The Usefulness of Project Plans - Essay Example

Topic: Critically discuss the usefulness of project plans based on literature review and your own analysis, focussing your discussion on one of the following: Quality Plans - are they useful to the overall success of projects? Introduction Project management has been traditionally practiced and implemented in the business conducts’ framework in an attempt of managers to effectively and strategically deal with projects, tasks and activities (Jaafari, 2007). The systematic and sophisticated approach to project management was eventually intensified and extensively reviewed by literature in the early 1950s in an effort to establish a direct association between managing projects and successfully implementing projects (Atkinson, 1999). Several authors including Lock (2004) and Milocevic and Patanakul (2005) suggest that project management aims at maximizing the prospects for success of a particular project given that there are various limitations and constraints pertaining predominantly in the context of proper allocation of time and resources as well as minimization of uncertainty with regards to external or any other influences that may disrupt the flow of project implementation. In that sense, Project management as noted by Pich et al. (2002) aims at coordinating activities, processes and procedures in a sustainable manner and in such a mode that the potentials for success are expanded and leveraged. According to Munns and Bjeirmi (1996) and Soderholm (2008) project management intends to plan, organize and control the implementation of unit projects within the framework of time, quality and cost pressure. Leus (2004) further expands this view and addresses the issue of project success in the overall context of unexpected influences and occurrences that can have significant effects on project completion. Given these factors, there is an ongoing interest in attributing increased importance on the first phase of project management – project planning. Planning occurs at the initiation stage of project management and involves virtually the development of planned activities, tasks and procedures that need to be embedded in the entire project implementation (Qureshi et al., 2009). This paper focuses on the analysis of the significant contribution of project plans in the project success and emphasizes the critical role of quality plans in the entire planning procedure. The relationship between Project Plans and Project Success Project planning has received increased attention from practitioners and researchers due to its vitality in the design phase of project management. Milocevic and Patanakul (2005) argue that projects are unique tasks occurring for one time and requiring specific resources. In a similar notion, projects are sets of coordinated activities that have specific objectives and criteria with regards to accomplishing project goals and aims. For this very reason, project plans are essential not only for the initiation but also for the entire continuation of project implementation (Lock, 2003). Project plans are explicit decisions upon the project’s required inputs, required activities, tasks, allocation of resources, and required duration and costs. Planning enables management to design course of action on the basis of already known inputs as well as on the basis of anticipating un-known and unexpected ‘inputs’ (Dvir and Lechler, 2004). For this matter, project plans include detailed analysis of all the necessary processes that need to be followed, the necessary resources that need to be leveraged and the respective objectives that need to achieved. Turner (2009) and Westland (2007) propose that in the overall project management discipline (where there is a sequence of planning, monitoring and controlling action) project plans earn a special place in determining project success. They posit that projects are undertaken under the scope of serving organizational goals; in turn these goals are broken down to particular objectives which eventually become the projects’ objectives. In that respect, project planning is actually the coordination of the projects’ objectives with the utilization of the existing resources; whether these resources imply personnel, activities, costs, time or quality infrastructure. Project plans are perceived as critical and vital due to the fact that they constitute the designing of the project implementation in terms of all the parameters that will be encountered during the project implementation. Planning largely refers to determining the allocation of costs, the budget for project completion as well as the requirements of the processes’ systems towards this end (Field and Keller, 1998; Soderholm, 2008; Turner, 2009). However, as Jaafari (2007) mentions the most important element in project plans is that they constitute a systematic approach on the part of management to prepare alternative course of actions or activities in the onset of problems emerging. In more details, Jaafari (2007) states that essence of project planning lies with the fact that it equips the project implementation with ‘self- defensive’ and corrective mechanisms. The success of projects is based on a number of criteria including meeting time and budget requirements as well as other related critical aspects. The projects’ life cycles highly depend on the initiation stage of project design; project planning. According to a study conducted by Dvir and Lechler (2004) the vast majority of successful projects have been identified in terms of consistent, dynamic and strategic project plans. In a similar manner, Lock (2003) claims that project managers need to place extra emphasis on project plans because they constitute the blueprint and general guidance for the entire project implementation. In project planning the benchmarks, the critical success factors, the time and budget allocation as well as the development of projects’ objectives actually formulate the fundamental basis and starting point for project completion. The project plans reflect management’s decisions upon critical aspects and issues that will have an inevitable impact on the projects’ outcome; success or failure. Project plans involve strategic and efficient leverage of all the available resources in an attempt to maximize success potential and minimize risks. Within this context Dvir et al. (2003) and Dvir and Lechler (2004) argue that planning can offer great advantages but cannot be perceived as determinant factor for project success. Their argument lies in the fact that projects are not static or stable; rather they are dynamic and become subjects to external or internal changes. According to their views and theoretical assumptions, projects’ progress is based on a number of variables that cannot be determined or forecasted in the preliminary stage of project implementation. The underpinning idea is that there is high uncertainty pertaining to projects and thus plans offer but predominantly initial predictions or estimations of project processes, activities and procedures. For this very reason the authors propose that project plans are directly linked with successful outcomes and products only when they entail by nature processes and mechanisms that allow changes to take place during the project implementation phase. Dvir et al. (2003) emphasize the issue of rationality in the project plan stage; they address the concept of rationality by underlining that the rationalization of possible outcomes and project objectives greatly expand the prospects for successful project implementation. Dvir and Lechler (2004) raise another important issue with regards to project plans; they posit that in order to ensure project success plans need to be designed in such a way that project execution is not fragmented and rigid. Flexibility needs to be incorporated in project plans so as to promote consistently project success; they define flexibility as the development of alternative courses of action undertaken in case of obstacles, limitation of resources or any other critical constraints. It is therefore obvious that project plans are actually essential in developing the framework for project success, however this should not be considered as determinant and finite. Project plans need to be flexible and address the dynamic nature of projects (in the sense of continuously changing forces that impact project implementation) in order to be directly associated with successful execution of projects. The relationship between Quality Plans and Project Success According to Westland (2007) each project has four interrelated dimensions/metrics; scope, cost, time and quality. All these are fundamental and essential in defining the project as well as in determining the overall management of the project. Planning on those four dimensions is the core element in establishing the grounds for project success. Lock (2003) suggests that the project success depends to a great extend in the design and development of project plans that place emphasis to these measures but at the same time allow for flexibility in all those metrics. Other authors suggest that the emphasis needs to be based on quality because quality is the determinant factor for projects’ success, whereas the remaining factors are indicative of the projects’ performance (Atkinson, 1999; Turner, 2009). It extends therefore to the notion that one of the most important aspects in project management is the assurance of quality in project implementation. Quality plans are means of enabling management to address criteria with regards to quality standards that need to be met during the implementation phase of the project. They usually entail clear and explicitly stated quality standards that are to be measured against actual execution in order to determine the degree of the projects’ ability to meet the quality requirements. In general quality assurance is discussed by the majority of authors and researchers within the framework of successful projects implemented (Dale, 2003; Field and Keller, 1998; Leus, 2004). The underlining argument is that quality needs to be embedded and incorporated at the very beginning of every project. Westland (2007) comments that there are two basic perspectives to project quality (that need to be considered in creating and developing quality plans); “the quality for each derivable for the customer and the quality of the management process undertaken to produce each deliverable” (p. 74). This is very critical as it pertains to two different but highly interrelated aspects of project quality; the quality plans integrate the quality expected by customers along with the quality that principally guides the project execution and implementation. Quality plans are developed at the initial stage of project management, within the context of project plan. According to Turner (2009) they derive from the managements’ critical decisions over quality criteria, methods and processes to ensure these criteria, procedures and functions to control and assure quality (assurance and control measures/ techniques) and outputs that are to be measured over their degree of success (in achieving quality targets). Lock (2003) indicates that the most important element in quality plans is the identification and the evaluation of the definition of quality within the context of the project itself. He explains that project managers should first of all realize and understand the scope and depth of quality for each respective project to be implemented; therefore planning with regards to quality becomes necessary for not only ensuring embedded quality but predominantly for developing tools and mechanisms that can control or estimate the project’s success (during execution) measured against the particular quality criteria that adhere to defining the quality issue. The critical role of quality plans in the overall project success is perceived by Atkinson (1999) as an integrated and consistent approach to project implementation that manages to minimize or even eliminate any variations of quality during the project execution and not after project completion. In a similar manner, Lock (2003) suggests that when quality measures are taken prior to project implementation then it is far more effective and efficient for project managers to address quality controls and