RESUME HOW TO FAIL IN PROJECT MANAGEMENT

(WITHOUT REALLY TRYING)

By Shelly Deviana Hakim (29113362)/YP50B
Project management techniques have been widely used by organizations to
accomplish various tasks. More and more companies who understand the benefits provided
project management, including rapid product development, the use of better and more
efficient than all of the resources, and the increase in cross-functional communication and
more productive. These organizations find that the techniques of project management
becomes an integral part of their operations.
In a continuing effort to project management skills better and techniques, experience
plays an important role which consists of both positive and negative consequences. Why
inspect the project and catastrophic failure in the first place? There are certain subjects that
produce valuable data in relation to future projects.
Because each project is unique. As a result, each project, if not managed properly, can
have a direct negative effect on the parent company. The actual cause of failure in most
projects fail is often difficult to ascertain. It is indeed unfortunate, especially considering the
fact that the cause is finally do surface, although systematic damage control procedures many
companies'. The second lesson is equally clear: Where there is a failure, there is the potential
to learn. It says, in essence, that failure will not be ruled out, but studied. Learning from
mistakes-learn how to do it. The converse is also true: Learn what is not working and then
avoid it in the future
A QUICK GUIDE TO RUINING YOUR PROJECT
Not every project achieved the success it deserves. Conversely, not every project in the
direction of a pile of garbage arrive. However, when we consider the activities and decisions
that can play an important role in the failure of the project, research and experience points
several important causes of project failure. Consider a list of a dozen surefire method to ruin
your chances of project success.
1. Ignore the project environment (including stakeholders).
One of the best ways to submit a project to failure is almost certain to manage
regardless of the external environment, including project stakeholders and external groups
that have been called "intervenors" who can play an important role in success or failure.
In many cases, problems can occur when an organization project forget their client base
or think they know more than their stakeholder groups. One clear message that came
through time is a valid power of stakeholder groups such as support or thwart the success

of the project development. Reasonable is to remember that not all external stakeholders
of the organization. Many projects have been derailed because of opposition (either overt
or covert) of the group or other functional operating divisions.
Before the "go" decision, one very important factor that must be considered: the
organization's internal environment for the acceptance of the proposed project. If there is
suspicion of disharmony vague, it is important to take time to reassess the reasons and
take corrective action, including working with groups of stakeholders to understand their
concerns or make the necessary adjustments to the project.
2. Push a new technology to market too quickly.
New technology means new and unknown risks. Sometimes the appeal first to market
with new technologies cause companies to cut corners, the safety factor marginalize, or
make a sacrifice quality. In the end, though, this decision almost always comes back to
haunt the company executives, sometimes with tragic results. New technologies are very
tempting to exploit for exactly the reasons that: They are new. They offer powerful legs
above the competition. Unfortunately, in the rush to push this new design or technical
achievement, there is a strong possibility that adequate pretesting or a glance that can lead
to disaster. There must be a balance between being the first to market and ensure that the
product will perform in a positive, expected way. When a project is developed too
quickly, to the point where there is a potential questions about its performance, it is a
threat to society and therefore should not be interpreted as the quality offered.
3. Dont bother building in fallback options.
All projects have trouble at one time or another. When the problem begins to impede
progress, one of the tests of good project management is how quickly the project was
brought back on track. A logical exercise in which the project manager should be
involved to keep asking for a series of "What if?" Question. This will force the project
manager and the team to look for problem areas tend to be active rather than waiting for
trouble to find them and their responses to them are more successful than those operating
on a purely reactive, waiting until a problem occurs before the weight of their responses,
however, successful project managers are those the most able to adapt to the new situation
with flexibility, look for opportunities, and bring their projects back up to speed quickly.
4. When problems occur, shoot the one most visible.
Problems with the project, especially in large scale, tend to push the panic element of
top management. Often leads to panic because the results will come and regrettable:
spontaneous sanctions key personnel. Once the top management in a state of panic, it is

