Analyzing Scope Creep

Scope creep is “the natural tendency of the client, as well as project team members, to try to improve the project’s output as the project progresses” (Portny, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer, Sutton, & Kramer 2008). I experienced and am currently experiencing scope creep with one particular project: the redesign of our New Hire class. We are on our second phase of the redesign because the first one did not go too well and we saw areas that needed big improvement. During the first phase, managers, team leads, and the training team all had ideas that they wanted to include in the New Hire class, but it was not possible due to the length of the class. However, it was discovered that after the first redesign was implemented, some training team members were including the information they wanted to anyway resulting in the classes not all being the same. This then caused complaints from the managers because some of their associates understand the job great and others are quite confused because they didn’t get all of the training and simulation practice they needed. It was discovered that the shorten simulation practice time was due to the additional information being added in that wasn’t approved. This was a huge set back because the additional content was needed, but within a three week time span was not possible so it was said that it would be looked over again in phase two. This caused a lot of tension among the training team, design team for the class, and the center towards training. It was a mess!

At the time, I kept informing my boss, who was also the PM that these ideas were good, but would need to be added to a phase two of the project when we could convince the center to extend the time of training. She agreed; although, she added in some of her own brief practices that was not run by everyone in the team. It was a lot of chaos and not a lot of communication, which resulted in a frustrated project team, training department, and anyone else impacted by it. I was unfortunately trying to have some control over the content since I was put in charge of designing, but that control wasn’t really there once it came time for decisions. I needed to have more of a voice and help more with the communication knowing that’s not a strong skill for the PM.

The second phase, which we are currently working on, began in January 2010 and has been a better success in terms of the project phase. It won’t be implemented until early 2011, so it is still up in the air as to whether this is a successful project or not. However, there have been steps taken to ensure more success. For example, the PM did give me complete control over managing the content and announced it to the team so there was no confusion as to who had the final say. We did implement a type of “change of scope” document where there are formal written requests to add or change the scope of the project (Stolovitch, n.d.). This has worked much better as there is now tracking being done with these requests and things are being delegated to either be added or to be looked over again in phase three. Before phase two began, the training team met with the managers and discussed what they wanted to see in New Hire and the idea of extending the class to incorporate all of this information. Involving the managers during the conceive phase was essential and has really smoothed out some rather big bumps with this project. The PM has also done more delegation instead of trying to be a PM and create content. This has provided her with more focus on the overall project and opened up time for her to follow-up and have continuous meetings with individuals and the team. I can see first-hand why communication is essential to any project – it ensures everyone is on the same page and any confusion is handled right away.

Another area that was lacking the first time was having a Linear Responsibility chart. There were so many people involved in the project and unfortunately no one knew what each other was doing and/or many people were working on the same piece. There was no clarification from the PM as to what the assignments were so it stayed chaotic and ended up falling on one person to tie up loose ends, which there were many. Phase two has a chart similar to the Linear Responsibility chart that has been in place and updated periodically throughout the project. It hangs in the Training Department’s aisle where everyone can see what projects have been assigned, what needs assigned, what has been completed, and what is currently being worked on. When I spoke to my manager/PM about this idea, I didn’t know what this was called, but I did know a chart needed to be involved. The results are great and it truly has helped the flow of the project and people know who to communicate with about certain topics. It also holds people accountable for their piece if it’s not finished in time, where last time it seemed to all fall on one person instead of the correct individuals who were at fault.

I am still not in the position of managing the whole project, but being able to manage the design portion has really helped my skills and allowed me to help the team in building those communication skills with each other. If I were in charge of the whole project, I would be sure I thoroughly go through the steps: conceive, define, start, perform, and close and ensure all the proper forms (e.g., Statement of Work, Linear Responsibility chart, Work Breakdown Structure, Project Schedule, etc.) were used (Portny, et al. 2008). With the Project Management class’ course project, I have been able to work with each of those forms and work through the phases, which now I can see the benefits and if I am ever in charge of a project, they would certainly all be used as much as possible. It’s amazing to see the transformation of the team with phase two of this project and we all have a good feeling this will be a very successful project that will transform the New Hire class and improve the learners’ understanding of their job skills.

References

Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., $ Kramer, B. E. (2008). Project management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Stolovitch, H. (n.d.). Monitoring Projects. Laureate Education, Inc. Retrieved November 30, 2010, from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4603378&Survey=1&47=6260654&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=1&bhcp=1

Communicating Effectively

This week we were provided with a multimedia program that had one message delivered three different ways: written, voicemail, and face-to-face. We were to read/listen to each message and jot down our interpretation of them and what changed from one form to the next. Below is what I thought about the different deliveries.

