The thin line between SME & PM

It isn’t uncommon for subject matter experts to run or lead projects. In fact this tends to occur as the focus of projects from a sponsor’s perspective is generally on the ‘content’ of the project and they often don’t really see the value of a separate PM role on the project.

While it is vital to have a subject matter expert or analyst on a project, (as PM’s should not be responsible for solutioning) there are some subtle yet potentially costly risks associated with putting that individual in a dual SME/PM role.

It is human nature to focus our attention and efforts in our areas of expertise and more often than not this is what occurs. A SME is more likely to focus their attention on the details around the ‘solution’ and to then go through the motions when it comes to the PM component of their roles.  This includes throwing together a ‘project plan’ because this is expected of the PM side of their role.

My experience has shown many SME built project plans and there are some consistent findings in this respect. One is that the project plan always seems to end on the targeted project completion date, but the critical path cannot be calculated.

This is usually because there are few if any dependencies built in. Instead the Start No Earlier Than (I call it the SNET) constraint is abused throughout the plan obscuring the total slack.

So what? Well while the solution may approximate perfection, the estimated time, effort and costs are unknown and likely based on a faulty ‘work back’ plan. The ‘project plan’ is simply window dressing and there simply to satisfy the sponsor & stakeholders’ need to see things appear to wrap up on time.

What results is often a project that overruns it’s scheduled time due to poor planning, key resources that may also cost dollars (IT resources or consultants) either disperse to other previously committed projects or must charge the extra time against the project increasing the budget and lowering the return on investment.

In many cases this part of the job is severely neglected in favor of solutioning. The other risk is that having the SME who is also responsible for the PM function is akin to having the fox watching the chicken coup.  The PM role naturally provides the devil’s advocate to question the validity and assess the overall impact to the project’s success when change requests are introduced.

Scope creep cannot be properly managed without having an unbiased second opinion and a true assessment of the impact on the overall plan. This again leads to the perfect solution that will likely meet none of the requirements of the triple constraint. If getting to market on time is a key requirement, you need to have someone whose focus will remain on getting to market on time. SME’s are excellent at what they do which is why they perform this role. Their participation is vital to the project’s success. Excellence and perfection are the undying goals of a SME and rightly so. This is why they are at the table.

A PM’s role is to ensure that ALL of the objectives of the sponsor are being addressed, stakeholder expectations are managed, and that there is a high quality, regularly revisited plan in place along with the proper checkpoints and processes to address the unknown unknowns that tend to crop up at inopportune times.

Not all projects require a PM. As a rule of thumb, if the number of stakeholders and team members is small, the scope of the project is limited to one department (not an enterprise wide project) and time & cost is not an issue you may be able to manage with a SME/PM. Once the scope of the project grows beyond this, your risks increase significantly unless you have a qualified & experienced project manager running your project.

The PM’s view of the project is much broader than the SME and project success means keeping your eye on all of the moving parts of the project, including the solution.

Article published in BA Times Dec 2007 by Sean Best, PMP, Project Management Professional and Owner of exOrion LLC. His 20+ years of project management experience includes work in the banking, payment processing, telecommunications and software industries. He can be reached at exorion.solutions@gmail.com

Decision Making – Trusting Your Data

Making decisions is an inherent part of managing projects.  How those decisions are made, and the information that they are based upon, can make the difference between a successfully run project and a potential disaster.

Projects are comprised of hundreds, and potentially thousands of issues.  Where do you focus your attention for the greatest gain?

Your information or ‘data’ is only as good as the effort you put into keeping it current.  However, what you learn from your data can be the difference between managing by the skin of your teeth or managing your projects as a professional PM, making decisions based on facts.  It is the difference between following every goose-chase looking for the ones that might put your project at risk and identifying the real risks quickly and early.

In order for information to become project data it must be documented.

Project data is any documented information related to your project;  e.g., project plans, business cases, PMO documents, emails, logs decks, minutes, agendas, status updates, etc.

Project data is not hallway conversations, meeting discussions, gossip, innuendo, hearsay, body language, tone of voice.  Verbal information remains just that until the commitment to document it is made.  It is more difficult to deny something that was written or recorded than to deny something that was said.

The value of the data is directly related to the level of commitment behind it.  When project information is documented it is published for public scrutiny and does not rely on the accuracy of individuals’ memories.

The pareto rule is that 80% of the problems are the result of 20% of the issues.  To find that 20% you need to gather, organized, validate and analyze your project data.  Mine the 20% that will give you the biggest bang for your buck and delegate the rest.

This could be interpreted as ‘passing the buck’, but at the end of the day your job is to manage the project, not to personally solve every single issue that arises.  The 20% usually has a component whose consequences would directly affect the scope, schedule, cost or quality of the end product and by this definition falls under the jurisdiction of the PM to address.  The remaining will generally fall within the realm of responsibility of the Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) requiring a greater depth of knowledge / experience than a PM would typically possess.

After all, every project has a team.  Each team member is responsible and accountable for their deliverables and it’s the PM’s job to leverage their skills, talents and strengths by assigning them the issues to manage that are best suited to resolve.

For example, a working project plan with an unusually high number of tasks that are locked with “Start No Earlier Than” or “Start No Later Than” constraints will hide the true critical path, particularly if these tasks have predecessors and successors.

Article published in Project Times September 2007 by Sean Best, PMP, Project Management Professional and Owner of exOrion LLC. His 20+ years of project management experience includes work in the banking, payment processing, telecommunications and software industries. He can be reached at exorion.solutions@gmail.com