The Use of PRINCE2 in Business Projects - Assignment Example

Project Management Part 1: PRINCE2 This project management method covers all activities and disciplines that are needed within a project. The objective of the methodology is to present business case, which justifies and present rationale for the project. The method traces its roots to PROMPTII, which was developed by Simpact Systems Ltd in 1975. The Central Computer and Telecommunications Agency adopted PROMPTII as a standard system that the government utilised in managing information system projects (OGC, 2002). Changes within information technology and other requirements within the business environment meant that the method requirement improvement. The updated method, PRINCE2, was launched in 1996 as a standardised system in which not only information technology projects was based on but also other type of projects. PRINCE2 was commissioned because every departmental within the government could utilise in managing projects because it was a single, common and structured method. Some of the benefits associated with the method include bring a method that is teachable and repeatable, building on experience and early warning of problems. The following diagram illustrates the relationship between PRINCE2 with business and projects. PRINCE2 is based on process that takes place within a project. Processes are defined as business activities that are carried out during the span of a project. Moreover, PRINCE2 incorporates components that are inherent in ensuring that a project is successful. PRINCE2 method covers eight processes that range from initiating the project, controlling the project to managing the project. The following diagram illustrates process associated with PRINCE2 method. The PRINCE2 Process Model The eight process (stages) that are supported by model are discussed Starting up a Project (SU) This is the first process in PRINCE2 method. This is the stage whereby prerequisites for initiating the project are analysed. Some of the document that should be in place is the Project Mandate, which defines reasons for the project and what type of product is required (OGC, 2002). This section analysis six important things, which include the Project Brief, the Project Approach, the design, quality expectations, risk log and initiation stage plan. Directing a Project (DP) This process is non-stop until the end of the project. This process is important for Project Board since they are responsible for management of the project, and since they represent users, business and suppliers (OGC, 2002). To achieve its goals, the Project Board manages through controls, exception and monitors via reports the progress of the project. To fulfil requirements, the Project Board break down this section into four sections, which are initiation, stage boundaries, ad hoc direction and project closure. Initiating a Project (IP) Some of the objectives that should be fulfilled at this stage includes plan and cost the project, encouraging the Project Board to own the project, documentation, justification of investment, commitment of resources to the next stage, and providing the baseline for decision making process. The outcome of this section is Project Initiation Document while three other blank products are created that includes the issue log, the quality log and the lessons learned log (OGC, 2002). Managing Stage Boundaries (SB) This stage produces information, which guides the Project Board in determining whether the project should be stoped or to continue with the project. Some of the objectives for this stage include update on completed tasks and activities, provide the Project Board with appropriate information that will allow it to close the current stage and authorise the next stage (OGC, 2002). Other objectives of this stage include recording measurements and lessons that have been learned and are applicable in later stages of the project. In addition, some of the products from this stage include a revised Project Plan and Business Case, Current Stage Plan actual and the updated Risk Log. Controlling a Stage (CS) This process defines control and monitoring activities in ensuring that the project stays on course, allocation of tasks and reactions towards eventualities. It is an important process for Project Manager because it provides base in which day-to-day activities can be accomplished. In this process, there are numerous cycles of reviewing the situation, authorising work to be dine, watching for changes and reporting. Some of the documents produced from this stage include highlight reports, an updated risk log, work packages, exception report and project issues (OGC, 2002). Managing Product Delivery (MP) This process ensures that the project delivers on planed products. This is achieved through ensuring the work is done, obtaining approvals, assessing work progress, ensuring quality is maintained, ensuring authorisation and agreement is achieved and ensuring that the project follows the requirements in Work Package. Some of the products that are created and frequently updated include risk log updates, team plans, and project issues and check point reports (OGC, 2002). Closing a Project (CP) This process allows for closure of the project. This phase allows Project Manager to end the project either prematurely or maturely. Most of the tasks that are completed are aimed easing the work of Project Board in conforming the end of the project. Some of the tasks that are completed include