PRINCE2 Method as a Tool for Managing a Project - Term Paper Example

Project Management Name Course Name and Code Instructor’s Name Date Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Part 1: PRINCE2 3 Introduction 3 Background of PRINCE2 method 3 The Processes 4 Starting up a Project (SU) 5 Directing a Project (DP) 5 Initiating a Project (IP) 5 Managing Stage Boundaries (SB) 6 Controlling a Stage (CS) 6 Managing Product Delivery (MP) 6 Closing a Project (CP) 7 Planning (PL) 7 Part 3: Engineering Project: Boston Big Dig 9 Background of Boston Big Dig 9 Failures of Boston Big Dig Project 10 Successes of Boston Dig Project 11 Lessons learned 12 References 13 Part 1: PRINCE2 Introduction Numerous methodologies and approaches exist that can be used in managing projects. Some of the methodologies include PMBOK and waterfall (Office of Government Commerce, 2002). PRINCE2 methodology defines a project as “a management environment that is created for the purpose of delivering one or more business products according to a specified Business Case”. Moreover, the method states that it is not a requirement for those responsible for the project to have worked together before (PRNCE2, 2013). This means that people from different sectors can come together to ensure that a project is completed successfully. The aim of this part is to analyse and discuss PRINCE2 method as a tool for managing a project. Background of PRINCE2 method PRINCE stands for Projects IN Controlled Environment, which is a structured method is ensuring efficiency in completing projects. It traces its background to the Central Computer and Telecommunications Agency that established the method in 1989 based on PROMPTII concept, which had been established by Simpact Systems Ltd in 1975 (Office of Government Commerce, 2002). PROMPTII was utilised by the government as a standard for managing projects in 1979. However, CCTA realised changing requirements and demands for projects updated PRINCE method and launched PRINCE2 in 1996. PRINCE2 method was able to address and provide guidance in completing different projects and not only those associated with information systems (PRNCE2, 2013). PRINCE2 methodology then became the standard method in which United Kingdom based its projects. Utilising PRINCE2 method in projects has numerous benefits and creates new opportunities that a project manager can maximise on. PRINCE2 is also important because it is a single, common and structured method for ensuring that a project is completed optimally (Office of Government Commerce, 2002). Some of the benefits include a method that is teachable and repeatable, builds on experience and allows for means for early warnings. Moreover, the method allows for proactive method rather than reactive method and hence prevents occurrence of threats. Organisations that employ PRINCE2 method are better placed in ensuring Business Case requirements are achieved. In the case of organisation, PRINCE2 allows organisations to control management of change, involvement of stakeholders and users and defines the responsibility and requirement of the project (Office of Government Commerce, 2002). While for the project, some benefits that PRINCE2 method brings include flexible decision points, controlled and organised project progress, effective communication, involvement of stakeholders and automatic management control. These aspects ensures a project is completed within the stated requirements. The Processes To accomplish its requirements, PRINCE2 method allows completion of tasks based on eight important processes. Any project that follows PRINCE2 method should follow and address these processes. The processes are addressed. Starting up a Project (SU) This is usually the first process that is championed by PRINCE2. It is the process that ensures that the prerequisites required for the project are in place. Project Mandate is the important document which defines the Business Case (Office of Government Commerce, 2002). This section of the process establishes six important things which are the Project Brief, quality expectations, designation and appointment of project management team, the Project Approach, A Risk Log and finally the initiation Stage Plan. Directing a Project (DP) This is a crucial stage because it is all the activities, which are carried out from starting the project until the end of the project (Office of Government Commerce, 2002). This process is commonly associated with Project Board whom are responsible for making decisions and represents the interests of users, business and suppliers. The process for the Project Board includes starting the project, defining stage boundaries, ad hoc direction and also project closure (PRNCE2, 2013). Initiating a Project (IP) This process allows starting of the project. Some of the objectives for these process include plan and cost the project, quality requirements expectations, encouraging the Project Board to own the project, analysis of Business Case, and commitment of resources. The important document that result from this process is the Project Initiation Document. Other blank documents resulting from this stage includes the Quality Log, the Issue Log and the Lessons Learned Log. Managing Stage Boundaries (SB) This process ensures that the Project Board has basis in which decisions will be based on. These decisions include whether to proceed with the project or terminate the project (Office of Government Commerce, 2002). The object of this process include assuring the Project Board that important products have been completed, obtain information on viability of continuity, authorise completion of current phase and provide green light for next stage, and record any lessons/measures obtained from current stage. Some products obtained from this process include revised Project Plan and Business case, current Stage Plan actual and lessons learned log (PRNCE2, 2013). Controlling a Stage (CS) This process allows control and monitoring of the project by the Project Manager. The Project Manager will ensure information on work allocation, maintaining stage and ensuring that unexpected events are managed effectively (Office of Government