Defending Resource Management Strategies in Projects

Introduction

Three myths about project management are: (1) a delayed project is always bad, (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 on the project manager's outlook. This paper evaluates each myth, describes how to mitigate it, explains how to measure and control the project resources expended, and identifies five specific resource management issues along with the mitigation techniques that can be used to address them.

Debunking the Three Project Management Myths

The first myth — that delays are always bad — can be problematic for project managers because it boxes them into thinking about progress in a very narrow way. The reality is that hiccups are likely to occur, and if one area of the project falls behind, there should be a clear sense of where other areas can continue moving forward. This is where the Gantt chart becomes valuable, helping the project manager understand how to manage the project effectively when one area falls behind schedule. The Gantt chart shows which stages of the project can proceed independently of others and which stages require earlier processes to be completed first. It is the best tool for mitigating this myth, because it allows every step of the process to be measured and controlled so that the manager knows what resources are needed, where, 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. Both time and resources are people-dependent: people provide the time and the resources for a project, which means that a project manager must communicate effectively with all stakeholders to ensure (1) that the project 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 understanding of how to budget time and resources appropriately, and breakdowns — from the supply chain to assembly — can follow. This is why Gasparotti (2011) states that "human resource planning is very important" (p. 36). One practical way to manage human resources is through the Gantt chart, which allows the manager to see the person-to-hour ratio of every activity within the project, providing a sense of "the time required by a single person to achieve a certain activity" (Gasparotti, 2011, p. 36). The Gantt chart is a significant asset for the manager, largely 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 provides a detailed picture of how time and resources can best be managed.

Additionally, if a delay occurs and all work comes to a temporary halt, it does not necessarily mean the project has failed or is in danger of failing. Delays can provide more time to inspect completed work, ensure everything meets standards, and correct issues that were not properly addressed earlier. A delay can be viewed as an opportunity to examine each project area carefully and resolve any problems that arise.

The second myth — that processes are more important than people — implies that getting the formula right is all that matters. In reality, what matters most is having the right people in place so that they can make sound decisions, achieve the project's goals, and provide support wherever it is needed. Churchill and Lovell (2012) note that formulas can be helpful for streamlining processes, but ultimately the people executing those formulas must be capable, with the understanding and ability to perform at a high level consistently. The best way to mitigate this myth is to hire the right workers for the right roles and to maintain open lines of communication with workers throughout all phases. This can be measured and controlled by working with HR to develop a protocol for identifying and recruiting the precise talent required for the project.

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 continue investing in projects that should be abandoned, re-tooled, or restarted. As Dellestrand and Kappen (2011) point out, "the cost of developing new innovations is substantial" (p. 263). Fear of that cost can drive managers to persist with projects that show early signs of failure. Rather than acknowledging the failure and identifying the need to return to the drawing board, managers may feel compelled to carry on, committing additional money and resources to a failing endeavor. Mitigating this myth can be accomplished by establishing a culture that embraces learning from failure. The organizational culture should promote the idea that failure is an acceptable outcome, provided that stakeholders understand why a project failed. This can be measured and controlled by implementing an evaluation method that allows every project manager to identify what went wrong, where, when, and why — so that stakeholders can learn from those errors and approach future projects with better tools and greater insight.

Five Resource Management Issues and Mitigation Techniques

Five specific resource management issues related to the myths discussed above 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 enables the manager to clearly see what resources are needed, when, and where. This aids in measuring capacity by helping the organization understand up front what a project requires and whether the capacity to accomplish it actually exists. Software management programs can be used alongside the Gantt chart so that capacity can be monitored continuously throughout the project.

For assessing resource risks, the Gantt chart also provides a sense of which resources depend on others and where risks exist in terms of project completion. If a later step requires outputs from earlier steps, it is essential that those earlier steps receive appropriate attention. The Gantt chart gives the manager the ability to anticipate where resource demand problems may arise, to identify the risks posed by the schedule, and to determine what needs must be fulfilled.

The third issue — a lack of skilled human resources — can be addressed by working with HR to develop a protocol for hiring the right workers for the job. Clearly listing the job requirements and the tools and skills each candidate should possess is critical to the project's success. This requires project managers to work closely with HR staff so that those conducting hiring understand precisely what to look for to support the project manager's specific skill requirements.

The fourth issue — lack of optimal resource usage — can be addressed through evaluation techniques such as Six Sigma. There are five phases in the Six Sigma process: (1) defining the problem, (2) measuring the current process, (3) analyzing the root 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 develop ways to ensure those resources are deployed as effectively as possible.

The fifth issue — unrealistic deadlines — is problematic because it sets a project up for failure from the outset. Mitigating against this requires combining all three strategies identified in this paper. First, the Gantt chart allows the manager to see what resources are needed where and when, and how long the project will realistically take to complete. Second, the HR protocol for ensuring that skilled workers are hired helps the manager predict a realistic timeline based on available talent. Third, evaluation techniques like Six Sigma help troubleshoot problems and verify that all resources are accounted for so that the project can proceed according to plan.

Conclusion

Having unrealistic 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. Taken together, these three mitigation strategies — visual scheduling, targeted recruitment, and structured evaluation — address the five resource management issues identified here and help project teams move past the myths that can otherwise distort planning and decision-making.

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