|
Armed with certification as a Project Management Professional (PMP), I took on a consulting assignment to manage projects in a Six Sigma environment in a large, well-established global company. This was my first exposure to Six Sigma Change Process (SSCP) and after the introductory training, I was initially very excited to be a part of an organization that fully supported a methodology—any methodology. In previous engagements, management was often resistive to project management processes and I was encouraged to see that that was not the case at this company. Everyone seemed to “walk the talk.” Projects were up and running and each project team had a Black Belt, Master Black Belt, or Green Belt that seemed to function as the Project Manager. In a very short period of time, though, it became clear that the color of one’s belt, while significant in the world of SSCP had only an incidental relationship with project management.
Management’s push for conformance to the SSCP methodology and their support for consistency was, at the outset, a good thing. Team members worked to develop specific deliverables in clearly defined steps that resulted in the product or process. Where the system began to break down, however, was when the requirement for those deliverables leading to the Six Sigma “gate” reviews were declared as completed project process steps. There was a gate review for each of the DMAIC phases, which are Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, and Control.
Contrary to good project management practice, each DMAIC phase acted as a specific project milestone to be passed only one time and viewed in one’s rear-view mirror from that point forward. Consequently, projects lacked a tightly scheduled plan that could prevent them from stretching into extra months and costing far more than necessary. To be fair, the effort resulted in high quality deliverables. It’s just that absent good project management discipline, the results were very time consuming and costly to achieve. My challenge at this company was to impose project management processes that would not threaten the well-entrenched and enthusiastically supported SSCP methodology.
Just how big is this conflict between good project management discipline and the guidance that Six Sigma espouses? Surprisingly, there doesn’t have to be any conflict at all—they can be complementary if applied correctly. What does that mean, “applied correctly?” Simply put, it means that a certain synergy can exist only if we don’t try to make one or the other something it isn’t. To guard against improper application, we have to know what each methodology actually is. So, let’s first look at a couple of definitions. Consider how the International Society of Six Sigma Professionals (ISSSP) and the Project Management Institute (PMI) define their methodologies.
ISSSP (www.isssp.com) defines Six Sigma as “a methodology that provides businesses with the tools to improve the capability of their business processes. This increase in performance and decrease in process variation leads to defect reduction and vast improvement in profits, employee morale and quality of product.” Also, “Six Sigma is a rigorous and a systematic methodology that utilizes information (management by facts) and statistical analysis to measure and improve a company's operational performance, practices and systems by identifying and preventing 'defects' in manufacturing and service-related processes in order to anticipate and exceed expectations of all stakeholders to accomplish effectiveness.” Not much about project management here, is there?
PMI (www.pmi.org) has established itself to be a global leader in the development of standards for the practice of project management. Their document, A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide), is globally recognized as a standard for managing projects. A commonly held definition of project management as described in the PMBOK® states: “Project Management is the application of knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to project activities to meet project requirements. Project management is accomplished through the use of the processes such as: initiating, planning, executing, controlling, and closing.”
In spite of the differences, there are some similarities here. The DMAIC phases (Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, and Control) of Six Sigma are sequential as are the PMI processes (initiate, plan, execute, control, and close). It seems logical to overlay these two methodologies and get the best of both worlds. It’s critical, however, to overlay in the correct sequence.
The company chose to start with the foundation of SSCP and overlay the PMI processes rather than the other way around. Hence, every DMAIC phase repeats the project management processes—particularly initiate/plan activities of phase kickoff, activity definition, activity sequencing, resource planning for the phase, activity duration estimating, schedule development, cost estimating, and staff acquisition/removal. Notice the deliberate combination of two extremely important and distinct processes, initiate and plan, into a single initiate/plan process.