Commerce, 2002). This process is crucial stage for the entire project since it involves cycle of authorising tasks, watching changes, collection of progress information, reporting, and introducing necessary corrective action (PRNCE2, 2013). This process also produces some products that include updated Risk Log and Stage Plan, work packages, highlight reports and project issues. Managing Product Delivery (MP) This process ensures planned products are created and delivered (Office of Government Commerce, 2002). The products are achieved through allowing the Team Manager negotiate with other project players, ensuring Work Package information is according to the project, ensuring that the work is done, obtaining appropriate approvals for the completed tasks, and ensuring that the section completed fulfils quality requirements. The products that are created at this process include Risk Log updates, Team planes, Quality Log updates, and checkpoint reports (PRNCE2, 2013). Closing a Project (CP) This process aims at executing a controlled closure to the project. The purpose of the process is to allow Project Manager to either close the project prematurely or according to plan (Office of Government Commerce, 2002). Most of the tasks at this stage are to prepare appropriate information allowing the Project Board to close the project. Some of the objectives for this process include confirming on quality assurance, confirming maintenance and operation requirements, and recommendations for future work. Planning (PL) This process is repeatable and plays a crucial role in other process of the project. Some of the tasks include Planning an Initiation Stage, Planning a Project, and Planning a Stage (PRNCE2, 2013). Other products of this stage include a Product Checklist and the Risk Log. Part 2: PRINCE2 vs. PMBOK In understanding the contribution of these two methods, it is important to understand the philosophy that each method supports. From the perspective of PMBOK, the project management aspect is viewed as the responsibility of a project manager while in the case of PRINCE2 method, project management is a structure ion which an organisation governs and delivers projects (Office of Government Commerce, 2002). This means that in the case of PMBOK, the project manager is accountable for the project but PRINCE2 method, the responsible for the success or failure of the project is held by the Project Board (Project Management Institute, 2000). Therefore, PMBOK holds an individual for accountability but PRINCE2 method holds the entire Project Board accountable. Another distinguishing factor between PRINCE2 and PMBOK method is how a project is done. PMBOK can start a project without prior information and continue working on the project until solution for the requirement is achieved (Project Management Institute, 2013). PRINCE2 method captures all information in Product Descriptions that states all requirements of the project and the outcome/solutions of these requirements (PRNCE2, 2013). Thus, PMBOK champions starting a project without all information but a PRINCE2 method requires all information before starting a project (Office of Government Commerce, 2002). In addition, PMBOK understands that it is not a complete method in fulfilling the requirements of project and proposes other methods such as PRINCE2 in assisting in completing the task (Project Management Institute, 2000). This means that PMBOK acts as a proposal on how tasks should be completed but does not provide framework in which the project should follow but PRINCE2 addresses these requirements. The two methods have process in identifying on how tasks should be completed. PMBOK has five processes while PRINCE2 has seven important processes: even though there is an eight process that is not compulsory (Office of Government Commerce, 2002). Both methods accepts that there are certain phases that are natural phases and usually guided by type of projects and handoff between the stages is determined by the project manager. This means that PMBOK and PRINCE2 understands that overlaps within and between the projects is unavoidable. Another important issue that arises from these two methods is roles and responsibilities. PMBOK identifies three important roles, which are PMO, project manager and the sponsor (Project Management Institute, 2013). Each of these three people has important roles that they are supposed to address (Office of Government Commerce, 2002). On the other hand, PRINCE2 also understand the importance of separation and definition of roles and it identifies four main roles and other optional roles. Some of the four roles include Senior Supplier, Senior User, project manager and project executive (Project Management Institute, 2000). The roles and responsibilities identified by PMBOK and PRINCE2 are further elaborated by role descriptions. Part 3: Engineering Project: Boston Big Dig Background of Boston Big Dig Officially, known as Central Artery/Tunnel Project (CA/T) was a project in Boston that rerouted traffic from the chief highway into a 5.6 kilometre tunnel (NYU Wagner Rudin Centre for Transportation Policy and Management 2009). Other subprojects included construction of Rose Kennedy Greenway, Leonard Hill Memorial Bridge and Ted Williams Tunnel. The project was handed over in December 31 2007 when the contract expired. CA/T was the most expensive highway that was original estimated to cost $2.8 billion and be completed in 1998 but the project was completed in December 2007 with costs over $14.6 billion. Financing was from loans and if the interest for the loans is included, the project will have cost $22 billion (NYU Wagner Rudin Centre for Transportation Policy and Management 2009). The aim for the project was to reduce traffic jams and also to replace the dilapidating six lane highway. To understand whether the project was successful or whether it was a failure, the project will be analysed from five perspectives, which are functionality, cost, schedule and management, quality (stakeholder satisfaction). Failures of Boston Big Dig Project The project in terms of functionality was a failure. This is attributed to numerous weaknesses