Something that many companies will do during the planning phase is to do experimental and characterization testing. They do not require any acceptance criteria or sample size requirements that verification testing needs and can be a good way to see if the product would pass similar testing that will be completed in V&V or if a new test is needed to fully load the product to failure. These tests can aid in pointing out areas of concern prior to a verification test. 

Other strategies and ways to avoid going back to the planning phase is to have customer input and proof of concept labs that aid in understanding if the advancement during the engineering phase meshes well with what the customer wants in the product and if any misuse cases may occur. There are many areas that a risk analysis will cover areas of concern, but sometimes its best to learn from those who utilize the tools in their career. 

Understanding the requirements and establishing a robust project definition is paramount for the success of the project. Spending more time on the initiation and planning phases is a long time investment and should be encouraged by the PM and high-level executives. Risk planning and taking necessary actions to avoid them could help a lot. The roles and responsibilities have to be clearly established and as you mentioned verification tests have to be discussed as early as possible. Sometimes the regulation mindset makes engineers focus only on minimum control requirements. Good communication and analyzing the situation are very important in avoiding pitfalls in planning. 

I think the most ideal solution in this case is to set up phase review meetings after each phase in order to review all documents and make sure that everything looks good with no mistakes that might delays things in the future. Nothing is perfect and mistakes always happen; Sometimes things are not discovered early on in the process and it would be only discovered when there is a failure or when the team realizes that they don't have a certain manufacturing capabilities. Sometimes it is really not controllable. Another solution would be having a mitigation plan for everything; any uncertainty or any tasks that the team is not sure what the results are going to show would be marked as a risk and the team would come up with a mitigation plan, to basically expects the worst. With following this strategy, the team would not need to go back to planning phase since they already planned for the worst and know exactly what they should happen to avoid the set backs.

I've found that I can avoid going back to the planning phase after the execution phase by planning backup plans prior to starting.  I work with tissues and cells: I can never just assume that things are going to work out according to plan. Instead, I schedule and plan so that I have options and back-ups.

I also actively verify parts of my project before proceeding to more timely, and expensive steps. Instead of just running with a single concept, I will run smaller experiments that ensure that my hypothesis is supported. If these experiments show otherwise, then it is far easier to return to the planning phase than if I had jumped the gun and started all parts of my project at once. 

Personally, I think it is ok to go back to the planning phase after the execution phase IF you've organized your project so that you have wiggle room (both time-wise and financially) to do such. It isn't as much about avoiding returning to the planning phase as it is planning so that, if you have to return to the planning phase, you can minimize loss. 

There are several ways that we can do to avoid going back, quick and easy is one is to just change the overall scope of the project to align it with current results, however you might have to find a new job after. But in all seriousness I think the best option would be to check your results after each subtask, task, milestone, step etc with the actually project plan. It is a very diligent task and may require an extra resources or even time, however I think it serves a great deal as it allows for everyone involved in the project especially the PM, to ensure that the project is moving in the correct direction. This will also help the PM catch any mistakes from the beginning instead of finding them out after they become unresolvable. 

I agree with designing each step of the project plan with verification steps will avoid going back to the planning phase from execution phase. This provides opportunity to detect the mistakes immediately and  can try to rectify that instead of finishing the entire project and then finding the mistake which makes you go back to the planning again. This causes a great loss to the project. Also there should be backup plans defined earlier during the planning phase to make sure the mistakes can be rectified. 

After reading a few comments I would say I agree with getting customer reviews after the execution phase would help with not returning to the planning phase. By asking for others input they wouldn't necessarily try to create a totally new product, but instead give their input and ideas on how you can change what you currently have. The changes made do not mean that you have to go back to the drawing board. These changes can be simple modifications to help the product be more relatable to the user.

I do, however, disagree with someone's comment on changing the entire scope to make your product work with the idea. At that point i feel like the whole reason for starting the development is completely out the window. Also, that wouldn't be an option if you have been hired by a company for a specific purpose. 

Hello,

To avoid having to go back to the planning phase after starting the execution phase, it is important to take a proactive approach to project management. One effective strategy is to develop a comprehensive project plan that includes timelines, milestones, deliverables, and resource allocation. Regular progress reviews can also help identify potential issues or risks early on, while implementing a change control process can ensure that any changes to the project scope, timeline, or budget are carefully considered and documented. Thorough testing and quality assurance can help minimize the risk of errors and defects that can lead to costly rework, while encouraging open communication among team members and stakeholders can ensure that everyone is aware of potential issues or concerns and can work together to address them. By incorporating these strategies into your project management approach, you can minimize the risk of having to go back to the planning phase after starting the execution phase and ensure that your projects are completed on time, on budget, and to the desired level of quality.

Having to restart a project from the beginning is a worst case scenario for any PM, especially when it comes at the cost of missing a deadline. To avoid having to do this, a PM can employ some of the following methods: First, they can be sure to develop a detailed project plan. Before starting the execution phase, you must ensure that the project plan is comprehensive and covers all aspects of the project, including the scope, timeline, budget, and resources required. This will help to minimize the chances of unexpected issues or changes that could warrant going back to the planning phase. Another option is to communicate regularly with stakeholders or advisors. Regular communication with stakeholders can help identify potential issues early on and avoid surprises that could halt your entire project. This can be achieved through meetings, progress reports, and other communication channels. Lastly, a PM must be sure to define clear objectives and deliverables. This ensures that the project objectives and deliverables are explicitly outlined and agreed upon by all stakeholders. This will help to ensure that everyone is working towards the same goal and can avoid unnecessary changes to the plan.

I would plan different routes in terms of executing the project as well as planning testing phases to make sure that the team is on the right track. If the team can understand the requirements beforehand, then the execution process will go more smoothly. Reoccurring review meetings are also a must so that everyone can stay on track. If not, we can revise our approach according to the current situation. Communication is key in working with projects that have different aspects to them so if someone is lacking behind we can try to compensate for that.

As a project manager, avoiding the need to return to the planning phase after already beginning the execution phase is crucial for the efficiency of the project. Not only does returning to the planning phase hinder the progression of the project, but it may also affect certain outcomes within the project, especially when the project is flooded with specific deadlines. In order to steer clear of these results, project managers can employ various methods including developing a detailed project plan, holding regular progress reviews, and applying effective communication. When initially installing the project plan, it is important that the project manager invests sufficient amounts of time and effort to ensure that all aspects of the project are well-defined and understood by not only the employees, but the stakeholders as well. This includes establishing the objectives, scope, and timeline of the project. During the execution phase, which is the longest phase of a project's life cycle, the project's scope is carried out. Therefore, it is pivotal that everything about the project is clearly conveyed. Another important method to avoid returning to the planning phase would be to host regular progress reviews. By having a system to review important updates made throughout the execution phase, project managers open the opportunity to potentially catch any deviations from the plan early on. This in turn, will reduce the likelihood of having to spending time on significant rework later on. Lastly, just like any other phase, it is always important to implement effective communication. A project manager should encourage team members to raise any issues or concerns as soon as they develop.