by David A. Johnson
Great Expectations
All too often, Recovery Planning projects begin with great expectations but end in disillusionment. Cost overruns, missed deadlines, staffing problems, and a plan that is outdated even before the ink is dry, are just a few of the pitfalls that can plague the unwary Recovery Planner. For the benefit of those responsible for managing Recovery Planning projects, this article will first review the various obstacles that may be encountered during a typical project, and then review how the Recovery Planner can overcome these obstacles, and ensure that the project meets expectations.
It should be emphasized, however, that this article is not about Recovery Planning; it is about project management. While the information will be presented within a Recovery Planning context, the problems and solutions to be discussed are not unique to Recovery Planners. Anyone responsible for managing a complex, multidisciplinary project, regardless of its purpose, may face the same problems, and can employ the same solutions.
The fundamental goal of project management is to ensure that the expectations of management and the project’s sponsors are met. These expectations are usually quite straightforward. In the case of a Recovery Planning project, management and sponsors will undoubtedly expect three things: they will expect the plan to be completed; they will expect it to be completed on time and within budget; and they will expect it to be workable.
Consequences of Failure
These expectations are perfectly reasonable, and should come as no surprise to the Recovery Planner. It should also be no surprise that failing to meet these expectations can have adverse consequences. First, if a workable plan is not completed, the exposure that was to have been addressed by the plan will remain. Second, if a workable plan is not completed on time and within budget, the Recovery Planner may find it considerably more difficult to gain support for subsequent projects. Last, failing to meet expectations may result in a significant setback, if not an abrupt end, to the Recovery Planner’s career.
Why, then, do so many Recovery Planning projects fail to meet expectations? If the Recovery Planners know what is expected of them, and the possible consequences of failure, why do they allow their projects to fall short of expectations? The pat answer is “circumstances beyond their control”.
Obstacles to Success
There are indeed many obstacles to a successful project which may seem to be beyond the control of the Recovery Planner. If the Planner simply accepts that he or she is powerless to overcome these obstacles, failure is inevitable. For the benefit of those who choose to take this fatalistic view, the ten most common obstacles to a successful Recovery Planning project are listed below, along with the corresponding excuses that can be used for failing to meet expectations.
1. Too Broad a Scope: “The scope of the project was simply too broad. There was no way it could be kept under control.”
2. Ambiguous Objectives: “The objectives of the project were too vague. Nobody could agree on exactly what we were supposed to accomplish.”
3. No Real Commitment: “Management wasn’t really committed to the project. They were just paying it lip service.”
4. Budgetary Constraints: “The budget was too tight. We couldn’t get adequate funding or resources to achieve our objectives.”
5. Unrealistic Target Dates: “The target dates for the project were completely unrealistic. There was no way the schedule could be met.”
6. Lack of Accountability: “No one involved in the project was accountable for meeting target dates. Falling behind schedule was inevitable.”
7. Poor Communication: “Communication between project members was terrible. Everyone seemed to be working at cross purposes.”
8. Lack of Technical Expertise: “The project required technical expertise in so many different disciplines. The project members were simply out of their depth.”
9. Inadequate Testing: “We weren’t able to do enough testing to prove the plan would actually work. We just had to keep our fingers crossed.”
10. Poor Maintenance: “It was impossible to keep the plan up to date. The environment kept on changing too quickly.”
The Fatalistic Approach
It is unlikely that a given Recovery Planning project will encounter all of the above obstacles. However, it is equally unlikely that a given project will encounter none of them. The fatalistic Recovery Planner, therefore, should be prepared to offer the appropriate excuse or excuses to management and the project sponsors when it becomes evident that expectations have not been met. If the Recovery Planner is convincing enough, he or she may get a second chance. However, the Recovery Planner that is prepared to accept failure once is a Recovery Planner that is destined to fail again.
There is no substitute for success. Failing to meet expectations, no matter how well rationalized, is not an acceptable course of action for anyone wishing to pursue a career in Recovery Planning. The fatalistic approach is, indeed, fatal. The Recovery Planner, therefore, must not accept any of the above obstacles as being beyond his or her control.
(Editor’s note: Part 2 will appear next issue, focusing on the Five Key Principles of project management, and how to avoid all the obstacles listed in Part 1.)
|
|
David A. Johnson, CBCP, FBCI, is a director of the Canadian Centre for Emergency Preparedness, an executive member of the Disaster Recovery Information Exchange, and a member of the Journal’s Editorial Advisory Board. |
