I think that the longer a project goes, the smaller changes the project team can make to the schedule, budget, and design without consequence. To give an example, it would be difficult to change to make large changes to the schedule during the implementation because the project team members and resources have already been allocated and it would be difficult to make a project team member work at a time or on a task that they originally were not assigned to. However, I do think that small changes like delaying a task for a few days due to a project team member is not as disruptive and are often necessary later in the project cycle.
Returning to previous phases within a project typically is a step backwards. Regardless of the problem, returning to a previous phase requires additional time that was not originally anticipated for, and may add to the total project costs. Ideally, this issue would not delay the overall timeline of the project excessively. With proper scheduling and planning, both expected and unexpected issues can be accounted for within the planning phase. For example, in the prompt given in the original post, good scheduling in the planning phase would eliminate the possibilities of issues with team members or essential staff taking scheduled vacations. On the other hand, unplanned vacations or other emergencies can possibly be accounted for with flexible timelines that have plenty of slack. Although returning to previous phases in a project would most likely be considered a backwards step, the extent to which the project is affected could be greatly reduced through successful planning and scheduling.
Hey everyone,
I agree with @ial4 post. Returning to an earlier phase does not mean your moving backwards. Going back to an earlier phase may actually help you reach your goal at a faster rate. There could be additional knowledge that will help with the success of the project, or help the project run smoother. A planning phase should be important for a projects success, because it creates of course of action when achieving these objectives that were set in place for the project.
It is very important to plan because of the budget that needs to be put in place, so that the team members also understand the importance of staying in a certain price range. The completion date can be moved up if you move backwards during the project or may even be pushed back a few days. If the project is pushed back a few days and the changes created are better for the success of the project, then moving the completion date would be very helpful for the success of the project.
It very rare to find an instance in which when taking a Step back, is actually step forward. Project management is all about practicality so I would have to side with @am2343. Even though taking a Step back to improve the project is helping the company or the project out but in reality still step back because you are making a corrections. So some sort of time increase would occur, be it big or small and that would prolong the project more than intended.
On the contrary, if we are thinking about it from a quality perspective it makes sense to go back and make those corrections or adjustments as they will improve the overall quality of product, and of course improve the patients lifestyle. In a project there are alway one of two limiting factors, and some cases both time and money. So its important to weight out what is more important to the project, saving money or saving time, because at the end of the day they are one and they same thing.
A step back in the project would lead to a number of complications in the project. The timeline of the project will increase which in-turn increases the cost of the project. The planning phase is very important in a project as it defines every detail according to which the project has to run. Stepping back is very crucial at any point of time. Continuous revaluation of the project should be performed throughout the project to make sure the project execution is following the plan exactly as planned. This might help in avoiding to step back. I do not agree with step back of the project which could be really difficult once everything is in place. If there will be a need to step back on a project it indicates the failure of the project planning.
The planning phase sets the foundation for the rest of your project. Although you may begin other steps of the cycle while still in the mist of planning having a good general foundation using information from past projects and team member experiences will assuredly cut down on the shock of certain set backs and may even lead to having backup plans already thought out before the issue even arises. As for the overall question, I do agree that having to change the plan does not mean that the team is moving backwards; it just means that they had to take a different path at the fork in the road.
The planning phase of project management is the most important stage in any project. It is the most critical phase because it guides various teams and project managers on how to implement and execute the other phases in project management. This phase also helps one to not miss any deadlines, identify the goals of the project, reduce risks and ultimately, have the desired results. I agree that revising your project plan does not mean you are moving backwards. Unforeseen events occur, which may be expected if the planning phase is well thought out. There will always be an output regardless of what pitfalls occur or “hills” a project manager encounters. Making the proper adjustments throughout the entire process will always enable the project manager to stay on task and successfully complete the project.
@Puneet provides a great explanation. The planning phase is one of the most important in the project lifecycle. It would make sense to identify a good project manager in this phase being that planning is needed to identify desired goals, avoid missed deadlines, reduce risks, and ultimately deliver the product/result. Project managers have a vital role because without their careful planning and expertise, project performance could suffer drastically. If the planning phase is executed well, it does set the entire project up for success.
I think that the longer a project goes, the smaller changes the project team can make to the schedule, budget, and design without consequence. To give an example, it would be difficult to change to make large changes to the schedule during the implementation because the project team members and resources have already been allocated and it would be difficult to make a project team member work at a time or on a task that they originally were not assigned to. However, I do think that small changes like delaying a task for a few days due to a project team member is not as disruptive and are often necessary later in the project cycle.
@jmbellanich has a good interpretation. Some changes can be made if done early on in the project's life, but it would have to be smaller changes to the scheduling, budget, and design without a major consequence. There could be challenges with delaying tasks, which could slow down the progress if you're trying to reach certain deadlines. But, this could occur or be necessary later in the project cycle.
