Monday, May 30, 2016

Project Delivery Process D230

D230 - Focus on delivery of Benefits

SIIPS Delivery Processes (D).png

DEFINITION

SIIPS D230.pngFocus on the intended benefits of the project and monitor that those benefits are being realised.

SUMMARY

Throughout the delivery work, techniques are used to monitor that the desired business benefits will be delivered and to keep the team’s focus on delivering these benefits.  In this process, those techniques are first agreed and then applied throughout the life of the project.

PATH PLANNING GUIDANCE

Optional

DEPENDENCIES

Prerequisites (Finish-Start):
  • definition of the intended scope, terms of reference and objectives for the project, as described in the Project Constitution (L010)
Prerequisites (Finish-Finish):
  • definition of business needs and anticipated benefits (L020)
Dependent procedures (Finish-Start):
  • none - process continues throughout project and, optionally, beyond

RECEIVABLES

  • Delivery Approach Definition (DAD) or similar definition of high-level design
  • Project Constitution (PCON) or similar definition of scope
  • Definition of business needs and anticipated benefits (BNAB)

DELIVERABLES

  • Successful project
  • Revised / monitored Cost/Benefit analysis and/or Benefit Model

TOOLS

  • Benefits Realisation” Guide
  • Target solution’s consulting guides, such as provided by Software Supplier

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF TASKS

Various techniques may be used to ensure that the progress of the project is constantly compared with the intended delivery of business benefits.   All decisions taken throughout the project may also be made upon the basis of delivering the best overall business benefits.
The approach to monitoring the achievement of business benefit may have been defined in Process L010 - Review / Confirm Business Needs and Anticipated Benefits.   A Benefit Model may have been established giving a balanced view of the various forms of benefit that are desired.  Alternatively, appropriate techniques should be defined and agreed with the project’s sponsor as part of this process.  See Process L020 and the Benefit Realisation Core Guide for further guidance.
The Project Manager and executive (eg Steering Committee, Project Director) will review the project’s status to ensure that it is on course and that decisions have been taken in the best interests of the client organisation.  These reviews will be performed on a continuous basis and reviewed in formal project review meetings.  They may be based around the Benefit Model.
The focus on delivering the benefits will be conveyed as a key message to all participants in the project.  Performance measures or other forms of publicity may be used to encourage all personnel to work towards the success of the project in terms of genuine business benefits.
Any proposed changes or deviations from plan should be assessed (inter alia) to see whether they increase the overall business benefit delivered by the project.  Particular attention should be paid to any events or decisions which impact upon the analysis of costs and benefits.  The Cost/Benefit Analysis should be updated as required.

Project Delivery Process D211

D211 - Plan & Prepare Prototyping Approach

SIIPS Delivery Processes (D).png

DEFINITION

SIIPS D211.pngThe purpose of this process is to plan and prepare for using the package software as a prototyping tool to design the way in which the package’s facilities will be used to meet the organisation’s business needs.

SUMMARY

This process involves the development of a prototyping approach, prototyping scenarios for each area, test cases, scheduling prototyping sessions, and developing the prototyping procedure.

PATH PLANNING GUIDANCE

This process is optional.  It is used where prototyping is conducted on a wide scale such that formalised control and planning is beneficial.

DEPENDENCIES

Prerequisites (Finish-Finish):
  • Prepare / review / agree Topics / IP descriptions and sign offs (D100).
Dependent procedures (Finish-Finish):
  • Configure initial model (D364)
  • Build core testing data for prototyping (D383)
Dependent procedures (Finish-Start):
  • Design / prototype - Implementation Papers (D400)

RECEIVABLES

  • Definition of Requirements (DoR)
  • Delivery Approach Definition (DAD)
  • Definition of Topics (DoT)
  • Business process specifications

DELIVERABLES

  • Prototyping approach IP
  • Prototyping cases
  • Prototyping schedule
  • Prototyping procedures

TOOLS

  • MS Project or othe PM software
  • Aris Toolset or other BPM tools, if available
  • Test script definition templates

