Introduction
The British Library project was undertaken by the British Library, which is the biggest and the official national library for the United Kingdom (UK). The library currently holds about 150 million items in form of books, journals, videos and other forms of materials which are sourced globally (Wedgeworth 1993, p. 149).
The library is accredited with holding up to 14 million books from various sources and some of them are historic (meaning that they date from 2000 BC) (Wedgeworth 1993, p. 149). Annually, the library is estimated to add up to 3 million items in various modes and collectively, the distance covered is up to 11 kilometers (Wedgeworth 1993, p. 149).
The library is currently a non-departmental public entity and most of the projects undertaken by the institution have been under the department of culture, media and sport (in terms of sponsorship and supervision).
The Library undertook a failed project that saw it experience delays of up to 5 years and an upsurge of project costs that were in excess of 400 million Euros. There are many reasons advanced for the failure of projects but every project has its own unique characteristics (Walravens 2006, p. 30). This study will focus on the British Library project and account for the delays and shortcomings of the project.
Secondly, this study will analyze the role the project managerial team had in causing these delays and the overspill of budgetary cost. Thirdly, this report will evaluate the possible remedies which could have been adopted by the project managers to avert the delays and overspill of project expenditures. Lastly, a conclusion summarizing the above findings will be provided.
Delays and Cost Increases
Project delays are a common recipe for the failure to meet project deadlines (Sears 2008, p. 1). There are often a number of reasons why various projects fail to meet their deadlines, thereby resulting in delays, but a number of them are unique to the project itself.
The British library project resulted in significant delays of up to 5 years. There were a number of reasons voiced by various shareholders but most of them are not unique to the project per se, but projects of similar nature as well.
One of the reasons attributed to the project delay was the overambitious estimation of the time needed to complete the project (Mincks 2004). There was also an incorrect task assessment of the project. Perhaps, the optimism evidenced in the project came about from the project outcomes expected of the study and previous precedents set by other projects of similar nature and undertaken by other organizations.
However, the failure to correctly estimate the factual time schedule could be attributed to the failure of the project shareholders to coordinate effectively, thereby leading to overly optimistic time schedules. Also, the theoretical time scheduling failed to factor in the practical challenges of implementing such time schedules, therefore leading to excessive delays.
Also, increased pressure from the client (British Library) put a lot of pressure on the project managers to unrealistically squeeze a lot of tasks within a short timeframe (that could potentially lead to an overall compromise of the project quality).
Considering the mandate that the British Library has is of a public nature, there was a lot of public scrutiny and media surveillance that also added on to the pressure experienced by the project managers in meeting the project specifications (Wedgeworth 1993). This ultimately resulted in a lot of simultaneous task scheduling that fails to meet the required time schedules.
Secondly, there was an unrealistic project scope that evidently showed an inconsistency in the manner the project was to be undertaken and the time schedule allocated. In other words, the project had a wide scope that could not be accommodated in the set timeframe.
The irrationality of the client also contributed to the widening of the project scope because various features were added to the project without carrying out a feasibility study to determine whether such changes could be accommodated. Such types of changes are normally estimated to result in months of project delays (Angel 2009).
Thirdly, there was an obvious lack of clarity of project tasks and roles supposed to be undertaken by the project staff (Project Smart 2011). This means that there were instances of certain project staff doing the duties of another, and in the same manner, there were instances of certain project staff failing to do the duties that they were assigned.
This led to instances of overwork and time wastage to both groups of project staff; thereby leading to significant project delays. The lack of a clear breakdown of tasks also significantly affected the work of the project staff, with instances of staff misunderstandings becoming a common feature.
Fourthly, there was a clear lack of risk management system where significant problems encountered in the course of undertaking the project were easily assumed to be repairable. In some instances, there was evidence of team members downplaying certain project challenges and assuming that they could be tabled in subsequent meetings.
This created a situation where team members acted like they lived in a make-believe world where they believed that they could rescue a project at its last dying minutes without a comprehensive and all-inclusive plan that facilitated the achievement of such goals.
This kind of short-term strategies meant to deal with project challenges are not recommended by most project experts, as is affirmed by Angel (2009) who notes that: “All projects have problems; any one problem could destroy the plan and throw the project out of whack. If these problems are not identified and proactively resolved on an ongoing basis, things will only get worse” (p. 78).
The lack of resources was a commonly voiced topic of concern among the project managers and which eventually lead to significant project delays. One of the most recognized factors was the delay in project funding by the relevant ministry which set back the completion of the project by a couple of months if not years.
