chapter for any articles on Stakeholders. In looking back we had never written an article specific to stakeholders, so we were unable to help them.I did, however put the thought of writing an article on stakeholders in the back of my mind.Then a few days later I finished a very short book and, as I was thinking about the "learning" from the book, I realized that there was a connection between the "learning" and stakeholders.Actually this occurred after waking up in the middle of the night and trying to get back to sleep.You'd think I would have better things to think about while trying to sleep.Anyway, the result is our first stakeholder's article.
For those of you in the Twin Cities area, the local International Institute of Business Analysis (IIBA) Chapter is offering a great deal for individuals and companies that sign-up 5 or more for the April 27th Professional Development Day, entitled "The Innovative Business Analyst". They have a great day of speakers and learning lined up including some guy by the name of Jesse Freese. Please take advantage of this excellent value and click on this link for details on registering to take advantage of the 5 person from one company discount.
In his article, "Agile Parenting: Progress Through Practice", Geof Lory talks about the difference between knowing and doing, one of my favorite topics.One example he uses is the fact that "while the theory and mechanics of a sport can be studied and known, when it comes to performance, there is no substitute for practice. Ask any good athlete how much they practice and you will understand just how important it is." Doesn't that peak your interest to read the entire article?
Sandy Haydon is one of our guides and has contributed a personal article about her latest passion. I think you will enjoy her story.
Our upcoming public workshops and webinars can be found on our website (http://www.fissure.com/workshop_registration.cfm) - our computer simulation powered workshops the most effective and fun way to learn AND EARN PDUs.
Make sure you also check out what's happening at Fissure (Fissure News).
Thank s for reading and enjoy the spring,
Jesse Freese
Fissure, President
Back to top
|
PROJECT PARENTHOOD Agile Parenting: Process Through Practice
by Geof Lory, PMP
 From an early age to pre-adulthood children spend a large portion of their time in school, but they spend almost all of their time learning. Their exposure to new ideas and the time spent developing new skills is greatest during these early years. Academic progress is measured with grades and scores, but how do we assess the progress made in other areas? If we are going to help instill the values of Agile Parenting in our children, and therefore develop future Agile Parents, we need a way to assess their progress.
Similarly, project teams have a higher learning curve during the initial stages of a project as they become familiar with the purpose and deliverables. Beyond the technical and business learning necessary for the project's success, teams also have to learn the structure of the project and how to work with their teammates within that structure. This period of rapid learning is usually referred to as the "forming and storming" stage.
To read full article, click here
Back to top
|
What do project management and
ballroom dancing have in common?
Answer: Fissure Guide Sandy Haydon. 
In the spring of 2008, I started two exciting adventures: being a project management guide and taking ballroom dance lessons. While the dance lessons were to be just an 8-week activity, dancing has become a passion which has given me opportunities I never dreamed of having. The latest opportunity was taking lessons from Dancing With The Stars pro's. In early February, eleven of us, students and staff from the Fred Astaire Dance Studio, flew to Burbank, CA to attend a 3-day dance camp. We participated in both group and private lessons taught by DWTS pro's. For you DWTS fans, our instructors included: Cheryl Burke, Chelsie Hightower, Elena Grinenko, Kym Johnson, Dmitry Chaplin, Tony Dovolani, and Corky Ballas. 
Evenings were spent with great food and more dancing, including a fantastic Saturday evening show featuring the pro's. It was such a fun experience that I'm ready to sign up again next year. Back to top |
Stakeholders and the
Triple Constraint Trade-off Matrix
I have often talked about the triple constraints (scope, cost, and schedule) and the Fissure Quintuple constraints (adding quality and team productivity as equally important constraints or variables). Most of you are very familiar with the triple/quintuple constraint relationship and the fact that you can't change one without impacting the others. Considering just the triple constraints, if the focus is on schedule, then cost and scope will tend to suffer. If the focus is on scope, then cost and schedule tend to suffer. If a project makes schedule focused decisions one week, sacrificing cost and scope, then makes scope focused decisions the next week, sacrificing cost and schedule, then makes cost focused decisions the third week, sacrificing scope and schedule, by the end of the project it is highly unlikely that any of the constraints will be met.
