PM World Today Editorial May - June 2005
May/June 2005: Editorial | Viewpoints | Papers | Education | Publications | Case Studies | Community
PROJECT MANAGEMENT’S CRITICAL MARKETING PROBLEMS
An editorial by Hugh Woodward
In spite of the growing popularity and prestige of project management, “selling project management to senior executives” consistently shows up as a top concern of project managers. Why? Is it simply a failure to speak the language of senior executives? While there may be some truth to this in individual cases, it does not explain why the problem is so ubiquitous. Selling skills can be learned or purchased. Why then has somebody not discovered the silver bullet we seem to be missing? Is there something at work here besides a dearth of selling skills within the project management profession?
If we reject the notion that project managers are inherently poor sales people, there must be a more subtle reason our message is not being heard. We see three critical issues associated with project management’s ability to market itself:
1. Our claims do no not match the observed results
There is little doubt that project management is generally not delivering the results it promises. The Standish Group’s 1994 Chaos Report finding that only 16% of software projects are completed on-time and on-budget has been widely cited. Robbins-Gioia Inc. conducted a similar, although smaller, study of construction projects in which 44% of participants reported projects with cost overruns of 10% to 40%. And Terry Cooke-Davies analyzed 136 (mainly) European projects executed between 1994 and 2000 and found that the mean performance against budget was a 4% cost escalation while mean schedule performance was 16% late.
It can be argued we are improving, of course. The 2001 update to the Chaos Report reported considerable improvement. Between 1994 and 2000, schedule performance on IT projects improved from an average overrun of 222% to 63%, and cost performance improved from 189% to 45%. Overall, the success rate improved to 28%. This is clearly worth celebrating. But a profession that promises to deliver projects “on time and under budget” can hardly be proud of a 28% success rate.
Project managers will argue these depressing results represent not a failure of project management, but a failure to apply project management effectively. This argument certainly has intuitive merit. But the evidence supporting this claim is scant and unconvincing.
2. We are selling a product that does not address the need
A fundamental premise of any sale is that the purchaser buys to address an unmet need. Successful marketers, like The Procter & Gamble Company, invest enormously to convince consumers they need fresh-scented clothes, less dandruff, and whiter teeth. When the consumer becomes convinced, the sale is inevitable. Applying this premise to project management, it becomes important to ask if we are selling a product that addresses an unmet need of senior executives. More pertinently, are senior executives convinced they need project management?
The dilemma in answering this question is that project management is generally perceived to be a methodology to achieve cost and schedule goals. However, cost and schedule performance is often not uppermost in a senior executive’s mind. There are times when cost and schedule targets are important, of course. An obvious example is when they are required by contractual obligations. Other examples include the production of a component needed on a specific date for assembly with other components, and preparation for a date-certain event such as the Olympic Games or celebration of a national holiday
Frequently, however, targets stated as a specific cost or a specific date are really better expressed as “as cheap as possible” or “as soon as possible”. For example, the key to successful new product introduction is often being first to market. Therefore, in a competitive situation, a company will often be willing to invest more for a faster schedule. Conversely, when productivity or efficiency improvement is the goal, an earlier start-up may or may not be a good investment, depending on the relative costs and savings. Nevertheless, a project management process focused rigidly on fixed date would be unlikely to excite any senior executive.
Clearly, it is important to realize that senior executives are not necessarily looking for better cost and schedule performance, and if project management is seen as simply a means to achieve cost and schedule targets, we will find ourselves selling a product of questionable value.
3. We promise results, but substitute bureaucracy for effective processes
One of the most pervasive liabilities of project management is that it is perceived to be expensive and unnecessary overhead. And regrettably, this reputation is well-deserved. It is the inevitable result of well-intentioned efforts to implement methodologies capable of accommodating the most complex project the organization is ever likely to encounter. Unfortunately, the mythical “highly complex” project rarely eventuates, and the organization is left with a burdensome process
Addressing this subject, Tony Crawford writes: “Can there be too much methodology? I think the answer to that question is also “yes”. I have seen methodologies evolve in several organizations from very little to a maze of methodologies – all mandated for every project, in a futile attempt by senior management to ensure project success – and to the point where rather than helping, they too often inhibit project success.”
A similar cycle often occurs when the introduction of project management involves the implementation of enterprise project management software. Management is initially enthralled with the colorful screens promising instant information about any project in the portfolio. However, providing such information inevitably requires diligent data. Soon, this translates to increased staff and significantly higher costs. Eventually, the reasons for implementing the enterprise project management software are forgotten, and once again, senior management sees only the costs associated with a white elephant they mistakenly suppose to be “project management”.
Can project management solve these marketing problems? That remains to be seen, of course, but in the meantime, we invite your comments. pmforum.org is committed to providing a forum to facilitate debate and discussion about the future of project management and we will be pleased to publish reasoned articles in future editions of PM World Today. Please send your feedback and comments to editor@pmforum.org
Hugh Woodward is the President and Managing Editor of pmforum.org, and an
internationally recognized leader of the project management profession.
He served two terms as Chair of the Project Management Institute and almost
six years as a member of PMI's Board of Directors. His professional experience
includes projects and programs in manufacturing, construction and IT, and
involving both the public and private sectors. He continues to promote the
profession as a frequent conference speaker, having addressed audiences
in Argentina, Australia, Canada, China, France, Hungary, Israel, the Netherlands,
New Zealand, Russia, Singapore, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
Express your views on any PM World Today matter with a Letter to the Editor.
Letters to the Editor are readers comments and observations on the Editorial, Viewpoint Columns, articles, papers or other notices of PM happenings appearing in the monthly issues of the Project Management World Today.
Send a Letter to the Editor!
Read the Letters to the Editor
Editorial Policy: The PMFORUM® has no connection to any national or international project management organization nor does it reflect the policy of any project management professional or commercial organization. The PMFORUM® maintains an objective and impartial view of project management affairs. In the interests of advancing professional project management the PMFORUM® will publish contending and objective views on issues that reflect collegial differences and perspectives