Setting the scope

Last time I talked about the use of an "aims grid" to ensure the purpose, end results and standards of your project are clear, as well as all the key actors or stakeholders. Another useful and simple technique for the early stages of a project is "scoping" – agreeing with your sponsor and other stakeholders what is "in" and what is "out" of scope for your project. It is like drawing a clear frontier or boundary round what your project is expected to cover.

As the project progresses, there may be all kinds of requests to add other bits and pieces to the scope of the project. Beware of the tendency to be helpful and agree. That way lies galloping "scope creep", where projects get pushed further and further off target and you find it harder and harder to meet deadlines. Skilful project managers say something like, "That is a request for a change to the original scope - we'll need to discuss its impact."

Three aspects of standards
A word about standards, before we go any further. The three classic aspects of standards, as I mentioned last time, are time, quality and cost. Your customer will no doubt want the best quality at the lowest cost in the shortest time. In reality, though, you can usually hit any two out of the three ideals. High-quality and fast? Yes, but it'll cost a lot. Fast and cheap? No problem, but the quality won't be good. These things need also need to be sorted out and agreed with your project sponsor as well as with the end users - the people who will eventually use what your project produces. As the project progresses, things may happen that will mean the original estimates and standards have to be changed. This usually involves some trade-offs. For example, if you are building a stadium for the Olympic Games, time is crucial. If for some reason there are delays during construction, either quality standards must be dropped or costs increased to ensure hitting the deadline. Keep the project's purpose in sight when you are managing trade-offs – don't just take snap decisions on an ad-hoc basis.

High quality and fast? Yes, but it’ll cost a lot. Fast and cheap? No problem, but the quality won’t be good.

Avoiding scope creep and deciding about trade-offs are both aspects of managing change during a project. And foreseeing possible changes and problems is an essential aspect of a project manager's job. You may think that being positive-minded is important for a manager. This is true, but only up to a point. Being realistic about likely problems and possible risks isn't being pessimistic; it is making sure that you can manage these risks pro-actively.

Some risks may not be realised, particularly if you take pre-emptive action. If the worst does happen, however, you need to have a contingency plan in place. Most project managers are expected to report on risks and problems they think might emerge, not just on progress they have made. Don't ever paint a picture that looks rosier than it should - it's sure to catch you out somewhere! The easiest way to assess the importance of risks is to draw an "impact-probability" matrix: impact high, medium, low plotted against high, medium, low probability. If you plot all risks you can think of on this table, you'll find that they scatter across it, perhaps clustering in certain squares. It's very helpful do this plotting with other people, to incorporate different points of view. Try writing the risks on post-its so you can move them around until you agree which square they should be in.