So… I felt like revisiting an old favourite this
time, something I am sure that many, if not most, have seen before. But this time I want to push it, stretch the
idea as far as it will go.
The diagram
below describes one of the central ideas behind Project Management – that it is
necessary to balance Time, Scope and Cost (or Resource) to deliver a
project. For example, when a project is
planned, the amount of Time, Scope and Cost is defined. If something occurs which is not to plan, a
compromise must be found. Possible
responses might be to reduce Scope to ensure that Time and Cost are still
delivered as planned. Or increase the
amount of Time and Cost so that the full Scope is delivered. In reality it is rarely that simple, but you
get the idea.
These three
parameters could be classified as inputs, and changes to any of them alters the
shape of the project. This in turn will often
affect the planned outcome of the project – the Objective. If we develop our diagram a little further,
at this point we can plot our Objective on a fourth scale, the Benefit scale.
As the
project progresses, we can draw lines from the planned departure points of each
input towards our objective. The length
of line could denote how much of each input parameter has been consumed. Errors in planning alter the departure point of
each of these lines, as the assumption of how much of that input was required was in
error. Using this method it is clear to
see that the closer the project is to completion, the harder it is to adjust for
incorrect assumptions and still hit the objective.
Further, it
is apparent that should the Objective change partway through a project, although
it may be possible to adjust it will also mean that consumption lines will not
be straight (and therefore less efficient).
Those more
familiar with Project Management will at this point be wondering about Risk and
Quality – where do they fit in this model?
Let’s start with Risk. Risk is by
definition an ambiguity, and can easily be considered as a cone around each of
our input parameters. The earlier a Risk
is to eventuate in a project, the greater the potential impact on the eventual
objective.
Finally,
Quality - assuming that our definition is consuming our three input parameters
as planned to deliver our Objective. This
is by far the simplest concept, so much so I am not even going to draw it on
the diagram. Delivery of a Quality
outcome is simply bringing the three input parameters together at the point of
Objective, despite changes in project requirements, erroneous assumptions or eventuating Risk. The greater the variance, the greater impact
on Quality. The key to delivering
Quality is therefore alignment. If all
those involved in a project fully understand the input parameters, the Objective,
the Risks, and most importantly – how these relate to each other, the result
will inevitably be a Quality outcome.
