The dark art of project management

In the wonderfully weird American indy movie, Donnie Darko, a cool American high school teacher informs the film’s teenager hero that one phrase is objectively the most beautiful in the English language. No, it’s not ‘I love you’. It is ‘cellar door’.

Opinions on the subject may differ; but I’ll guarantee some of the phraseology I picked up last week at Sheffield Hallam University won’t be giving ‘cellar door’ a run for its money anytime soon.

Take ‘logical framework sequences’ for example. If ‘cellar door’ is beautiful, ‘logical framework sequences’ are not. It’s exactly the sort of syntax that would get blood boiling at the Plain English Campaign. But given the phrases which have crept into common parlance during the recent financial crisis (‘collateralised debt obligations’ anyone?) perhaps fewer eyebrows would have been raised than six months ago!

We were in Sheffield for a marathon four-day session on organisational skills for sustainable communities: the so-called ‘soft skills’. Project Management, partnership working, assertiveness training, leadership skills and team working were all part of the module… so far, so plain English!

And so far, so useful. This is an area which the course has promised to deliver on and has. Some of what was covered – especially leadership skills, chairing meetings and assertiveness training – were not new to me but they were an excellent refresher and the opportunity to pick up some handy tips. I have never known such freedom in purging emails without simply hitting ‘delete all’, or in learning how to say “no” to the senior management team!

For one full day, our attentions were focused upon exploring the essential principles of project management including the approaches of the ‘Project Cycle Management’ and ‘Prince2’ systems.

As a trainee architect, project management is part and parcel of what I do, so it’s not surprising that this element of the module was of particular interest, if only to show me where I have been going wrong!

For the uninitiated, I should probably explain the differences between the two approaches. Prince2 ultimately focuses upon an output – that is, delivering an end product; say a building. For Project Cycle Management, however, outputs are matched against ‘desirable’ outcomes. The theory is simple – establish desirable outcomes at the outset then work backwards; praying that the output will continue to support established outcomes. If only the application was as straightforward.

Although the art of successful project management may be in the ability to devolve responsibility; this, with the continuous review against outcomes forces all groups to communicate, with the project manager being the conduit for information flow.

By way of example, I am currently working on a project to build a £5 million youth centre in the Belle Isle area of south Leeds. Funded by the Big Lottery, it is located in an area that has seen its fair share of abandonment over the years.

So what lessons might our two approaches to project management offer? Under Prince2, the chosen output – in this case the new building – is paramount. But then, if you take the Project Cycle Management approach, those desirable outcomes come to the fore. For the community in Belle Isle that means the delivery of essential services and initiatives aimed at promoting healthy eating, greater participation in sport, better sexual health, reduced truancy and lifelong learning opportunities. These can only be achieved by an approach which clearly focuses on these defined outcomes – and by engaging those with a vested interest in making them happen. Project Cycle Management does. Prince2 doesn’t. Another lesson I have learned is that both systems require a lot of paperwork. I suppose you can’t have everything!

This is the fifth blog from Richard Oliver in a series about the Academy’s foundation degree.