In the e-mail message, my interpretation was that Mark was holding a very important puzzle piece to the project and Jane needed that in order to complete her report. The tone read a bit threatening using a lot of “I’s” and what she needed and not seeming very understanding in the end that he is a part of other projects and in meetings all day. It read as though Mark would be the one to blame if her deadline was missed.

In the voicemail message, my interpretation completely changed because I could hear the tone of voice so I am not misinterpreting how the message was meant to be conveyed. It appeared less threatening and more understanding and trying to work with Mark to get the reports completed. She seems to emphasize the importance of his report and how it will help her complete her report. I still do not like the wording about how she may miss her report’s deadline if she doesn’t get his; however, I did take it this time as more of a sense of urgency than thinking Jane would blame Mark if she misses her deadline.

In the face-to-face message, my interpretation didn’t change too much from the voicemail. The benefit of this was seeing her body language and how friendly she was making her appear to be more approachable. She conveyed that she needs his report to finish hers (still having a sense of urgency) and truly willing to accept it in many different formats, whatever was easiest for him.

Out of the three variations in delivering the message, the one that conveyed the true meaning and intent of the message to me was face-to-face. The voicemail worked well for me too, but I think seeing how approachable she was in person, helped take away any threatening tones. Her communication in person was the most effective also because her attitude, body language, and tone influenced her message in a positive way (Stolovitch, n.d.). If I were working on a project with her, I would be more willing to take time out of my busy day, finish up my report (if that hasn’t already been done), and send it to her as soon as I could.

From this exercise, I saw how not every message should be conveyed via e-mail. E-mail is our primary form of communication these days and I know I forget how important it can be to just walk over to someone’s desk and meet them face-to-face or at least a phone call if they are not nearby to talk to in person. If e-mail is the only way to send the message, Dr. Stolovitch (in his video Communicating with Stakeholders) presents some key information to keep in mind:

- Begin with a clear purpose

- State the situation

- Include possible solutions

- Indicate if a sign off is required

- Specify the form that the response is required to take

- Keep tone of all communications business friendly and respectful

I also learned that my tone (in e-mail or in person) has a big influence as to how people will take my message. I tend to appear stand-offish to people when really I am more than willing to help. Therefore, my tone and body language need to convey my willingness to provide assistance when needed and not convey that I may be annoyed or bothered by the request. Dr. Stolovitch’s video and this exercise have helped me see why some colleagues aren’t as open to coming to me when they need to and that is on me, not them. In addition, I have learned that in any form of communication (written, voicemail, or face-to-face), it is essential to keep your audience in mind and avoid any ambiguity in the message so there is clear communication to all involved. This is especially critical when working on a project team so that there isn’t any miscommunication on people’s responsibilities, deadlines, scope creep, any changes, any issues, etc. An important question to ask before deciding on how to convey the message is “How is the best way of communicating this message so its true meaning is conveyed?” I will certainly be asking myself that question from now on so that the intent of my message comes across clear.

References

Stolovitch, H. (n.d.). Communicating with Stakeholders. Laureate Education, Inc. Retrieved November 15, 2010, from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4603378&Survey=1&47=6260654&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=1&bhcp=1

Learning from a Project “Post-mortem”

In projects, “it's important for project managers and team members to take stock at the end of a project and develop a list of lessons learned so that they don't repeat their mistakes in the next project. Typically, such reviews are called post-project reviews or ‘post mortems’” (Greer 2010). Reflecting on a past project I was a part of is a reminder of what (and what not) to do. This particular project did not end up being successful. The project was designing and implementing online learning into a face-to-face course making it become a blended learning course. The course was for new employees to the company. The project was called “Blended Learning”. There are two questions that will help me reflect on this project in what went well and what needed improvement:

1. What processes, project artifacts, or activities did you include in the project that contributed to its success?

2. What processes, project artifacts, or activities did you not include in the project that might have made the project more successful?

To answer the first question, there were a lot of areas that went well and it looked like it was going to be successful. There are 5 phases that a project needs to pass through: conceive, define, start, perform, and close phase (Portny, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer, Sutton, & Kramer 2008). The “Blended Learning” project did follow this process and created the idea to incorporate blended learning to enhance the learners’ experiences in the new hire course. The plan was then developed explaining how the team will make this possible. The project then began with the project manager, in case the unit manager, picking the members that would be a part of this project team and the core work began. At the close of the project, approval was received of the final results.

