Graphical project reporting-v1-0

03-23-05Juni 2011

page 1 • view on reporting

project – programme – portfolio management – view on project – programme – portfolio management – view on reportingreporting

Presented by Jan Biets

[email protected] +32(0)477 32 90 11 Mechelen - Belgium

Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 2 • View on Reporting

Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting

• What is the purpose:

– Increase success rate of -strategically- projects;

– Decrease failure rate of -strategically- projects

– Improve - visual- reporting data;

– Improve baseline information to take decision upon;

– Improve communication, also to ‘non project management’-skilled audience , i.e. top management;

– Increase effort in strategically supportive projects; define metrics for measuring progress/success/quality of balanced scorecards;

– Order (go / kill ) strategically important projects;

• Very often lack of right information to be used by stakeholders to have a clear understanding of the project status, progress , and ‘forecast’.

• Reason to take drastic, but un-rightful decisions, which can endanger outcome of organisation’s strategy;

note:

•It is not the author’s intention to be aligned with whatever existing methodology, nor framework;

•‘projects’ – in this presentation, ‘projects’ can mean projects, programme, or portfolio



Abbreviations:

PMO - project management office

• it does not matter who takes up the initiative to implement ‘View on Reporting’ in your Organisation:

– Project manager

– PMO

– (executive) Management

– Stakeholder(-s)

– Project board ( steering committee )

– Or other



• Remarkable observations (after + 20 years of professional project experiences):

– Quality of project planning is very poor.

– Project planning is a specialty!

– Reporting and PM-‘understanding’ is very poor;

– Risk management:

• less loss of effort;

• Less loss of time;

• Less loss of money;

• Less loss of missed deadlines;

• Less loss of window opportunities;

• Improve awareness of ECV of project;

– Aligning (more) all initiatives (programmes, projects):

• Compose a roadmap with all required investment data

Abbreviations:

ECV - expected commercial value



• Improving the planning quality;

• Reducing the risks, or at least identify the potential risk for organisation’s strategy;

• Improving the resource capacity management (aligning);

• Improving the reporting (aligning);

• Improving alignment of projects & master plan;

• Aligning ‘initiatives’ / projects according the pre-set strategy, thus avoiding loss of effort , focus, money and business opportunities (window of opportunity);



• Inform all stakeholders (e.g. operations, management, team leads, pm’s, business, PMO,…);

• Obtain better mutual understanding of ‘needs’:

– business leads the projects, IT is a service provider!;

• Planning:

– approach & policy;

– naming conventions, other;

– capacity (specialised staff)

– quality;

– tool;

• Project process flow

– use of PM-tool, or ‘manual’- processes?;

• Information / instructions:

– written instructions, information, education;

• And lots of “Good-willing”.


Project management – view on reporting Project management – view on reporting

• Reports , on progress, risks, resources (next skills);

• Updated project planning;

• Alignment of programmes / projects;

• Alignment of planning approach:

– Planning policy,

– Avoid typical errors of planning;

• Alignment of reports, EVA (earned value analysis), finance;

• Improvement of Business & ICT project performances.

• Aligning all kind of efforts , to enable the strategy , market position;

– Harvesting all initiatives, projects

– Based on business case , (financials, and strategic fit/match, ROI , ‘what if we not?”-assessment (reference to balanced scorecard ‘product selection’);

– Compose order of importance (necessity of good outcome per project


Project management – view on reporting : SET UP Project management – view on reporting : SET UP BSC BSC

•Measuring is knowing;•Define what information is required to be able to assess your project on ‘total project quality management’?;•A ‘best’ tool is Balanced Scorecards (Kaplan/Norton);

•Good defined BSC allows a in-depth view on the projects, thus:•Increasing organisation’s benefits of outcome of project (application);•Increasing lessons learned for other project initiatives; your organisation will improve project-ability behaviours;•Decreasing failure rates of projects, and consequently , negative impact on organisation’s strategy;

Reference to ‘Project Management Dynamics” @ SLIDESHARE.net

Abbreviations:

BSC - Balanced Scorecards (Kaplan & Norton)


view on reporting – some interesting PM criteriaview on reporting – some interesting PM criteria

• There is a lot of –valuable - information available when executing a project, but some interesting data has to be excavated, you have to know where to find it, and what to do with;

– Time:• Schedule (overall, per phase;)

