Projects continue to be delivered late, over budget, incomplete, requirements omitted, delivered but never used or worse, benefits never realised.  Progress monitoring, reports, metrics and dashboards only provide a snapshot, they may inform stakeholders a milestone has been missed or budget exceeded, but they do not highlight whether it could be a systemic problem.  This level of reporting can also reinforce the notion that a project is in control, facilitating a tendency by project managers and sponsors to assume everything is OK.

The Project Health Check can mitigate these risks and provide real value but only when:

1.  The right check is completed at the right time(s);
2. Processes & procedures are well defined;
3. Those completing the review have the necessary skills, knowledge and approach;
4. There’s an action plan to put things right after the review

1. The right time to complete a Project Health Check

Two occasions when you may be required to complete a Project Health Check:

i. Planned

As part of a standard project review process, often at a predefined governance gate or stage.

These planned checks are in place to ensure all the steps are complete in the current stage before governance permission is given to move to the next stage.  Unfortunately, they are often tick the box exercises with missing or incomplete tasks excused as not important, fudged as complete in another process or quickly thrown together without substance or due care.

To add real value pre-planned Project Health Checks must:

• Be completed by resource which are trained to complete the process consistently and accurately
• Include at least one reviewer independent of the project and programme office
• Have a defined scope, effort and budget, to complete each Project Health Check, included in the Project Charter

ii. Ad hoc

When the project is showing signs it may be in trouble (example matrix below), to identify what needs to be fixed to quickly bring it back on track.  The project contingency plan should include effort and budget to complete ad hoc Project Health Checks

Note:

1. Project Health Checks are not designed for use after a project fails, they are not “the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff”, however a Project Health Check may be used in conjunction with a project review for a failed project.

2. The cost of correcting an issue is many times the cost of preventing it. The longer you leave it the greater the cost.

2.   Well defined processes and procedures.

The Project Health Check must have well defined and documented processes & procedures.  The process must have the buy-in of the programme office and the commitment of all involved to deliver & follow-up on the Project Health Check

The process must include a well-documented (including names and contact details) procedure to select the most appropriate independent assessors, free from internal politics of the project and programme office, who can provide a balanced view.  The assessor will need to be sufficiently trained to follow the structured approach while taking the organisation’s unique nature and project management methodologies into account.

A good Project Health Check will encompass:

• A well-documented, easily available and precise knowledge of the project methodology used in the Company
• Review process which enables a common interpretation, understanding of the substance of the Project Health Check questions
• A process which enables the identification of common problems and solutions to be applied to future projects and programs.

The terminology is as neutral as possible so it can be adapted ad hoc to certain projects and situations.

 3.   Skills, knowledge and approach

The application of the Project Health Check is not always a focus of the typical project management training courses, Prince2, PMI, etc.  It is critical therefore to develop training, classroom or on-line, for your organisation’s Project Health Check.  The initial and ongoing training effort is reduced if your processes and procedures are well documented and available on-line (company intranet).

Getting the approach right, to avoid the “tick in the box” syndrome is critical to the success of the review.  Prior to a minor Project Health Check (see matrix below) the review team confirm the scope & objectives, and for the comprehensive Project Health Check the team will review the stakeholders and sponsor agreed scope.  This preparation activity, along with a brush-up of the review processes and procedures, will guide and focus the team.

The minor Project Health Check document will have a formal process checklist to ensure the self or peer reviewers are similarly focused with the right approach.

4.   The action plan

The Project Health Check doesn’t end at the review, the review will include options and recommendations for improving and moving forward with a healthy project.  The agreed actions will be prioritised with timescale for implementing changes and owners identified for completing each action.

There’s always risk involved with change and changing the way projects are managed is no different. An important step is to identify risks resulting from implementing new ways of working.  For example, improving change management by implementing a new process will require training and they may be resistant to doing things in a new way. The review risks plan will include mitigations to support improvement efforts.

 Applying the right level of Project Health Check at the right time

It may not be necessary to complete an in-depth Project Health Check every time there is an issue.  It may be appropriate to apply differing levels of checks for differing situations.  For example, the following levels could be applied:

Engaging an independent External Moderator

While many project managers may view periodic Project Health Checks as an unnecessary distraction, assessments conducted by an outside expert add both value to the project implementation and added protection against the high cost of failure.  An independent and experienced third party will recognise the subtle issues and intervene to build consensus amongst project team members developing a collaborative approach to complete the Project Health Check.

The cost of project delays and peace of mind that the project is on the right track easily out way the incremental costs incurred for an additional resource to periodically support your Project Health Check.