In addition to the 5-phase process, weekly communication was conducted via e-mail and meetings were held once a month to ensure the team was on track and in an effort to keep the lines of communication open. In each monthly meeting, the materials created thus far were brought for review to determine if it met the goals and objectives of the project. Towards the end of the project and before implementation, a Train-the-Trainer session was held to receive feedback from the Training team and make any necessary adjustments before the roll-out date. Once implemented, evaluations were performed during the blended learning course from the Trainer as well as completed by the learners. After 10 blended learning classes, data was put together from the evaluations and the test scores to see how they compared to the traditional face-to-face course. The results of the data is where it was determined the project had been unsuccessful, which leads me into the second question.

The test scores revealed a dramatic drop from face-to-face to blended learning and the evaluations were mostly negative as to how the learners felt the blended learning course impacted their learning. At first glance, it looks like the perfect thought out project on paper; however, there were a lot of holes that should have been filled. To begin, the 5 phases may have been performed, but not diligently or thoroughly. The conceive phase was performed like this was a small project when in fact, this was a large project that should’ve had “formal review and decision” before proceeding (Portny, et al. 2008). All upper management and Vice President of the company’s Ohio, Georgia, and North Carolina sites should have been involved as this project’s goal was to be first conducted in Ohio and then implemented in the other sites in phase 2 of the project. Therefore, the other sites were supporters and the project needed their approval of the idea. If that were done, many of the issues with implementation at the other sites wouldn’t have been there.

The define phase did not include many of the elements that are needed such as, “a detailed description of results to be produced, a detailed project schedule, budgets, assumptions, and detailed roles all team members will play” (Portny, et al. 2008). There was not a detailed plan as to how the project team will conduct this project. Including a more detailed plan and in writing would have dramatically increased the probability of success with this project.

When the team was formed (the start phase), the project manager didn’t look into detail everyone that needed to be a part of this project. This allowed for many stakeholders that have now caused a lot of rework to try and get the “Blended Learning” project to be successful the second time around. One important group that was left out the majority of the project was the IT Department. They needed to be included as they are supporters and would help the project team know what software and capabilities the computers can do with the online portion of the course. For the members that were chosen, project roles were not assigned right away and instead, done sporadically throughout the project as the project manager saw fit. Another big downfall in this phase was when it was time for implementation, instead of letting the whole center know the progress of the project, only the associates who were signed up for the course, and their managers, were notified that they would be going through the new blended learning course. This caused for a lot of frustration as the managers thought they were signing their associate up for the traditional course (face-to-face), not be a beta tester in the new blended learning course. Had the project manager ensured all needed people were a part of the team, taken into consideration the stakeholders, and assigned roles at the beginning it would have made the project more successful. A work breakdown structure and responsibility chart would have been two excellent forms to utilize in this project helping it be more productive and successful.

The perform phase seemed to be better than the first three phases; however, it also had areas of improvement. The biggest improvement would be to keep everyone informed of changes, scope creep, issues arising, revisions, etc. The drivers of the project were informed throughout, but the supporters and observers were not. The supporters are the ones that have a heavy involvement in all of the phases as they are the “people who help to perform project work” (Portny, et al. 2008). These are the members that are working on the project and to not inform them of changes needed produces work that isn’t following the revised project plan. The project ended up following none of the new objectives since the supporters were not informed of changes made to the original objectives. This was discovered during the close phase with the evaluations and the observers noticing a different flow than what was discussed.

The close phase was the best phase conducted out of the others simply because without this phase, the project wouldn’t have been deemed unsuccessful and would have continued as it was. As many Training Departments know, evaluations are vital when conducting courses as things will need improved in order to keep up with the learners. The downfall in the close phase is that the final results did not receive approval of the other sites before implementation. Because of this and the results from the evaluations, the project team went back to square one to go through the project in more detail the second time around ensuring the same mistakes aren’t made twice.

My portion in the project was one of the supporters and I created the majority of the online material being implemented into the blended learning course. Being left in the dark about many things was quite frustrating, but I also learned from it and this time around I am ensuring I ask many questions and for the Project Manager to keep the supporters in the loop. This time around, I have been appointed the second project manager to help the original one out. So far, I have conducted a statement of work and am currently working on a work breakdown structure and responsibility chart. This Project Management course couldn’t have come at a better time as it is truly helping me conduct a successful project.

References

Greer, M. (2010). The project management minimalist: Just enough PM to rock your projects! (Laureate custom ed.). Baltimore: Laureate Education, Inc.

Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., $ Kramer, B. E. (2008). Project management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Perception of Distance Learning

Distance learning as a whole has grown in the past 5 years. It has been incorporated in many K-12 environments as the teachers create their own websites, with adult education, and in corporations for training purposes. The growing acceptance of distance education is “fueled by an increase in online communication, practical experience with new tools, growing comfort with online discourse, and the ability to communicate with diverse and global groups” (Siemens, n.d.). The growing technology we have in our society is a big part in distance education increasing and the perception of it becoming a positive one. “The concept of distance education is exciting, and recent hardware and software innovations are making telecommunications distance education systems more available, easier to use, and less costly. Distance education has begun to enter the mainstream” (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek 2009). Distance education has been around for many years, but only within the past 5 has it grown in education and corporate businesses.

The question is what it will become in the future – next 5-10 years. This will depend on how our technology grows as distance education will be impacted by “new communication technologies, contribution by experts around the world, and increased use of multimedia, games, and simulations” (Siemens, n.d.). The more people embrace technology and the more technology creates, the bigger the opportunity there is for distance education to become even more popular than it currently is. It has seemed to have spread like wild fires throughout all areas of our world and predictions indicate that it will likely become the preferred method for courses and/or training. It provides many benefits that more people are gaining access to and although it is unlikely face-to-face traditional classroom will disappear, I can see it becoming drastically less of what people want. For K-12, it would be difficult for children to have the discipline for solely distance learning to be beneficial to them, but for adult education and the business environment, it offers so much potential and allows corporations to interact with different offices around the world bringing the communication level to an all-time high and increased productivity (Siemens, n.d.).

To keep distance learning growing, it is also the responsibility of the Instructional Designers and Facilitators to promote this type of learning. For me, I am an advocate of distance learning and truly believe it is the better option for some learners and learning environments (e.g., corporate trainings). In my career, I fought to incorporate online courses into our training program and offer it for associates to attend at their desks as well as blended learning in the classroom for our new hires. After months of research and presentations on the benefits, it was agreed that this would work for our corporation and software was purchased to make this happen. Currently, material has been created for the blended learning environment in our new hire classes. The facilitator is there to provide the content and the learners go online to take the assessments, some activities, and simulations. It has improved our new hire class greatly and after initial quarks were worked out, it is the preferred method for our site. Online courses for the associates to complete at their desks on their own time are currently being developed and will hopefully be implemented by the end of the year. The managers are raving about this new opportunity training has provided and we anticipate many requests for online training. It has also been shared with our other sites across the United States and that has proven to be a huge benefit because we are now all delivering the same information.

Keeping the exciting perceptions of distance learning alive in the company is going to be a challenge as the programs we have don’t allow for everything people are going to want. There are restrictions that we will have to overcome and at the same time keep promoting this type of education and its benefits. Another key challenge will be “bridging the gap of comfort for the learners” (Siemens, n.d.). Most associates have a high school diploma and very little are savvy with technology beyond their job requirements. My next job is to make sure I create something that will help them be comfortable with the new learning environment and we plan on holding orientation sessions to help everyone become familiar with the programs we’ll be using and provide them with the knowledge needed to be successful in the online training modules. Continually improving the content will also help the perception of the distance learning courses as well as being sure to keep it interactive, fun, and non-stressful. The goal is for us to create an easier way to train everyone and be sure we are able to reach as many associates as possible.

Distance learning “provides the opportunity to widen intellectual horizons, as well as the chance to improve and update professional knowledge. Further, it stresses individuality of learning and flexibility in both the time and place of study” (Simonson, et al. 2009). Distance learning has many benefits that outweigh the main downfall of no face-to-face interaction with the facilitator because webcams have helped bridge that gap. It is the Instructional Designer’s job to create an interactive course that will be beneficial to each group of learners and the Facilitator’s job to support the learners to ensure their success. Instructional Designers and Facilitators need to work together so the idea behind what the ID has created is communicated to the Facilitator so they can in turn communicate that to the learners (Piskurich, n.d.). Ultimately, distance learning is only going to be as successful as we all make it.

References

Piskurich, G. (n.d.). Facilitating Online Learning. Laureate Education, Inc. Retrieved October 20, 2010, from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4442081&Survey=1&47=6260654&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=1&bhcp=1

Siemens, G. (n.d.). The Future of Distance Education. Laureate Education, Inc. Retrieved October 27, 2010, from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4442081&Survey=1&47=6260654&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=1&bhcp=1

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek S. (2009). Teaching and Learning at a Distance: Foundations of Distance Education (4^th ed.) Boston, MA: Pearson.