Definition of goals in the “Six Interdependencies” playing field

4 min.

Summary

Project objectives are the establishment of requirements which are as quantified as possible and which must be met in order for a project to be considered successfully completed. Conflicts of objectives are to be avoided. An absolute prioritisation of the goals is recommended. In the case of objectives, one must always pay attention to the combination of SMART objectives, completeness of the objectives and, above all, the delimitation of benefit and non-objectives. An absolute prioritisation across all goals in order to be aware of one’s own priorities is helpful. In addition to the magic triangle, the aim is to distinguish between non-targets, benefit targets and now consciously the negative benefit targets as damage and to provide resource planning optimised for all organisations involved.

What are goals and how should they be?

Project objectives are the establishment of requirements that are as quantified as possible and that must be met in order for a project to be regarded as successfully completed. DIN 69901-5:2009-01 defines the project objective as “the totality of individual objectives achieved by the project”.
A complete definition of objectives requires the identification of all relevant stakeholders, which can lead to conflicts of interest. Conflicts of objectives are to be avoided, i.e. the different project objectives must fit together.
The magic triangle defines performance (including quality), costs and deadlines. The magic triangle is supplemented by further dimensions through the six interdependencies.
The goals are to be defined as SMART:

Specific/Simple Simple, understandable, concrete
Measurable Operationalized, quantified
Achievable/attainable Achievable, socially accepted, worthwhile
Realistic/Relevant Objectively attainable
Timeable/Timely Concretely planned in terms of time

Define objectives in a delimited way

Often there is talk of “never-saturated stakeholders”, I have experienced in practice that it helps to have absolute prioritisation across all goals in order to make people aware of their own priorities. In other words, in addition to the must-can-target categorization, a prioritization with a clearer definition of what is the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, … x most important goal is recommended.

One must always pay attention with the goals to the combination of SMART goals, completeness of the goals and above all the delimitation of benefit goals (= business benefits/business objectives) and also non-goals. A consideration of these target categories certainly helps to encourage the stakeholders to make a clear statement or to hold on to their expectations in advance, to commit them even better.

The benefit of the project can be defined by the benefit goals of the project. And just as with risks and opportunities, there is a positive and negative sign here. With the “Six Interdependencies” I have consciously chosen the negative sign (i.e. damage here) as the initial viewing angle, as with risk management, in order to deliberately provoke this lighting. In the past, benefits and thus benefit goals were often and well defined by project managers (in contrast to their performance goals).

Social goals

In my opinion, an example of “training on the job” within the framework of the project is a good example of a social goal that can be well defined in terms of objectives, provided that “training on the job” takes place during the course of the project. If, on the other hand, this “training on the job” takes place in the follow-up of the project on the basis of the use of the project object (e.g. use of the implemented software in everyday operations after the end of the project), it is a clear benefit goal and must also be defined as such. If, on the other hand, the training is essential for the implementation of the project, it is a performance goal, because otherwise the object of performance will not be completed or achieved.

Goals in the playing field of the Six Interdependencies

The supplemented interdependencies help my perception according to the clear definition of the project object and the demarcation by the use of this and the well definition of the basic conditions (context determination) in the framework of resources, damage and stakeholder satisfaction.

In my opinion, the Six Interdependencies bring more to light the things that have so far been defined, in part neglected, on the edge, next to the magic triangle, by benefit goals, resource planning (but so far only with the focus on the project and not as is now the case with the Six Interdependencies of the entire (parent) organization(s) involved). In practice, I have already achieved positive, more conscious and more complete goal definitions and delimitations. Thus the six interdependencies show all known practice-proven project methodical aids like magic triangle, in addition delimitation of not goals and use goals and now consciously the negative use goals as damage, conscious restriction of the resources and however not only for the project (as it happens classically with the resource planning primarily), but also for all organizations involved an optimized resource planning.

Thus, the Six Interdependencies are a combination of already known, previously independently considered influences and now additional consideration of damage and cross-organizational resource consideration together:

Six Interdependencies

Stakeholder Management as an Element of the Six Interdependencies

4 min.