DETAILED DEFINITION OF TASKS

Develop prototyping approach

The purpose of this activity is to define the overall scope, objectives, and approach (technical and procedural) to be taken in using the base package software as a prototyping tool for the design of the business solution.  The objective is to support the iterative design prototyping that is used in Process D400 (individually for each topic) to:
  • refine requirements,
  • consider options,
  • agree an approach, and
  • determine the detail of that approach.
It should be determined which functions and features of the software to focus on in order to target future prototyping appropriately.  Also, procedures should be set in place that define the method for determining which suggested changes can be implemented.  Further steps will rely on the procedures established in the prototyping approach, so there should be sufficient detail to guide the set-up of the package modules, prototyping procedures, and session schedules.
These may include:
  • detailed objectives and criteria for acceptance (ie, major design issues in question - performance assessment, screen format/navigation, tool evaluation, process functionality),
  • scope (business units, functions and processes, types of customers, etc),
  • participants,
  • extent of simulation,
  • process approach (how sessions are scheduled and controlled), and
  • technical approach (tools for building and running prototypes).
The prototyping approach would normally be defined and agreed in the form of an implementation paper (see Process D400 for a generic description of the format and usage of Implementation Papers).

Develop prototyping scenarios (each area)

Using the defined prototyping approach, procedural scenarios that will be used in the prototyping of the software with respect to one business area or site should be developed and described.  Each scenario is designed to show how the package handles a specific business situation and may involve one or more procedures and various package functions and features.  Where appropriate, alternate scenarios should be developed to explore differences in current procedures and those implicit to the package software.  Level of detail should be sufficient to guide scenarios for business process to be evaluated and presented in a text and / or matrix format.  Clearly define specific functional processes within each business area which are to be prototyped.  Each scenario should include:
  • policy and procedure issues addressed,
  • description of business situation, including procedures and controls, triggering and triggered events, etc.,
  • conditions to be tested, and
  • set-up requirements (databases, equipment, etc).

Develop test cases

The purpose of this task is to develop the specific test cases to be used for each of the prototyping scenarios developed in previous steps.  It is optional whether these should be prepared in detail in advance or whether they should be left to the individual prototyping work teams to define as they go through the design process (see Process D400).
The detail should be specific scenarios to prototype all significant business processes within the overall business requirements.  This may be presented as structured text and graphics.  In order to provide this, a series of test cases may be established, providing specific storylines that cover the business processes identified.
Test cases might include:
  • reference ID
  • scenario and conditions tested
  • initial data values
  • special set-up procedures
  • reference data requirements
  • sequence of cases/steps to run
  • expected final data values.

Schedule prototyping sessions

The purpose of this task is to identify desired participants for each business area and site identified in the prototyping  approach and to make whatever arrangements are necessary to ensure that appropriate facilities and system resources will be available per site location.  This will involve scheduling one or more prototyping sessions for each business area or site.  Scheduled dates, times, and locations of all prototyping sessions should be confirmed well enough in advance to ensure appropriate participation.  The session should go into sufficient detail to provide support for scheduling and monitoring of task work.  Each session should include:

  • grouping (business area or site)
  • facility resources (computer equipment, desks, terminals, etc.)
  • software support and settings necessary
  • necessary supporting documents or business forms to support all prototyping activities (data entry, recorded results, etc.)
  • date, time, location
  • participants
  • advanced preparation.

Friday, May 27, 2016

Project Delivery Process D200

D200 - Agree reviewers & sign-off authority / responsibility

SIIPS Delivery Processes (D).png

DEFINITION

SIIPS D200.pngState the list of papers to be produced and agree a small empowered group of reviewers and authorisers.

SUMMARY

In a Brief Delivery it is important that decisions can be taken very rapidly.  For this reason, the project manager will normally state the list of papers without consultation.  Appropriate management from the client organisation will be identified as reviewers of these papers, and specific managers will be identified with the authority and responsibility to sign-off the documents.  The final list should be agreed with the client organisation.
Each topic will normally be designed and documented using a Brief Implementation Paper (BIP).  At the outset of the delivery segment, the list of topics must be created and/or revised to define the precise breakdown of topics.  Responsibilities must be defined both for the conduct of the tasks and for the management “ownership” of the topic.
The required papers and sign-off responsibilities are documented in the IP Control Log.  If desired, the Definition of IPs/Topics document can also be used to give a more detailed description of the content and purpose of each paper.  The definitions should be formally agreed and accepted by the client organisation.
This process is used in a Brief Delivery in place of the D100 process in Integrated Design Development and Implementation (IDDI).