This issue can potentially cause a total halt to the project process, or in the same manner, lead to a slowdown of project functions (Angel 2009). In real sense, there is no way a project can be able to be completed in good time if the resources identified to complete the project within a given time schedule are not provided.
For instance, if a project requires five developers, and only four are present, the likelihood of the project being completed in the given time is very low.
Lastly, there were significant delays evidenced out of experiencing damaged or missing infrastructure where certain tools to be used in the project completion (such as software, hardware, or documents) were either not availed at the project site or failed to work properly (Angel 2009).
Significant delays were evidenced and compounded when such infrastructure were needed most; possibly to facilitate the transition of a given project task into another.
In terms of costs escalation, the British library Project incurred more than 400 million pounds in excess of the estimated project costs. A number of reasons were attributed to this cost increase. Firstly, technical considerations accounted for the largest increase in project cost. Particularly, the lack of appropriate cost forecasting techniques contributed most to the project’s cost escalation.
Most importantly, there seemed to be a lack of inadequate data that could be relied on by the project experts to correctly estimate the project costs (Project Smart 2011). These two factors consequently contributed to the biggest increase in project costs.
Secondly, there was a clear evidence of optimism-bias by the project managers which consequently led to an escalation of project costs (Flyvbjerg 2008, p. 3). In other words, there was evidence of the project managers and other project shareholders to overestimate the likelihood of positive cost expenses and downplaying the likelihood that the costs incurred may spillover the set budget.
Finally, there were instances of the sociopolitical environment having an effect of the cost structure of the project, in the sense that, there was a strategic misrepresentation of the scope of the project and the nature of the budget in ensuring the project is completed in an affordable manner.
Considering the British Library project was a matter of public interest, such kind of sociopolitical influence was widely expected to affect the project in the long-run.
Responsibility of Project Managers
Of the above reasons identified for project delays and cost escalation, some of them can be directly attributed to a failure of the project manager to effectively undertake his or her duties, but others are beyond the scope of the project manager.
When critically analyzing the escalation of project costs, the technical and psychological causes of project increase can be significantly attributed to the failure of project managers to effectively undertake their duties in the project management process (Project Smart 2011).
In detail, the project manager should have adopted good cost forecasting techniques that were beneficial to the specific project. The inclusion of wrong data into the entire process also significantly contributed to the problem because wrong inclusion of data was bound to result in wrong cost forecasting.
In terms of the failure of the project to meet its laid down guidelines, a number of factors could be specifically attributed to the project manager. For instance, the lack of clarity of project tasks was a function of the project manager because as Project Smart (2011) affirms, the project manager is supposed to ensure that project tasks are correctly executed by the project staff.
The incorrect task assessment of the project was also a failure of the project manager because Verzuh (2008, p. 39) notes that project managers are supposed to ensure successful planning of the project is done before the project is underway. Under the same role, the failure to come up with a reasonable project scope was also a failure of the project manager.
The same can also be said regarding the evidence of overambitious time estimates by the project manager. The lack of formulation of good risk management systems was also a failure of the project manager because this task falls under the role of monitoring and controlling of project tasks (Verzuh 2008, p. 39).
Comprehensively, the above factors sum up the roles supposed to be undertaken by the project manager, but the lack of resources for the undertaking of project tasks, and the failure to provide appropriate and efficient infrastructure for the successful completion of the project, could not be attributed to the project manager.
In a similar manner, the sociopolitical factors that led to the cost increase cannot be entirely attributed to the project manager, but rather the department for culture, media and sports and the administrators of the national Library.
Alternative Project Management Actions
There are a number of strategies which could have been undertaken by the project managers to avert the above mentioned time and cost risks. With regards to the costs risks, the project manager should have had a cost contingency fund to shoulder any risks of cost escalation (Mincks 2004, p. 316).
This fund should specifically cover the spillover of costs that were not factored in the initial cost scope of the project. This strategy has been derived from studies done to evaluate the reasons for the escalation of costs in cost engineering processes (Mincks 2004, p. 316).
In ensuring the project meets it’s laid down time schedule, the project manager needed to first critically analyze the details pertaining to the project (Luckey 2006, p. 203). This implies critically analyzing the requirements of the project so that he or she can correctly know what the project entails (right to the slightest of details).
In instances where there is evidence of ambiguities, clarification should be sought and finally, professionals should be hired to iron-out the project requirements, functional demands and ultimately, the design requirements for the entire project.
