Generally speaking, all companies and organisations are trying to get better at project management. (In other words, there aren't any organisations that are purposely trying to get worse at project management.) Though they may not be able to articulate it, organisations recognise that there is value associated with being able to manage projects more effectively.
Why then, are so many organisations still so bad at project management? What is keeping most organisations from being able to effectively manage projects? Having pondered this on many consulting and training engagements, I have ranked my top five reasons below. See if you can pick out the reasons why your organisation falls short in implementing good project-management discipline.
5. Senior managers think project management is a software tool
When you discuss project management with some managers, they think initially that you are trying to implement a tool that allows you to be a better project manager. In fact, if it was a tool, you might have more luck convincing them to do it. Even though some aspects of project management, such as the creation and management of the workplan, may utilise a tool, that is not where the value of project management lies. Instead, project management is about skills and discipline. It's about applying proactive processes and best practices. It's about using common and understood templates. Don’t get me wrong — tools have their place. However, software tools are not the answer.
4. Organisations don’t value the upfront investment of time
Many people consider themselves to be "doers", and organisations can also be that way. If you're going to be good at project management, you have to understand that the upfront planning process has value. You need to know that if you plan the project well (in other words, if you know what you're doing before you start), you'll be able to manage the work more effectively. I have seen organisations say they want to apply good project management, but then are unwilling to invest the time required. No-one wants to take the time to plan. Instead, everyone wants to start executing immediately and then redo all the work later to get it right.
3. You may have been burned in the past
A common criticism of project-management methodology is that it is cumbersome, paper intensive, and takes too much focus away from the work at hand. Sometimes this is a legitimate concern, caused by not scaling the methodology appropriately to the size of your project. However, project management was not the problem. The problem was a misguided attempt at implementation of project management. If you implement project-management methodology correctly, the results will be outstanding.
2. Your organisation is not committed
Many organisations say they want good project management, but do the actions back up the words? For instance, the first time you try to define the work, does everyone say "just get on with it"? If you try to enforce scope change management, does your manager say "just do the work"? Does your sponsor say you are wasting time identifying risks? This disconnection is very common. The words say one thing but the actions say another.
1. Organisations don't know how to implement culture change
Most organisations don’t know how to manage culture change in general, and project management in particular. You can’t just train people and turn them loose. You can’t just buy MS Project and turn people loose. You have to have a long-term, multi-faceted approach to managing culture change. It takes hard work and resources. Most organisations aren’t committed to focusing on the culture change in the long-term, and they don’t want to spend any resources to do it. Is it any wonder then that six months later, project-management deployment ends up in the rubbish pile of culture-change initiatives that have all failed in the past?






Talkback
I couldn't agree more! Usually the purchase of the required Software should already reflect the change in culture and processes envisioned by the commitment to a better project management. That means that an orderly project that involves a clear picture of the companie's strategy needs to be finalized before the real work begins. This requires a lot of buy in on all levels.
Additionally I have often seen management try to let PMs compete for ressources budget, time, and success. Prioritisation and planning for ressources on the company level often leads to the unproductive friction between competing projects.
Last but not least, PMs mostly operate on a vertical level without significant formal authority. While I agree that that is almost unavoidable in many cases, the change process in the company should include a reward and reporting system that includes PMs.