Picking up on the “goldfish bowl” description, Bill Crothers of Identity and Passport Service said the National ID Cards Programme was under constant scrutiny from a range of stakeholders, including those most affected - the UK public.
The £4.6bn programme, due to be rolled-out in part in autumn 2009, is full of complexities. On technical side there are issues over security, data capture, transmitting data and integrating legacy systems. The resulting database, described as a “the biggest of its kind in the world”, contains fingerprint/biometric and biographic data such as names and addresses.
The programme is also highly controversial with its own pressure group. “We have one chance to get it right,” said Bill, “or it could end up as a beautifully documented disaster.”
Key to success is managing supplier relationships, which Bill says will “make or break the programme”. A big part of this is empowering suppliers. Under procurement framework five big software providers, plus 40-50 sub-contractors, will be encouraged to work together under programme of financial incentives/penalties.
A big part of this is behaviour. Bill said that behaviour of the different parties would be documented and “360 degree” feedback used to determine strength of relations. No fixed prices would apply to contracts as this creates “dysfunctional behaviour”, instead competitors encouraged to work together to achieve targets. “The less we pay, the more they earn,” he said.
Behavioural assessment is subjective not written into multi-million contracts. “We don’t expect criticism of other suppliers,” said Bill. “Behaviour is as important as price.”
Do you have experience of working in a situation where companies collaborate? 90% yes.
Did rival companies fully co-operate? 60% no.
Does the customer has to smarter than the supplier? Yes 50%.
We know how to break complex projects down into manageable chunks but do we know how to put them back together? 70% no.
Showing posts with label Managing in a complex world. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Managing in a complex world. Show all posts
Friday, 31 October 2008
Thursday, 30 October 2008
Managing programme complexity - a case for change. Chris Hodson and Bob Warner
"Like living in goldfish bowl,” was how Chris Hudson and Bob Warner of Remploy described attempts to overhaul the business model and integrate more disabled workers into mainstream employment.
For the past 60 years Remploy has placed 95% of disabled workers in its own factories but this was costing money.
Bob said: "The loss per disabled employer was 20k per year, whereas the cost of placing them in mainstream employment is 5k.”
But there were considerable challenges, not least from within the organisation where previous attempts to change working practices had met with resistance and even resulted in candlelit protests from Remploy employees outside the House of Commons back in 1999.
Remploy’s strategy was to first guarantee no compulsory redundancies and then manage the process of change internally. This involved bringing project managers up to speed and breaking the complex nature of project into manageable parts.
The result is a fourfold increase in numbers of disabled workers in mainstream employment and a further 20,000 expected to enter into jobs over the next five years.
“One of the lessons learnt,” said Bob, “was that the active management of project complexity leads to acceptable levels of project risk.”
For the past 60 years Remploy has placed 95% of disabled workers in its own factories but this was costing money.
Bob said: "The loss per disabled employer was 20k per year, whereas the cost of placing them in mainstream employment is 5k.”
But there were considerable challenges, not least from within the organisation where previous attempts to change working practices had met with resistance and even resulted in candlelit protests from Remploy employees outside the House of Commons back in 1999.
Remploy’s strategy was to first guarantee no compulsory redundancies and then manage the process of change internally. This involved bringing project managers up to speed and breaking the complex nature of project into manageable parts.
The result is a fourfold increase in numbers of disabled workers in mainstream employment and a further 20,000 expected to enter into jobs over the next five years.
“One of the lessons learnt,” said Bob, “was that the active management of project complexity leads to acceptable levels of project risk.”
What do we mean by ‘complex’? Step back from chaos - Harvey Maylor, Stephen Carver
A lot of complexity is added, it needn’t be there. Researched what this meant; managerial response was to identify some broad factors that can introduce complexity:
• mission,
• organisation,
• delivery,
• stakeholders,
• team.
We identify two dimensions to complexity: structural and dynamic dimensions.
Example: flying – want a journey to be boring, uneventful.
How do pilots do it? They plan everything, but spend little time flying, done on autopilot – just like projects should be! They’re there to deal with unplanned events – low structural and low dynamic dimensions.
