Project Management, do we need it?

[kaiser78]

What a waste of 7 pages and 70 odd threads.

The answer is simply, would the software team without a PM;
- be able to manage the initial phases - project setup, reqs/design activity ?
- be able to know what additional numbers to include in the costs in addition to what what they are developing as the
software team - infrastructure, training, resourcing ?
- monitor the budget ?
- be able to manage phases of testing - system, user, nft etc ?
- be able to oversee training to users
- also arrange user logons
- what about rollout approach
- go live cutover, making sure everything is signed off
- manage stakeholders, especially those emedded in the business who are only want to know how much and when, as opposed to what development technologies are being used ?

In my experience I don't think so.

[woohoo]

What a waste of 7 pages and 70 odd threads.

The answer is simply, would the software team without a PM;
- be able to manage the initial phases - project setup, reqs/design activity ?
<woohoo> yes of course, I often do this.

- be able to know what additional numbers to include in the costs in addition to what what they are developing as the
software team - infrastructure, training, resourcing ?
<woohoo> yes again, often the PM is just a filter asking the tech team about the numbers.
- monitor the budget ?
<woohoo> yes again or just assign an admin person to this.
- be able to manage phases of testing - system, user, nft etc ?
<woohoo> yes again, done this many a time. Often we will assign a developer to liase with the testing team, no requirement for a pm to lead the project.
- be able to oversee training to users
<woohoo>I would identify a trainer and the person responsible for training at the start of the project. Its now their responsibility to train and would work with them.
- also arrange user logons
<woohoo>Give this to the jnr or general dogs body.
- what about rollout approach
<woohoo>I've been involved in a great many rollouts, nothing requires a PM to lead it.
- go live cutover, making sure everything is signed off
<woohoo>Again, a PM would just be a filter for the senior dev.
- manage stakeholders, especially those emedded in the business who are only want to know how much and when, as opposed to what development technologies are being used ?
<woohoo>
This is the bit where the PM, justifies their wages by going around asking people when stuff will be done. I've sat in meetings and done this. It's pretty effin easy.

In my experience I don't think so.

So our experience is different, so not a waste of 7 pages. Quite interesting reading actually.

I think there is too much emphasis on getting a project completed and reporting progress, duration etc. Producing a product that adds value to the business is key and the best people to do this are a committed team of software developers.

[Lance]

So our experience is different, so not a waste of 7 pages. Quite interesting reading actually.

I think there is too much emphasis on getting a project completed and reporting progress, duration etc. Producing a product that adds value to the business is key and the best people to do this are a committed team of software developers.

most people who PAY THE MONEY for projects would disagree with that statement.

Last client I had had pissed £34m away on a software project to transform their business. It's 3 years late, with no end in sight.

[northernladyuk]

Haven't read entire thread.

All projects need project management but they don't necessarily all need a dedicated project manager. As the complexity, risk and cost of a project increases, then the need for a dedicated project manager and for more robust project management processes increases.

[kaiser78]

most people who PAY THE MONEY for projects would disagree with that statement.

Last client I had had pissed £34m away on a software project to transform their business. It's 3 years late, with no end in sight.

Did they have a PM assigned ?

[Lance]

Did they have a PM assigned ?

Yes, but not a good one. And Woohoo's model wouldn't work as the development is outsourced.
It's a classic example of why good project management is important.

Lots of scope creep. No 3rd party supplier management. Over-promising deliverables to management. No BAs gathering requirements. No Enterprise Architects (well no architects really). Just a bad PM, some 3rd parties and an apparently limitless budget as it'll solve all the business problems when it delivers.

[SueEllen]

I think building is an excellent analogy actually. What you need is someone similar to the architect who's main job is as a PM as well as being the "mastermind" behind whatever your building. If a PM is just an expert in Gantt charts and spreadsheets then I think PM would be the wrong term, I would say project co-ordinator or administrator, i.e. like an adjutant run around who you can dispense with to get the costs down.

I know PMs in the building trade they have a different role in the project from the architect. The are the ones who ensure things stick to budget, deal with the customer, ensure that the other trades are there at the right time and do things in order, deal with the architect and ensure that their plans are followed.

[woohoo]

most people who PAY THE MONEY for projects would disagree with that statement.

Last client I had had pissed £34m away on a software project to transform their business. It's 3 years late, with no end in sight.

I should have added a bit about completing a project to a timescale - rather than just completing project.

My point is once your focus is completing to estimated timescales, which are often guesses then you produce a bad product.

[woohoo]

Yes, but not a good one. And Woohoo's model wouldn't work as the development is outsourced.
It's a classic example of why good project management is important.

Lots of scope creep. No 3rd party supplier management. Over-promising deliverables to management. No BAs gathering requirements. No Enterprise Architects (well no architects really). Just a bad PM, some 3rd parties and an apparently limitless budget as it'll solve all the business problems when it delivers.

It's not my model, it's about questioning when and if project managers are useful when developing a software product. Also, I'm questioning this emphasis on project managers as the leaders of teams creating software products.

Now, outsourcing is a different thing all together, in my experience it's almost like the worst of the waterfall model. You get what you specify at the start and god help you if you need someone to do any thinking.

[woohoo]

Haven't read entire thread.

All projects need project management but they don't necessarily all need a dedicated project manager. As the complexity, risk and cost of a project increases, then the need for a dedicated project manager and for more robust project management processes increases.

Does it though, I've not heard a convincing argument why a dedicated PM should lead a software team creating a product.