PATH PLANNING GUIDANCE

This process is normal practice in a Brief Delivery.  

DEPENDENCIES

Prerequisites (Finish-Start):
  • (none)
Prerequisites (Finish-Finish):
  • finalisation of the high level design architecture / scope of project
Dependent procedures (Finish-Start):
  • all BIP design tasks

RECEIVABLES

  • Delivery Approach Definition (DAD) or equivalent statement of overall design architecture

DELIVERABLES

  • Definition of IPs/Topics (DoT) (optional)
  • IP Control Log (IPCON)

TOOLS

  • sample lists of IPs per application area / industry
  • IP control log template (IPCON)
  • Definition of IPs/Topics Template (DoT)

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF TASKS

IP Control Log

The IP Control Log is used to define all planned papers and subsequently to control progress and issues.
Other control information may be stated on the IP Control Log.  In particular, it can be used to define other responsibilities such as the prime author and other required signatories.  The following information may be included:
  • Reference: An identifying code for control and cross-reference purposes
  • Title of the Brief Implementation Paper (BIP)
  • Responsible Author: The prime member of the Project Team responsible for investigating the topic and preparing the paper
  • Date(s) signed + status: Sign-off by the author - status shows whether this is “in principle” ie the reviewer requires no further change but the topic is open, or “final” ie the paper is now finalised and should not be amended further (other than through the formal change control process).
  • Responsible Manager: This is the manager within the client organisation who it is agreed will have prime responsibility for defining, agreeing and signing off matters relating to this topic.
  • Date(s) signed + status: Sign off by the Responsible Manager provides a definitive acceptance by the organisation.  Sign off may be “in principle” or “final”
  • Other required signatories: These are other personnel within or outside the Project Team who it is agreed should review and sign-off matters relating to this topic.
  • Date(s) signed + status: Sign-off by other signatories “in principle” or “final”
  • Other circulation:  Other agreed recipients of the paper.  Further notes may be added to show whether this is for review or information only etc and whether draft copies or only final copies should be supplied.
  • Document Status: This shows the current status of the document, eg draft, signed “in principle” or finalised.
  • Version Number: The current version number of the document
  • Planned Publication Date
  • Included in Management Summary: Shows whether the contents of this paper should be/have been included in the overall Management Summary design document (if applicable)
  • Other comments: as appropriate.
The IPCON template document is set up as an Excel spreadsheet.  Although it is a single table, it prints in two parts - signoff/responsibilities information and status information.

The Definition of Topics (DoT)

The Definition of Topics (DoT) is a similar table to the IP Control Log.  It is used to hold full details of the purpose and nature of each planned paper.  Entries will correspond to the titles shown on the IP Control Log.  It is used optionally to allow other parties, such as user management, to understand the purpose of the papers.  (Further details can be found in process D100.)

Review and agree

Individual's’ involvement, powers and responsibilities should normally be discussed and agreed with the personnel concerned.  Care should be taken to ensure that appropriate participants are chosen.  In particular, Responsible Managers should have sufficient time and interest to perform their role. - they should be involved, responsible, accountable and committed.
In a Brief Delivery, it is important to avoid political disputes.  The chosen reviewers  must have genuine authority to define requirements and accept design decisions regarding the system on behalf of the client organisation.  Preferably, this should be a small empowered group who can meet together to decide any issues that arise.
The definition of sign-off responsibilities forms a crucial part of the project’s mandate.  It is important that the powers and responsibilities are formally agreed by the project’s executive body - eg a steering committee or the sponsor.

Any effect on the Path Plan or Segment Plan should be addressed and agreed.

Tuesday, May 24, 2016

Project Delivery Process D190

D190 - Issues - control, escalate, resolve

SIIPS Delivery Processes (D).png

DEFINITION

SIIPS D190.pngDefine, agree, instigate and operate procedures for the identification, control and resolution of issues.  Issues that arise during the design work are noted, logged, controlled and resolved.  Escalation and tie-breaking mechanisms are used where necessary.