Summary


In order to identify the right stakeholders of the project, the environment analysis is carried out as a precursor. The social environment factors are included in the stakeholder analysis and it is recommended to consider them according to the following dimensions: Power and conflict potential. The objective of the stakeholder analysis is to group the stakeholders in the individual quadrants of a 4-quadrant portfolio in order to represent a corresponding number of stakeholder strategies. If I consolidate the stakeholders in a stakeholder portfolio quadrant, I have the chance to plan a consolidated measure using the common strategy of the quadrant. Various sources of error in the preparation of the stakeholder analysis are pointed out.

What is a stakeholder?

As already mentioned in my “Six Interdependencies“, the consideration of stakeholders is an essential component for project success. Stakeholders are individuals, groups of people, organizations or the entirety of all those who are involved in the project, directly or indirectly affected by it or have a justified interest in it.

Environmental analysis as a basis for stakeholder analysis

In order to identify the right stakeholders of the project, the environment analysis is carried out as a precursor. The project environment analysis is a systematic, forward-looking consideration, observation and analysis of the positive (supporting) and negative (disruptive) influences of the project environment on the project, to be introduced as early as the initiation phase. A distinction is made between the social and factual environmental factors. A further distinction can be made between project-internal, project-external or company-internal or company-external factors. A differentiation exclusively between internal and external factors is not specific enough. Opportunities and risks in the further course of the project planning can be determined from the objective environmental factors and interfaces of the project can be made conscious.

Stakeholder analysis and its determination

The social environment factors are included in the stakeholder analysis and it is recommended to consider them according to the following dimensions: Power and conflict potential. Other dimensions such as influence, interest can be qualitative but not necessarily clearly grouping dimensions. Interest and influence can be positive, negative, high or low. The advantage of power and conflict potential is that they can be high and low, but not positive or negative at the same time. Why do we only want to record high and low values of the two dimensions and not e.g. values with very high, very low etc.? Low conflict potential stands for (potential or actual) promoters and high conflict potential for (potential or actual) opponents. In practice, a constant consideration of the (potential) opponents and promoters is necessary anyway.

The objective of stakeholder analysis is to group the stakeholders in the individual quadrants of a 4-quandrant portfolio in order to subsequently reflect a corresponding number of stakeholder strategies in it. It therefore makes sense to group the stakeholders in a portfolio into high and low power, high and low conflict potential. A direct allocation of stakeholder strategies can then take place directly.

Stakeholder strategies and their allocation in the portfolio

The following strategies can be included in a stakeholder portfolio:

  • Participative strategy based on participation and active involvement, communication and information of the project environment actors, e.g. joint decision making workshops,
  • discursive strategy, which (mostly reactive) is geared to the objective analysis of the project environment, e.g. by means of conflict resolution instruments,
  • repressive strategies characterised by the use of organisational, informational or factual power, e.g. management requirements or selective information.

For the fourth quadrant, it is recommended to provide for purely informational measures, which, however, do not represent a real strategy and are therefore not referred to as such.

A meaningful stakeholder portfolio thus looks as follows:

Stakeholder-Portfolio

Stakeholder strategies – why is that?

Why do I want to look at strategies and not just measures for each stakeholder? Measures per stakeholder are time-consuming and costly. If I now plan individual measures for each stakeholder, I have a complex bundle of measures. If, on the other hand, I consolidate the stakeholders in a stakeholder portfolio quadrant, I have the opportunity to plan a consolidated measure using the joint strategy of the quadrant.

Typical sources of error in stakeholder analysis

If stakeholder strategies are mapped on the basis of dimensions other than power and conflict potential, there is a danger that the stakeholders will not be clearly classified. If, for example, the stakeholder’s interest is highlighted instead of the power dimension, secretly positive, negative, high and low groupings are possible and therefore multiple allocation to portfolio quadrants is likely. I have observed this in many misguided stakeholder analyses.