• Schedule performance index [SPI]

– Finance• How are we going against budget;

• Cost performance index [CPI];

• Earned value analysis [EVA/-M];

• Return on investment [ROI];

• Net present value [NPV];

• Expected commercial value [ECV];

criteria that constantly emerge (1/2) :

Abbreviations:

SPI - schedule performance index

CPI - cost performance index


view on reporting – some interesting PM criteriaview on reporting – some interesting PM criteria

• There is a lot of –valuable - information available when executing a project, but some interesting data has to be excavated, and you have to know where to find it;

– Resources• How much time are we spending on the project,

• How many resources we need (globally, per IT department, roles);

• Do we use the available resources;

– Scope: Is the scope [creep] in line with expectations (?)/ (!);

– Quality (total quality project management – TQPM)• Is the plan realistically built-up;

• Number of issues reported;

• Are we reviewing and fixing quality problems;

criteria that constantly emerge (2/2) :

note:

An organisation with project tradition, has advantages when building up a project minded attitude and a benchmark data-warehouse to assess the projects and improve the project’s success rate, thus organisation’s strategy outcome.


view on reporting - TIMEview on reporting - TIME

Time: How are we going against schedule;

– Progress on schedule;

– Number of tasks late started;

– Number of tasks overdue (not closed);

– Number of open tasks;

– Metrics & status : traffic light

– Define : (these are default values)

• number : 1 – 2 : orange

• number : 2+ : red

– Explain reason:

• E.g. technology, resources, errors, training, management


view on reporting – Finance & COSTview on reporting – Finance & COST

Cost: How are we going against budget schedule

– Earned value management (and assessment)

– Progress on schedule (€);

– Cash flow;

– ROI , pay-back time;

– ECV;

– Metrics & status : traffic light

– % : orange

– %+ : red

– Define reason to understandAbbreviations:

ECV - expected commercial value

ROI - return on investment

NPV - net present value


Abbreviations:

SPI - schedule performance index

BCWP - budgeted cost of work performed

BCWS - budgeted cost of work scheduled

view on reporting – SCHEDULE : SPIview on reporting – SCHEDULE : SPI

• Indication for quality of schedule / planning

• Metrics & status :

SPI value should be 1

SPI <1 means project is behind schedule

• Define reason (e.g. over-/ under-estimated tasks, wrong schedule techniques,

CPI & SPI

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

-25 -15 -5 5 15 25

variance SPI index of 1.0 or greater is on/above target and considered satisfactory

varia

nce

CP

I

delta CPI %

delta SPI %

Note:

Figure is a combined graphic, both CPI and SPI

“How is schedule against schedule”

SPI = BCWP / BCWS


view on reporting – EVA - COST : CPIview on reporting – EVA - COST : CPI

• The CPI shows the ratio of budgeted (or baseline) costs of work performed to actual costs of work performed, up to the project status date or today's date.

CPI = BCWP / ACWP


CPI value should be 1

Variances:

CPI < 1 means project is over

budget

• identify reason(-s) (e.g. over-/ under-estimated costs, wrong cost expenditure techniques,

CPI & SPI

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

-25 -15 -5 5 15 25


varia

nce

CP

I

delta CPI %

delta SPI %

Abbreviations:

EVA - earned value analysis

CPI - cost performance index


ACWP - actual cost of work performed

“How is cost against cost”


view on reporting – EVA - COST & SCHEDULEview on reporting – EVA - COST & SCHEDULE

• The CSI shows the ratio of budgeted (or baseline) costs of work performed to actual costs of work performed, up to the project status date or today's date.

CSI = CPI x SPI


CSI value should be 1

Variances:

CSI <> 1 means project is less likely to be ‘recoverable’

CPI & SPI

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

-25 -15 -5 5 15 25


varia

nce

CP

I

delta CPI %

delta SPI %

Abbreviations:

EVA - earned value analysis

CSI - cost schedule index


ACWP - actual cost of work performed

“How is cost against cost”


view on reporting – budget milestones (or phases)view on reporting – budget milestones (or phases)

Every milestone (or phase) has a budget (baseline), vs actual budget (€ , man-days)

Rationale:

•quality check of budget planning;

Explanation:

•close follow up of milestone budget, planned (baseline) vs actuals

•A possible understanding why (when) project budget has deviations vs baseline

•Explanation: a prognosis of total budget spent (at completion)

