Only when this information was provided would you be able to start work to draw up a meaningful plan. What I asked you to do then was Initiation (“Please plan my project”) but you needed Start Up information. Instead of speeding you up by leaving out Start Up, I actually stopped you dead. You are still going to have to do Start Up type work then, even if you do decide to roll it into Initiation because you still need that basic information before you can make a sensible start to project planning. But having established that the Start Up work is necessary, we now need to look at the implications of leaving out the pause between Start Up and Initiation i.e. the case for not rolling them together.

The gap between Start Up and Initiation is valuable because it can bring an immediate stop to work if it is apparent that the project is not worth running, despite initial views that it will be. There is a tendency to think all projects are worthwhile, particularly if they are being strongly promoted by someone (an enthusiastic ‘sponsor’). That is often accompanied by assumptions that the project will be cheaper and take less effort than is actually the case. This problem is described by HM Treasury as ‘optimism bias’. A fast but clear headed review of the potential project can bring things to a halt quickly if it is found that it is not viable after all, and so avoid wasting time and resource doing the more detailed planning in Initiation. Too many projects start, and are stopped later, where a fast but careful look early on could have established that the project was not viable. Start Up has an important benefit here that is not always readily apparent and that is the separation of the potential project from the person who wants it. PRINCE does not use the word ‘sponsor’ but rather ‘stakeholder’ when describing the person suitable for a Project Executive. This is a smart move because a sponsor can be too close to the idea for the project and too keen that it is run to be sufficiently impartial to abandon the idea at the outset (or indeed later in the project if the Business Case weakens). Start Up takes the project idea out of the domain of the individual and into corporate ownership. The look at the Outline Business Case must establish that there is genuine corporate benefit at the end of that project’s rainbow and that the project is in line with corporate strategy. This makes great inroads into dealing with the problem of ‘pet projects’. As an aside, perhaps a the sponsor would often make a better Senior User than an Executive.

Changing the project boundary

There is still more benefit to keeping Start Up separate though, and that is considering the project boundary. It can be that while the project scope seems fine at the outset, a bit of discussion results in changes to the boundary to get an even better balance of benefits. This is something that the management writer Tom Peters calls ‘re-framing the project’. While the Brief is being dealt with, adjustments to the boundary are relatively easy to do – the Project Brief remember is like a sketch plan of the project. If things proceed to the detailed planning of Initiation, and then it is decided that the boundary is wrong, there is much more work to do to make the change.

The "right wall"

Steven Covey says “Before you climb the ladder, make sure it is leaning against the right wall!” This is in illustration of his second habit of highly effective people, “Begin with the end in mind”. Even where people are really clear on what the project is about, it is surprising how often they have different ideas to one another. A very powerful use of the Project Brief is to ensure that everyone is agreed on what the project is about before going on to the detailed planning. Again, adjustments can be made very quickly to a sketch plan, but if work proceeds into Initiation with no pause to check, differences in concept may not be found until much later and the work to adjust the more detailed plans can then be significant.

Finally

Finally then, Start Up can be done really quickly. For some projects it may only take a couple of hours. But the benefits of this pause to ‘check bearings’ before going on to plan the project in detail are out of all proportion to the minimal amount of work involved in staying with the method here. Keeping Start Up separate from Initiation is a sensible thing and it is commended to you. Think carefully before you leave out this valuable and logical part of the PRINCE2 approach.

This article is just one example of how Inspirandum can show you how to use PRINCE2 productively and effectively to get the power out of the method. It is extraordinarily adaptable and flexible but this is contrary to the usual public perception of it.

Many PRINCE2 courses in the market place focus only on getting people through the exams and passing on what is in the book. At Inspirandum, we recognise that the exams are important for many people and, don’t worry, we fully address them! However, in addition we pack in lots of information on how to actually use this method well on projects.

Many of the things we show you just aren’t in the book. This means that you can go back to projects and use the method very well indeed. And in the end, that is what this is about - running projects as well as possible. We know that PRINCE2 can be used with such power be such a real help on projects, we find it really sad when we go on to new sites and find people thinking that PRINCE2 is just some form filling exercise, just another overhead. This is a million miles from how it should be, can be, and is with those trained by Inspirandum.

For details of our training, including our powerful PRINCE2 practitioner training, please give us a call or contact us through this web site.

"Both the course materials and the instructor are of the highest quality imaginable"

"Extremely professional"

"Fantastic course material"

"Best course I have ever done"

“Superb”

“A brilliant training course”

“Got learners’ attention 100% of
the time. Impressive.”