SUMMARY

Issues are inevitable in any project.  They arise for many reasons.  Often they are due to changing needs or improved understanding.  Occasionally they result from misunderstandings, poor communication or errors made in the work or management of the project.  A particular form of issue occurs when a gap is identified between the client organisation’s requirements and the capabilities of the packages.
With a complex project, issues are particularly likely to occur due to conflicting needs and designs within the different topics of the overall project.  No amount of scheduling of the tasks or review processes could totally avoid such problems.  The answer is to identify such issues and provide an efficient mechanism for their resolution.  The issues resolution process links directly with the Implementation Papers process (see D400).
The issues resolution method is used both for the resolution of issues noted during the development of the various Implementation Papers and also for issues recorded by participants.  Issues forms and a control log may be used.
The issues resolution mechanism must be made known to all participants in the project.  This document may be known as the Issues Control Protocol (ICP).  It will set out the rules and procedures and provide example forms to be used.  All participants and other parties concerned should be encouraged to report issues wherever appropriate.
Any issue leading to potential changes in the project’s deliverables, timescales or costs should be managed in the same way as a change request - note the related activity of Change Control - see process D140.  In general, the best value for money will be achieved where the client organisation’s requirements are adapted to make best use of the package rather than undertaking unnecessary modifications or custom development.  The full effects of any issue may be measured against the project’s “Benefit Model”  where one is in use.
The Software Application Implementation Project  does not stipulate a fixed method for applying issues control.  It may be defined by the project management methodology that is in use.  In this process, the basic needs are identified and some example techniques are illustrated.

PATH PLANNING GUIDANCE

Optional - may be used where there are several people involved in the project such that issues need some form of formal control.  (When no formal mechanism is in use, informal techniques should be used to encourage the identification and resolution of issues.  Issues should always be noted to ensure they are not forgotten about.)

DEPENDENCIES

Prerequisites (Finish-Start):
  • none
Prerequisites (Finish-Finish):
  • none
Dependent procedures (Finish-Start):
  • project termination cannot be completed until all unresolved issues are accounted for

RECEIVABLES

  • none

DELIVERABLES

  • Issues Control Protocol (ICP)

TOOLS

  • Examples: “Issue Log”
  • Examples: “Issue resolution form”
  • ITPM Core Guide
  • Benefit Realisation Core Guide - Benefit Model

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF TASKS

The issue about issues

In the same way that changes are almost inevitable during the life of a project, issues also arise and have to be resolved.  Issues normally concern either the system being implemented or are organisational.  Areas where technical / design issues arise include:
  • the approach being taken
  • the techniques being used
  • the design itself
  • the proposed solutions to the systems requirements and problems
  • gaps identified between the client organisation’s requirements and the capabilities of the package.
Organisational issues can involve conflicts within the project or between the project and other parts of the organisation.  They include:
  • project team performance problems
  • possible misunderstandings of project scope, activities and directions
  • problems beyond the project team’s control
  • external issues
Issue are often less tangible than changes, especially when they relate to people’s performance, roles or relationships.  It is all too easy to treat them informally, and as a result to et them drift or to forget about them altogether.  This can be disastrous to a project.  To avoid it happening, all issues which cannot be resolved as they arise must be logged and followed up.  The project manager may prefer to keep a separate log for sensitive issues, which is not open to access by the whole team.
The resolution of an issue often results in a change request.  For example, an issue might be a user’s observation during testing that he cannot easily reconcile the input from a feeder system.  As a result of the issue resolution process, the need for program changes in the interface extraction program might be identified - thus the issue is resolved by switching to the change control procedure.
In general, the best value for money will be achieved where the client organisation’s requirements are adapted to make best use of the package rather than undertaking unnecessary modifications or custom development.  The full effects of any issue may be measured against the project’s “Benefit Model”  where one is in use.

Cross-functional / inter-topic issues

A particular type of issue occurs frequently in a complex project.  This is where the design and issues are so complex that conflicting needs or solutions have been defined by different members of the project team whilst addressing different topics.   For example, in the implementation of integrated systems for an airline, the sales and revenue functions required a monthly processing cycle whereas the flight scheduling and operations operated on a two-weekly cycle tied into the timetable and staff rosters.  The packages involved could accommodate either of these requirements but could not meet both at the same time.  Without review and issues resolution processes, such a problem might not be identified until a late stage in the systems integration, yet it could be fundamental to much of the design.
To address this type of issue, the Implementation Paper processes (see D400) include the review of papers by other project team members and specific provision for issues to be identified and resolved even after a topic has been finalised “in principle”.
Implementation papers may include a section detailing any outstanding issues raised regarding the topic in question or raised in other areas which might affect the topic.  Papers remain open for modification as the result of such issues until the time that they need to be “frozen” in the interests of providing a solid basis for finalising the implementation.  After the topic is frozen then subsequent issues can only be resolved by formal change request / change control procedures (see process D140).

