So it [...]]]> We have always maintained that “the fate of most projects is sealed before the project even starts – lack of management commitment, unrealistic timeline, unclear objectives.” That is why in our work we have chosen to focus on the activities that happen before a project even starts.”

So it was gratifying to read the recent article in the Harvard Business Review on “Why Your IT Project May Be Riskier Than You Think“.

In the article the authors Bent Flyvbjerg and Alexander Budzier, highlight “the true pitfall of IT change initiatives: It’s not that they’re particularly prone to high cost overruns on average, as management consultants and academic studies have previously suggested. It’s that an unusually large proportion of them incur massive overages—that is, there are a disproportionate number of black swans. By focusing on averages instead of the more damaging outliers, most managers and consultants have been missing the real problem.“

Few organizations take a realistic, never mind pessimistic view of the probability of project success. Therefore so many projects fail, and fail spectacularly.

Proper planning, actively engaged project owners and stakeholders, and the willingness to stop a project in mid course to reassess fundamental assumptions are the keys to increasing project success rates. Yet few companies do this. They are willing to play Russian roulette with their projects, hoping that one of them will not destroy the company.

Many projects run out of steam when the going gets tough- often because the project was built on a shaky foundation in the first place.

Few things are more important to the on-going engagement and participation of the organization than a clearly stated change imperative, [...]]]>

Image via Wikipedia

Many projects run out of steam when the going gets tough- often because the project was built on a shaky foundation in the first place.

Few things are more important to the on-going engagement and participation of the organization than a clearly stated change imperative, and a clear picture of the resulting benefits from the project.

It is no surprise then, that when the sponsor leaves, or new senior management are brought in that the project grinds to a halt – it is starved of attention, resources and funds as other priorities supersede it. In many cases this is because there was no solid business case for the project in the first place. A clear and compelling case for change was not made.

A business case must be much more than a simple cost / benefit analysis. But often even this component is not done well – there is no base line for current costs, the future benefits are wildly exaggerated, and project costs are often woefully underestimated.

Yet most project managers write their business cases by just taking an existing business case and modifying it – it is simply a “check the box” exercise.

With so much riding on the business case, one would think that most companies would be able to make a business case for some investment in training, or at least a business case toolkit increase your organization’s project success rate? Yet few do! Here are some ideas on that you can apply to improve your organization’s ability to make the case for change.

Resources:

A thorough explanation on the concept of a Business Case

Comprehensive template (in Word so you can reuse) and guide from the Treasury Board of Canada

A training course on Making the Case for Change

If you would like [...]]]> We periodically send out via email quick reads, short updates and our perspectives on topics related to helping companies make strategic decisions – from a corporate and project perspective. Our latest communication-  a newsletter proving access to research and materials that we have recently produced – can be accessed here.

If you would like to be added to our email distribution list, please email us. Alternatively you can subscribe to our RSS feed.

In this final, summary report, we compare the perspectives of clients and management consultants on which factors have the greatest impact [...]]]> Earlier this year we conducted two short surveys, both with similar content, but one from consultant’s perspectives, and the other focus on collecting input from users of consulting services.

In this final, summary report, we compare the perspectives of clients and management consultants on which factors have the greatest impact on generating overall satisfaction when working with management consultants. These factors include those that are under the control of the consultants, as well as, those that clients control.

The survey showed that less than 30% of clients consider that the management consultants they engaged either met or exceeded their expectations. In contrast, more than 70% of management consultants believe that they have met or exceeded their client expectations.

It seems that there is a big gap between actual and perceived overall satisfaction, and that consultants do not have a clear understanding of how either factors under their control, or under the client’s control, impact overall satisfaction.

Whether you are a client or a consultant, we hope that you find this short report useful in narrowing the gap between actual and perceived satisfaction from consultants, thus enabling overall satisfaction levels to be raised.

Click on the report cover to view or download it.

“But increasingly, says Jenny Sutton of the Hong Kong-based RFP Company, clients are refusing to pay for junior staff’s on-the-job training. Instead, they are asking for fewer and better consultants and setting them to work alongside their [...]]]> In this article on the state of the consulting industry, The Economist contacted Jenny for her thoughts!

“But increasingly, says Jenny Sutton of the Hong Kong-based RFP Company, clients are refusing to pay for junior staff’s on-the-job training. Instead, they are asking for fewer and better consultants and setting them to work alongside their own staff.”

We recognized several other comments in the article – in particular the reference to Eden MacCallum and Point B “In short, consulting is looking less like a licence to print money and more like temporary labour. Clients can bypass the big names and hire consultancies such as Eden McCallum, a British firm that packages teams of experienced independent consultants, or Point B, an American firm that provides only a project manager, letting the client select the team. Big consulting firms (with their big brands) can probably coexist with smaller operators.”

We spoke at various conferences and meetings, and Gordon made a guest appearance on BNN (Toronto).

You can download the relevant material from this page.

Here is the link to [...]]]> We recently conducted a survey of users of consulting services to determine the factors that contribute to client satisfaction. From the results we were able to identify several key factors commonly associated with client satisfaction, and also identified other factors had little or no impact on the overall outcome.

Here is the link to the final report based on the consultant’ survey results – view the survey results here.

Since this survey was conducted we conducted similar research with consultants on their perceptions of the factors that determine client satisfaction – in April we will publish the comparison between the two surveys – which promises to be very interesting.

This event should be an interesting opportunity to discuss the status and future of the consulting industry with some of the leaders of the big consulting firms.