common to see a head start rolling, starting with project managers and others are clearly
visible as part of the decision-making team. In the absence of a clear inability or behavior,
but the consequences of such extreme reactions should clearly be considered before any
further action. Because the learning curve, it takes longer to bring new personnel up to
speed on the project, delaying further into the future. Before making changes to
personnel, asking the question, "What we achieve with this change?"
Their attitude can best be summed up by the dictum, "Fix the problem, not the
blame." Blame game involves, counterproductive and ultimately vicious cycle does little
to solve the problem that brought the project to its current state. Although there is no
doubt that in the face of ongoing problems with the project it was tempting to show
decisive action in the form of reorganization and punish, it is important to first consider
the reasons for such action. Project managers are constantly looking over their shoulders
out of paranoia and fear of retaliation could not take the risk and the necessary actions in
ways to promote the success of the project.
5. Let new ideas starve to death from inertia.
The other hand push the new technology out the door without having to spend
considerable time assessing problem areas is to enable new products to remain in a
holding pattern indefinitely. For example, the Xerox Alto personal computer, due to a
combination of politics and bureaucratic obstacles, Xerox Alto never developed into a
commercial product, so the expense of millions of profits over the next two decades. How
a company does successfully created a surefire winner and then sit on it? Of inertia
organization plays a role. There is no clear path to bring this product to market and Xerox
executives do not have the desire to take a gamble. Furthermore, the training of their top
management teams dominated finance. The result is a clear Xerox willingness to forgo a
great advantage to take the safe route. Due to lack of willingness to take risks, Xerox lost
its dominant position in the personal computer. The rest, as they say, is history.
6. Dont bother conducting feasibility studies.
Why bother checking the feasibility study? Obviously, the answer to any of these
questions is because failing to do so is one of the surest path to failure of the project.
Feasibility planning implies an organization doing homework advance to put himself in a
position to conclude a successful project. The feasibility study and the project manager
requires top management to devote sufficient time to understand the project risk analysis,
cost analysis, completion period, stakeholder analysis, and other relevant information
before funding is approved. Benefit eligibility accurate planning and reasonable is that the

company is locked into planning mode, then execution. This approach is equivalent to
"Ready, aim, fire" model that describes the company effective. Alternative, "Ready, fire,
aim," leading to an incredible amount as waste project after the project started with only
minimal advance assessment.
7. Never admit a project is a failure.
Project failure occurs due to mismanagement, miscalculation, or a fundamental
change in the external environment. Recognize the state of arrival difficulties and failures,
while companies are reluctant to retreat. Wrongful act is to overreact to the belief that
throwing more money at the project would "buy" success, unless the project is really
suffering from a shortage of funds, increasing the budget usually will not bring the kind
of return expected. The first step to do is to do a realistic analysis of where the current
project, how it happened, and how additional funding can bring it back on target. When
the termination decision must be made, the willingness to admit mistakes is required.
When problems similar project a clear and irrecoverable, it is important not to throw good
money after bad. When the patient's recent resurgence, admit it, learn the relevant lessons,
and move on.
8. Overmanage project managers and their teams.
Large companies, laden with layers of oversight and bureaucracy, getting into some of
the worst settings to achieve a cutting-edge innovation. Size and organizational inertia
makes it almost impossible to react quickly or accelerate the transfer of technology to
exploit commercial opportunities.
The term "lean and mean" has come into our vocabulary regarding the types of
organizations that enjoy better than average success with new product development.
Organization lean and mean not layered himself in the mantle of bureaucracy. It is
flexible and has driven decision-making authority to lower levels, where the project
manager can make product development decisions without endless rounds of view and
modify.
9. Never, never conduct post-failure reviews.
Failure teaches us some valuable lessons, as long as we can examine them objectively
and non-maintained. Some of the most effective head of project management organization
are those who painstakingly project manager can run them back through the process of
developing the failure to see where the wheels fell off the wagon. This process should not
be accused, but instructive. One of the best techniques which we have witnessed is used
by the project director who develop chronic failures of the past and the cause.

