Project / Programme Delivery and Service Delivery – Is There A Conflict?

(Shamelessly taken from a reply the DeliveryDemon provided to a question on LinkedIn)

Do you see a conflict?

The main interfaces with service delivery are:

• When defining the scope of the project, acknowledge that there will be an impact on service delivery, and involve the stakeholders who can form a view of the impact and how it is likely to affect other priorities, and take decisions.
• During the design / delivery / test stages of a project, identify and involve the service delivery stakeholders needed to provide input / carry out activities / test.
•  As part of dependency management, identify dependencies / resource conflicts with other projects also impacting service delivery, establish a suitable level of communication with them.
•  For transition to business as usual, allow for testing and business change within the service delivery function.

All of the above are down to planning and communication and should not be a significant source of conflict if well managed.

There is only ONE intrinsic and irresolvable conflict between programmes / projects and service delivery. Service delivery is there to deliver a service and that is their first priority. In the event of a serious incident, restoring the service has first priority.

In the event of a serious incident, all the programme / project manager can do is:

• Keep tabs on the incident resolution without hassling those at the sharp end.
• Make use where possible of resource not involved in the incident, provided their workload has not increased to cover colleagues dealing with the incident.
• Carry out an impact analysis, work on a contingency plan and implement it.
• Keep the project / programme stakeholders informed.
• Escalate only in the event that it is likely senior management will give the project priority over the service.
• Keep the morale of the team up when they can’t make progress.
• When the pressure lifts, get in there with the key stakeholders to ensure that the programme / project gets appropriate priority as the pressure comes off.

Surprise, surprise – Risk Management

The DeliveryDemon was interested to see some risk management being discussed in the US Treasury.

The US bank bailout includes the setting up of a public-private partnership to buy up toxic assets. As this Reuters article http://tinyurl.com/carurp explains:

• The cost risk to taxpayers outweighs the potential for benefits
• Conflicts of interest have been identified and recognised as a source of risk
• The scheme is inherently vulnerable to fraud, money laundering and other forms of abuse
• The ‘public’ element of the public-private partnership dilutes the risk for the private element, increasing the likelihood of a high risk approach to managing the overall funds

What is surprising is that these risks are being so publicly and simply stated. The early days of most public-private partnerships are normally wreathed in a mist of bonhomie as each party strives to protect and enhance its relationship with the other party. Reservations are rarely made public.

The DeliveryDemon will be interested to see how strongly this risk management and transparency is followed through. And whether the UK takes a lead from the US when it comes to acknowledging and managing the risks associated with the UK government’s bank bailouts.