Comparing And Contrasting Project Failure And Success In Complex Projects/Programmes Is An Essay.

Write essay comparing and contrasting three complex projects/programmes in terms of project failure and project success?

In recent times, managing projects is considered difficult due to dynamic business environment.  To move forward with project management, it is crucial to define project. By definition, project is referred to as a task or set of tasks possessing objectives and end products. All the tasks in a project are inter-related. Hence, if any task fails, it may lead to failure of complete project. In order to manage projects, various methodologies and techniques are adopted by project managers (Chatfield, 2010). The process is referred to as project management. ‘Project success’ and ‘Project failure’ are commonly used concepts in Project management. A project usually goes through different stages and these stages decide whether the project will be failure or success. The project lifecycle consists of three stages: Initiation, Execution and Closing, as discussed in the table below.

Table 1: Project Lifecycle

Source: Chatfield, 2010

For a project manager, juggling between different roles and also keeping eye on right ball is the key to deliver successful projects. Experts believe that determining potential reasons for failure of a project is crucial but without any definition of success, there can be no differentiation between success and failure. Defining success might seem easy but the views expressed by different people vary about success. By definition, success refers to achieving all the ‘project objectives’. By far, this is the most accepted definition of success (Paul, 2005). But there can be different definitions depending upon point-of-views. This essay examines the statement, “suppose a project is delivered within its constraints, but is then not used as it was intended or does not deliver the expected benefits. Is that actually a successful project?” In order to examine this statement, the essay compares and contrast three complex projects/programmes in terms of project failure and project success. The three cases that will be examined in this essay are FiReControl, 2011; Heathrow Terminal 5 Programme, 2008 and Libra Project (Courts), 2003.

Normally, there are numerous constraints that impact the success or failure of a project. By definition, constraints are referred as limitations or problems that are leveraged to a project such as time, budget and resources. A project which gets completed under the impact of these constraints is only considered successful (Cattani, 2011). Constraints are also sometime act as project drivers that make project managers to handle a project in limited time, cost and resources.

1. Time: It is the timeframe allocated to complete the project and produce desired results. For instance, the time frame of the project can be 1 month or 1 year depending upon the urgency of the project.

2. Cost: It is the budget allocated to complete the project. For instance, client sets a fixed cost for every project and managers are required to complete the project in that allocated budget.

3. Resources: These are type, amount and availability of the work to be done. Resources can be limited or surplus depending upon the region where the project is going to take place and client who is allocating the project.

Factors Contributing to Project Failure and Success

Many times, a project is performed under above said constraints but doesn’t produce desired results. Such projects are typically not successful. By definition, successful projects are often referred to as those projects that are able to accomplish project objectives under constraints. For a project to be successful, there are numerous factors required. These include Smart people, smart planning, Open communication, Careful Risk management and String project closure. Smart people are required to manage the project efficiently under any given constraints. Smart planning enables personnel to handle the project effectively. In order plan smartly, all stakeholders are required to be on board so that they know their role during the entire project (Lewis, 2006). Open communication enables that every stakeholder is informed about every decision and also can share his thoughts to make project completion more efficient. Risk management is crucial as there can be numerous situations when projects can go off-track. A strong project closure is crucial otherwise the project will continue consuming resources.

As per above discussion, below are three cases:

FiReControl was a government IT project which failed in spite of numerous efforts, using numerous resources without meeting any of its objectives. FiReControl was an ambitious project put forward by government in order to enhance national resilience, efficiency and technology. It aimed at doing so by replacing the functions of 46 local fire and rescue services in UK by nine control rooms powered by a national computer system. The project was rolled out in December 2004 but had to terminate in 2010 December due to series of failures (Phillips, 2003). Although initiated to accomplish wider objectives, the project was started too quickly. Government in England wanted a system at a place to help them deal with rising terror attacks, disasters and accidents. However, there were basic approval checks and balances. The results of the project were very unpractical. The project was a failure due to numerous reasons. Foremost, the department aimed at imposing a single and centralised approach on Fire and Rescue Services without engaging with independent locally accountable services. Also, the project didn’t have the power to make these local bodies adopt latest regional structures. Secondly, the project was swiftly started i.e. the rapid pace of project led to the inefficiency and incomplete work. Hence, the project came out be highly over ambitious followed by highly unrealistic results. Thirdly, there was lack of proper project management (PMI, 2010). The department didn’t have any relevant operational experience in the field so they had to depend on external consultants in order to manage the project. It led to poor project management. This was one of the reasons which made the project very expensive. It was estimated that about 76% of the total cost of the project was spent in hiring third party consultants. In spite of hiring professionals, department didn’t use any monitoring and evaluating technique to analyse the performance of the project. In order to address these concerns, department should have won the confidence of local fire and rescue services. In future, department must take their approval who are expected to use this technology. Secondly, the department must follow business case approval. It ensures that proper challenge is applied to approval process. Thirdly, the department must clearly identify role and responsibilities so that any under-performing area can be assessed right away. Fourthly, department must ensure that resources are not wasted and they don’t hire third party consultants in future. Instead it can be replaced by training the personnel in department with the technologies to be used in the project. This case highlights that factors such as poor project management, lack of operational experience, inappropriate resource allocation can be few reasons leading to failure of project (PMI, 2010).

Heathrow Terminal 5 Programme was one the largest construction project which involved 60 contractors, 16 projects and 147 sub-projects. The Heathrow Terminal 5 Programme aimed at providing crucial new capacity to tenant airlines and also enhance overall revenue by significant amount. However, unnecessary delays impacted the opening of the project. It affected the overall quality on diverse areas such as market reduction in testing and staff orientation within premises. Besides delays, some other factors that led to the failure of project included loss of cost recovery options, angry tenants, failed contracts, negative political implications and public relation nightmare (Lock, 2007). Failure factors also included loss of confidence, technical failures, business interruption and negative publicity. In order to address these concerns, the project of Heathrow Terminal 5 Programme should be planned appropriately in future so that there are no delays in future. Secondly, all the technical things should be monitored and cross checked before final testing in future. This case provides with a lesson that unnecessary delays can usually result in failure of project. Hence, there should be a proper system put in place to monitor any delays.

Libra Project (Courts), 2003 is a project based in UK which aims at designing a national system for 385 magistrates. This project aimed at improving the IT magistrate system in UK and enables them to share information electronically. But it was later declared that Libra Project (Courts), 2003 was one of the worst IT project in UK. The factors that led to failure of Libra Project (Courts), 2003 included lack of interest of bidders, lack of cost effectiveness model and outdated contingency plans. For future considerations, department must make share all bidders involve in the project who show interest and finally, take the assignment. Secondly, department must invest in developing cost effective model to assess the reasonableness of bid. Thirdly, departments should have latest contingency plan to take necessary steps when project goes out of track.

To conclude, there can be numerous factors that lead to project success or project failure. All three projects listed here failed due to numerous reasons.

References

1. Chatfield, C. (2010). A short course in project management. Microsoft.
   
   
2. Paul C. (2005). The right projects done right! John Wiley and Sons, 2005.
   
   
3. Cattani, G. (2011) Project-Based Organizing and Strategic Management, Advances in Strategic Management, Vol 28, Emerald.
   
   
4. Lewis R. (2006) Project Management. McGraw-Hill Professional, 2006. p.110.
   
   
5. Phillips, J. (2003). PMP Project Management Professional Study Guide. McGraw-Hill Professional, 2003. p.354.
   
   
6. PMI (2010). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge p.27-35
   
   
7. Lock, D. (2007) Project Management (9th ed.) Gower Publishing, Ltd., 2007.