Milestones budget tracking

0% 0% 9%

97%

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

InitiateDefineDesignBuildImplementClosePhase / Milestone

Man

Day

s0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

% v

aria

nce

planned manhrs

spent mandhrsvariance

note:

phases - typical naming by Prince 2


view on reporting – budget man-days vs man-daysview on reporting – budget man-days vs man-days

project progress : mandays

0

5

10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

reporting cycle

num

ber st

aff

baseline (abs)

Baseline planned man-days vs actual man-days

Rationale:

•quality check of planning: most realistic plannings have a specific wave-profile:

•Explanation: unrealistic growth (variations) of staff on project

•A possible understanding why project has deviations vs baseline

•Explanation: planned resources vs actual resources

•Identifies reason of ‘late’ of project : not enough man-hours ‘produced’

•Reason of deviations have to be identified and explained


0

5

10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

reporting cycle

%

baseline (abs)

actual (abs)


view on reporting – budget man-days vs man-daysview on reporting – budget man-days vs man-daysBaseline planned man-days vs actual man-days

Planned (Man Hrs / week)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

45033 36 39 42 45 48 51 2 5 8 11 14 17 20 23 26 29 32 35 38 41 44 47 50

Planned (Man Hrs)

Manhrs Week

Rationale:

•quality check of planning: most realistic plannings have a specific wave-profile:

•Explanation: unrealistic growth (variations) of staff on project

•A possible understanding why project has deviations vs baseline

•Explanation: planned resources vs actual resources

•Identifies reason of ‘late’ of project : not enough man-hours ‘produced’

•Reason of deviations have to be identified and explained


0

5

10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

reporting cycle

num

ber st

aff

baseline (abs)


view on reporting – budget milestones (or phases)view on reporting – budget milestones (or phases)Baseline budget (€ or man-days) vs actual value (cumulated , %)

Rationale: Tracking of progress (man-days, % complete, €, and other) vs baseline

Explanation: visual follow up, easy to understand, and to communicate;A possible understanding why project has deviations vs baseline

Explanation: using other tools, understand why project has deviations

project progress : mandays (cumulative)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

reporting cycle

%

baseline

actual


Metric – cost / schedule variance trendsMetric – cost / schedule variance trendsCost / schedule variance trends

€


Open tasks

0

2

4

6

8

10

mrt/11 apr/11 mei/11 jun/11 jul/11 aug/11 sep/11 okt/11

reporting cycle

# o

pen

tas

ks (

late

)

closed (ETC=0)

open (0<actuals>100%)

not started (late)

Metric – total quality project management: open Metric – total quality project management: open taskstasks

Description:

• Activities too early started (according baseline schedule);

• Activities started, prior to closing predecessor tasks;

• Activities started but unfinished (stays “open”/ <100% work complete)

activities started

0 5 10 15 20 25

actual this w eek

activitiesstarted

Follow up the planned activities vs the actual started activities;

Follow up open / non finished tasks, time that these tasks stays un-finished/ open;

Rationale:

quality check of project progress and project management

Explanation:

typically, in a troubled project, tasks start, without finishing predecessor / prior tasks;

Graphical view on number of tasks started on time, late, or still open after due date (according planning)


Metric – EVA : budget at completion Metric – EVA : budget at completion

Rationale:

•Visual quality status check of project progress (man-days and €)

•Explanation: in an eye blink, a status report to communicate;

•A projection of estimated budget at completion is available;

•Additionally, contingency (both € and man-days) can be added on chart; and if used, it can be shown as a decreasing line.

project progress : budget [€] & mandays

0

50

100

150

200

250

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

reporting cycle

0

5

10

baseline [€]

actual [€]

baseline budget

baseline [md]

actuals [md]

reserved budget


TQPM – staffing managementTQPM – staffing management

Rationale:

•quality check of resources planning

•Explanation: based on available resources , vs assigned resources; the number of ‘man-days’ available and the number of man-days assigned , and planned. This should be done per role or function; “too many/ not enough staff (specific role) for a certain project , or certain timeframe”

•Resources management:

•When well managed, in combination of the project plans (and roadmap) an early warning system for hiring / firing staff;

•Upfront check if sufficient resources according the scheduled needs.

