It’s a common challenge for the project manager:  the sponsor wants the project done by a certain date, regardless of other things going on.  Not wanting to appear unable to rise to the challenge, the PM sets off to execute an impossible plan.  The project quality suffers, the project team rushes and gets frustrated by constant nagging, or the PM tries to take on the whole thing single-handedly.  Even if the PM is fortunate enough to deliver the project on time, it has required high amounts of overtime, expensive from both a financial and a human standpoint.

Set the Project Deadline
Frequently the sponsor (typically the IT director for technology projects) has a deadline in mind for the project even before the PM is assigned.  The sponsor, focusing on the end and trusting the PM to manage the means, selects the earliest possible date, both to discourage inefficiencies and excuses by staff, and to accelerate other projects which are riding on its completion.  The sponsor hands the PM a project and a deadline together and simply wants it done.

Deadlines are a very useful tool for the IT director because they are unambiguous; setting a due date is a way of “drawing a line in the sand.”  It’s a powerful technique the director uses both to keep key initiatives moving forward and to measure staff performance.  Staff members who continually miss their date commitments are easy targets because, unlike many other performance measurement tools, the calendar is completely objective.  The staff member either completed the task on time or didn’t.

The PM feels the same pressure of being measured by the deadline.  As the date approaches, the sponsor becomes anxious if he or she hasn’t seen indication that the project is on track and almost completed.  The PM becomes worried about his/her own success as viewed by the sponsor.  Tensions rise and the dates on the project plan continue to slip.  This generates a domino effect on the projects that are on deck; they all get delayed.  The project manager gradually loses credibility, and the sponsor gets frustrated.  All the while, projects are moving onto the list faster than they are moving off. 

Manage the Sponsor’s Expectations
To avoid this outcome the PM not only needs to manage the project, but also needs to manage the sponsor’s view of what is realistic by taking the time to review the resource requirements and verifying the deadline’s feasibility. Drafting a plan with calculated resource assignments allows the PM to negotiate a realistic deadline with the sponsor at the beginning of the project, enabling everyone associated with the project to be placed in a position to succeed.

Projects that are delivered late can usually be traced back to poor planning, insufficient resources or an unrealistic deadline.  While it would be easy to point a finger at the sponsor for having unreasonable expectations, the PM should be held accountable.  The PM is responsible for negotiating a deadline the team can achieve in the “real world,” not just in the sponsor’s “ideal world.”

While there are instances when a project finish date is set in stone, many times it can be adjusted to accommodate a well thought-out and accurately resourced project plan.  Every sponsor loathes the eleventh-hour cry for help.  Negotiating then is too late; the PM failed in the planning, and the team failed in delivering.  The PM needs to gather the requirements and risks early and work with the sponsor to set a reasonable timeline for the project.

Do Your Homework
As a project manager, what can you do to finish projects on or ahead of schedule?  To prevent failure at the end, know what you need and ask for it before the project starts, state your justification, and the sponsor will be more likely to give you what you need to make the project successful.

Before you approach the sponsor about adjusting the deadline or adding resources, you need to do your homework.  First, in the initial assignment of the project, try not to promise delivery by the sponsor’s ideal finish date.  Even if the sponsor blindly “pins the tail on the calendar” and hits February 15, ask for the time to create a high-level project plan and do a draft resource allocation before you make a rash commitment.  Taking the time to strategize like this gives you the room you need to go back and raise the caution flag before the race begins. But before you raise that flag, see if you can mold your plan to fit the deadline the sponsor wants.

Resource Availability and Scheduling
Resource availability is more of a constant than you or the sponsor might realize.  The time it takes to complete a project is based on the mathematics of how many hours a resource works in a week, when they will not be able to work (vacation, an office meeting, holiday), and what percentage of working time the resource can dedicate to your project.  After all, there must be another way to meet a deadline than to pull back a resource’s vacation request.

The percentage of time a resource can work on projects will likely vary across a department, but this percentage should be determined as a department guideline by the IT director in consultation with the IT managers.  These percentages generally should be consistent for a resource across all projects.  For example, the helpdesk staff might have 25 percent (or less) of their time available for project work.  For a 40-hour workweek, that is 10 hours a week or two hours a day.  A trainer might be able to commit 50 percent, or 20 hours a week, four hours a day.  Developers, litigation support and project managers likely can spend closer to 80 percent or more of their time on projects.  Others will fall somewhere in between. 

The Resource Equation
Your first concern during planning is to uncover which skills are needed for the project, which tasks will require the most hours and which skills are needed to complete those tasks.  This will enable you to propose assigning a resource with the right skills and the highest availability.  To determine availability, first consider the resource’s project availability percentage, then adjust for concurrent project demands and planned out-of-office time.  Find the right balance to solve the resource equation, and you’ll be able to shorten the project’s planned duration and accelerate the finish date.

You might be able to hit the sponsor’s initial deadline by using creative resource allocation, such as a trainer with development skills, or a desktop technician who can set up a server, when traditional resources aren’t available and delaying isn’t a practical option.  The key to making these kinds of choices, and settling on the most aggressive yet realistic deadline, is to communicate with the resources’ managers.  Make sure they agree to commit their people to the effort and hold them accountable for their active participation on the project team and timely completion of their assigned tasks.

In some cases, you will have done all that you can to plan aggressively, and you simply can’t make the resource allocation mathematics equal the sponsor’s envisioned end date.  You’ll need to meet with the sponsor and negotiate a later deadline, a change in scope or the addition of resources. Having planned thoroughly, you’ll be armed with the reasons why one of these factors needs to change, which are clearly mathematical and completely objective.  It can feel difficult to say, “No, we can’t meet your target,” but by developing a sound argument through detailed planning of the resource equation, it can be easy to make your case.  After all, you work at a law firm.  Do your planning, present the facts, justify what you need to make the project successful and be persuasive.

Facing Reality
Next time you find yourself in this situation, perhaps you can say what I said to our firm’s CIO recently.  He wanted a new product deployed by January 31.  I soon realized that our firm’s office move and vacation planned by our lead developer would make hitting this target unlikely.  I approached him with the following:

“I’ve completed my planning, and we can’t deliver this project to you by January 31st without cutting back the requirements or risking quality or delay.  But if you will sign off on February 15, we’ll do it on time and do it right.”

“Sure, that’s fine,” he replied.  I always ask for things a little earlier than I actually expect them anyway.” 

That’s reality.

About our author . . .

Cynthia Harrison is the Associate Director of Information Technology at Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP in New York where her focus is establishing the firm's IT Project Management Office.  Previously, she was the Supervisor of the Application Development staff at Arnold & Porter LLP in Washington, DC. Cynthia can be reached at cynthia.harrison@cwt.com.