Organizing project control systems

Organizing project control systems Dragan 2 Milosevic

Improvements in the organization of project control is a major challenge facing project organizations today. In response, manage~lent in general is taking stock of ~~pproache~s in ~~~~~chthe ~mpr~~vements can be accomplished. This article describes vitul points of such an approach taken recent!y in a project constructed in the Middle East. Essentially, this approach includes systemsbased design and in~~?IeFnentati~~n of an organi~ati~~nal .s~~b.sy.stem of the project control ~syste~n, which could contribute to enhancement of‘productivity in the project organization as a whole. Ultimately, this article drrr1.s with project control within a matrix environment. Key~~~jrd,s: munageme~~t te~~~~li~il~e.s,project ment, project control, matrix organization

manage-

If’ one accepts the notion that a system can be used as the basis for describing project control, one could describe the system as a set of the following subsystems’: l l l l

organizational subsystem. process subsystem, information subsystem, cultural ambience system.

These subsystems are interrelated and interactive. Therefore, design and development of any of these subsystems cannot be isolated, but must be carried out within the entire project control system. Hence, in considering the organizational subsystem, and whenever necessary for understanding the entire problem. we shall also view other subsystems of the project control system.

76

02(7.3-7X6.?/X7/020076-03

$03.00 @ 1987 Butterworth

BASIC ORGANIZATIONAL PROJECT CONTROL

CONCEPT

OF

Project control in the matrix organization is far more complex than in the pure project ~~r~anizatioil. Since the plan is the foundation stone of control, project control begins with project planning?. In this connection, it is logical that the project planning function is performed by those involved in the project control function. During the project planning process, communication channels develop between participants in the process. These channels represent basic communication links also in project control. In the matrix environment, in addition to the project manager, other key managers in the project team and functiona managers participate in controlling the project. In the organization itself, different organizational levels perform control activities. Each organizational unit controls its performance irrespective of what project control requires. This leads to complexity of control in the matrix organization. There is a hierarchy of levels of control: in the matrix environment, these levels of control are related as shown in Figure 1. This essentially means that project control has to be concerted with controls on all managerial levels of the matrix organization. Because of this, and since most professionals report to their project manager, in a pure project organization the project manager has far greater latitude and flexibility ‘in controlling than the equivalent in the matrix orgal~ization.

ORGANIZATIONAL

STRUCTURE

Figure 2 represents a simplified chart of a global project organization of matrix type used for this project. This organization is structured around the project task, i.e. a simple project work breakdown structure (WBS) that divides a project into activities, and activities into work packages. The following organizational functions and

& Co (Publishers)

Ltd

Project

Management

I

Top management

I

I control

Project manager

Project team

Project team

Figure 1. Complexity of controls in matrix organization: + coordination required

units were incorporated organization:

in our model

top management, manager of projects, project manager, project control manager, activity managers, work package managers, other members of activity functional units.

global

project

groups,

In structuring this chart, the intent was to cover all of the most important organizational functions and units, while still having a simple and comprehensive chart.

ROLES IN PROJECT

CONTROL

Members of the global project organization worked together towards accomplishing the objectives of the project and individual project activities in consonance with the project plan. In so doing, they also performed project control functions. Who did what in terms of project control can be seen from roles of organizational functions and units (i.e. categories) involved. It was essential that, in defining individual and collective roles of these categories, there should be no doubt as to authority and responsibility for project control activities. Therefore, the project-functional interface has to be taken into account in’defining roles. Generally speaking, this interface meant that the would control performance of project manager members of the project organization in terms of ‘what’. ‘when’ and ‘how much’, while functional managers would control their performance in terms of ‘how well’, ‘where’ and ‘whoT3. The defining of roles was carried out by use of the

Vol 5 No 2 May I%7

direction

Project team

Project team

of control;