What is needed is a clear and consistent priority among the triple constraints. If there is an agreed upon priority among the three, when decisions are made during the project, they will be consistently made to meet the "must meet" (or highest priority) constraint. To do that they will need to adjust to meet the "adjust" (or secondary priority) constraint, and then accept the resulting "accept" (or third priority) constraint. The matrix below is a simple, yet powerful tool to identify the priorities and stay consistent in project decisions that impact the scope, schedule and cost.
To read full article, click here Back to top
|
Fissure News March 2011
Fissure is pleased to once again be a Premier Sponsor of the Minneapolis/St. Paul IIBA Chapter. The Chapter continues to grow and improve. Please check out their website and signup for their email announcements. The monthly meetings and presentations are well done and well attended.
Jesse Freese will be a presenter at the Minneapolis/St. Paul IIBA Chapter Professional Development Day on April 27th. Checkout the conference and join Jesse for an enjoyable and valuable experience - it is very inexpensive.
Jesse Freese will also be presenting at the Project Summit & Business Analyst World held in Minneapolis on June 13, 2011. Checkout the conference and again join Jesse for an enjoyable and valuable experience.
We were also recently approved by the Project Management Institute in renewing our Register Education Provider status; every three years every R.E.P. must go through a rigorous application and detailed review process to maintain their provider status. Fissure passed with flying colors!
PMI SeminarsWorld
Our Ultimate Project Management Skills Challenge workshop was selected for delivery at 4 of the 2011 PMI SeminarsWorld; we will be at Savannah, GA, Orlando, FL, Annapolis, MD, and San Diego, CA. Check out the description at the SeminarsWorld web site
 We are currently offering three Agile/Scrum workshops: The workshops were developed and are delivered by our own Agile/Scrum guru, Geof Lory. Please contact us for more information or to schedule a class. 952.882.0800 or toll free at 887.877.6333 Webinars  Be sure to check out our monthly, 1 hour webinars. We have had outstanding reviews and when you consider that they are free - they are hard to pass up. Mike Wold reports that his wife, Pam, who underwent major bac k surgery in November, will be taking off her brace in time for Saint Patrick's Day. This completes the recovery process for the surgery which has been a complete success. Sue's knee is doing great . She has a trainer to help strengthen her knee.
|
Stakeholders and the
Triple Constraint Trade-off Matrix
I have often talked about the triple constraints (scope, cost, and schedule) and the Fissure Quintuple constraints (adding quality and team productivity as equally important constraints or variables). Most of you are very familiar with the triple/quintuple constraint relationship and the fact that you can't change one without impacting the others. Considering just the triple constraints, if the focus is on schedule, then cost and scope will tend to suffer. If the focus is on scope, then cost and schedule tend to suffer. If a project makes schedule focused decisions one week, sacrificing cost and scope, then makes scope focused decisions the next week, sacrificing cost and schedule, then makes cost focused decisions the third week, sacrificing scope and schedule, by the end of the project it is highly unlikely that any of the constraints will be met.
What is needed is a clear and consistent priority among the triple constraints. If there is an agreed upon priority among the three, when decisions are made during the project, they will be consistently made to meet the "must meet" (or highest priority) constraint. To do that they will need to adjust to meet the "adjust" (or secondary priority) constraint, and then accept the resulting "accept" (or third priority) constraint. The matrix below is a simple, yet powerful tool to identify the priorities and stay consistent in project decisions that impact the scope, schedule and cost.
