Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

What's the point of having blame centric project management if nobody gets pulled up?

Options
  • 01-09-2017 10:40am
    #1
    Neon_Lights
    Registered Users Posts: 1,426 ✭✭✭


    I don't know if anyone has experienced similar, but in this governance obsessed world, id like to vent a particular foible I see with businesses, particularly Irish ones.

    Say my company uses a blame centric system for projects like prince2. (well a loose adaptation)

    In my company some governance obsessed managers will request that everything get signed off, to the lowest level. However nothing gets done to the person responsible for S/O when things go tits up, it's amazing. What's the point of sign off in this case other than to tyre kick and waste time?


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Nody
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 18,317 CMod ✭✭✭✭Nody


    Neon_Lights wrote: »
    I don't know if anyone has experienced similar, but in this governance obsessed world, id like to vent a particular foible I see with businesses, particularly Irish ones.

    Say my company uses a blame centric system for projects like prince2. (well a loose adaptation)

    In my company some governance obsessed managers will request that everything get signed off, to the lowest level. However nothing gets done to the person responsible for S/O when things go tits up, it's amazing. What's the point of sign off in this case other than to tyre kick and waste time?
    Well the sign off ensures that the managers can show that they did their part; it's avoiding risk on their part more than anything else. As a PM though I'd speak with the sponsor personally because clearly something has gone wrong in delivery vs. expectations and try to understand with the sponsor why for the next project.


  • Options
    #3
    Neon_Lights
    Registered Users Posts: 1,426 ✭✭✭Neon_Lights


    Nody wrote: »
    Well the sign off ensures that the managers can show that they did their part; it's avoiding risk on their part more than anything else. As a PM though I'd speak with the sponsor personally because clearly something has gone wrong in delivery vs. expectations and try to understand with the sponsor why for the next project.

    Yeah it's a very slimy way of doing things of you ask me. "Oh they signed off on it is just avoiding the blame" more than ensuring quality of anything being done.

    I've pretty much seen it in every company I've worked in as a means to shirk responsibility and pass the buck. I do agree though requirements specification and elicitation are really important in delivery.

    I'm just saying if your pinning something to somebody, when push comes to shove either the pm, or the person signing off, or both need to be pulled up at least if something comes up. Not really a specific issue, just a bug barer of mine for people to weasel out doing things the right way and get the bare minimum done.


Advertisement