What is important when starting a project?
Project management in its various variants is described in a large amount of literature, and all authors have their own original view of this process. Having read more than one Talmud and leading no project, I also want to present my view on this process, in terms of project design, which, in my opinion, is little described (everyone is fascinated by the description of the process itself, and he himself and his quality depends not least on how everything was designed).
All management can be represented as a TCP / IP protocol stack, expanding it about the levels of interaction of the subjects and objects involved in the process.
So you can highlight
Everything that is the very essence of the project (what we want to achieve and what are its properties) belongs to the ideological one. It is difficult to structure this level, but this is, first of all, communication at the stage āListen, there is a cool idea ...ā or āHere, we need to be here ...ā. Here the most important experience of the Republic of Moldova itself, which will allow to distinguish between necessary and unconvincing questionable desires (they are further characteristics) of the project. To understand and explain the reality of the implementation of certain ideas, it is possible that here it will become clear what it is. Communication, communication and again communication, with all the specialists and amateurs who are adjacent to the project and who can participate in it. Amateurs will describe the essence in two words - the more they themselves do not know, but the essence was told to them one way or another. Specialists - will devote to the subtleties and nuances.
It goes without saying that the Republic of Moldova should be specialized in some field, I assure you that RM Internet startups will look sorry for the production of concrete goods.
')
At the communicative level, questions are solved how and in what way this whole mess of the previous level, and subsequent ones, will be managed in the sense of people and their interactions. There are, in my opinion, obligatory subjects for participation. Namely: the responsible entity on the part of the customer, the responsible entity on the part of the contractor and the ideologist of the project. How and to what extent these three subjects will be transformed into concrete personalities is your business, but if possible try to avoid combining the responsible subject on the part of the performer and the projectās ideologue in one person - otherwise, in the case of a work breakdown by the ideologist (for people are either creative or VERY busy ) you will not be able to influence him through the responsibility of the customer.
From early practice:
A project with ever-changing TK. In the project there were doubtful in terms of the parties to the contractor to work with the original data. At the same time, all project participants were aware of the need to solve these problems. We will think that the participation of the customer in the implementation of project tasks is not necessary to explain. So the performer was not against taking on these tasks, for a fee, respectively. The customer has long made a decision on this issue, changing the decision, simultaneously trying to do something himself. As a result, without the original formalized data, further work was impossible, and things are still there. The project stalled by itself ...
Try to immediately determine the degree of bureaucracy, namely what decisions will be recorded and confirmed by acts, protocols, etc. There is no way to avoid paper confirmation (there should be at least roles and responsibilities), and there is no sense in turning the project into the work of the bureaucracy either. But if the project is likely to delay the constantly changing data from the customer, and the project deadlines are tight and the customer each time brings something new and opposite to the previous one Ā¬ you canāt do without fixing these steps, indicating the shift of the project deadlines. And if there is no agreement on signing protocols and other documents at once, you can get a very conflicting situation by deciding to sign the decision of the customer in the middle of the project. We'll have to work with the fact that there is all the responsibility for disrupting the project will fall entirely on you. :-(
The working level is directly related to the work, when the time comes to āfiche and ficheā ļ At this level, all modern models of project management, waterfall, edzhil, etc., work. The choice is yours.
Instead of concluding:
In practice, everything becomes very transformed with respect to theory.
I brought for myself some points without which the project is a thankless task:
All management can be represented as a TCP / IP protocol stack, expanding it about the levels of interaction of the subjects and objects involved in the process.
So you can highlight
- ideological
- communicative
- and project levels
Everything that is the very essence of the project (what we want to achieve and what are its properties) belongs to the ideological one. It is difficult to structure this level, but this is, first of all, communication at the stage āListen, there is a cool idea ...ā or āHere, we need to be here ...ā. Here the most important experience of the Republic of Moldova itself, which will allow to distinguish between necessary and unconvincing questionable desires (they are further characteristics) of the project. To understand and explain the reality of the implementation of certain ideas, it is possible that here it will become clear what it is. Communication, communication and again communication, with all the specialists and amateurs who are adjacent to the project and who can participate in it. Amateurs will describe the essence in two words - the more they themselves do not know, but the essence was told to them one way or another. Specialists - will devote to the subtleties and nuances.
It goes without saying that the Republic of Moldova should be specialized in some field, I assure you that RM Internet startups will look sorry for the production of concrete goods.
')
At the communicative level, questions are solved how and in what way this whole mess of the previous level, and subsequent ones, will be managed in the sense of people and their interactions. There are, in my opinion, obligatory subjects for participation. Namely: the responsible entity on the part of the customer, the responsible entity on the part of the contractor and the ideologist of the project. How and to what extent these three subjects will be transformed into concrete personalities is your business, but if possible try to avoid combining the responsible subject on the part of the performer and the projectās ideologue in one person - otherwise, in the case of a work breakdown by the ideologist (for people are either creative or VERY busy ) you will not be able to influence him through the responsibility of the customer.
From early practice:
A project with ever-changing TK. In the project there were doubtful in terms of the parties to the contractor to work with the original data. At the same time, all project participants were aware of the need to solve these problems. We will think that the participation of the customer in the implementation of project tasks is not necessary to explain. So the performer was not against taking on these tasks, for a fee, respectively. The customer has long made a decision on this issue, changing the decision, simultaneously trying to do something himself. As a result, without the original formalized data, further work was impossible, and things are still there. The project stalled by itself ...
Try to immediately determine the degree of bureaucracy, namely what decisions will be recorded and confirmed by acts, protocols, etc. There is no way to avoid paper confirmation (there should be at least roles and responsibilities), and there is no sense in turning the project into the work of the bureaucracy either. But if the project is likely to delay the constantly changing data from the customer, and the project deadlines are tight and the customer each time brings something new and opposite to the previous one Ā¬ you canāt do without fixing these steps, indicating the shift of the project deadlines. And if there is no agreement on signing protocols and other documents at once, you can get a very conflicting situation by deciding to sign the decision of the customer in the middle of the project. We'll have to work with the fact that there is all the responsibility for disrupting the project will fall entirely on you. :-(
The working level is directly related to the work, when the time comes to āfiche and ficheā ļ At this level, all modern models of project management, waterfall, edzhil, etc., work. The choice is yours.
Instead of concluding:
In practice, everything becomes very transformed with respect to theory.
I brought for myself some points without which the project is a thankless task:
- 1) Understanding of the circle involved in the project and measures of responsibility with a confirmed in paper form option;
- 2) Understanding the range of tasks and the parties to the performer of these tasks, also confirming this on paper;
- 3) Understanding the degree of process formalization and interaction model;
- 4) Fixing the deadlines and dependence on the presence or absence of source data and, accordingly, the shift of the end point from the signing of the final version or its change after.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/36764/
All Articles