In our simulation powered workshops we introduce the matrix to students and ask them who should set the priorities. They always give the right answer, the stakeholders, particularly the sponsor. But of course, this is also the time in the workshop where the students laugh and relate stories about how stakeholders insist that all three constraints are equal and there is no need for prioritizing. Some students actually insist there is no way to get their stakeholders to set a priority; that is sad, since it is too often true.
I have always been somewhat at a loss to explain how to deal with this roadblock. How do you convince stakeholders that they have to set a priority; that they can't have everyone focused on everything at the same time? My best answer up to now has been to give them the triple/quintuple constraint lecture using examples of project decisions that optimize one constraint while negatively impacting one or more of the other constraints. It is easy to say, but in reality difficult to do and may need to be repeated several times, particularly after projects that had no priorities and failed to meet any of the constraints.
I recently read a book that I think can help you deal with this roadblock the next time you are trying to get your stakeholders to fill-in the trade-off matrix. The name of the book is "Plugged", and it is written by Krissi Barr and Dan Barr. It is a very short book that is mostly told through the story of a business challenge and somewhat through the story of improving your golf game (which of course is what drew me to the book). The key learning from the book is a very sensible three step approach to success - PAR. The first step is "Prioritize"; focus on what matters most. Now you can see how I made the connection between the book and stakeholders and the trade-off matrix.
Stakeholders and PMs/BAs want a successful project and we often talk about defining what success will look like when the project is done. Defining success is a critical upfront piece, but we also need to prioritize the success criteria so everyone is not only focused on what matters most, but also focused on what is second most important, and not focused on what is least important. Setting and keeping focused on what it is most important on the project (and not changing what is most important with every situation) is critical to a successful project. We all know that if we are singularly focused and not pulled constantly in other directions we will have the best chance to meet that objective.
The second step in the Barr's PAR approach to success is "Adapt"; see change as an opportunity. Most project change comes from the stakeholders, particularly the customers and users. The changes usually have an impact on the triple constraints, and when you add up numerous changes, they definitely have an impact on the triple constraints. So in this case the project managers and business analysts need to communicate back to the stakeholders what the impact will be on cost and schedule when additional scope is added or current scope is changed. If there is significant change, it might be time to reset the constraints and get everything back in balance. In other words, can the desired scope be delivered within the cost and schedule constraints? If it can't, it is time to change the constraints. It is also good practice to first have a trade-off discussion concerning the change. Is the change an opportunity we can't pass up? Is the change an opportunity that is worth the related impact of cost and schedule?
The last step in the PAR approach to success is "Be Responsible"; take ownership of the outcome. Here is another reference to "what is the project going to look like when it is done?" And more importantly, who is responsible for the outcome and making sure the objectives have been met? Stakeholders are responsible for setting the objectives and priorities for the triple constraints, and the project managers are responsible for managing to those objectives and priorities. If you have and follow a trade-off matrix you will have significantly better results in meeting constraints based on the chosen priorities.
In conclusion, if you are not currently using one, start using a trade-off matrix with your stakeholders. Have them prioritize between scope, schedule, and cost. If they resist, talk to them about the "P" in PAR. The priority is to help the team focus on what is most important. Remember, only one objective/constraint can be the most important. Help your stakeholders and team get comfortable with change on your projects and how changing one constraint impacts others. Follow your priorities as you deal with the change and accept that at some point you might have to reset the constraints to get the constraints back into a balance where you can meet them all successfully. Lastly, be clear about stakeholder and project manager outcome responsibility on the project. Both parties are responsible for project success, with the stakeholders responsible for setting priorities and focus (filling in the trade-off matrix), while the project manager is responsible for managing to those priorities (following the trade-off matrix). Go for PAR!
Back to top
|
|
PROJECT PARENTHOODAgile Parenting: Process Through Practice by Geof Lory, PMP
| | Geof Lory |
From an early age to pre-adulthood children spend a large portion of their time in school, but they spend almost all of their time learning. Their exposure to new ideas and the time spent developing new skills is greatest during these early years. Academic progress is measured with grades and scores, but how do we assess the progress made in other areas? If we are going to help instill the values of Agile Parenting in our children, and therefore develop future Agile Parents, we need a way to assess their progress.
