OGL 320/Module 2 Paper

Joellen Leichner

In assessing the top five reasons projects fail, the first thing that came to mind for me is

not having the right people in place. It is as essential to choose the right project manager as it is

to choose the right team. Because the team manager is responsible for all aspects of the project,

he/she must be knowledgeable concerning the area in which the project is being done, networked

well enough that they know the top performers in each of their respective departments, and that

they understand and can communicate effectively and thoroughly to the team the scope,

schedule, and budget to the all of the other stakeholders, and finally that they can communicate

effectively and efficiently with all levels of the team from the sponsor, team lead, or any one of

the workers on the team throughout each phase in order to complete and close the project.

Because of this, this is my first risk. Not having the right people in the right position or working

on the job.

In our video this week, it stated that you needed to “get the right people on the bus and in

the right seats.” One recent experience I had with a project manager at work was one in which

the wrong person was put in place, and the project went over the scheduled time and was not

well planned or executed from the beginning. This project manager was unfamiliar with our

organization's request for proposals (RFP) process, and she was unfamiliar with the new

software that we now use for our grants. She called me to meet with me to learn more about the

software, so we met in her office for about an hour, and I explained our process on how we do

our grants using the software, but she decided not to use the software because she thought it

would be more cumbersome because she had to learn it to use it. I offered to help her load it

initially, but she wasn’t very motivated to do so. At the last minute, the sponsor decided they

wanted to use the software for security and accountability, and she then called me numerous

1
 OGL 320/Module 2 Paper
Joellen Leichner

times with singular questions. Still, she didn’t communicate the full scope of the project, which

brings me to my number two.

A second reason that projects often fail is the need for clear and concise communication,

especially in the planning and implementation phase and the need for complete transparency. By

hoarding critical information and not sharing what she was trying to accomplish from the

beginning, it was difficult to know which way to guide her. She didn’t want to share her full

project goals and current status, which was detrimental to the whole project and outcome. It is

better to share ideas, experiences, and even failures to better understand how to avoid them.

Thirdly, she was slow to react to the sponsor request to change from manually

completing the work process to that of using the organization's grant software. She then had to

quickly learn and load the RFP herself without the knowledge of what the software was capable

of and how to manipulate it to do what she needed to complete the process. When the projects

were already through their departmental process and scientifically reviewed, she asked that I

bring them to each discipline group for approval.

My fourth reason that projects fail would be that the project manager does not understand

the operating environment, regulations, and policies, and the risks associated with a project

before taking it on. Because people are unaware of the required processes needed, extensive

amounts of time can be lost backtracking to accomplish this. In this instance, she was unaware

that each study required prioritization and scientific review and had not communicated with

anyone else. Because of the absence of communication, this then caused additional long delays

in the award recipients being allowed to open their studies because they had not gone through the

institutionally required process. The departmental meetings are only held once a month, so if

2
 OGL 320/Module 2 Paper
Joellen Leichner

that department had held their monthly meeting already, she was now delayed on her schedule

further until the next month’s meeting. So, I helped her get them through this part of the process,

and then she indicated that they had already been reviewed; however, none of the reviewers had

filled out the required form. So that took additional time for each one to complete the forms,

sign them, and return them to us. Many of these missteps could have been avoided had we

worked together collaboratively to plan out the project, identify pitfalls, and then load the

information into the software properly. It is usually at that point of loading the RFP where many

errors or missteps are caught and modified to alleviate risks. By not managing the triple threat of

scope, schedule, and budget well, the grant opened late, they were rewarded behind schedule,

and all of these processes made the projects opening status run beyond what it should have. In

the end, this cuts short the amount of time the investigator has to complete the study and

completely exhaust the funding.

Finally, my fifth reason for failed projects is because they should have been in line with

institutional goals. In this example, they were funded by a specific department for use in that

department, and not aligned with the broader organizational goals. Had their departmental

funding goals been better aligned with the organizational goals, I feel that she would have had

additional resources available to her. Additionally, she would have had access to a more

extensive network of professionals with expertise in her project area to help get the project

properly planned, implemented, and closed on time. Because this project manager didn’t have

the backing of the institution, she was a team of one, hired without a thorough knowledge of the

process, and unprepared for the challenges that usually surface during any new project. She tried

to rope in the right people to help her along the way but didn’t offer those people enough

information to assist in the planning and implementation phase fully. This eventually caused

3
 OGL 320/Module 2 Paper
Joellen Leichner

many delays, loss of time for the investigators, and potentially loss of funds depending on the

close date for the projects. Additionally, when these projects have extensive delays, start late,

and go over their allotted time schedule, they also quite often end over budget as well;

occasionally, ending without completion due to lack of additional funding. This is usually where

alignment with institutional goals plays a large part, because they can often help with

supplemental funding mechanisms to get the project across the finish line.

It seems evident that one of the main reasons this project failed was due to the wrong

person in the wrong position. Without a knowledgeable, well networked, and institutionally

backed project manager, the project was likely to have many pitfalls and an even higher

likelihood that it would run long, over budget, or even close before the study objectives are met.

Being transparent and collaborative during the planning and implementation phase would have

been very helpful in the long term for this project manager in mitigating risk, being more

efficient with her time, and the time of others pulled in to support her. Another suggestion

would be to initiate idea sharing so that those more experienced and knowledgeable could have

suggested options or offered expertise before the projects were in trouble. These experts could

have assisted her in navigating the changes from the manual process to the electronic software,

and again, through the policy, regulations, and procedures required by the institution for

approving such projects. And finally, with institutional goal alignment, there are additional

resources that can be allocated and networks that can be utilized for expert knowledge and input.