« "the long arm of privilege and power picking their pockets" | Main | Critical Resources »

Automating Project Management Processes is Very Dangerous

I've been telling people that the reason that I am fundamentally opposed to tools like Microsoft Project Server is that it does not adequately convey the details of a project. It does not allow for project knowledge to be conveyed. It is great for project accounting, but less so for the active management of the process. For a long time I've been alone in this view. But now Glen Alleman writes that a veteran project manager told him that there are:

two critical attributes of a successful project

1. Have the right people - this means hand picking them
2. Manage the interfaces - this means pay close attention to the send and receive points of the project. Do this "manually" through face to face interaction.

Glen's conclusion - automating project management processes is very dangerous. Nice to know I'm not alone. Face to face interaction reinforces commitment. Face to face interaction brings out latent issues and nagging doubts before they impact the project. Face to face interaction is a fat pipe compared to the thin straw of a web interface. I feel it is a necessary part of the project management process.

RELATED POSTS

TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Automating Project Management Processes is Very Dangerous:

» Project Management Systems Don't Kill Project Knowledge, Bad Project Managers Kill Project Knowledge from projectified
Jack Dahlgren talks here about the perceived evils of project management systems like Project Server that use tools like timesheets to gather status information. He also points to Glen Alleman [Read More]

» Project Management Systems Don't Kill Project Knowledge, Bad Project Managers Kill Project Knowledge from projectified
Jack Dahlgren talks here about the perceived evils of project management systems like Project Server that use tools like timesheets to gather status information. He also points to Glen Alleman [Read More]

» Project Management Systems Don't Kill Project Knowledge, Bad Project Managers Kill Project Knowledge from projectified
Jack Dahlgren talks here about the perceived dangers (not [Read More]

Comments (2)

Jack,

Dangerous may be a bit of a stretch, but if you rely on the automated processes as the ONLY means of statusing, then you're headed for the ditch.

Here's some reasons to have automation:
1. Maintenance of all the status of the deliverables. A typical program in our domain will have 100's of not 1,000's of individual documents (CDRLs). Automatically statusing these through the document management management system is handy.
2. Risk analysis and critical path. RISK+ is our prefered tool and it requires a "well formed" network - no widows no orphans, all tasks have thre-point estimates (there are automated ways of doing this), risk ranking, and branching probablities. With this in place an estimate of completion and a confidence interval for that estimate can be derived.
3. Automated generation of reports. We make lots of briefing documents from the .mpp files. Alll in specific formats - not ONE of which is possible from MSFT itself. The data in these briefings needs to be up to date, reflect the current status of the schedule, its risks, available margin and all the other attributes deemed important to outsiders.

So do automation, but do it with all the attendent risks in mind.

Jeff:

I enjoyed checking out your blog, nice work. If you have some time, please check mine out. It’s focus is project management, resource management, document management, help desk and we can be found at

Post a comment

(Comments are moderated to fight SPAM and will be published after I have a chance to approve them. Thanks for waiting.)

About

The previous article is "the long arm of privilege and power picking their pockets".

The next article is Critical Resources.

Current articles are in the main index page and you can find a complete list of articles in the archives.

Creative Commons License
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Powered by
Movable Type 3.34