Another problem can be the failure to conduct a continuous stakeholder analysis. You should always look at stakeholders anew. Shifts in power in a company can change the dimension of power, but above all the characteristics of the dimension of conflict potential can change again and again. The stakeholder’s potential for conflict with the project can change as a result of changes in attitudes towards the project as a result of project developments.

A renunciation of the combined indication of names or roles already in the environment analysis and then also in the transfer into the stakeholder analysis can lead to a generalization and to an overlooking of important characteristics. Mr. Mayer-Schulze can be a pedantic, conflict-laden comrade-in-arms, but his role as a user does not necessarily suggest this.

Grouped environmental factors such as “steering committee” instead of the performance of all individual steering committee members may lead to lump sums and thus the overlooking of specific interests and influences.

From the “Triple Constraints” to the “Six Interdependencies”

3 min.

Summary

The project objectives, the Magic Triangle, Triple Constraint or also called Objectives Triangle is a consolidated representation of the project objectives. In the course of time, a further target variable has been added to represent stakeholder satisfaction, especially client satisfaction. The project is carried out in the context of organisations. At least one organization provides resources in the form of project personnel and material resources. A simple resource planning of the project optimized for the project isolated from the context is not target-oriented. Further each project has not only positive aspects, but causes also a damage. These are the “six interdependencies” which also apply to agile project management approaches.

Origin and Development

The project objective variables, the magic triangle, triple constraint or also called objectives triangle is a consolidated representation of the project objectives on the basis of the measurement variables

  • scope or service,
  • cost (hours or person days and costs) and
  • time (duration and dates).

In the course of time, a further target variable has been added, which is to represent stakeholder satisfaction, especially customer satisfaction. An extension to the magic square did not take place, but was seen as an extension of the magic triangle.

A magic square in connection with project management was mistakenly included in the literature, in which the quality was recorded separately. However, we must clearly distance ourselves from this, since quality is inherently anchored in the aforementioned goals.

We can therefore state that there are at least four indicators for the success of a project: scope, time, cost and stakeholder satisfaction.

Project success in the context of the environment

The project will be carried out in the context of organisations. At least one organisation provides resources in the form of project personnel and material resources. These are also limited and it is a component of the planning duties and thus criterion of the project success, how effectively the project personnel and how careful/limited the project resources are used for the entire organization. Because the project personnel is often entrusted with other tasks in the line and / or the coworkers are just as urgently looked for in other projects. The material resources such as an excavator become just as important for the course of the project on another construction site, for example. A simple resource planning of the project optimized for the project isolated from the context is not goal-prominent. The optimization needs which the project director, the project portfolio manager or the specialist departments specify for project resources are not only a one-sided process. Perhaps the consideration of this interdependence resource optimization in project success would also nip in the bud the thought construct of “thinking of project members only as inputs”.

Every project not only has positive aspects, but also causes damage. For example, an implementation of software may lead to job losses. Or an environmental protection project for the creation of a new nature reserve leads to the loss of a farmer’s arable land. This causes damage to the farmer, even if he is certainly compensated for it. So here we have a clear contribution to the project success in this case with a negative sign. We cannot simply deduct this negative contribution from the performance. Here we would make it too easy for ourselves, because the service is the desired dimension of the client and automatically does not take the damage into account.

In addition to scope, time, cost and stakeholder satisfaction, we have now established two further success criteria such as resource optimization and project damage.

We have thus outlined the “Six Interdependencies”.

Six Interdependencies

Agility and the reflection of the Six Interdependencies

Now you might think the magic triangle was never relevant for me as an agile product owner anyway, because the performance is never relevant due to “fix” number of story points that can be processed in a sprint. This is deceptive and not really true, because by prioritizing the backlog the most important performance is of course defined as “part” of the project. Reprioritizing, adding or removing stories at the start of each sprint deliberately changes the performance of the project. So the six interdependencies are also likely to be relevant in agile practice.