Defining the Issues Control Protocol (ICP)

The Issues Control Protocol (ICP) is simply the definition of how issues are handled.  If there is not a technique within the project’s chosen project management methodology, instructions may be drawn directly from this text and the example below.
The purpose of the ICP is to agree and publicise the process of issues control and resolution and, in particular, how to resolve disputes.  It will:
  • describe the concepts,
  • define individual responsibilities and authority,
  • set out the detailed procedures to be used, and
  • provide sample forms etc.
The Issues Control Protocol should be agreed with the client organisation including the steering committee and any key management.  It should define in particular which managers “own” which aspects of the requirements or solution.

Defining authorities, and responsibilities

Normally issues can be resolved by discussion and agreement between the parties concerned.  From time to time it will prove impossible or impractical to gain consensus amongst all those involved.  To be prepared for such circumstances, it is useful to agree in advance
  • who has the deciding authority over each issue, and
  • when and how issues should be escalated to higher levels of management.
A useful technique can be to get the organisation to decide upon “guardians” for each aspect of the data or functionality.  These guardians would always get a casting vote to decide any disputed issue provided it was within their defined scope.  It is often to easier to get such agreements in advance when there is no burning issue to be fought over.
Details of these escalation procedures and individual responsibilities would be agreed and published in the Issues Control Protocol (ICP).

Example procedure

1 - Initiate the request and update the Issue Log
Ideas for changes can arise in many ways, such as:
  • from unsolicited Issues Resolution forms from team members
  • in the comments received from team members (eg by using a “comments” section on weekly timesheets)
  • during meetings with the project team or with users
  • by memos notes, etc
  • as the result of quality assurance reviews
  • as the result of testing or prototyping
It is essential to recognise and record these as they arise.  The best way of doing this is by keeping a central Issues Log, accessible to the whole team, but maintained by (or on behalf of) the project manager.  A commonly heard remark when a critical issue materialises towards the end of a project is “but I warned you about that in a team meeting months ago but nobody listened to me.”  If these procedures and practices are followed this type of problem would be eliminated.
2 - Complete the Issue Resolution form
Once an issue has been recognised it should be properly documented.  A standard Issue Resolution form should be used (see Examples: “Issues Resolution Form”).  Note that it is normal firstly to log the issue and then to complete the full form afterwards.  If issues are only recognised and noted when the official form is filled in then they are likely to be forgotten due to other pressures.  The forms can be completed by anyone concerned with the project, and their use should be encouraged.
3 - Assign staff and establish options
Most issues will require careful consideration to establish the options available.  The project manager will often be able to delegate the work to another member of the project team, or it may be possible to ask a representative of each side in a “dispute” to work together to supply a joint recommendation.  Time spent during investigation should be booked to an unplanned task opened for the purpose within the appropriate phase of the project.
4 - Assess impact
The impact of each option must be analysed in terms of costs, benefits, timescales and other tasks affected.  The team member who established the options will normally do this initially, but the impact should be reviewed by the project manager who has a wider understanding of the overall project.
5 - Decide and agree on action
Normally the project manager plus the initiator of the issue and any team members involved will be able to decide upon a course of action.  If this requires change to project plans or budgets beyond the project manager’s agreed authority, Steering Committee approval will also be required.  Occasionally, when the options are not clear cut, they may be referred to the guardians or to the Steering Committee for fuller discussion of the issues

The Issues Log should be updated to show the result.
If the resolution procedures are to work successfully, it is important that the log should be inspected at least once a week by the project manager, and progress on any unresolved issues should be pursued.  Similarly, log entries not backed up by Issue Resolution forms should be investigated.
If the project team know that all issues they raise will be dealt with promptly and professionally, they will be more likely to take the trouble to raise them early.