There is ample evidence that planning for a digital project is important. However, in all of those texts on project management I encountered there was always an assumption, sometimes explicitly stated, that the project was something new, unique, outside of the usual operation of the given body. I work for an organization where projects are our daily operation - all staff members are managed through projects. As a result, all members of the team usually know what their roles are; there is no need to worry about buy-in, because our products are based on material submitted by the partners. Previously, there were some initiatives coming from the team in order to participate in grants and gain some additional funds, but those projects could have been realized only because the Partners - the stakeholders - were interested.
The whole environment and operation is relatively low risk; the whole team relatively successful and accepted. The relationships within the team are built on trust. I realize that that can easily backfire, however, I consider that an asset. This trust is also a motivating factor and generates interest, commitment, and sense of professionalism on the part of the team. The members of the team often bring up suggestions that lead to improving workflows and amending our policies which further improves the work environment.
It is clear that the project has to have a clear sense of direction, because not all suggestions have to necessarily lead in the right directions. H. Frank Cervone's articles brought the philosophy of project management that was a bit remote and too technical to the familiar turf of the libraries and other cultural and heritage repositories. It was a reminder that current practices should not be taken for granted and always have to be validated in practice during implementation and execution. Monitoring and constant evaluation are really key.
No comments:
Post a Comment