staff: capacity vs scheduled

0

500

1000

1500

jan/00 jan/00 jan/00 jan/00 jan/00 jan/00 jan/00 jan/00

reporting cycle

mo

nth

ly h

ou

rs

pm

developper

business analyst

tester

business representative

developper (scheduled)

business analyst (scheduled)

tester (scheduled)

business representative (scheduled)

pm (scheduled)


TQPM – staffing management (per role / function)TQPM – staffing management (per role / function)

Level:

•Project

•Programme

•portfolio


0

500

1000

1500


reporting cycle

mo

nth

ly h

ou

rs

Rationale: Resources planning:

•Explanation: based on pipeline (projection) a clear view on expected variances on resources (function) for the next phases (in time).•Better ‘serieux’ of overall planning;•Better ratio on successful outcome of project (assigned staff) , and outcome of programme / strategy;•Better understanding of cashflow (actual fiscal year) , cash reservation (for next fiscal year);


Rationale: An important project quality success indication is the number of met requirements.This can be: Functional requirements , tangible and intangible, operations, up-time , availability, mean time between failures, matching with technology policy, …

•Define clear user requirements•Identify , quantify , ‘name it ! ‘•List requirements;•Build metrics;•Test or assess during review meetings;•Report;•Validate the met requirements versus the requirements defined;•Prioritise the application / project outcome;•PDCA (plan-do-check-act);•Set up improvement project.

TQPM – TQPM – meeting functional requirementsmeeting functional requirements

What is the scope of the project?!

What is quality / success rate of the project?

What is to be assessed during the project review meetings/process?


Rationale: An important organisation’s quality success indication is the number of skilled / trained staff to meet the required technology skills ?This can be: Technology, skills, tangible or intangible, …

•Define clear skills requirements (technology, other skills), based on defined strategy;•Identify , quantify , ‘name it ! ‘•List requirements;•Build metrics;•Test or assess during review meetings;•Report;•Validate the met requirements versus the requirements defined;•Prioritise the training initiatives (or hire the required skills);•PDCA (plan-do-check-act);•Set up improvement programme.

TPQM – TPQM – meeting competency modelsmeeting competency models

What is the applied or to be technology of the project / organisation?!

What is the competency level of our staff / organisation?

How measuring? Certificates rate? Number of staff certificated?


Abbreviations:

CPM – Critical Path Method

FQT – final qualification testing

FAT – factory acceptance test

POC – proof of concept

logic planning composition

Critical Path method (elapsed time)

Rationale:

•quality check of planning

Explanation:

•optimising or reducing elapsed time

by logically flow of milestones.

view on reporting – ‘Logic’ - diagramview on reporting – ‘Logic’ - diagram


Metrics: Metrics: progress (cumulative)progress (cumulative)

• Schedule: How is actual against baseline (cumulative)

• Metrics & status : indication how actuals are evolving against baseline ;

• % variance (+ / - )

Period late or early;Indication of % deviation, or better, time of deviation (ahead or late vs baseline schedule);

Use other diagrams to examine reason (e.g. over-/ under-estimated tasks, insufficient # staff,…

project progress : mandays (cumulative)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

reporting cycle

%

baseline

actual

% behind

# cycles late





‘late’ due to insufficient # of man-days ‘produced’.

Use other diagrams to examine reason : lack of staff staff (not assigned , illness,…)


0

5

10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

reporting cycle

# m

and

ay /

rep

ort

ing

cyc

le

baseline (abs)

actual (abs)





‘late’ due to insufficient # of man-days ‘produced’ : development staff.


project progress : 'development' - mandays

0

5

10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

reporting cycle

# m

and

ay /

rep

ort

ing

cyc

le

baseline (abs)

actuals 'development' staff





• 3 given data involved: work to be done (scheduled), # available/assigned resources, realised work by the assigned resources (actuals)= NEED TO BE BALANCED

• ‘late’ due to insufficient # of man-days ‘produced’ : development staff. • Use other diagrams to examine reason : lack of staff staff (not assigned ,

illness,…)


0

50

100

150

200

250

300


reporting cycle

mo

nth

ly h

ou

rs

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

development (planned work)

development (assigned staff - maxmanhours)development actuals (manhours/week)

developpment ( # assigned staff)





‘late’ due to insufficient # of mandays ‘produced’ : functional analyst.