Consider the alternative: Ignore the evidence and lessons from the failure of past
projects and treat each situation and challenges as unique and not previously understood.
The result was predictable-they point to the difference between a manager with ten years
experience and one with one year of experience ten times. Obviously such an attitude
cannot be in the best interests of the company. Nor does it help the career of a project
manager, especially in the long term. Learning from mistakes become more than just a
personal luxury; it is a duty.
10. Never bother to understand project tradeoffs.
Like it or not, when managing a project we are often faced with a series of alternative
tastes. This trade-off often come to a "dollar-days" determination. In other words, to what
degree are we willing to sacrifice money in exchange for our schedule, and vice versa?
This question refers to the nature of the trade-off decisions project: They are often
balancing act between rival (and apparently equally attractive) demands. Do we
understand the implications of bumping into a project? Do we take the time to consider
the budgetary impact of such a decision? If the answer to either or both of these questions
is no, obviously we do not make decisions on the basis of rational insight. Difficult
decision is additional revenue from project management. Uninformed decision, however,
is his curse.
11. Allow political expediency and infighting to dictate crucial project decisions.
In the politicized environment most companies, a number of potentially important
decisions are motivated much more by personal agendas rather than by the desire to meet
the needs of the company as a whole. The nature of political decision-usually emphasize
the parish needs, even at the expense of overall organizational effectiveness.
Project decisions are made on the basis of the game of power and maintain the
prerogative of the executive will certainly be less effective. As a result, this project
became a pawn in a larger hostage, the game is more personal gain and maintain power.
In such circumstances, it is not surprising that the environment is too political to have a
much more difficult time in successfully developing innovative projects.
12. Make sure the project is run by a weak leader.
The term "weak leader" is oxymoronic. Leadership is an important element in the success
of the project. In the absence of a strong leader to keep operating in the path of the project
team, most of the projects started experiencing emptiness confusion, orders were given
and withdrawn, and common sense without a purpose. Weak leader not only help to
successfully complete a project, they actively counterproductive.

The key is the project leader. It was one of those who must make the project a success by
marshaling the resources, personnel motivating the team, negotiating with stakeholders,
cheerleaders development process, and constantly keep an eye on the main prize: the
project was successfully completed. Naturally, when described in this case, it is not
surprising that successful project managers are a special breed, one of which needs to be
carefully cultivated and maintained in our company. His role in the development of a
successful project is almost always very visible.
In the end, what conclusions can we draw from this case and this guide on how to ruin
a project? First, the failure of which is often a product of risky venture. Projects often
involve technologies that have not been tested or novel and processes. The risk of
technical failure is always present in such situations. Furthermore, the project
organization disrupt the status quo. They operate outside the formal channels with a
diverse group of individuals while being pulled together for one purpose, and often
violate the political relationship and the chain of command set. Given the environment in
which many projects in operation, it is not surprising that failure is a very real possibility
with a business project. The second conclusion is that past failures should not prevent us
from efforts in the future. Despite the failures of the past that we gain experience and
wisdom to lead to a successful conclusion. The final example of the failure of the project
of the famous (and not so famous) gives us the opportunity to point to the relevant lessons
that can be derived from their studies. No project is worth analyzing if it does not have an
object lesson on offer. This article is a collection of object lessons, drawn from several
different types and several different projects. They all share one common characteristic in
that, through some degree of mismanagement, they failed.
This last point is important: There are lessons to be learned from the failure, if only
we are willing to pull them. The first step is to learn exactly what the project "failed" has
come to mean. That is the easy part. Much more difficult is to take the next logical step
and looking in to the cause, especially when mistakes worn comfortably similarity to our
own past experiences. It is, however, an honest assessment is that we can come closest to
decrease the strength of this article and its lessons.