+ - +

interaction

of Contrd.~ -

linear responsibility chart (LRC) given in the Appendix. Structuring the LRC for project control comprised three steps. First, the categories involved were stated in the upper right-hand part of the LRC matrix. These categories were arranged so that categories belonging to the project organization were separated from those included in the nonproject part of the global organization, in order to depict the chart from Figure 2. The arrangement of categories obtained did not mean that categories from the project organization were in line relationship. In the second step, control tasks of the project control process were stated on the left-hand side of the LRC matrix’. These tasks were grouped according to stages of the control process to which they had belonged. This facilitated analysis and enhanced visibility of the LRC. The second step was also a prerequisite to integration of the process subsystem and the organizational subsystem of the project control planned for the next step. In the third step. matrix symbols were defined which related organizational functions and units (i.e. catcgories) with control tasks. This could be done in various ways, but each of them contained what is called ‘relationship: category-task’ or RCT. To define roles in the project control, five types of RCT were used.

l

Performs task/RCT (PT/RCT) is the real relationship between the organizational and the process subsystem of the project control. In simple terms, PT/ RCT means that the category performs (itself or through others) the control task in compliance with instructions received or detailed in project control procedures, etc. Approves task performance/RCT (ATP/RCT) represents the first level of operational control within the control function. In other words. the category pcr-

77

RCT results. Essentially, this is pure information transfer without coordination requirements. In short, the LRC obtained consisted of the categories (organizational functions and units), stage-wise arranged tasks of the project control process and RCT. The LRC defined relationships of categories in performing task of the project control process, integrated the process and the organizational system of project control.

any sub-

As with any other LRC, this one was limited to showing the category-task relationships that constituted the formal organization; it did not purport to reveal the infinite number of variations in human relations arising from the informal organization’. Despite this, the LRC served as a very good device for organization analysis. However, the greatest value of this LRC was the participatory process involved in its development Through a process of bringing together key members of the project organization to discuss how each category related to other categories and to the control tasks, much was gained in open communication, in conflicts resolution, in learning, in mutual understanding and in achieving consensus. Overall, this formed a basis for harmony and productivity of the project organization.

REFERENCES Figure 2. global project ~)rg~n~zati~i~:- - - fu~~~t~~~~l~~ managers’ control; c * + . . -+ interaction of controls coordination required; ~ project manager’s control forming ATP/RCT is administrative supervision over PTIRCT. ATP/RCT evaluates results achieved by PTlRCT on the basis of the policy established, instructions received, project control procedures. time schedules and other techniques of the managerial control. If there is no ATP/RCT symbol beside a task, it means that, being routine, the task often does not require ATPIRCT. General supervision/RCT (GS/RCT) is the second level of operational control, and the first level of policy making for PTIRCT. A category performing GSiRCT is administrative supervision over a category performing ATP/RCT. The primary role of GS/RCT is to formulate the policy framework for performance of ATPIRCT and PT/RCT, thus enabling them greater ~exibility in decision making in the process of achieving planned results of PTIRCT. To omit GS/ RCT from the control function of PT/RCT means that PT/RCT is rarely undertaken. Such exceptional cases have to be covered by the project procedures. Must be consulted/RCT (MBC/RCT) is information input into PTIRCT. To assign MBCiRCT to some matrix category means that the category must be consulted as to task performance; e.g. the category performing PT/RCT consults the category performing MBC/RCT regarding quality of the activity results expected. Must be informed/RCT (MBT/RCT) is information output from PTIRCT. To label a category with MBIi RCT means that it is important for that category to receive some special or timely information on PT/

78

MiloSeviC, D Z ‘Kako poveCati efikasnost kontrole projekata’ Poslu~n~ Pufitika Vol XIV, No 9 (1985) pp 59-61 Stuckenbruck, L C The implementation of project management: the professional’s handbook AddisonWesley, USA (1981) D I and Kocaoglu, D F ~ngir~eer~~?g Cleland, ~nffnage~ne~~tMcGraw Hill, USA (1981) Hed, S R Projecf control manual Sven R Hed, Switzerland (1973) Cleland, D 1 and King, W R Systems anal.y.sis and project management McGraw Hill, Japan (1983)