Using DMAIC as completed project steps, in effect, creates a new project for every phase in SSCP instead of wrapping the effort into a single comprehensive project plan. And, many project deliverables are completed out of order. For example, according to PMI the project charter is completed during the initiate process before any detailed planning effort. In this company’s scenario, however, the project charter is completed after budgeting, planning, final resource assignments, and schedule are already done! The project charter is declared complete during the PMI executing process—well after initiating and planning. Instead of “ready, aim, fire,” this is truly a case of, “ready, fire, aim!” It’s no wonder that projects consistently take longer than expected and cost far more than necessary.
So just how does one keep a project view (and sanity) in a SSCP environment? The first step is to assign a Project Manager who will keep that focus. Don’t overlook this one. To be effective, the Project Manager should be designated as the single person responsible for all project management duties on a project. Parceling out these duties to two or more team members, which is often done in a Six Sigma project, will not provide the unity and focus needed to effectively manage a project. That is not to say that the Project Manager cannot perform other functions on the team, but their primary job should be to manage the project to the benefit of all.
If Project Managers create specific project deliverables and perform a few standard project management duties, they will help to deliver high quality projects on time and within budget while following and supporting the DMAIC process. Volumes have been written on good project management practices. But, all of them can be boiled down to a few core deliverables and tasks that, if faithfully performed, will result in a well-managed project.
As a minimum and separate from the SSCP deliverables, the Project Manager must provide key project deliverables at the proper time in the project life cycle. If, for example, you are compelled by the organization to complete a project charter well into the project, be sure to revisit—with the team—other deliverables such as project plan and budget, roles and responsibilities, and other planning deliverables that follow the creation of the charter instead of precede it. This review will reenergize the project and put the focus on the objectives and scope where it should be.
Keep the following chart as a reminder of which deliverable belongs with which project management process.
| Project Phase | Core Project Deliverables |
| Initiate | Project Charter (with the Project Sponsor) |
| Plan | Project Plan, Budget, Roles & Responsibilities and Project Organization Chart |
| Execute | Kickoff Meeting Agenda and Presentation |
| Control | Project Status Reports, Risk Log, Issue Log, Key Decision Log, Action Item Log |
| Close | Lessons Learned, Project Close Report |
There are specific duties the Project Manager must perform to keep the project on track. These duties really have nothing specifically to do with SSCP, but neither are they in conflict with any of the DMAIC phases. The Project Manager’s duties can be summarized as follows:
- Create Deliverables required for Project Management
- Conduct Kickoff Meeting with all Stakeholders
- Manage Deliverable Status on all project and SSCP deliverables and tollgates
- Manage Change Requests (scope, budget, time resources)
- Manage Action Items
- Manage Risks and escalate when necessary
- Manage Issues and escalate when necessary
- Track Key Decisions
- Report Progress
- Conduct "Lessons Learned" workshop
- Administratively Close the Project
Finally, the foundation should be PMI processes with a DMAIC overlay instead of the other way around. Successful projects come from applying PMI guidelines for effective project management and using SSCP for which it is best suited—improving business processes. Here is how it looks:
| PMI Project Process | DMAIC Phase |
| Initiate | Define and a dash of Measure |
| Plan | Define, Measure, and some Analyze |
| Execute | Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, Control |
| Control | Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, Control |
| Close | Control |
So, looking back, did I meet the challenge? Was the project successful? Since any measure of success is primarily subjective, it appears the answer to both of these questions is yes. The project was completed on schedule and within budget with no scope changes. The project team freely focused attention on their assigned SSCP deliverables in pace with the project schedule. Stakeholders openly commented on how well informed they were. The team was aware of the smooth progress of the project. It wasn’t clear that anyone fully realized why things were going so well. It was evident though; everyone knew something different was going on and they responded favorably!
So while there is a semblance of success, it’s doubtful that things at this company are much different today than I found them. The project progressed well, but a “culture” of project management did not live past the end of my contract. There were no other project managers to help the concepts to grow. For that to happen, the entire organization must embrace project management processes as the driving force for the project life cycle, and employ SSCP according to its original design, which is to improve business processes. As in any other culture change, that takes time. As for me, I will definitely apply the lessons learned here to the next Six Sigma encounter!
|
