If you have to return to earlier phases of a project, I do believe that you lose time. Once you have moved on to the next stage, you are ready for the next step and do not need to remain on the previous one. Going back would not have been included in the planning phase, thus causing the project to have to halt to resolve an unplanned issue. In the example given, I think the need to go back could have been prevented if they planned for the absence of specific team members during the planning phase. Were these team members going on vacation? Were these things spontaneous? Unless it was an emergency that caused the team members not to be available, we see again just how important it is to have a strong planning phase. The planning phase is the number one part of a part that can doom it before getting started.
I don’t consider having to go back to amend the plan a backward step. In fact I look at it as iron sharpening iron. I remember working with the American red cross on a project that involves disaster situation and dealing with livestock and developing a plan for evacuation when dealing with animals and after meeting with stakeholders in various sir teams in became apparent that some of the provisions that will put into place may need revision. New information arise that may contribute to the breath of work of a project it doesn’t necessarily mean that you’re taking a backwards step in spite of that information. It’s certainly not a restart either. And I cannot be overstated that you can plan for a amalgamate of events and yet when it comes to implementation you may find that you may lack in resources that were not accounted for initially and so you have to sidestep for a moment and plan for these unexpected twists in the planning process. Sometimes we have to rethink some policies that may affect the timeline for the purpose of project success.
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.
The planning phase is essential to success. Not only should there be a plan, but there should be one with contingencies for a failed plan. It should always be okay to revaluate the project and monitor and adjust. That is part of monitoring and controlling. Sometimes adjustments are needed, but depending on the stage, some particular adjustments may be out of reach. That is one reason I think a backup plan is best. That all increases the likelihood of success.
I currently work in a field where we constantly have multiple projects going on at once, so we multitask constantly. Prior to Dr. Simon’s course, I have completed Lean Sigma Six and have a basic understanding as well as I have completed Army course Project Management for Supervisor’s course. However, this course has taught me the fundamentals behind action. Most of my experience with the Army is we get tasked out to learn a specific subject matter and we are kind of programmed, they teach us how to be efficient but not necessarily the reasoning behind the concept. From my experience with the Army as a Civilian, I agree that there are times in a project when you have to go back to the planning phase to re-evaluate the original base plans and make them relevant to the current situation. I understand for academic purposes we are learning how to break it up and separate the different phases and sections but in the real world, unfortunately, it can be due to a time constraint or just a miscommunication but phases sometimes run together in a single cycle without the proper breaks. We are currently working on a project for additional funding in my department and because of the data lapse we have had to go back to our tasks then re-evaluation and re-planning based on the most updated projected timeline. This lessens the efficacy of the team on the project because the team spends more time figuring out the timeline than executing the plan. There are many reasons why changes to the timeline occur. It could either be due to poor planning in the initial planning phase or because of unforeseeable events that caused changes, which cannot be avoided. Either way, planning is most certainly a vital part of the project’s success but even with delays, the project can still be successful through teamwork and communication.
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.
project planning plays an essential role in helping guide stakeholders, sponsors, teams, and the project manager through other project phases. planning is needed to identify desired goals, reduce risks, avoid missed deadlines, and ultimately deliver the agreed product, service or result.
The planning phase has enormous value to the success of a project. It determine its trajectory. However, often times the surprises don't happen until you execute. Therefore, execution is the more important phase. It is when all the work happens. Still, planning effectively will determine the ease of the execution phase. The best projects are the ones where the planning makes way for a smooth execution. Hence what I've done for projects in the past is double planning. The first phase of planning was handled by me. Often my goal was simply to get the customer to think through the trouble spots in advance of working with an implementation consultant. As a result, when the implementation consultant was engaged to finalize the project plan, the customer already had a sense of how to recommend and request their project implementation.