project progress : 'functional analyst' - mandays

0

5

10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

reporting cycle

# m

and

ay /

rep

ort

ing

cyc

le

baseline (abs)

actuals 'functional analyst' staff





• % variance (+ / - )

• Period late or early;

– Indication of % deviation, or better, time of deviation (ahead or late vs schedule);

Rationale:

•quality check of project progress and project management

•Explanation: typically, in a troubled project, tasks start, without finishing predecessor / prior tasks;

•Reporting of progress to ‘all’ stakeholders , eventually with coloured ‘deliverables’;


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

reporting cycle

%

baseline

actual

• Use other diagrams to examine reason (e.g. over-/ under-estimated tasks, wrong schedule techniques, EVA


TQPM – TQPM – Finance / ROIFinance / ROIRationale:

•Quality check of project ROI

•Important to be defined in ‘project charter’ (financial feasibility).

•Calculating the ROI , based on assumptions when defining the project charter (project investments , and operational costs (maintenance, and evolving maintenance) [forecast cash flows]

Return on Investment (2011 - 2014)

0

1000000

2000000

3000000

4000000

initial 2011- Q2

2011- Q4

2012- Q2

2012- Q4

2013- Q2

2013- Q4

2014- Q2

2014- Q4

Project / Application Life Cycle

cost

& b

enef

it p

rog

no

sis

costs (assued)

benefits (assumed)


TQPM – TQPM – Finance / ROIFinance / ROI

Rationale:

•quality check of project ROI

•Could be of importance when ‘re-assessing’ the desirability of the project outcome , by the stakeholder(-s). Stop of go decision

Return on Investment (2011 - 2014)

-1000000

0

1000000

2000000

3000000

4000000

initial 2011- Q2

2011- Q4

2012- Q2

2012- Q4

2013- Q2

2013- Q4

2014- Q2

2014- Q4

Project / Application Life Cycle

cost

& b

enef

it p

rog

no

sis

costs (assued)

benefits (assumed)

benefits (actual)

costs (actual)

Lineair (benefits (actual))

Lineair (costs (actual))


TQPM – TQPM – Metrics: Metrics: Finance / NPVFinance / NPV

project PV

(present value of future earnings)

Development cost

Commercialisation cost

NPV

(net present value)

Ranking based on NPV

decision

alpha 30 3 5 22 4 hold

beta 64 5 2 57 2 go

gamma 9 2 1 6 5 hold

delta 3 1 0,5 1,5 6 hold

echo 50 5 3 42 3 hold

foxtrot 66 10 2 58 1 go

scoreboard using NPV to rank and prioritise project selection


TQPM – TQPM – Metrics: Metrics: Finance / NPVFinance / NPV

scoreboard ranking projects according to the NPV-based productivity indexproject NPV development

costProductivity index =

NPV / development cost

Sum of development costs

decision

beta 57 5 11,4 5 hold

echo 42 5 8,4 10 hold

alpha 22 3 7,3 13 hold

foxtrot 58 10 5,8 23 drop

gamma 6 2 3 25 drop

delta 1,5 1 1,5 26 drop

Limit reached*

* : productivity index is used to rank projects until out of resources (€ 15 m) in development costs is reached.

* : value of the portfolio is NPV = € 121m from these 3 projects.


TQPM – TQPM – Metrics: Metrics: Finance / Finance / ECV ECV – determining the expected commercial – determining the expected commercial value of a projectvalue of a project

Abbreviations:

ECV – Expected Commercial Value


TQPM – TQPM – Metrics: Metrics: Finance / Finance / ECV - ECV - Determination of Expected Commercial Determination of Expected Commercial

Value (ECV) of Project – Use Decision Tree AnalysisValue (ECV) of Project – Use Decision Tree Analysis

ECV = [(PV x P - C ) x P - D]cs ts

Technical Failure

Pts

TechnicalSuccess

Yes

No

Pcs

€ C

€ PV

CommercialSuccess

CommercialFailure

Yes

No

Launch

Development

€ D

€ ECV

€ ECV = expected Commercial Value of project

P ts = probability of technical success

P cs = probability of commercial success (given technical success)

€ D = development costs remaining in the project

€ C = commercialisation (launch) costs (if not into project budget)

€ PV = present value of project’s future earnings (discounted to today)


METRICS : overall budget versus spent versus spent ‘reserved-’budgetMETRICS : overall budget versus spent versus spent ‘reserved-’budget

Planned & Forecast HRS

150

350

550

750

950

1150

1350

1550

1750

1950

Weeks

Baseline Forecast Actual

Planned & Forecast HRS

150

350

550

750

950

1150

1350

1550

1750

1950

Weeks

Baseline Forecast Actual

project progress : budget [€] & mandays

0

20

40

60

80

100

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

reporting cycle

%

baseline [€]

actual [md]

baseline budget

baseline [md]


METRICS : financial - EVAMETRICS : financial - EVA

What?