If we introduce Air Traffic Control (ATC) to maximise use of airspace complexity changes. ATC is more of an art than a science, but a lot of science is used – complexity becomes low dynamic, high structural.
Introduce fighter pilot – lots of planning, uncertain outcomes – low structural, high dynamic.
Introduce ATC for military need to know what’s going on and make decisions on how to deal with situation – lone pilot quickly a dead pilot - know where your projects (own and enemy) are – but they’re moving all the time, high structural, high dynamic.
Do you have SROs who can deal with this? Takeoffs easy, landings difficult – landing projects the same anyone can start one. A good landing is one you can walk away from, a very good one is when you can use the plane again.
On an organisational level, we’d probably like our projects to fall in the low/low category, but as project managers we’re more likely to prefer the high/high categories – more challenging, more enjoyable. There’s a balance to strike.
In future, should be aiming to identify, manage and reduce complexity as we go along.
• mission,
• organisation,
• delivery,
• stakeholders,
• team.
We identify two dimensions to complexity: structural and dynamic dimensions.
Example: flying – want a journey to be boring, uneventful.
How do pilots do it? They plan everything, but spend little time flying, done on autopilot – just like projects should be! They’re there to deal with unplanned events – low structural and low dynamic dimensions.
If we introduce Air Traffic Control (ATC) to maximise use of airspace complexity changes. ATC is more of an art than a science, but a lot of science is used – complexity becomes low dynamic, high structural.
Introduce fighter pilot – lots of planning, uncertain outcomes – low structural, high dynamic.
Introduce ATC for military need to know what’s going on and make decisions on how to deal with situation – lone pilot quickly a dead pilot - know where your projects (own and enemy) are – but they’re moving all the time, high structural, high dynamic.
Do you have SROs who can deal with this? Takeoffs easy, landings difficult – landing projects the same anyone can start one. A good landing is one you can walk away from, a very good one is when you can use the plane again.
On an organisational level, we’d probably like our projects to fall in the low/low category, but as project managers we’re more likely to prefer the high/high categories – more challenging, more enjoyable. There’s a balance to strike.
In future, should be aiming to identify, manage and reduce complexity as we go along.
What do we mean by ‘complex’? Delivering complex projects; it’s not just about the project manager. Simon Henley
Programmes and projects are becoming more complex, sometimes spanning the lifetimes of several technologies, perhaps also with a dynamic project path. Through-life basis on which some projects are undertaken changes our attitude to completion – becomes full life management. Often can’t produce full work breakdown structure at outset.
Projects must be reduced to certainty wherever possible to allow management as we know it and use tried and tested PM techniques as introduced at MoD via their PPM specialism.
When is a project complex, not complicated? Characterised by uncertainty, dynamic interfaces and significant political or external influences.
Complex project strategies require:
• agreed definitions of desired outcomes
• critical success factors/measures
• planning for change
• appropriate tools and techniques
• incremental delivery of projects approaches.
Lead projects as systems:
• establish where certainty exists – manage it with traditional PM skills to deliver the known
• establish where uncertainty exists and establish strategies to manage
• cope with changing strategic needs while delivering coherent tactical solutions.
Programmes aren’t always analysed routinely for their uncertainty.
Appropriate governance requires:
• measure progress towards desired outcomes,
• organisational ability to make decisions with uncertain outcomes,
• appropriate approval/decision timelines,
• budget for incremental delivery,
• culture needed to make the above possible – dealing with uncertainty.
ICCPM (International College of Complex Project Management) seeks to provide international leadership to drive excellence in the management of complex projects.
Complex projects feature uncertainty, rapid rates of change and developing technologies among others– we need to find better ways of managing more of them.
Projects must be reduced to certainty wherever possible to allow management as we know it and use tried and tested PM techniques as introduced at MoD via their PPM specialism.
When is a project complex, not complicated? Characterised by uncertainty, dynamic interfaces and significant political or external influences.
