Delivery & Commercial Capability Programme - Understanding complexity - Andy Murray
-
Upload
association-for-project-management -
Category
Education
-
view
368 -
download
6
Transcript of Delivery & Commercial Capability Programme - Understanding complexity - Andy Murray
1
Delivery & Commercial Capability Programme
Understanding Complexity
2
The Killer Question...
• Are "complex projects" real or are they simply a result of poorly defined scope. How can one distinguish between a genuinely complex project and one that has not had its scope and context sufficiently developed?
Complexity & Capability
Helmsman performance cliff model A project’s performance/complexity rating
ComplexityCliff
Projects this side of the cliff are within the host organisation’s
inherent capability
Projects this side of the cliff need a greater maturity than
current organisation al capability
Note: Diagram is illustrative. Not TfL data.
Increasing maturity level raises the complexity cliff
Complexity v Performance for Company X Project portfolio
Why Assess Complexity?
Complexity rating
Maturity requirement of
host organisation
Degree of rigour to apply
Lifecycle/Gates
Process / Techniques
Authority approval level
Assurance strategy
Monitoring/Reporting
Strategies to treat complexity drivers
De-scoping
Feasibility studies
Agile
Choice of Team Appointments
Choice of Delivery Model
These are factored into Pathway and will continue to be used to refine default levels of control
Optioneering
Proof of Concept
Project Teams can use the results to target the factors driving up their complexity
Enables capability gaps to be identified
DECA / Helmsman
Helmsman
Helmsman Increase Capability
Helmsman Model (comprehensive)The Helmsman model measures both hard and soft factors
Results for Project ‘X’
Comparing similar projects
C ontext S oc ial Ambig uity Technical P roject Manag ement
C omplex ity R ating
B aker S treet S tation Improvement 5.3 5.0 5.0 3.1 5.4 4.8B ond S treet S tation Upg rade 6.7 5.0 6.6 6.2 7.0 6.3C hancery L ane S tation Improvement 4.7 5.3 5.0 3.1 5.3 4.7G reen P ark S F A 5.3 4.5 4.7 3.6 6.1 4.8Marble Arch 5.3 6.0 5.1 4.2 6.3 5.4Notting Hill G ate 5.3 4.0 4.6 3.9 5.4 4.6Tottenham C ourt R oad S tation Improvements 7.0 5.6 4.9 7.3 7.6 6.5V ic toria S tation Upg rade P roject 7.3 5.5 5.3 5.5 7.0 6.1
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
8
• TfL typically has a large number of core disciplines involved in projects.• Timeframes are typically quite long, meaning it is likely that scope will be
ambiguous and/or subject to change and continuity of stakeholders and project personnel is unlikely.
• Project Managers typically are accountable for delivering new capabilities (not just tangible outputs), However, there are typically 4-5 decision-making layers above the Project Manager
• There are generally a lot of stakeholders interested in TfL projects
Multi-dis c iplinary Timeframes S tructure L evel of Accountability
S takeholder Numbers
Averag e R ating 8.1 7.4 7.2 7.1 6.9
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
Top 5 Sub-Factors
conflict
The D&CC governance workstream has been helping with this issue, but there’s still more to do: e.g. Only submitting investment papers to the final decision-maker
Complexity & Cost10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
£1-25m £25-£50m
£50m-£100m
£100m-£300m
£300m- £1bn
£1bn+
Generally, the bigger the project by cost, the more complex it is.
But lower value projects have a wider spread of complexity. The ranges shown here cover a 90% confidence interval..
It could be more critical to understand complexity drivers for projects <£100m than in other cost bands.
Variability
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
TfL P ortfolio Averag e S TD E V
Most variableTo be addressedby projects teams
Least variableTo be addressed
corporately
• The least variable complexity drivers should be addressed corporately – e.g. factored into TfL pathway, tools/systems, competency development etc
• The most variable complexity drivers should be addressed locally, and factored into team selection, assurance etc.
Context Approach
What we are doing next...
Source: Ackoff / Senge & Roth
12
The Killer Question...
• Are "complex projects" real or are they simply a result of poorly defined scope. How can one distinguish between a genuinely complex project and one that has not had its scope and context sufficiently developed?
• My experience...– Even for well defined projects
– Some complexity drivers are inherent – Some can be tamed
– Others cannot
– Some complexity drivers are self-inflicted
– For poorly defined projects
– Most complexity drivers are self-inflicted