on the project including bolts and support of the ceiling of the tunnels. Numerous accidents and litigations have been reported meaning quality was not championed. Moreover, frequency of witnessed structural failures also illustrates poor brinkmanship (NYU Wagner Rudin Centre for Transportation Policy and Management 2009). Other functionality problems reported include failure of epoxy system, numerous leaks reported in completed sections, falsification of records, and bolts showing stress. Thus, functionality of the project is still not satisfactory. This also is associated with the quality of the project. Frequent failures and frequent repairs may mean the materials utilised may have been of poor quality. This translates in the entire project being of lower quality and thus may not pass quality satisfaction requirements. Another shortcoming for the project is the cost of the project. Originally, the project was supposed to cost $2.8 billion but the project cost skyrocketed to $22 billion. This illustrates that numerous factors were not considered in designing and planning of the project (NYU Wagner Rudin Centre for Transportation Policy and Management 2009). Moreover, the source of the funds also has contributed immensely to the cost of the project since it will take more than 25 years to pay the cost of the project. Other indirect costs include repairing costs and costs associated with litigations. If proper planning could have been in place, these costs could have been avoided. Project management was also an issue (Burianek et al., 1999).. The origination of issues ranges from planning to completion of the project. Major concern is the issue of accountability whereby there was no definite person accountable and there was no person responsible for auditing the project (NYU Wagner Rudin Centre for Transportation Policy and Management 2009). Project management requires analysing and updating information obtained from the site and measures set to mitigate challenges that may occur. However, the project management reports did not provide useful information such as determining the actual cost of the project. In addition, the management did not formulate appropriate means of acquiring funds that could have enabled completion of the project within projected costs. Therefore, project management in CA/T project was not successful. Successes of Boston Dig Project Even though numerous problems were and are still reported, success has also been attached to the project. Reductions in traffic delay, traffic improvements and increase in number of vehicles accessing the project highway has resulted in economic development (Burianek et al., 1999).. It has reduced economic problems that are associated with delay in traffic such as work hours and reduction of fuel cost contributing to economic development of the society (NYU Wagner Rudin Centre for Transportation Policy and Management 2009). Moreover, restructuring of the routes and introduction of new routes has greatly reduced the distance that vehicles cover resulting in decrease of citywide carbon monoxide levels emitted by these vehicles. This generally means that the project achieved the benefits and goals that originally were planned. Apart from improving mobility, completion of the project allowed reconnection of neighbourhoods, which had been severed by the old highway (Burianek et al., 1999). This change resulted in improvement of lifestyle and also improved quality of life of inhabitants of Boston. Moreover, the dirt, clay and other quality waste materials were used to cap and fill landfills. Completion of the project also improved the society perception of their environment. Numerous public plazas and parks have provided visitors with stretches of land that they can relax. Apart from the benefits to the society, the parks have also improved the environment. Lessons learned The importance of projects according to PRINCE2 methodology is providing a framework in which lessons are learned and measures are instituted to ensure shortcomings are corrected while successes are encouraged (Office of Government Commerce, 2002). CA/T is an example of a project that has both positive and negative lessons. Some of these positive and negative lessons include: Management is an important requirement in ensuring that a project is successful. Moreover, it is prudent to define and allocate tasks to different persons based on their capacity and capability. In addition, accountability is crucial to ensure that a project is completed successfully. Proper planning should be in place and milestones should be analysed to determine whether the project follows the right path. Moreover, resources should be allocated based on tasks and milestones to ensure that resources are utilised optimally. Cost allocation and auditing is important in determining the path of the project. Some auditors and planning in CA/T project informed the management that the cost of the project was escalating but since the management was not accountable, these issues were not addressed conclusively by the project management. Understanding long term benefits of a project is important since it ensures that the society and economy benefits at long last. Factoring into consideration benefits to the environment, the lessons learned is important to understand long term benefits and not only short term benefits. References Burianek, T., Chan, S., Khemka, S., Maa, M., and Rozier, J. 1999. The Central Artery/Tunnel Project. The Structure of Engeering Revolutions. Available at http://web.mit.edu/6.933/www/6933final.pdf (Accessed March 6 2013) NYU Wagner Rudin Centre for Transportation Policy and Management. 2009. The Central Artery / Third Harbor Tunnel Project (‘The Big Dig’). Boston, Massachusetts. Available at http://www.omegacentre.bartlett.ucl.ac.uk/studies/cases/pdf/USA_BIGDIG_PROFILE_291010.pdf (Accessed March 6 2013) Office of Government Commerce, 2002, PRINCE2, London: The Stationery Office PRNCE2, 2013, Welcome to the Official PRINCE2® Website, Available at http://www.prince-officialsite.com/ (Accessed March 6 2013) 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 (Accessed March 6 2013) Read More