A project cannot be implemented if there is no team to execute the plan. In the given scenario, I believe it is worth it to revisit the initial plan to have the project be successful and completed in a relatively timely manner. The planning phase is essential to a project. A part of the planning phase is consulting your team to determine schedules and availability for the project to execute efficiently. If a large number of your team cannot show up to perform, the PM will need to restaff or consult the sponsors to outsource a team to execute the project. If you go with the latter choice, the budget will need to be readjusted. It's kind of like building a tower with a poor foundation. If the base is poor by the end of the project, you have to start from the ground up and make redundant adjustments.
Hello everyone,
Suppose you're leading a project aimed at updating the packaging for a product line. You begin the planning phase by estimating your project budget and completion date.when you enter the buildup phase ,you get much more specific in your budget and schedule estimates. Then, during the implementation phase,it turns out that several critical staff members aren't available. This forces you to go back to your project plan and revise it to your account for the need for outside resources to keep the project moving forward.
Returning to the activities of an earlier phase doesn't means you're moving backwards or losing ground.It is simply means you're incorporating new knowledge and information into the overall project plan. Please share to this discussion your ideas if you agree. How important should a planning phase be for a project to be a success.
Hello @ial4 I agree with your points made about how moving from the planing phase to another phase and back isn't necessarily regressing as much as it is repositioning your approach when new information is received. Furthermore, I think that most project teams whether they realize it or not move back to the planning phase throughout the full executing process. There is always a new problem to be solved and will require planning to push through to be successful. If you agree or disagree please share your ideas as well.
I believe this is a refreshing way of looking at this type of situation. First, I do believe that returning to earlier phases will strengthen the overall project because it shows maturity and growth. Continuing with a project despite problems just to reach a deadline will be detrimental to the final product/project at hand. Secondly, incorporating new knowledge and information will prove better in the end because the final phase will come from a more wholistic approach. Lastly, the planning phase should be, and is, vital to a project's success because it is the groundwork for the entire thing. Without a foundational understanding of what is about to take place and what resources will be needed, no one on the team will know in which direction to start or continue. Further more, the Project Manager will not be able to adequately delegate or manage if there is no plan.
I believe this is a refreshing way of looking at this type of situation. First, I do believe that returning to earlier phases will strengthen the overall project because it shows maturity and growth. Continuing with a project despite problems just to reach a deadline will be detrimental to the final product/project at hand. Secondly, incorporating new knowledge and information will prove better in the end because the final phase will come from a more wholistic approach. Lastly, the planning phase should be, and is, vital to a project's success because it is the groundwork for the entire thing. Without a foundational understanding of what is about to take place and what resources will be needed, no one on the team will know in which direction to start or continue. Further more, the Project Manager will not be able to adequately delegate or manage if there is no plan.
Hi @delany,
I like your take on this and completely agree, going backwards in a project does show maturity and growth. You are not going to do things the same the second time around because you have been able to learn as you continued through the other steps. As well as your point about the project being more cohesive is a wonderful perspective. In our projects, we don't want people to be able to say, "Oh they were inexperienced during this phase but they got better." We want them to say, "This is very well done and consistent throughout." Thank you for your perspective on this.
A project cannot be implemented if there is no team to execute the plan. In the given scenario, I believe it is worth it to revisit the initial plan to have the project be successful and completed in a relatively timely manner. The planning phase is essential to a project. A part of the planning phase is consulting your team to determine schedules and availability for the project to execute efficiently. If a large number of your team cannot show up to perform, the PM will need to restaff or consult the sponsors to outsource a team to execute the project. If you go with the latter choice, the budget will need to be readjusted. It's kind of like building a tower with a poor foundation. If the base is poor by the end of the project, you have to start from the ground up and make redundant adjustments.
@niya-j I like your reflection on the topic. Revisiting the initial plan could help bring success to the project and eliminate confusion that would lead to missed timepoints and falling behind schedule. Your emphasis on the project team is important. As you mentioned, consulting your team is a big part of the planning phase in order to ensure the project can be executed efficiently. There may be a time that outsourcing will be needed, so it's important for this communication with the team to understand availability and other specifics.
For all the clichés regarding how important it is to plan, perhaps the most famous being: “Measure twice and cut once”, I cannot recall the cliché that says be ready for the surprise. Actually, it may be Murphy’s Law. Hence I view a surprise for a project initiation as an indication that I’m on the right track. Most serial entrepreneurs will also agree that the busines plan is really an outline of how well you will deal with surprises. Therefore, when in the planning phase, you need to be ready for the surprises. A successful planning phase will “flush out” most surprises. The planning phase is also when you build your project team, which undoubtedly can be challenging. Next you want to solidify your scope. Lastly you want to conduct a kick-off meeting with stakeholders.