Similarly, project teams have a higher learning curve during the initial stages of a project as they become familiar with the purpose and deliverables. Beyond the technical and business learning necessary for the project's success, teams also have to learn the structure of the project and how to work with their teammates within that structure. This period of rapid learning is usually referred to as the "forming and storming" stage.
In both situations, projects and parenting, it is easy to lose sight of the fact that all teams suffer through these stages. Unwilling to accept this state of imperfection-or simply too impatient-we create schedules that are too aggressive, applying productivity levels not yet achieved, leading to projects that are late before they are even defined. The resultant slippage puts external pressure and emphasis on immediate results and dismisses spending any time developing the people, which is exactly what is necessary to get the team performing at a higher level.
It is important to recognize the team is not always where you want them to be. Constant evaluation of where they are is essential to taking corrective action and/or providing support. The same is true as parents: we too often fail to understand the world through the eyes of our children. Consequently, we attribute to them levels of understanding and capabilities they may not have yet. The result is almost always unmet expectations.
The only way to know where the team or our children are on this development spectrum is to let them practice their proficiency, observe objectively, and determine their progress. The challenge is letting them practice; we lose control of the outcome and we feel less able to influence the result. This is a risky proposition when the consequences are potentially severe. This risk pushes us into uncomfortable territory, as we fear the outcomes will not meet our expectations without more direct intervention.
But it wouldn't be fair to assume the practice will always fall short of our expectations. Given the chance to practice, people will often learn and progress far faster than we can accept the changes and make the necessary adjustments to our approach.
I like to remind myself that many of the things I do as a parent and a project manager are new to me too, at least situationally. I may know what to do, but in practice my actual performance may be something entirely different. If I expect to be allowed to learn through practice, I have to afford that same privilege to others. As my daughters matured, they presented us with new situations in which to parent. Like them, we are continually learning too. I try to recognize that for all of us practice is an investment in learning, and without learning there is no progress.
We often forget that there is not a direct or immediate correlation between knowing how to do something and actually doing it. There are many things we know how to do, but doing them with regular discipline is another thing entirely. Sport offers a good analogy for the difference between knowing and doing: while the theory and mechanics of a sport can be studied and known, when it comes to performance, there is no substitute for practice. Ask any good athlete how much they practice and you will understand just how important it is.
While knowing may be a prerequisite for doing, few results will come from the knowing alone. Therefore:
As Agile Parents, we have come to value:
Practice and Progress over preaching perfection.
Practice will show progress, while preaching perfection only reiterates the known or asserts an external parochial perspective. Preaching tells us how it should be done, while practice allows us to explore how we can do it ourselves. Practice encourages the assertion of the individual by allowing personal proficiency to unfold. If we are looking to develop great teams or the Agile Parents of tomorrow, we have to make time for deliberate practice. It is the only way to make progress. Just talking about it is not enough. Practice will develop and demonstrate progress; because just like children, teams progress one day at a time. Projects are completed one task at a time. Recognizing this, to get the most from our practice, we follow these principles:
Last week I had a project team member come to me with some information about an issue on our project. She dumped it in my lap like it was yesterday's leftovers, as if to say, "do something with this." I thanked her for bringing it to my attention and then asked her what she planned to do about it. She looked at me as if I had stolen her question. We talked it over for a bit and then I reassured her that she was capable of handling this issue, and was in fact the person who understood it the best. Therefore she was the ideal person to deal with it. After some discussion, she came up with some ideas she wanted to try (practice) and we set a check point later in the week to measure her progress. What she needed from me was support and guidance for her practice, not an answer. What we both got was a stronger team member. To take some liberties with an old axiom, "Practice may not make perfect, but it almost always makes progress." Back to top |
|
|
