Why do I focus on program management?  That’s a question I get asked on a regular basis and my answer is normally two-fold:  Because program management is my profession and because there continues to be confusion about the what, why and how of program management.

I have to admit that for the first twelve years of my career, I naively believed that the practice of program management was well understood.  That’s because I worked in the defense and aerospace industries where program management was developed and matured for over three decades before I arrived on the scene.  It wasn’t until I transitioned to the commercial high-tech industry that I began to realize there was some confusion about my profession.  That fact hit me during the initial meeting with my first program team at Intel.  As we went around the table introducing ourselves and our role on the team, I learned that my program core team consisted of myself and eight other program managers.  Now, to the best of my knowledge and experience, there is supposed to be a single program manager leading a program.  This prompted me to schedule a meeting with my new manager. As I discussed my confusion with him, I heard for the first time what is now a common statement, “Oh, we tend to use program and project manager titles interchangeably”.

For some time, I thought this confusion was central to Intel.  The realization that it was more systemic came as I began to network with my program management counterparts in an organization called the Program Management Forum (PMF) in Portland, Oregon.  The PMF is a cross-industry community of practice that was formed to bring program management professionals together to discuss topics of common interest.  Due to the lack of resources specific to program management outside of the defense and aerospace industries, communities of practices like PMF tend to be a primary source of knowledge on the subject.  Through this network of local high-tech, IT, medical, financial services and public service professionals, not only did I realize that program and project management titles were being confused, so were the roles, responsibilities, skills, and practices.

Read complete paper in English

Top of Page

During several postings with a variety of clients, it has come to my notice that we have a broad contingency of our practitioners and those who claim to be professionals who are checklist lazy.  Yes, some among us have become checklist only project managers.  Their thinking skills are limited to the four-corners of the document known as the checklist.

In defense of the checklist, it should be said that the checklist does have a place and utility, but they should not be used as the sole tool on any project.  So what is the place and utility of the checklist on a project?  First, the checklist can be used as a stimulator to thought.  It can be used to stimulate brainstorming or lines of inquisitive discussion for areas such as risk management or value engineering for the project.  Second, it can be used as an outline for project review teams or individuals conducting project reviews.  Third, they serve to ensure that technical tasks have indeed been completed as intended.  And, they can be guides for project managers for whatever part of the project he or she is working to ensure they are completing the tasks that should be completed in the sequence that they should be completed and that all have been completed.

But in no case is the checklist the sole method to perform any task.

By relying on a checklist as the only means for performing a task the project manager not only shows obvious signs of lazy project management skills, but he/she gives up real ownership of the project.  Ownership becomes a matter of paper designation rather than an active status.  Further, the position the project manager may have had in respect to the project to be able to argue his or her position for resources, priority, or political position, for example, will have been undermined and eroded as much of the material necessary for the interaction with executive or upper management will not be gathered through the use of a checklist only.

Read complete paper in English

Top of Page