Posts Tagged ‘Project management’

Flexibility Key During Project Implementation

January 26th, 2012

Organizations are constantly in the midst of implementing or rolling out huge projects that impact the business, users, and customers. This process is rarely easy when you have deal with unexpected challenges, whether it is technology related, a scheduling conflict, or whatever. That is why it is critical for the success of the project that you and your team remain flexible throughout the implementation. Rob Murphy, a Program Manager for the U.S. House of Representatives, recently led one of our Web Forums and he discussed the idea of project flexibility. The House is in the process of implementing a Financials ERP so Rob spoke about some of the challenges they have encountered and how being flexible has enable them to be successful thus far. You can read the full IMF Report on Rob’s presentation here.

Below is a snippet from the report where Rob talks about the advantages of limiting project customizations…

“When it comes to large technology projects, many organizations tend to stay pretty close to vanilla in terms of their approach. Certain companies may flat out say “no we are not going to have any,” “you can have one or two different levels” or “if you have some they have to be this type of characterization.” They can have only so much effort and impact, which is excellent. You definitely want to limit it because these are very complex applications, even without customizations. They still roll out patches and fixes regularly whether it is desktop computers and very simple software or more complex. There will always be patching and fixing taking place. Vendors and IT organizations know that so any time you can limit the complexity on your end it is an advantage.

You will reach a certain point on most projects where customizing becomes a necessity, whether it means minimally invasive tasks like designing your own reports or possibly more invasive items. The project team at the House started out with the idea that they were going to stay vanilla and only do a couple of items, some of which were required. They may have been for reporting or regulatory needs but there were certain items they had to produce. The software package that was selected may not have all of the features, fields, and data that are needed. Consequently those fields and reports will need to be created…“

No comments »

Posted in IMF Updates, Strategy

Tags:

Virtual Team web forum summary

January 14th, 2010

Dr. Michael Hitson, from the Verizon Telecommunication Organization IT Program and Project Management division in Westfield, IN, presented at Thursday’s IMF Web Forum on “technology driven transitory virtual teaming: facilitating adaptable lean project teams into the new decade.” His presentation addressed transitory teams, the factors that affect transitory virtual teams in addition to the significance of virtual team leadership, memetics, and the influence of the cloud.  Hitson began the presentation with an introduction on the business trends impacting technology organizations. These include:

·        The consumerization of IT (IT is no longer driven by the business and is instead driven by the needs of the customer.)

·        Globalization

·        Invisible IT

·        Continued increase in project approach to work (Provision of continuity.)

·        Green IT (A driving factor that goes hand-in-hand with virtualization of the workplace).

The technologies that enable these business trends are comprised of Enterprise 2.0 (social computing, network enabled devises, cloud computing, and virtualization- an abstraction of all computer resources that goes along with the application of the cloud. Hitson also addressed “soft problems” which are human-based and mostly affect virtual teaming. In order to facilitate needed change in this environment, there must be a facilitated strategy, an understanding of the virtual team needs, and applying lean to look at problems in a different perspective.

For virtually bound transitory teams there are four primary perspectives which are cost, economy, competition, and globalization of IT. Hitson believes that IT organizations will be “enabling the Cloud to the greatest organizational advantage” and adds that “cloud use will be the norm.”

Leadership considerations that must be considered that factor into transitory virtual teams include team selection, proper IT (such as equipment, hardware, and software), trust, communication methods, culture consideration, multitasking, member burnout, training, leadership style, and development and follower needs. Trust is essential for the team to come together, and Hitson emphasizes the importance of team leaders being aware of the team workloads to prevent member burnout. Hitson points out that in virtual teams it is easy to assign task in excess if members are particularly high performing.

The key to a virtual team includes the leadership. Hitson notes that leaders should embrace an open perspective to leadership development where adaptability is key and the organization and follower needs are understood. This is further defined by employee satisfaction which is an agreement between employee and reality.

According to Hitson’s presentation “the memetic progression implies that the development, spread, application, and eventual non-applicability of an idea, knowledge, and invention are natural processes much like natural selection.” Memetics refers to the idea that once considered applicable knowledge eventually proceeds out of use.

Hitson’s closing recommendation included the advice that “leaders must be adaptable and stewards for change. These same leaders, though, must model clear values, develop and communicate precise strategies, and create and implement innovative ways to operate.”

To download a copy of Hitson’s presentation please click here.

Follow us on Twitter @ITInfoForum.

No comments »

Posted in IT Workforce

Tags:

Featured report: CCI’s New Solutions Delivery Framework

November 10th, 2009

“The decision process is further forward so accountability is share with business owners as well as IT.” –John Olmstead, Senior Project Manager, Cox Communications

Cox Communications is a prominent figure in the cable TV industry. They also offer services such as high speed internet, standard telephone, voice-over-internet telephone and recently entered the market as a wireless provider.

In an August web forum presentation, John Olmstead, Senior Project Manager for Cox Communications offered an overview of the organization’s methodology for project development and infrastructure delivery.   According to Olmstead, “The process we implement at Cox allows you to still have your pilot, but what you have created will be analyzed in the assured process to make sure that it is ready for production.”

CCI’s Enterprise Solutions Group consisted of six sub-groups, many of which overlapped each other, throughout completion of various projects. Each group conducted project management and system development life cycle (SDLC) through their own methodology. The Delivery Management Organization (DMO) which was one of the six sub-groups, devised a common frame work for standardization purposes. This ‘Assured Framework’ allowed for all groups to think and work alike and allowed for better quality, cross functionality and the ability to augment each other’s teams. Along with this established framework, gating functionality was introduced to audit quality and stop the implementation of projects until problems and issues are rectified.

The traditional PMI model was followed and executed through the common phases including: initiation, analyzing, design, building, testing, and implementation. Each phase had specific tasks and deliverables to be completed.

Another implementation by the organization was the use of quality gates. According to Olmstead, “The quality gate is designed to help you succeed, so there are progress checkpoints before gates.”  These gates, defined by the executive team, identified the significant projects of the organization. The determination process involved evaluation of the projects based upon preset criteria that. There were three quality gates identified by red, yellow, or green status. The project cannot pass a quality control gate until they have attained “yellow” or “green” standing. Because a gate review would inundate a project with so many deliverables, there are only three gates: alignment, execution and delivery.

To read the report in its entirety, please click here. (Members must be logged in to download.)

Non-members, to request a copy of this report please contact us here.

Do you have something similar to Cox Communication’s New Solutions Delivery Framework? What kind of strategy have you implemented? Follow the Discussion @ITInfoForum.

No comments »

Posted in Strategy

Tags: