Now, let’s assume you did have a conversation with the sponsor at the beginning of the project two months ago and your sponsor prioritized the triple constraints as; Time, Resources, then Scope. You have submitted a significant change request (10% overall increase) to add resources to the project to ensure the project end date can be obtained (the project schedule is slipping due to critical path activities taking longer to complete than anticipated). Let’s assume your sponsor has rejected the change request saying the project can not exceed the currently allocated project budget due to recent budget cuts. You then need to discuss with your sponsor the ability to change the priority of the triple constraints. It’s apparent that Resources (money) are now the highest of the triple constraints. It’s impossible to meet the current end date with the current allocation of resources and scope. You have already reduced scope to the minimum acceptable level by the business areas (you already did this because scope was the lowest prioritized triple constraint agreed upon originally) – so your next logical option is to move out the project end date. If you sponsor says “that’s impossible” then you can remind him that you must “balance” between the three triple constraints and “SOMETHING must give”. It is essential for you to take a stand and remind your sponsor about the critical balance between the triple constraints and work with the sponsor to stabilize the project.

Conversations like this are difficult, but they are essential for the ultimate success of the project. Maybe the business areas can reduce scope some more. Is there any chance some of the budget for the project can be increased? In addition, maybe we get more internal resources and remove some of the project consultants that are more expensive. It’s time to get creative – but it’s not appropriate to compromise the concept behind the triple constraint. If you don’t push back, your sponsor will assume you can “pull it off”. It is not in the best interest of the project team (or the company) to have people work even more overtime than they already are and/or reduce the quality (i.e. testing, reviews, etc.) of the agreed upon scope (which is typically what happens).

The prioritization of the triple constraints can, and will, change throughout the life of the project. However, the prioritization should not change frequently and you definitely don’t want it going back-and-forth (i.e. Time is the #1 priority this week, Resources next week, and back to Time the following week). When the priority does change (or appears to be changing based on the behavior you’re observing from your sponsor), it should be confirmed via an overt conversation with your sponsor. This will enable you to move forward and to continue making daily decisions about your project based on the new prioritization of the triple constraints.

As the project manager, it’s YOUR job to educate your sponsor (and other key stakeholders) regarding the triple constraint concept and to manage them effectively. Anyone can UNDERSTAND the triple constraint concept; however, MANAGING the triple constraints successfully is the hard part. It’s similar to a diet – the concept of a diet is easy. If you consume less calories than you burn, you will lose weight. Easy concept – extremely difficult to implement successfully!

continue>>

<<back