<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.5" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why Projects Fail</title>
	<link>http://www.reformingprojectmanagement.com/2005/02/06/456/</link>
	<description>The magazine for the project age</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 03:03:08 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.5</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Graeme Nichol</title>
		<link>http://www.reformingprojectmanagement.com/2005/02/06/456/#comment-2184</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Dec 2005 17:07:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.reformingprojectmanagement.com/2005/02/06/456/#comment-2184</guid>
					<description>Building a new piece of software or configuring a package certainily need user involvement from day one.

In typical IT projects project management is done very tightly on MS project and the real human interaction issues cannot be tightly worked in so they fall out. Projects fail.

There unfortunately needs to be a level above project planning where the ultimate outcome is determined, measured and reported on. (not a program office type role) This is a more strategic role. This has to involve multiple stakeholders and manage expectations.

Even with that projects can still fail!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Building a new piece of software or configuring a package certainily need user involvement from day one.</p>
<p>In typical IT projects project management is done very tightly on MS project and the real human interaction issues cannot be tightly worked in so they fall out. Projects fail.</p>
<p>There unfortunately needs to be a level above project planning where the ultimate outcome is determined, measured and reported on. (not a program office type role) This is a more strategic role. This has to involve multiple stakeholders and manage expectations.</p>
<p>Even with that projects can still fail!!
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Jim Bullock
        </title>
		<link>http://www.reformingprojectmanagement.com/2005/02/06/456/#comment-289</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Dec 1969 16:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.reformingprojectmanagement.com/2005/02/06/456/#comment-289</guid>
					<description>
        Yes, we need a common sense for projects that tracks with, well, the way the world actually works.

That said, the FBI project sounds a lot more like a mostly-integration project, than a mostly-software project. That's one step to common sense - talk about the project in terms of what's in it. Human practices and humane project organizations help people talk about what's really going on. It's necessary, but not sufficient, however.
      </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, we need a common sense for projects that tracks with, well, the way the world actually works.</p>
<p>That said, the FBI project sounds a lot more like a mostly-integration project, than a mostly-software project. That&#8217;s one step to common sense - talk about the project in terms of what&#8217;s in it. Human practices and humane project organizations help people talk about what&#8217;s really going on. It&#8217;s necessary, but not sufficient, however.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