• Measure of project progress;

• Forecast completion date and final cost;

• Provide schedule and budget variances:

• By integrating 3 measurements, EVA provides consistent, numerical indicator with which you can evaluate and compare projects.

Key:

• Where are we on schedule?

• Where are we on budget?

• Where are we on work accomplished?

Abbreviations:

EVA – Earned Value Analysis



How?

• It compares the ‘planned’ amount of work with what has actually been completed, to determine if COST , SCHEDULE, and WORK ACCOMPLISHED are progressing as planned

• Work is ‘EARNED’ as it is … 100% completed

EVA gives a uniform unit of measure: € or man-days

EVA provides an ‘EARLY WARNING” for prompt corrective actions

Example:

30% time spent

30% € spent

Equals 30% work performed ?

Not necessarily !

Abbreviations:




Abbreviations:


BCWS – budgeted cost of work performed

planned cost of the total amount of work scheduled

to be performed by milestone date

ACWP – actual cost of work performed

cost incurred to accomplish the work that has bee done to date

BCWP – budgeted cost of work performed

planned (not actual) cost to complete the work that has been done



Some more abbreviations:

SV - Schedule Variance (BCWP – BCWS)

comparison of amount of work performed during a given period of time to what was scheduled to be performed

Negative variance means that the project is behind schedule

CV – Cost Variance (BCWP – ACWP)

comparison of the budgeted cost of work performed with actual cost

negative variance means that the project is over budget

Example:

Schedule Variance = BCWP – BCWS

Cost Variance = BCWP - ACWP


Total Quality Project Management : schedule sanity checkTotal Quality Project Management : schedule sanity check

Indication for quality of schedule;

• Slope is sinusoidal:

• Increase and decrease of number of team members in project is controlled manner;


0

5

10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

reporting cycle

num

ber st

aff

baseline (abs)

“How realistic is the schedule”


0

5

10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

reporting cycle

num

ber st

aff

baseline (abs)

Rationale:

‘Very’ Early warning

Explanation

A quality check for a realistic schedule. For example a project schedule with this curve is doomed to fail. The number of mandays is equal for both schedules.


Total Quality Project Management : Milestone chart (Deliverables Chart)Total Quality Project Management : Milestone chart (Deliverables Chart)

Rationale:

Early warning

Explanation

When a (first) milestone has been missed, very probably, following milestones will be delayed too.

Inclusive the closure milestone.

This chart will help to show and understand the moving milestones (pushed away in time) and indicates a new ‘closure’ date.

Purpose:

•Management communication

•Interdependencies communication

Deliverables Chart

nov/10

jan/11

feb/11

apr/11

jun/11

jul/11

sep/11

baseline 28/02/2011 31/03/2011 30/04/2011 31/05/2011

reporting cycle

De

liv

era

ble

s d

ate

s

Business Requirements

Functional Design

Coding & Testing

Launch


Total Quality Project Management : average costs of project team members , Total Quality Project Management : average costs of project team members , evolutiveevolutive

Rationale:

cost improvement

Explanation

Follow up of contract costs of IT staff, and potentially re-negociate contracts;

In case of increasing contract costs, it could have impact on project budget;

This chart will help to show and understand the evolution of average hiring costs of IT staff.

Purpose:

•Follow up of average costs of IT profiles;

•Influence contract negotiations of –external- IT staff ;

•Control of budget.Totaal

840

850

860

870

880

890

900

910

707 708 709 710 711 712 801 802 803 804

Astitel

Totaal

Average day rate (€) per month.


