top of page

Case:

Challenge: 

Client needed a deliverable against a strict deadline while managing an existing approved budget.

Approach:

In order to deliver there was outstanding information needed. I advised the team to follow up on the information, and our team would prioritize the work that was nearly complete while awaiting the outstanding information. This would avoid a staggered, piecemeal approach that doesn't save time and may introduce unplanned costs when speed over efficiency and accuracy is valued.

Outcome:

The team was reluctant, but following my recommendation avoided budget risk, prevented project inefficiencies to be introduced, and project was delivered within the necessary timeframe and on budget. If we had followed the alternate approach that values speed over accuracy it would pose a greater risk to project delivery. I present my client options but my recommendations values accuracy to minimize impact to program operations and financial management. Although every operation doesn't allow for flexibility, we must see the risks, so we can appropriately advise and mitigate against them. 

Case Two:

Challenge: 

The program required ongoing stakeholder communication to avoid risks to multiple interdependencies throughout the program.

 

Approach:

I use multiple project management tools for stakeholder communication to communicate project schedules, resource allocation, project status, deadlines, and to request feedback or updates on my recommendations to avoid project risks and next steps. The team was offered scenario planning to decide on the best path for project delivery. 

Outcome:

The team decided to break up the program into multi-channel projects for a concurrent multi-phased approach. 

Stay tuned for an upcoming case study on multiple-phased civic programs. 

bottom of page