I completely agree that revisiting earlier phases isn't a sign of failure but rather a necessary part of adaptive project management, and I think your packaging update example perfectly illustrates why planning needs to be both thorough and flexible. The planning phase is absolutely critical for project success because it sets the foundation it's where you establish your scope, identify resources, set realistic expectations with stakeholders, and create the roadmap everyone will follow. Without solid planning, you're essentially flying blind and will inevitably encounter avoidable problems that could have been anticipated and mitigated. However, I think the key insight from your example is that planning shouldn't be viewed as a one-and-done activity that you complete and never touch again; instead, it should be seen as an iterative process that evolves as you gain more information throughout the project lifecycle. When you discovered that critical staff members weren't available during implementation, going back to revise your plan wasn't a step backward it was actually smart project management because you recognized that your original assumptions no longer held true and you needed to adapt. The alternative would have been stubbornly sticking to an outdated plan and watching the project fail, which would be far worse. This is why I think the planning phase should be comprehensive enough to establish clear objectives, constraints, and success criteria, but also flexible enough to accommodate the inevitable changes that come up during execution. Good planning includes building in contingencies, identifying assumptions that might change, and establishing a change control process so that when you do need to revise the plan, there's a structured way to do it rather than chaos. The planning phase is essentially about reducing uncertainty as much as possible while acknowledging that you'll never eliminate it completely, which means building adaptability into your approach from the start. So yes, planning is crucial for success, but so is the willingness to revisit and refine that plan as new information emerges the two go hand in hand.
I agree that returning to an earlier phase of a project does not necessarily mean the project is failing, however, in the case of medical device projects, this can be very costly and potentially derail a project. Because of this, a thorough planning phase is crucial for the success of a project. One way to ensure planning is effective is to make sure the proper people are involved in this phase. Stakeholders, engineers, manufacturing personnel, and project managers should all be included early in the project process so that potential issues with resource allocation and timelines can be identified before the project moves forward to the executing phase. This reduces the chances of needing to revisit earlier project phases.
I agree that revisiting earlier planning activities is a normal and important part of project management. As a project progresses, new information sometimes becomes available that can affect the schedule, resources, or budget. Updating the project plan to reflect these changes does not mean the project is failing. Rather, it shows that the team is adapting and making more informed decisions. The planning phase is very important because it sets the foundation for the entire project. However it should also remain flexible. Factors such as resource availability, technical challenges, or regulatory requirements can change over time. By staying accommodating and flexible, teams can adjust their strategies, reduce risks, and keep the project moving forward more effectively.
When returning to an earlier phase of a project, does not mean that the project failing or moving backwards. It instead means that the project team is adapting to new information and is making the necessary adjustments to ensure that the project stays on track. For this, the planning phase is extremely important as it help to establish the scope of the project as well as the budget, and resource requirements. However, even with a strong plan in place, unexpected errors and issues can always arise. By revisiting the plan to allow for the team update their assumptions, allocate resources if need, and ensuring that the project is still meeting the goals. By allowing for more flexible planning it can allow for the project to be more successful and able to adapt to changes if need be through out the project.
I agree with your point that going back to an earlier phase does not mean the project is moving backwards. In this situation, the planning phase gave a general idea of budget and timeline, but once more detailed information became available, adjustments had to be made. Discovering that key staff are unavailable is a major constraint, so updating the plan to include outside resources is necessary to keep the project moving forward.
The planning phase is arguably the most important part of the project because it sets the foundation for the project, like many others have highlighted. An excellent planning phase has the capabilities to remove a majority of the potential risks, avoiding situations like this from arising. While it is impossible, to always have an immediate answer to the issue, the planning phase can severely implement ideology to mitigate the risk. A strong plan should still be flexible enough to handle unexpected issues like resource shortages. Continuously revisiting and improving the plan helps reduce risk and keeps the project on track instead of forcing it to fail due to outdated assumptions.
Do you think it is better to spend more time upfront in planning, or rely on adjusting the plan as the project progresses?
The planning phase is very important because it sets the foundation for the whole project. Early estimates for budget and schedule are helpful, but they are not always accurate at the beginning. As the project moves forward, new information like staff availability may require changes to the plan. Going back and updating the plan is normal and does not mean failure. It shows that the team is learning and adjusting to real situations. Good planning helps reduce problems, but being flexible is also important. In the end, a successful project needs both planning and the ability to adapt when needed.