Who is responsible for IT project results?

Many of the business owners and managers that I talk to are frustrated with the results that they get from IT projects. They take too long, they cost too much, they don't do what the business owner or manager want to do. Even with those who are relatively satisfied with the results aren't getting what they should be. I see many businesses who are satisfied with the results when so much more is available..

Why does this happen?

The reason is that there are three conflicting goals in any project. They are conflicting because even though everybody believes that they are all important, they compete for resources, for attention, for focus. The three are:

• Implementation of the software and processes to get the improvements that your business is looking for.
• Achieving the business goals for which the software and hardware was purchased.
• Running the day-to-day business.

The first goal gets all of the attention. Usually a project manager is assigned, and she knows that she must get the software installed in order to have a successful project. If the project manager is your software supplier, his goal is to get paid. What is a successful project? At best, the software delivers the functionality that was requested, at the cost that was estimated, in the time that was planned. Why did I say at best? Because if that is the criteria for success why was the business doing it? A lot of consultants have studied IT project success. In these studies, although there have been improvements over the past ten years, aprroximately 30% succeed, 40% have limited success, and 40% are outright failures. Even with those successful projects, they achieve less than they could have. The project manager typically owns this goal and tries to keep everybody focused.

The third goal, running the business, has to get attention. It is what brings in the money. It pays for the purchase of the software, which is supposed to improve business performance. The first goal competes with the third goal, because they both need resources (people, time and money). Few businesses have periods of downtime that allow them to reallocate resources to projects during slow times. Most of the time, both peak at the same time. In addition, implementing new software and learning new ways of doing things reduces productivity. So you have peak resource needs for the project, peak resource needs for running the business and low productivity. This problem exists in large companies that can afford to throw extra people at the project. It really hurts the small business. The business unit manager is responsible for this goal and tries to keep everybody focused on it.

The second goal is the biggest challenge. the reason all of this started is that the business owner wanted to improve performance. The software was purchased for this purpose. The assumption that was made, was that if the software was acquired, the business would be better off. The question that was missed is "how will the business improvements be achieved?". This may seem to be obvious, but it seldom is. Because nothing was specified as to how it would be achieved, the implementation of the software becomes the only goal. People lose touch with why it is being done. Since the business owner is not involved in the day-to-day activities, and seldom wants to get involved in the detailed activities of the project, there is a big gap.

This gap is the source of the problems. There is a focus on the delivery of the software. There is a focus on delivery of service to the customer. There is no focus on the business benefits.

The solution must come from the leadership team. The owner and senior managers must set the goal (to improve sales, reduce costs, improve service, etc.). They must ensure that everybody understands how the software will help to improve performance. They must maintain this focus throughout the project, because everybody will forget. If they do that, two things will happen:

• The software will deliver the business results.
• They will be surprised by the extent of the improvements.