Monitoring Project Progress : More than a series of feedback loops

Early detection that a program is not producing intended outcomes within planned time scales and budgets is of concern to all managers. The processes of monitoring actual progress against planned progress and the subsequent benefits to program management and its impact are often undervalued in program implementation planning. This paper will explore these processes discussing the value of planning sessions, determining accountability for evaluative decisions and corrective actions using responsibility matrices, and clearly identifying the program’s stages or sub projects. It will outline how decision-making flow charts, derived from these responsibility matrices, can provide feedback loops for assessment and corrective action. The implications for establishing these processes for the work of the internal evaluator will be surfaced. Introduction Traditionally project success, effectiveness and performance were related to the three principal criteria of attaining target dates, achieving financial plans and controlling the completion of the project to the specified quality. The foundation of this tradition corresponds to the management concept that effectiveness is related to the achievement of goals. In this way the success of a project corresponds to the effectiveness and efficiency of the project. Efficiency in economic terms refers to the maximisation of output for a given level of input or resources. Success represents a level of satisfaction with the achievement of the three criteria of on time, on budget and completion to specified quality. Today there is an evolution of these concepts. Besides the traditional mechanistic approach, other criteria are being analysed. Freeman and Beale(1992) for example revealed that the evaluation of the success of a project will vary with the type of the project. Belout (1998) lists twelve studies showing that the human factor is an important indicator of project success. De Wit (1988) distinguished between project success (measured against the objectives of a project) and project management success (measured against the traditional measures of performance against cost, time and quality). A second distinction is also important; it is the difference between success criteria (measures by which success of a project will be judged) and success factors (those inputs that lead directly or indirectly to the success of a project). (Cooke-Davies, 2002) These developments indicate that evaluation of a project and its success is more than the traditional mechanistic approach. Recognition of this has been incorporated into an Earned Value approach, that links budget and time constraints in project evaluation. The model in this paper incorporates the technical success factors of schedule, budget and task completion that form part of Earned Value approach. However, this model extends the evaluation to incorporate of the human and risk factors, which are also critical to a project’s success. This is done by using a modified version of the Balanced Scorecard evaluation tool. The Balanced Scorecard was developed as a tool of strategic management. With modification, it can become a useful tool of project management.