eventually undertake particular action if the criteria are not satisfied and the quality targets are not met. Once again – as in project plans in general – quality plans equip the projects with self-defense mechanisms towards threats that may constitute the projects as failures. It is important to note that quality plans address more than just the projects’ deliverables or outputs; they fairly address the projects’ processes and procedures towards ensuring quality in the projects’ execution stage. As Westland (2007) indicates, quality plans combine, integrate and build in the project the quality processes, the quality measurements and the quality targets. Therefore, quality plans address concerns of quality throughout the project by allowing management to configure means of quality assurance and quality control in advance and comply with the quality specifications from the very beginning of project execution. Turner (2009) posits that quality plans contribute significantly to the success of projects mainly due to the fact that they determine particular processes and functions that are intended towards ensuring and incorporating quality into the projects themselves. As quality is perceived as a core element in the project success, it is clear that specific requirements and measures need to be decided upon and developed so that the objectives and goals of the projects (in terms of quality) can be effectively achieved. Quality failures generate increased costs in the project implementation and for this very reason quality standards are critical and essential not only in detecting defects but also in building quality in every operation or process to prevent quality failures. As Field and Keller (1998) note quality plans offer comparative benefits to project management because they determine expectations on quality by defining the acceptance criteria or acceptance outputs and eventually they produce strategic decision making on the part of project managers over the successful implementation of projects. Conclusion Project management is a discipline that has caught the attention of academics and researchers due to its critical contribution in managing and implementing successful projects. Many authors suggest that the initiation of project management begins with the strategic project planning as this signifies the development of processes, functions and operations that need to be followed in order to achieve critical success factors that underline the entire project (Milocevic and Patanakul, 2005; Qureshi et al., 2009). This paper has addressed the relationship between project plans and project success in the broad view and has further focused on the relationship amongst quality plans (as important and integrated parts of the wider project plans) and successful implementation. It has been argued that planning is a critical stage in the entire project management mainly because it explicitly states the requirements, the standards as well as the particular procedures that are going to take place for the completion of the project. However it has also being argued that not all planning contributes to success; rigid and fragmented project plans tend to deprive the project from the necessary flexibility within the framework of overall non-anticipated obstacles or problems occurring. In that sense, project plans are meaningful and effective only if they are flexible and they allow for changes to be implemented as projects progress. With regards to quality plans it has been argued that they greatly contribute to project success because quality is the most important factor that determines the degree of success (the remaining dimensions are predominantly indicative of project success and can therefore be outweighed by quality assurance). Given these two underpinning assumptions it is rather evident that planning in a more generic view is vital and critical to the proper, effective and efficient completion of projects within the standards of success criteria. References Atkinson, R. (1999). Project management: cost, time and quality, two best guesses and a phenomenon, its time to accept other success criteria. International Journal of Project Management, 17(6), pp. 337-342 Dale, B.G. (2003). Managing Quality. 4th Edition. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Dvir, D. and Lechler, T. (2004). Plans are nothing, changing plans is everything: the impact of changes on project success. Research Policy, 33(1), pp. 1–15 Dvir, D., Raz, T. and Shenhar, A.J. (2003). An empirical analysis of the relationship between project planning and project success. International Journal of Project Management, 21(2), pp. 89–95. Field, M. and Keller, L. (1998). Project Management. London: The Open University Jaafari, A. (2007). Project and program diagnostics: A systemic approach. International Journal of Project Management, 25, pp. 781–790 Leus, R. (2004). The generation of stable project plans. Doctorate Thesis (Ph.D) Belgium: Katholieke Universiteit Leuven Lock, D. (2003). Project Management. 8th Edition. UK: Gower Publishing Limited Milosevic, D. and Patanakul, P. (2005). Standardized project management may increase development projects success. International Journal of Project Management, 23, pp. 181–192 Munns, A.K and Bjeirmi, B.F. (1996). The role of project management in achieving project success. International Journal of Project Management, 14(2), pp. 81-87 Pich, M.T., Loch, C.H. and de Meyer, A. (2002). On Uncertainty, Ambiguity, and Complexity in Project Management. Management Science, 48(8), pp. 1008–1023 Qureshi, T.M., Warraich, A.S. and Hijazi, S.T. (2009). Significance of project management performance assessment (PMPA) model. International Journal of Project Management, 27, pp. 378–388 Soderholm, A. (2008). Project management of unexpected events. International Journal of Project Management, 26, pp. 80–86 Turner, J.R. (2009). The handbook of project based management. 3rd Edition. New York, NY: McGraw Hill Inc Westland, J. (2007). The Project Management Lifecycle: a complete step by step methodology for initiating, planning, executing and closing a project successfully. London: Kogan Page Limited Read More