APPENDIX: LINEAR RESPONSIBILITY CHART OF PROJECT CONTROL SYSTEM GLOBAL

PROJECT ORGANIZATION

CATEGORY/TASK RELATIONSHIP SYMBOLS 0

PERFORMS

0

APPROVES TASK PERFORMED

TASK

0

GENERAL

A

MUST

BE

+

MUST

BE 1NFORMED

TO BE

SUPERVISION CONSULTED

1 I

CONTROL

STUDY 1 PROJECT ___..___. 2 ESTABLISH ‘-CHANNELS

TASKS

IN

THE

PROJECT

INIlIAL

STAGE

HISTORY COMMUNICATION WITH EMPLOYER

I HOLD KICK-OF MEETING WITH EMPLOYER

Project

M~ll~~lgernent

1 4. DEVELOP

SET UP PROJE 5 “PcnL,,,nrlnrl VI\“_IIIL~,

1

t

PROJECT

PLAN

I VI

CONTROL

l2131L151617i819110~

TASKS

IN

THE

,“I”

KICK-

OFF

DECQE “CHANGES

~-

WHETHER PROJECT PLAN PROPOSALS ARE NEEDED

DEVELOP COORDiNATlON PROCEDURE ISSUE PROJECT 8 rnNTDnl PPnCEDURES

42,MAKE PROJECT PROPOSALS DECIDE 43.CROSSlNG

ON PLAN CHANGES PROJECT LIMITS

g START MATION

DECIDE 44CRDSSING

ON PLAI PRO. ~~

Ill-L

.~1.

ESTABI .ISHING INFORSYSTEM ,* nrrnn*cr U-I+,=

“. THE

ASING TAKE THE

”

PROJECT

lZ.DEVELOP

DETAILED

,3,

PLANS OF ACTIVITIES

EXPLAIN ACTIVITY

”

q

PLANS

SCOPE / WORK

,5

ISSUE AN EXECUTION

III

CONTROL

1

1

1 Cl

OF PACKAGE

TASKS

0

q IN

PROJECT

THE

ACTIVITIES

WITH

20PARTICIPATE

REOUEST CHANGES

IV

CONTROL

TASKS

SUBSTAGE

1 A

1

o+

EXECUTION

1

o

+

o

o

o

0

0

0

0

0

c)

I 1

STAGE

PROJECT

PROJECT

OF GATHERING

CONTROL OF

CONTROL

INFORMATION

)

INFORMATION

1

2L.KEEP

PERMANENT CONTACTS PROJECTS TEAM MtMBERS --.

THE

PROJECT

,,

LOG

KEEP FOLOW UP DOCUMENT ON WORK PACKAGES WITHIN AN ACTIVITY

27. KEEP

THE

ACTIVITY

28.KEEP

THE

WORK

IV.2

SUBSTAGE

3L, GATHER ACTUAL

OF

v.

CONTROL

,

PERIODICAL

AND

IN THE

0

0

0

0

0

e

101

0

0

STAGE

0

A’.

SCREEN OUT KEY DOCUMENTATION

PROJECT

DECIDE TO DISSOLVE 50. ORGANIZATION

CONTROL

56 ;~&:N 152 IhlPLEMENT

THE

~R”o”J~~~~o”,‘,R”,“,“~&c~~ IMPROVEMENT

I

1

I

I

1

1

I

.OAAA

0

0

1

I 0

I*

0,

l

l

1

0

Oily+

.

o

q

FEEDBACK

I 1.

o

0

0

+

’ + I

0

l

I (-) I I

o

I

I

. .

