Johannesburg, 29 Oct 2009
The greatest project successes are achieved when practical experiences are seen as learning opportunities.
Having implemented a large number of project offices at major organisations such as FNB, Kimberly-Clark, Vodacom and the Department of Health, CEO of Post Vision Technology, Guy Jelley, has seen the good and the bad, and shares some of his tips.
When seeking a project portfolio management (PPM) tool, Jelley suggests choosing technology that is easy to use over something that might have all the bells and whistles, but is overcomplicated and takes time to implement.
"Adoption by users is the single most important factor that will determine the success of the tool implementation. When it is simpler to understand, they will get on board faster, use the tool more effectively and the organisation will start to benefit and see a return on investment within a much shorter timeframe," he explains.
"Also avoid large capex spend upfront and rather opt for a software as a service (SaaS) or pay-as-you-use product. This way, the responsibility to make the tool work is on the vendor. However, it is important to be careful not to get locked into long-term contracts and check that you have the option to scale the number of licences as required.
"Before you stop calculating, make sure that the tool won't create administrative overheads and therefore extra costs in future. It doesn't help if the tool and implementation are cheap, but it requires full time administrators, whether in-house or outsourced, to run the system, resulting in extra salaries that have to be paid."
According to Jelley, it is vital to investigate reference sites and to find out points such as the typical duration of implementation. "Companies should determine how much time they have for rollout and how long it will take before they attain value. Many systems take a minimum of six months to be deployed, while it can be done within one month," he says.
Understanding how the upgrade process works and the costs involved is also necessary to avoid having to pay again and again for new versions of the product. When using SaaS, upgrades are often free and clients don't have to worry about acquiring and implementing them as it is done automatically. Furthermore, ensuring there is sufficient local support, preferably from multiple vendors, lessens the risk of being stuck with the product should a partner opt out and gives an organisations a choice of service provider, which often leads to better service.
Jelly also warns against vendors that punt their "best practice" methodology and attempt to force their approach on clients. "Every business and project office is unique, so a project management tool should be methodology independent and allow an organisation to use the processes that work optimally for that specific business."
While implementing a project management tool, he recommends that companies continue to use their existing processes, because if users have to deal with both a new tool and new procedures at the same time, it will lengthen the implementation period and create a greater risk for failure. Organisations wanting to improve their processes should best wait until the users are comfortable with using the tool.
He further stresses that the technology must allow easy access from anywhere and to anyone who needs to use it, as most project environments are distributed with project managers logging in remotely.
It should provide the same level of performance from anywhere, therefore it is important to put accessibility before control and avoid VPN connections or having to dial in to networks, which can become frustrating and hamper the efficient use of the tool.
"What's more, it is beneficial to start using the tool from top to bottom as soon as possible, especially the reporting function, for project boards, review committees and weekly team meetings," says Jelley. "When using a phased approach, companies soon sit with two sets of reporting - on-system and off-system - which creates double work for employees and delays the transition. Based on this, it is critical not to accept the use of old reports, but rather start using the new tool in its entirety and make sure that everything is in place. Not only will users have to accept the tool much faster, but problems will be addressed from the start and consistency and quality will be achieved."
Share