Complex project strategies require:
• agreed definitions of desired outcomes
• critical success factors/measures
• planning for change
• appropriate tools and techniques
• incremental delivery of projects approaches.
Lead projects as systems:
• establish where certainty exists – manage it with traditional PM skills to deliver the known
• establish where uncertainty exists and establish strategies to manage
• cope with changing strategic needs while delivering coherent tactical solutions.
Programmes aren’t always analysed routinely for their uncertainty.
Appropriate governance requires:
• measure progress towards desired outcomes,
• organisational ability to make decisions with uncertain outcomes,
• appropriate approval/decision timelines,
• budget for incremental delivery,
• culture needed to make the above possible – dealing with uncertainty.
ICCPM (International College of Complex Project Management) seeks to provide international leadership to drive excellence in the management of complex projects.
Complex projects feature uncertainty, rapid rates of change and developing technologies among others– we need to find better ways of managing more of them.
Reduction in complexity by system orientated management - Dr Walter Kroy
"With spacecraft no chance of changing parts when you're near Mercury or Mars." Pre-planning essential.
Human brain is most complex system. "Best advice, use your brain. More complex than a computer."
Need to simplify systems. A system is a connection of different elements. If no way to calcualte future state of system, then you have complex system. Use other instruments.
Process approach: dynamic network of processes and interactions. Most things in life not predictable. When analysing system need to get creative.
Human brain is most complex system. "Best advice, use your brain. More complex than a computer."
Need to simplify systems. A system is a connection of different elements. If no way to calcualte future state of system, then you have complex system. Use other instruments.
Process approach: dynamic network of processes and interactions. Most things in life not predictable. When analysing system need to get creative.
Approaches to complex project management - Michael Cavanagh
"Two types of people in this world: simplifiers and complicators."
Need to simplify complexity. Things work on individual basis but put them together and they don't work. T5 good example - fantastic system but disaster because lack of systemic approach to testing real world experience.
Complex based on uncertainty, non-linearity and recoursiveness. Why use linear life-cycle for complex projects? Why pretend they are predictable and definable when not fixed?
Deal with complexity 1st order pm tools but basic tools not enough. 2nd order pm contracting models applicable. Key tools outcome management and honing leadership. "Better to do the right thing the wrong way rather than wrong thing right way."
Bureaucratic vs adhocracy approach. About thinking differently. Connections between new and old learning. Getting people to use brain. "Learn in experience not from experience. But only learn from own experience."
Experiential learning. "Drowning in information. Attention at a premium. Attention by its nature crude and vulgar." Trust in professionalism. "People good at job. Sniff out problem but need to argue rationally in order to articulate it."
Should systems thinking be part of the competency profile for project managers? Yes 96%. No 4%.
Have you personally ever thought of using a systems thinking approach to pm? 80% yes. 20% no.
Do you have to deal in your org with tasks which seem so complex that you can imagine failure? 96% yes. 4% no.
Need to simplify complexity. Things work on individual basis but put them together and they don't work. T5 good example - fantastic system but disaster because lack of systemic approach to testing real world experience.
Complex based on uncertainty, non-linearity and recoursiveness. Why use linear life-cycle for complex projects? Why pretend they are predictable and definable when not fixed?
Deal with complexity 1st order pm tools but basic tools not enough. 2nd order pm contracting models applicable. Key tools outcome management and honing leadership. "Better to do the right thing the wrong way rather than wrong thing right way."
Bureaucratic vs adhocracy approach. About thinking differently. Connections between new and old learning. Getting people to use brain. "Learn in experience not from experience. But only learn from own experience."
Experiential learning. "Drowning in information. Attention at a premium. Attention by its nature crude and vulgar." Trust in professionalism. "People good at job. Sniff out problem but need to argue rationally in order to articulate it."
Should systems thinking be part of the competency profile for project managers? Yes 96%. No 4%.
Have you personally ever thought of using a systems thinking approach to pm? 80% yes. 20% no.
Do you have to deal in your org with tasks which seem so complex that you can imagine failure? 96% yes. 4% no.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)