+ STAGE

.

lo

I

l

’

PRomsAL

OF IMPLEMENPROPOSAL

I I

0

I

I

/

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

+

This linear responsibility chart includes only execution stage of the project life cycle. ‘Performs task‘. as assigned in column ‘9. tasks 31 and 40. means the tasks were pert’ormed hy the project changes committee not included in the organizational chart from Figure 2 and the LKC

0

REPORTiNG

q

OF

0

0~

TERMINATION

PREMATURE

IN

0

0

o

ON PROPOSAL OF PREPROJECT TERMINATION

TASKS

STAGE

l q

PROJECT PROJECT

REPORT ON EFECTS 58 TING IMPROVEMENT

0

0

PROGRESS

INFORMATION ON PROJECT STATUS

TASKS

q

LOG

MAKE PROGRESS REPORT 35. DISTRIBUTE IT TO USERS

0

0

LOG PACKAGE

0

00

KEEP DOCUMENTS ON THE ACilVl25.TIES AND WORK PACKAGES FOLOW UP 26

.

‘+

0

0

I-,

23,MAlNTAIN WITH KEY

,

TERMINATION

0

MAKE PROPOSAL HOW TO 55. IMPROVE PROJECT CONTROL

GATHERING

1 o(

TERMINATION

lRE)ESiABLISH ORGANIZATIONAL 54.PROJECT CONTROL KNOW HOW

0

I

CONSTRUCTION

‘8.

IVIII.

0

0

CARRY OUT DECISION TAKEN ON 53 PREMATURE PROJECT TERMINATION

•~~oo

PERMANENT

/

NOT

THE

APPROVE PROJECT CONSTRUCTION REPORT

DECIDE 52. MATURE

000000 OF ACTI-

‘411.1. NORMAL

IN

MAKE PROPOSAL OF 51. PROJECT TERMINATION

*00000

0

TASKS

1 Vll.2.PREMATURE

lol

q l

0’

Cl I

42 RMEApK;R;ROJECT

+

.

q

MEETINGS

THE

OF

0

l~lol*lololol

FOR

22.KEEP RECORD OF RESULTS VITIES/ WORK PACKAGES

IV.1.

1

0

EMPLOYER

IN PROJECT

SUBMIT 2’ PROJECT

1

A

ACTIVIIIES

,8, COMMUNICATE WITH NON-PROJECT PART OF THE ORGANIZATION I$.COMMUNICATE

10

A

oo**+4

q

ON

1 .

A

0

PROJECTS 1

ESTABLISH COMMUNICATION THE ACTIVITIES EXECUTION

1 A

0

CHANGES

CONTRACTS FOR AND BM r~tn IO KESPO~

VII.CONTROL

+

PLAN

PROJECT .

CARRY OUT PROJECT PL, GES AND SUBMIT THEMTO RESPOh

CHANGE ~RIsDUR~ES

EXECUTION

.00l000

0

ORDER FOR OF ACTIVITIES

16 EXECUTE ”

ACTIVITIES

PART IN REVIEWING PROJECT PLAN

DEVELOP REMAINING

OF

q

Lo REVIEW THE REPUESTS,DECIDE ON MINORCHANGES,GIMPROPOSALOFllRJOR CHRNGES

CT

6 HOLD IN-HOUSE MEETING

__,.

STAGE

I A

0

CONTROL

INFORMATION

EVALUATION] I

COMPARE ACTUAL WITH PLANNED o 36 STATUS FOR YOUR PART OF PROJECT WBS

o

o

32 DETERMINE ACTUAL DEVIATION FROfl o PLANNED SIATUS FOR YOUR PART OF WBS

o

o

18 ~~!ZOT~END “r

OF

YOUR

3g DEFINE FOR YOURCORRECTIVE PART OF

Vol

PART I

“V_J

5 No 2 May

ACTIONS WBS

I%7

0

0

0

0

I

; o 1 I o

1 o

1o

o

o

o

o

010 010 0 1

0

1

0

I

0

I

1

o/o/

79