September 15, 2008 – Back to the Basic: Competing Project Constraints

Following last week’s edition, one of my project management co-conspirators dropped me a note informing me that the triple constraint (see The Troubling Triangle) is officially dead. The upcoming release of the PMBOK Guide 4th edition has killed it.

In lieu of the binding, restricting, tri-legged barer of logic, PMI has opted for “Competing Project Constraints.” The new PMBOK includes Scope, Quality, Schedule, Budget, Resources and Risk as a representative list of the numerous constraints that a Project Manager faces.

Without reading the text directly I can not make a fully informed decision about the wisdom of creating a multisided polygon constraint. For one thing it doesn’t have quite the same ring as a triangle (I’m sure there’s a bad musical percussion joke in there somewhere). However, here are my initial thoughts.

1. I whole heartedly agree that Project Managers have more to worry about than Scope, Schedule and Budget. I don’t think there was ever any real misunderstanding of that fact.
2. By removing the Triple Constraint and accompanying triangular image, we loose the visual used to explain the impact of changing one of the legs.
3. Of the examples given as other constraints, Quality is easily represented by the size of the area encompassed by the leg segments of the triangle. Although not originally part of the image, it fits.
4. Another, Resources is generally a factor of the cost (or budget) of the project. If money is no object you can get better and more resources. The New York Yankees and Real Madrid sports franchises, with their ability to buy talent, come to mind. Generally speaking, projects run out of time or money before they experience a lack in available resources.
5. For the other, Risks, I need more explanation for the use of the term “constraint.” If the term means “factors that may adversely impact your project” then I would agree.

Perhaps that is the basis of the change in the terms used. PMI may believe that it is doing us a favor by widening the term to show the myriad of chainsaws and knives we need to keep juggling. My fear is that it opens the door for management to defy the simple logic that if they increase scope, schedule or budget, one or both of the other legs have to adjust.

If we are expanding the number of constraints, maybe we just need a different image:
Picket Fence – Each of the slats represents a constraint holding the project level.
Suspension Bridge – All of the cables adjusted to keep the path safe for passage.
Multi-legged Table – Legs adjusting together to support the project.

Whatever the symbol, I will miss the triangle.

September 8, 2008 – Back to the Basic: The Troubling Triangle

In our quest to return to the basic of project management we have already tackled the stakeholders. Next we take on the triple constraint in the form of a triangle. The concept of a triangle to represent the Scope, Schedule and Cost of a project is actually quite ingenious. Adding more scope dictates an increase in the schedule, cost or both. Reducing the cost or timeline for the project requires less scope. Each part is dependent on the other two.

The trouble is that management thinks of these three items as completely independent of each other; like 3 line segments lying as distinctly separated as the bones in my daughter’s x-ray from last week’s edition.

Scope. The scope of your project includes the full extent of what is agreed to, both verbally and in writing. In reality scope is never fully defined until all of the requirements are vetted, but from the minute you take ownership it is our responsibility is to ferret out promises and commitments made. This is especially evident in the consulting world. Account Representatives (aka Salesmen) are notorious for making promises and not letting the project manager in on the secret. Take your list of Stakeholders and find out their expectations.

The resulting wish list is not your scope. Like pruning a Bonsai tree you need to cut that back to something you can realistically deliver in the timeframe and cost provided. Remember, you can’t set one line segment of your triangle without impacting the other two.

Cost. Auto salesmen get a bad rep, justifiably so in many cases. But you can take a page out of their play book. When asked how much it will cost to deliver the scope, ask how much they are looking to spend. If they only have enough for a used, beat up Yugo, don’t try to sell them a Lamborghini.

When giving an estimate, put it in terms of what will be delivered. Never give a quote without documenting your assumptions; the “here’s what I was thinking…” piece. Placing the cost into context forces the discussion of scope.

Schedule. Timing is always an issue. On one project our directive was to go live in August. Backing up from that date gave us July for Testing and Implementation, June for Development, May for Design and April for Requirements. It would be tight, but do-able. At the end of May “in production” was clarified to mean the day after 4 weeks of parallel testing in the production environment. Changing the move to production, even if we weren’t “live” would have been impossible without changing the scope and adding more resources (increasing the cost).

Find out what the date is and the significance of it. If it is a hard date you have already set one of the legs in the triangle.

As you establish the three legs of your triangle, it is management’s job to stretch the scope side while reducing the length of the cost and schedule sides. How can you effectively push back without a career shortening screaming match?

Go gourmet on them. Most CIOs, VPs and Senior Managers enjoy their share of fine food. The higher end restaurants produce amazing dinners that take longer to serve and cost quite a bit more than your local fast food joint. Even our cafeteria at work has a sign that says, “Good food takes time. Thank you for your patience.”

Build a reputation on speaking straight and not padding estimates. It is your responsibility to present the facts, back them up with evidence and state your case clearly. It is their job to make decisions.