Methodologies - Don't let yourself get boxed in by them

It seems, like my previous industry IT, digital media is slowly becoming obsessed with associating itself with methodologies such as Prince2 for nothing more than the assurance that comes from a recognised name.

Whilst it might be perceived that I have a personal agenda here, not being qualified in Prince2, I hope that there is another, more objective, outcome from this post.

Recognised methodologies are a very good way to assist anyone with trying to find some clarity in the grey fog that can descend when you're up to your neck in delivery deadlines. They provide you with a framework that can help you work towards your delivery targets whilst providing others around you with some insight into "how things are going".

They can give you the steps you should follow in order to achieve the successful delivery of projects. Some believe (some really do, I've worked with several) that as long as you tick all the chosen methodology check boxes long the way, your projects will have been a success.

This is nonsense and I would hope those behind the leading methodologies would be the first to agree with this sentiment.

In this fast paced competitive world, we are all seeking that edge that gets you the contract over your competitors. Equally, we are all looking to ensure that we cover our positions and define accountability in order to exonerate ourselves of any blame.

It is in my opinion, now becoming an obsession within the digital media industries to focus on naming a methodology to be used rather than the more important matter that the methodologies were originally designed for - delivering projects successfully, on time and on budget with transparency for all involved.

Where is this obsession coming from? Well I believe it to be a self perpetuating force. Agencies are looking to distinguish themselves from the crowd (or as is becoming the cause, towing the line) and clients are looking for common methodology to reassure themselves that the project management that they'll be receiving will be of an acceptable level.

We all need to have reassurance in areas that we might not understand ourselves. For instance when booking a plumber to help us with our gas boiler at home, the first thing we ask is are you Corgi registered? The almost blind reassurance we get from the registration provides us with the comfort that the individual knows what they are doing.

Project methodologies and qualifications in the methodologies are not quite the same. Using the same analogy of gas plumbing, it's akin to being qualified in installing large corporate boilers but never having had any experience with small home based appliances. You know the principles, but you might have to guess the bits in-between.

Wouldn't it be better to ask for testimonials and past track records?

The Prince2 methodology is a well developed, well supported and popular methodology that's used across the world in many different industry sectors. Does this mean it's appropraite for the delivery of every type of project? No.

Web project management more often than not needs to be flexible, as functionality is developed ideas develop and the project can evolve. As a project manager you need to be able to draw a line between minor adaptations and scope changing functionality.

You then also need to consider these changes on a client by client basis, providing a project management structure that is appropraite for the way the client likes to work. Sure there are times when you need to stand firm and state that a change is outside of the scope and will have to be dealt with in another phase. Then there are other times when you'll need to revise the delivery schedule on-the-fly.

To complicate matters, not only do you need to deliver on a client by client basis, but you also need to deliver on a project by project basis for each client. Larger scale projects can lend themselves to more structured and strict approaches. Smaller project can be expected to be delivered on a very flexible basis.

Then there's the standard documentation that can accompany a Prince2 project, sometimes this documentation is just too formal for some clients and they prefer a more story like approach to a delivery process.

At the end of the day, what I'm trying to convey is that we can't just state we deliver all our projects via a Prince2 method or by any other single method, because we don't. There's a good reason why, that's because I don't believe there is one methodology that is always appropraite. We need to pick an approach or a methodology that is appropraite for the project.

This should not be seen as a slight on Prince2, Agile, Scrum, Waterfall or any other type of methodology, as they are all thoroughly well developed and accepted approaches of delivery and I like elements of them all.

It is, however, a slight on the practice of naming a well known methodology in the hope that this instils the reassurance required to win business without ever necessarily needing to use the methodology in practice.

Instead of focusing on the specific methodology, we should spend more time focusing on the method.

Whatever the chosen approach or methodology, it should always hold the two key principles of definition and communication at it's heart.


Related reading:

Self organising units - Optimum performance? - Digital Signals http://www.digital-constructions.com/blog/2009/07/self-organising-units-optimum.html

Digital Project Management - The Communication Brief - Digital Signals http://www.digital-constructions.com/blog/2009/05/communication-brief-initial-project.html

Digital Project Management - Episode 3 - Planning, Pitching & Acceptance - Digital Signals http://www.digital-constructions.com/blog/2009/06/digital-project-management-episode-3.html

Communicate and define - Basic rules of any project - Digital Signals http://www.digital-constructions.com/blog/2009/03/communicate-and-define-basic-rules-of.html

blog comments powered by Disqus