Services > Project Management: The 5 Key Phases
Project Management: The 5 Key Phases
Development of a strategy for government agencies is an often forgotten or low priority. There is little time, few resources, external political forces and the pressures of day-to-day management that often distract even the best department leaders from this important function. WhysSolutions takes this function seriously and offers government leaders a staff that will collaborate in gaining an understanding of the core business needs of an agency.
The WhysSolutions approach is comprised of a thorough assessment of the Mission of an agency with an eye on envisioning new opportunities, new technologies and approaches to achieving the objectives of the agency. An important part of developing strategy is to encourage department leaders to remove the blinders, offer new perspectives, set aside the “myth of permanence,” and eliminate or, at least, recognize the impediments that may stand in the way of accomplishment.
Once an agency has focused on a particular project or series of projects to help achieve its Mission, each project must be approached separately, and the 5 phases of successful project management must be applied to each project. The 5 Phases are: (1) Inception: Planning and Strategic Thinking; (2) Development of Processes and Documents; (3) Evaluation of Proposals and Proposers; (4) Contract Development and the Negotiation Process; (5) Contract Management: Oversight and Accountability.
1. Inception: Planning and Strategic Thinking. Key questions our clients must answer during this phase include, but are not limited to:
- What are your needs?
- Where and how does this project fit in your business strategy?
- How well defined are your expected outcomes?
- How realistic are those outcomes?
- What are your budget and time constraints – and have they been realistically assessed?
- Which key executives from this agency or others can make the commitment to be part of a Project Team for the duration of this procurement?
- How much flexibility do your laws allow in your process; for example, can you use “competitive negotiation?”
Done correctly, this phase can be difficult and time consuming. Although the above questions are only a few of the issues we focus on during this phase, the point we are making here is that without well-defined outcomes and realistic expectations it is nearly impossible to move forward without substantial and costly project risk.
Additionally, this phase incorporates discussions focusing on communications and risk assessment, as well as the establishment of governance structures, the critical concept of project ownership and the assignment of management functions (which should follow through the transaction). This is also the phase during which budget planning, grant qualification/requests and business process improvement issues are evaluated.
2. Development of Processes and Documents. It’s never as simple as just writing an RFP. Considerations from the first Phase will dictate whether an RFI, RFQ, RFP, some combination of them is required. In complex procurements, especially those that may have only been tried once or twice before – or never - perhaps a global strategy summit (where vendors are invited in to speak about complex projects in other jurisdictions) needs to come first. Meaningful thought and discussion must go into this process because it will save substantial amounts of time, money and other resources down the line. It is important that strict guidelines have been developed to this point – and adhered to going forward – that address security, confidentiality, methods of communication and a thorough approach to due diligence for the vendors as well as the government.
When it comes time to create the bid or proposal documents, the following becomes critical, and this is another place where WhysSolutions has added tremendous value for our clients: clear, concise documents must be developed. Written well, they will allow the appropriate vendors (or teams of vendors) to understand the needs and expected outcomes of the agency so that their proposals are tightly focused and fairly priced. The content of the documents and the vendor responses should be such that it leads to a coherent legal contract. This makes the process extremely efficient and leaves a small number of important issues for actual negotiation. A good RFP and contract are the keys to militating against many of the risks inherent in a major procurement. How an RFP is constructed is the most critical aspect of this phase.
3. Evaluation of Proposals and Proposers. Too often, the approach to the evaluation process is haphazard with minimal capability for oversight or accountability. Moreover, when the process is completed one cannot be assured that a thorough evaluation has occurred. A well-managed and tightly controlled process will not only ensure thoroughness and precision, but outcomes that truly represent the best interests of the government. Additionally, such a process can allow automated production of final documentation that will withstand scrutiny and eliminate the risks associated with challenges.
Some of the issues that need to be discussed include outlining of procedures; calendars and assignments and leadership to keep the team on target; automated or non-automated process; how to determine the proposals that offer the greatest value, as opposed to the lowest costs; location of meeting facilities and security of all documents; process and timing to allow the team to do adequate due diligence of the proposers; process for development of the final report – a crucial document; and a method for capturing thoughts, material and information discussed through the evaluation process that may be helpful during the negotiation process.
4. Contract Development and the Negotiation Process. In a public procurement, the words begin to flow in the proposal requests. Without a clear RFP, the agency purchasing a system, product, commodities or services is at the mercy of the vendor. From the vendor’s point of view, it is equally important, however, to know what it is they are proposing on. Industry representatives often complain about bid documents or proposal requests that are unclear, ambiguous, amorphous, and lack direction. Thus, when you begin the process of procurement clarity must be the goal.
Your agency should want proposal requests crafted in a manner that binds the vendor to the words contained in its response – “binds the vendor to the words contained in its response.” A well-crafted bid or proposal request should delineate mandatory and optional system and service requirements; layout technical issues, goals and objectives; and, should set forth your plan for use.
Remember, the RFP and vendor response are the first steps in the negotiating process. This is the place where the minds are introduced well before their “meeting.” It is critical in this process to be leery of form responses by vendors (sales puffery, glossy marketing brochures containing vague and generic responses, etc). In this respect, sales literature is not an acceptable basis for evaluation and must be discouraged. The response should be tailored to the transaction, therefore, a simple brochure and price will not suffice. WhysSolutions will assist in the development and drafting of proposal request documents that will guide your agency through the procurement thicket.
As for the actual negotiation process, when designed correctly with particular roles and assignments to each member of the team, and strict adherence to the process, the results are usually very powerful. A WhysSolutions Principal typically leads this process. By now, the Proposal documentation and Responses have formed the basis for the contract and an initial document will have been drafted to present to the vendor. With this initial draft, the government team and the vendor will agree on which issues will be negotiated – and will do so before formal negotiations commence. By tightly managing this process, the time frame is shortened and both the government and the vendor benefit from a fair document. Too often, the wrong issues are intensely argued over and the ultimate contract ends up being a bad deal for one or both parties.
5. Contract Management: Oversight and Accountability. Contract Management is the most critical function of the 5 phases. Even with perfect execution of phases 1 through 4, if contract management is poorly executed or non-existent, then the project will fail. True contract management cannot be haphazard, and although outside contractors could be hired to perform the function, it would be an error to do so. Rather, this function should be developed internally, using outside expertise to help create the function and to train Department employees. Using Best Practices and sound, proven methodologies, over the long term, the majority of risks associated with many contracts in existence today would be mitigated.
Simply put, the government employee(s) responsible for managing the contract will hold the vendor accountable for their work and work product, using the content of the contract and knowledge of the intent of the language in the contract – a very significant point. By actively managing a vendor, an agency is in a position to keep the project on schedule; to allow them to learn of problems at the early stages and to be able to resolve them before they grow too unwieldy and costly; and to make any necessary changes throughout the project at an early, less costly stage, assuming a well written contract and well developed communications between government and the vendor - and, a well trained contract manager.