archiving the project files, preparing an End Project Report, producing a Post Project Review Plan and capturing lessons learned from the project (OGC, 2002). Planning (PL) Planning is a crucial component and plays a major role in project management and some of the processes that are completed include Planning an Initiation Stage, Planning a Project, Planning a Stage, Updating a Project Plan, Accepting a Work Package and Producing an Exception Plan. Other processes that are crucial at this stage including production of checklist and risk log (OGC, 2002). Part 2: PRINCE2 vs. PMBOK PRINCE2 and PMBOK are two important approaches that are utilised by project managers and other important stakeholders to ensure that a project is completed successfully (OGC, 2002). Numerous similarities and differences exist between these two methods and some of these differences are discussed. In the PMBOK, the information on utilisation of organisational resources is located in the Project Charter while in PRINCE2 the information is obtained from the Project Executive (Project Management Institute, 2000). Resources are important and determine the extent and viability of a project, and authorisation is important. Nevertheless, PMBOK does not proceeds means in which a project can be terminated but PRINCE2 methodology defines that a project should be stopped if it does not follow the layout plan and if it does not make any business case sense. In addition, the PRINCE2 methodology guides a project through Project Board, which states what should be accomplished and with which resources. On the other hand, PMBOK does not provide for this requirement (Project Management Institute, 2013). Planning is another crucial requirement and these two approaches utilise different means in ensuring the outcome of a project is successful (OGC, 2002). PRINCE2 uses product-based or output-based approach to planning. PRINCE2 states that the end product is important and to achieve this, deliverables are identified and specified to ensure the appropriate steps are followed towards achieving the output. On the other hand, PMBOK does not saying planning is associated with the required product rather in provide guidelines towards achieving the objective (Project Management Institute, 2000). Moreover, PRINCE2 provides hierarchy of approach towards a project and some steps should be completed before proceeding to the next stage (Project Management Institute, 2000). However, PMBOK does not provide hierarchy because it assumes that the aims of the project manager are similar with roles of team managers and governance (OGC, 2002). From this, it is evident that responsibility of a project within the case of PRINCE2 is accorded to the Project Board while in the case of PMBOK, the responsibility is accorded to the individual project manager. Another unique difference between these two approaches is how requirements for the project are provided or collected. Under the PMBOK, information is collected in early phases of a project. In this case, the project manager is responsible and accountable for information collected and will be responsible for incomplete or incorrect information (Project Management Institute, 2000). In the case of PMBOK, the project requirements are contained in the Project Product Description that is provided by the sponsor of the project and any other acceptance criteria and quality expectations (OGC, 2002). Some of the information contained in the Project Product Description include specifying functional, key products, quality and performance requirements. Senior Users are the ones who are held responsible for completeness and correctness of the Product Descriptions and project Product Description. From the analysis, PRINCE2 method is appropriate because it guides on means in which a project should be completed. In addition, the method provides milestones and documents that should be completed within each stage. Part 3: The Millau Viaduct Engineering Project Millau Viaduct project took ten years to be designed and it took four years to be constructed. The project was exemplary because of its quality and uniqueness. Construction of Millau Viaduct Started in 10th October 2001 and was completed on 14 December 2004 (Virlogeux 2004). Originally, the project was supposed to have taken three years but rescheduling resulted in an increase of one year (Buonomo et al 2004). The first traffic on the bridge was on 16th December 2004 after inauguration by President Chirac two days earlier. The project, which costed 320 million Euros that was funded through concessionaire means and this investment, was to be recouped after seventy-five years. Since the period for recouping the cost is long is attributed to the fact, the project is risky and thus quality construction justified the huge costs. The construction spanned 2.46 kilometres between two plateaus and across a river, which is supported by seven towers rising to 235m and spans 350m. Success/Failures of the Millau Viaduct Project The impact of the project is that it achieved most of its objectives that included budget, achievement on time and compliance towards specifications. The analysis of the success or failure of the project will be analysed from the perspective of quality, time, cost, initial plan (research) and management. Time is an important component in determining whether a project is successful or not. Moreover, rescheduling of tasks and redesigning of the project may contribute to changes in time that may be understood (Buonomo et al 2004). The project was planned to last 39 months and it actually took 38 weeks to be completed. The project started on 14th December 2001 and was completed on 14th December 2004. This means that according to requirements of time, the project was completed within time and thus successful. Budget is another important component that defines the outcome of a given project. The budget for the project was 320 million Euros whereby the construction of viaduct was 300 million Euros while 20 million Euros was used to construct the toll station (Buonomo et al 2004). The project was financed through concessionary agreement managed by Eiffage du Viaduc de Millau. Moreover, the company, which won the contract, did not request for financial assistance from the government. This was a win situation for the government because of the economic benefit associated with the viaduct and also the benefit the citizens will achieve. Moreover, the project was successful, economically, because the concessionary profited as investor, as operator and as contractor. The project also fulfilled the requirements of specifications of a project. The requirements and specifications were achieved because the viaduct met the requirements of functional, geometric and architectural characteristics (Buonomo et al 2004). The technical characteristics of the project were achieved because the life span of 120 years ensured that all details were considered so that return on investments can be achieved. The concessionary and continuity of the project has been successful because until date the project has been continuing well. Moreover, the project fulfilled the requirements of public service, the development policy and attraction of the project as a tourist facility has made the entire requirements of the project be successful. Generally, from specifications requirements, the project has been successful. Management of the project was also successful from designing the project until management of the project. The team of designers ensured that redesigning of the project after start of construction was avoided. Moreover, bringing together different stakeholders including private and public into designing, constructing and commissioning of the project was successful. Acquiring of financial support and management of the project by the concessionaire also illustrates effectiveness in management of the project. The government also formed an authority that managed the interests of the government and the public and hence, the project involved all stakeholders and the requirements of each stakeholder and their views were involved in completing the project. Thus, from management angle, the project was successful. Quality of the product also plays a major role in determining whether a project is successful or not. The quality of Millau Viaduct is superior because it met all technical and operation requirements. Moreover, the span of concession is seventy-five years meaning quality was championed through out the construction and materials that were used for construction. In addition, being a tourist attraction feature means, it is unique and of high. Return on investment is an important aspect that determines outcome of a project. The project has been beneficial both to the society and to the investors. The project will be beneficial to the society, government and investor (Buonomo et al 2004). If managed well, the project will be beneficial to the investor for seventy five years while for the government and society will be beneficial throughout. Being a tourist attraction provides revenues for the government and society while easiness in movement satisfies the requirements of the society. In addition, indirect benefits exists such as one of the unique bridges across the world. Lessons learned Projects are important components that provide means in which future projects will be based on. Completion of projects provides lessons and means in which lessons are learned and identification of future approaches are made. Some of the lessons learned from this project include: It is important to include all stakeholders during design of the project. Initial planning and document is important to prevent increase in costs or redesigning of the project. Inclusion of all stakeholders in formulation and construction is an important requirement to achieve objectives. Utilization of concessionary strategy in funding of projects as illustrated in funding of Millau Viaduct project. The government did not contribute towards the project through financial or subsidiary means or the contractor did not take a loan. Thus, the funding of the project was unique and useful. References Buonomo, M., Servant, C., and Virlogeux, M., Cremer, J., de Goyet, V., and Forno, J, 2004, The design and the construction of the Millau Viaduct. Steelbridge 2004. Available at http://cnrsm.creteil.iufm.fr/g01_dp/viaduc_millau_apk_44/01_greish/04_millau_steelbridge.pdf Project Management Institute, 2000, a Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge, Pennsylvania, Project Management Institute Project Management Institute, 2013, PMBOK Guide and Standards, Available at http://www.pmi.org/en/About-Us/About-Us-Annual-Report.aspx The Office of Government Commerce (OGC), 2002, PRINCE2, London, the Stationery Office Virlogeux, M., Bridges with Multiple cable-stayed spans Structural Engineering International 1/2001. The International Association for Bridge and Structural engineering, Zurich, Switzerland Read More