Emphasis should however be laid on the scope creep in the overall development of the project plan because it has the potential of killing the purpose of the project (Angel 2009, p. 157). In highly demanding situations, it is advisable for the project manager to aggressively reduce the project scope and to ultimately avoid the inclusion of any new features to the project plan which were otherwise not there in the first place.
To avoid any negative resource implications, it is pertinent for the project manager to map out any available resources (Mincks 2004, p. 316). This strategy need to be undertaken with the project requirements in mind so that the required personnel are available on the ground to undertake all the project requirements.
Also, the available funding need to be determined to ensure the project will be completed without any financial hiccups. The entire relevant infrastructure needed for the completion of the project also needs to be determined well in advance (before the start of the project).
With regards to risk management procedures, the project manager should identify all possible risks in the project execution process and develop a contingency plan that will outline the strategies to be used to remedy such risks incase they occur.
A back-up plan would also come in handy, in case any aspects of the project plan (like personnel failures) fail to materialize. This plan will ultimately be the support system for the entire process.
To avoid problems brought about by a lack of clarity of project tasks, the project manager should assign roles and responsibilities to team members in a clear and concise manner (Mincks 2004, p. 316). This will ensure every project member knows what he or she is supposed to do, and at what time.
In effectively coming up with a good plan to this effect, the project managers should use project management tools, such as Gantt charts to come up with the right time schedules for this purpose. A failure to observe this procedure will ultimately lead to an overlap of responsibilities, time wastage, duplication of employees’ roles and responsibilities, and poor project quality.
In undertaking this management strategy, the project managers also need to break down huge responsibilities into small and manageable roles. This implies the creation of sub-activities that are totally independent of each other, but which can be completed independently as well. After this breakdown is implemented, the smallest activities should be completed first; then the major activities follow.
On a more general platform, the project manager should discourage the scheduling of many meetings meant to change the course of the project (Mincks 2004, p. 316). On the contrary, the project manager should only support meetings which are meant to solve pertinent problems only (on a need-by-need basis).
Long and tedious meetings which have no clear-cut agenda are synonymous to a lot of time wastage and inefficiencies that are ultimately going to set back the completion of the project. Also, on a general basis, it is important for the project manager to document the critical underpinning of the project (Kohli 2006, p. 401).
This means writing down the successes and failures of the projects on a sheet of paper so that future referencing can be done (with regards to the same project or subsequent projects).
The project dashboard can come in handy when undertaking this task because it gives the project manager an overview of the project and enables him or her to quantify the progress made by the project team (in comparison to the laid down guidelines of the project plan).
Conclusion
This project assessment task exposes a number of lessons to be learnt in project management. Firstly, it exposes the fact that delays and cost implications are the most common types of risk in project management. In fact, these are the two factors identified as the sources of failure of the British library project.
Secondly, we are able to learn that a single element of the project management process can be potentially fatal to the entire process. This implies that all areas of the project execution process need to be considered with equal seriousness. Thirdly, we can see that a majority of the problems assumed to be project risks fall within the mandate of the project manager.
This means that the roles of the project manager need to be carefully checked in the execution of project plans. However, we can be able to see that there is a strong need for the coordination of project tasks and the roles of other project stakeholders (like sponsors); because not all project risks can be contained by the project manager. Comprehensively, these factors encompass the lessons to be learnt from the British library project.
References
Angel, P. (2009) PMP Certification, a Beginner’s Guide. London, McGraw Hill Professional.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2008) Curbing Optimism Bias and Strategic Misrepresentation in Planning: Reference class forecasting in practice. European Planning Studies, 16(1), 3–21.
Kohli. (2006) Project Management Handbook. London, McGraw-Hill.
Luckey, T. (2006) Software Project Management for Dummies. London, For Dummies.
Mincks, W. (2004) Construction Jobsite Management. London, Cengage Learning.
Project Smart. (2011) Role of the Project Manager. (Online) Available at: https://www.projectsmart.co.uk/role-of-the-project-manager.php .
Sears, K. (2008) Construction Project Management: A Practical Guide to Field Construction Management. London, John Wiley and Sons.
Verzuh, E. (2008) The Fast Forward MBA in Project Management. London, John Wiley and Sons.
Walravens, H. (2006) Newspapers of the World Online. London, Walter de Gruyter.
Wedgeworth, R. (1993) World Encyclopedia of Library and Information Services (3 ed). London, ALA Editions.