Project Plan Checklist
The Project Plan Checklist is a fully formed Process Chart that will be used throughout the execution stage of the project.
April 05, 2018 at 01:21 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Lean Adviser
Your work on the BUDGETING CHECKLIST should have yielded an initial chart for the project. Ideally, this will have progressed through different iterations, starting with life as a basic project plan of the tasks, then becoming an 'Activity Assigner Chart' with names and assignments, then developing into a 'Budget' or 'Costed Roadmap.' All the while, this plan should be examined for waste, inefficiency, and justifiable savings. Now your plan is ready for the final stage of its evolution, as a fully formed Process Chart. This will be the reference tool that is used throughout the execution stage of the project.
Checklist:
|- As always, gather in your planning work so far and project knowledge. The focus will be on the Costed Roadmap (or 'Budget') that is to be converted into a Process Chart.
- Review the Costed Roadmap or any other more current planning tool for robustness and fitness for purpose.
- Ensure that the plan and all of its components are clear and self-explanatory, or else explained.
- Verify that the plan is lean.
- Validate the plan with the project team. This enhanced and validated plan can now be treated as a Process Chart.
- Share the Process Chart with the team and appropriate external players and stakeholders.
- Report to the client.
Lean Routine:
|- Have you verified that every main task has been captured? Has each one been broken into sensible and meaningful subtasks? Are these all tasks that you have personally done or seen others do successfully?
- How likely is it that each task will be successfully performed in full and on time? If so, how well would that meet the client's expectations as to the finished project? Have you left any margin for error or unforeseen circumstances? Have you verified that all of the contributors are still available, ready, and willing to participate?
- Do you have backup plans if one or more of the team becomes unavailable? Have you crosschecked the overall cost estimates against the client's expectation?
- Have you considered whether the overall plan is clear and makes sense as a whole? Is each task and subtask clear and obvious? Do any of them need explanation to ensure they can be done accurately and successfully the first time? If any explanation is needed, have you thought through how this will be handled? Would it be worth writing some bullet points in an email or maybe meeting the fee-earner to make sure it is understood? Is there some part of the plan that would be better depicted in some other way, such as a mind map, flowchart, or decision tree?
- Have you sequenced the tasks and subtasks in the optimum way? Have you thought about which jobs have to be completed before others can start and factored that in (such as with gateways)? Have you lined up individuals of appropriate skill and talent for each task? Have you checked again for waste, inefficiency, and justifiable savings? Are the estimated task times and deadlines manageable without being overgenerous? Do you have contingency buffers for the unexpected?
- Have you checked with all important contributors to the project to be sure that they understand what is expected? Do they all agree that their role is appropriate and manageable? Have you considered any suggestions arising during these conversations?
- Have you documented this work and the discussion and decisions?
- Has anything in this work impacted your view of the feasibility of performing the project on time, on budget, and with the right outcome? If so, have you told the client what has changed your view and gauged their comfort level?
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLegal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Match Group's Katie Dugan & Herrick's Carol Goodman
2 minute readLegal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Eric Wall, Executive VP, Syllo
1 minute readHaynes Boone, Hicks Thomas Get Dismissal of $1.3B Claims in 2022 Freeport LNG Terminal Explosion
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1The State of Cost Recovery — Post COVID
- 2Why Is It Becoming More Difficult for Businesses to Mandate Arbitration of Employment Disputes?
- 3The Whys and Hows of a Mediator’s Proposal
- 4Litigators of the Week: A Trade Secret Win at the ITC for Viking Over Promising Potential Liver Drug
- 5Litigator of the Week Runners-Up and Shout-Outs
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250