As Quarked previously, the baseline (Draft) Structural Reform Plans (SRPs) for each Department are almost acceptable. There’s just about enough to begin a reasonable job of monitoring and control. There are actions with start dates and end dates. There are also milestones.
What is missing are definitions of what has to be delivered by an end-date. Quarkside believes that all public sector projects are expected to use Prince2 for project management. It is almost written in stone in Local Government. As everybody who has been trained knows, Prince2 “Focuses on products and their quality“. In other words it is ‘Product based planning’. A plan is only considered complete when it has described WHAT should be DELIVERED by a specific date, WHO should deliver it and the QUALITY criteria for acceptance. All these points rely a documented and agreed Prince2 Product Description.
Number 10’s Implementation Unit have misunderstood the guidelines, or have chosen to avoid them. You can identify a product deliverable because it is (usually) a concrete noun in the Product Breakdown Structure. The SRPs use a verbal description of an action eg Home Office
- 3.2.ii “Introduce English language requirements for spouses”.
Are these requirements a statute, a regulation or a ministerial memo to the Immigration and Nationality Directorate? Delivery implies the complete acceptance of a specific product. An alternative might be:
- 3.2.ii “English Language regulations agreed by Parliament and applied in Border Control”
Quarkside is not making a political point or just being pedantic. The first definition has many options on what the end product might be; the second is more specific and would be linked to the Product Description. In fact 3.2.ii in the Draft SRP does not give an end date, showing uncertainty. Prince2, using Product Flow Diagrams, would enable an end-date to be calculated.
Action based planning must have its devotees. Notably that’s the path followed by Microsoft Project out of the box. MS Project, unsurprisingly, does not follow the UK standard but is easy to tailor for Prince2 methods.
Martha Lane Fox has called for the use of standards Not only does it increases the interoperability project managers, it is the most effective way of controlling projects. The good news is that it is not be a big problem to change the Draft SRPs and produce a Prince2 plan with a useful Product Breakdown Structure. When this process is done it always uncovers things that had originally been considered. It improves the Plan.
The current Plan is little more than a ToDo list. That style is suitable for planning a foreign holiday for a group of thirteen people. It is not suitable for the far reaching political reforms of the coalition government. Prince2 is the Standard. The No 10 Implementation Unit should have ensured that each of the thirteen Departments understood and used Prince2 for both the Plan and the control mechanisms.
It’s not too late to produce a final plan that follows the Prince2 Standard. Then we can produce a transparent monitoring and control process.