Total Quality Project Management : number of external project team Total Quality Project Management : number of external project team members , evolutivemembers , evolutive

Rationale:

cost improvement

Explanation

Follow up of contract costs of IT staff, and potentially re-negociate contracts;

In case of increasing contract costs, it could have impact on project budget;

This chart will help to show and understand the evolution of number of external staff, the hiring costs of IT staff. And more important , it could help to optimising resources, when done on programme/portfolio level: future needs of external staff

Purpose:

•Follow up of number of external project staff;

•Influence contract negotiations of –external- IT staff ;

•Optimising of available staff

internal versus external project staff

0

5

10

15

baseline apr/11 jun/11 aug/11 okt/11 dec/11

Project Life Cycle

# p

roje

ct

sta

ff

internal staff (#)

external staff (#)


Total Quality IT / asset Management : TCO of applications, infrastructure, and Total Quality IT / asset Management : TCO of applications, infrastructure, and maintenance related costs (existing IT-infrastructure)maintenance related costs (existing IT-infrastructure)

Rationale:

knowing when to make a technology switch (‘warning’)

Explanation

Assessing the existing technology applied in IT infrastructure (hardware and software);

List the known expenses for each of the configuration item;

Controlling the total cost of ownership of each configuration item;

Knowing at the right moment when to switch to other technology;

Plan(-ned) investment: less unlucky surprises;

Add to roadmap: know what resources will be needed (fiscal year, staffing, priority);

Purpose:

•Management decisions

•Optimising of portfolio, and asset management.

•Strategic IT management

•TCO (total cost of ownership)

•Technology follow up (don’t stay behind the competition)

Not entirely in scope of this presentation , but….


TQPM : TQPM : Balanced scorecard Balanced scorecard (new product project selection)(new product project selection)

• Factor 1: strategic fit and importance

• Factor 2: product and competitive advantage

• Factor 3: market attractiveness

• Factor 4: core competencies leverage

• Factor 5: technical feasibility

• Factor 6: financial reward versus risk



• Factor 1: Strategic fit and importance

– Alignment of project with business’s strategy

– Importance of project to the strategy

– Impact on the business



• Factor 2: product and competitive advantage

– Product delivers unique customer or user benefits

– Product offers customer / user excellent value for money

– Competitive rationale for project

– Positive customer / user feedback on product concept (concept test results)

Driver:

ECV – expected commercial value

ROI – return on investment



• Factor 3: Market attractiveness

– Market size

– Market growth and future potential

– Margins earned by players in this market

– Competitiveness – how tough and intense competition is

• Factor 4: core competencies leverage

– Project leverages our core competencies and strengths in:

• Technology

• Production / operations

• Marketing

• Distribution / sales force



• Factor 5: Technical feasibility

– Size of technical gap

– Familiarity of technology to our business

– Newness of technology (base to embryonic)

– Technical complexity

– Technical results to date (proof of concept)

• Factor 6: financial reward versus risk

– Size of financial opportunity

– Financial return (npv , ecv)

– Productivity index

– Certainty of financial estimates

– Level of risk and ability to address risks

Abbreviations:

NPV – net present value

ECV – expected commercial value



Some ‘play-’rules:

• Projects are scored by the gatekeepers (senior management) at the gate meeting using these six factors on a scorecard (0-10 scales);

• The scores are tallied, averaged across the evaluators, and displayed for discussion;

• The project attractiveness score (PAS) is the weighted or un-weighted addition of the scores, taken out of 100;

• A PAS score of 60/100 is usually required for a go decision.



Some ‘play-’rules:

• Projects are scored by the gatekeepers (senior management) at the gate meeting using these six factors on a scorecard (0-10 scales);

• The scores are tallied, averaged across the evaluators, and displayed for discussion;

• The project attractiveness score (PAS) is the weighted or unweighted addition of the scores, taken out of 100;

• A PAS score of 60/100 is usually required for a go decision.


What is needed , what is to understandWhat is needed , what is to understand

• For all the shown graphical support tools, a proper planning is required, according to some applied planning guidelines;

• For all the shown graphical support tools, a proper follow up (progress capturing, man-days, financial data) is required;

• And proper project management (skills);

BUT:

• It is not necessary to have all these graphical analysis tools, use what is needed to execute your project, programme, portfolio.


Time is up. Much more to talk about this interesting topic….

Questions ?

Linkedin Jan Biets - [email protected] - +32(0)477 329011

? ?????? ? ?

Documents

Graphical project reporting-v1-0