Resource Management Issues and Solutions

Defend Resource Management Strategies
Three myths about project management are: 1) a delayed project is not good, 2) processes are more important than people, and 3) failure is not an option (Moore, 2011; Watson, 2014). These myths, if believed, can have damaging effects on a project and the project manager’s outlook. This paper will evaluate these myths, describe how to mitigate them, explain how to measure and control the project resources expended, and identify five specific resource management related issues and the mitigation technique that can be used to address them.
Myths
The first myth—that delays are always bad—can be problematic for project managers because it can box them in to thinking about progress in a very specific way. The reality is that hiccups are likely to occur, and if one area of the project is delayed, there should be a sense of where other areas can proceed. This is where the GANTT chart can come in to play to help the project manager understand how to manage the project effectively when one area falls behind schedule. The GANTT chart shows what stages of the project can proceed independently of others and what stages require earlier processes to be completed first. The GANTT chart is the best way to mitigate for this myth. It allows every step of the process to be measured and controlled so that the manager knows what resources are needed where and when and by whom.
As Gasparotti (2011) notes, “good project planning requires time and resources” (p. 36). Mitigation, therefore, depends upon having access to the time and resources required for the project to reach its goals. Time and resources are both people dependent. People provide the time and the resources for a project, which means that a project manager must be able to communicate effectively with the stakeholders involved in the project to ensure 1) that it can be completed on time, and 2) that the necessary tools are available.
Without an effective communication strategy, the project manager will not have an adequate idea of how to budget time and resources appropriately and breakdowns in everything from the supply chain to assembly can be negatively impacted as a result. This is why Gasparotti (2011) states that “human resource planning is very important” (p. 36). One practical way to manage human resources is via the GANTT chart. This chart allows the manager to see the person/hour ratio of every activity within the project, which gives the manager a sense of “the time required by a single person to achieve a certain activity” (Gasparotti, 2011, p. 36). The GANTT chart is a great boon for the manager for a number of reasons, but mostly because “if more people are involved, sharing among them various tasks, the actual duration of implementing a certain activity is reduced” (Gasparotti, 2011, p. 36). In other words, as the project “depends on the project priorities (performance, costs or time)” (Gasparotti, 2011, p. 36), the GANTT chart gives a detailed explanation of how time and resources can best be managed.
Additionally, if a delay occurs and all work grinds to a halt, it still does not mean that the project has failed or is in danger of failing. Delays can give more time to inspect everything that has been completed and make sure everything is up to code or to correct issues that were not properly addressed earlier. A delay can be thought of as an opportunity to take a fine-tooth comb over the project areas and work out whatever kinks are found.
The second myth—that processes are more important than people—implies that getting the formula right is all that matters. This is actually far from the truth: what matters most is having the right people in place so that they can make the right decisions, achieve the goals of the project, and help to assist the project along as needed. Churchill and Lovell (2012) note that formulas can be helpful for streamlining processes—but ultimately the people in place are ones responsible for executing the formulae. They have to be of a high caliber, with understanding and the ability to perform at a high level day in and day out. The best way to mitigate for this myth is to hire the right workers for the right job and to maintain open lines of communication with workers throughout all processes. This can be measured and controlled by working with HR to develop a protocol for finding and recruiting the exact kind of talent required for the job.
The third myth—that failure is not an option—undermines the idea that managers can learn from their mistakes. It can also cause managers to double-down on projects that need to be abandoned, re-tooled and started over from scratch. As Dellestrand and Kappen (2011) point out, “the cost of developing new innovations is substantial” (p. 263). The fear of cost can drive managers to want to keep going on projects that show themselves to be failures early on. Instead of admitting the failure and identifying the need to go back to the drawing board, managers feel that they must carry on with the project, throwing good money and resources after bad. Mitigating against this myth can be accomplished by having a policy in place that embraces the idea of learning from one’s failures. The culture should promote the idea that failure is an option so long as stakeholders learn why a project failed. This can be measured and controlled by having an evaluation method in place that allows every project manager to identify what went wrong where and when and why so that stakeholders can learn from the errors and approach future projects with the right tools to succeed.
Resource Management Issues
Five specific resource management issues that are related to the myths are: 1) poor resource capacity planning, 2) no assessment of resource risks, 3) lack of skilled human resources, 4) lack of optimal resource usage, and 5) unrealistic deadlines.
The first two issues—poor resource capacity planning and no assessment of resource risks—can be mitigated by implementing the GANTT chart strategy, which allows the manager to effectively see what resources are needed when and where. This can aid in the measurement of capacity by helping the organization to know up front what will be required for the project and whether or not the capacity to accomplish it actually exists. Software management programs can be utilized to facilitate this mitigation technique so that capacity can be measured along the way.
For assessing resource risks, the GANTT chart can also provide a sense of what resources are dependent upon others and where the risks are involved in terms of project completion. If a later step will be needing parts supplied by the project’s earlier steps it is imperative that attention be given to the early steps. The GANTT chart gives the manager the ability to see where problems may occur with resource demand, to see what risks are posed by the schedule, and what needs must be fulfilled.
The third issue—a lack of skilled human resources—can be addressed using the mitigation technique of working with HR to develop a protocol for hiring the right workers for the job. Listing out the job requirements and the tools and skills that each candidate should possess is critical to the projects’ success. This means that project managers must work hand in hand with the HR staff so that those doing the hiring know what to look for to facilitate the aims of the project manager who is looking for a very specific set of skills on the job.
The fourth issue—lack of optimal resource usage—can be addressed by using the evaluation mitigation technique. Evaluation tools like software management processes such as Six Sigma can be highly useful in this regard. There are five phases in the Six Sigma process. They include 1) defining the problem, 2) measuring the current process, 3) analyzing the cause of the problem, 4) improving the situation by applying the best solution, and 5) controlling the situation to maintain the solution. Six Sigma can be used to identify where resources are not being used optimally and to arrive at ways to ensure that these resources are used as effectively as possible.
The fifth issue—having unrealistic deadlines—is a problem because it can set a project up for failure. The way to mitigate against this is to combine all three strategies identified herein. First, the use of the GANTT chart can allow the manager to see what resources are needed where and when and how long the project will realistically take to be completed. Second, the protocol implemented by HR to ensure that the right workers for the job are hired can help the manager predict how long the project will realistically take with skilled workers. Third, the evaluation technique like Six Sigma can help to problem shoot and make sure that all resources are accounted for and that the project can proceed according to plan. Having unreal expectations sets a team up for failure but if the GANTT chart is used, the proper evaluation techniques are implemented and the right people are hired for the job, the project will proceed in an orderly and effective manner so that the desired outcome is achieved.
References
Churchill, A. M., & Lovell, D. J. (2012). Coordinated aviation network resource
allocation under uncertainty. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 48(1), 19-33.
Dellestrand, H., & Kappen, P. (2011). Headquarters allocation of resources to innovation
transfer projects within the multinational enterprise. Journal of International Management, 17(4), 263-277.
Gasparotti, C. (2011). Resource allocation within a project using heuristic
algorithm. Review of Management & Economic Engineering, 10(2), 35-46.
Moore, S. (2011). Three myths of project management. Retrieved from
https://strategicppm.wordpress.com/2011/10/18/three-myths-of-project-management/
Watson, Z. (2014). 3 project management myths. Retrieved from
https://www.liquidplanner.com/blog/3-project-management-myths/