Finding the right individuals for specific roles in enterprise IT projects is challenging, especially under time constraints. This pressure often leads to a compromise, where the need to hire quickly results in selecting candidates who are immediately available rather than those most suitable for the roles. Here are engagement options to effectively navigate project resourcing:

  • Consultants: Employed by consulting firms brought into projects to provide expert advice and specialised knowledge tailored to meet strategic goals.
  • Contractors: Self-employed individuals engaged specifically for a project. They offer specialised skills promptly to address specific needs without a long-term commitment.
  • Permanent employees: Staff seconded to projects, providing stability and continuity while remaining aligned with the organisation's long-term objectives and culture.

By categorising project participants into consultants, contractors, and permanent employees, teams can be structured based on engagement nature and specific project needs. Each type of engagement offers distinct benefits, from temporary specialised skills to enduring knowledge and stability. Understanding these categories aids in resource allocation and project execution strategies, positioning the project for success.

Consultants

Organisations engage consultants because of their broad exposure to diverse IT environments. Consultants offer innovative solutions and external perspectives on complex problems. Typically hired for specific durations or project phases, they are flexible resources quickly deployed to address critical needs.

Risks

While consultants bring invaluable expertise, several risks accompany their engagement:

  • Engagements often begin with senior consultants, later replaced by less experienced staff, which can diminish service quality.
  • There is a constant drive to identify opportunities to place additional resources on projects, influenced by performance incentives to increase team size.
  • A conflict of interest may arise as the need to safeguard future business precedes transparency in current project issues, often leading to filtered communication.
Risk Mitigation

To mitigate consultant engagement risks, consider these strategies:

  • Establish a contractual requirement to retain senior consultants throughout the project engagement.
  • Create a clearly defined statement of work that includes a fixed number of resources and seeks ongoing transparency regarding each resource's contributions to the project.
  • Ensure direct visibility into day-to-day project activities rather than relying solely on filtered reporting.

Contractors

Contractors provide services on a contractual basis, typically for specific projects. They offer flexibility and are often sought for specialised skills that are urgently needed but unavailable internally. Primarily focused on tasks, contractors deliver expertise without requiring a long-term commitment from the organisation.

Risks

While contractors provide essential skills, the risks of their engagement include:

  • Contractors generally do not invest in continuous professional development, risking skill obsolescence.
  • Their focus is primarily on task completion, often without regard for overall project outcomes, as they lack a vested interest in long-term success once their contract ends.
  • Dependence on contractors for specialised skills may create knowledge gaps, as critical information and expertise might not be effectively transferred to the internal team.
Risk Mitigation

To mitigate contractor engagement risks, consider these strategies:

  • Hire contractors who have demonstrated commitment to their ongoing professional development.
  • Implement performance-based contracts.
  • Develop structured knowledge transfer protocols to reduce dependence on contractors and enhance the internal team's capability.

Permanent Employees

Permanent employees are hired for long-term roles across various areas of the organisation. Often seconded to IT projects, they contribute their understanding of business operations, systems, and processes to enhance the project team's knowledge of discipline frameworks, standards, and best practices.

Risks

While permanent employees provide crucial insights into business operations, their engagement carries certain risks, including:

  • Some permanent employees in non-leadership roles may perceive temporary workers (consultants and contractors) as rivals for coveted positions, leading to negative dynamics within the project team.
  • Limited exposure to diverse project practices may narrow their perspective on project delivery, hindering their ability to adapt to varying project needs.
  • Balancing project tasks with business operations responsibilities can lead to burnout, reducing productivity and motivation.
Risk Mitigation

To mitigate permanent employee engagement risks, consider these strategies:

  • Promote a collaborative work environment that values contributions from all team members, regardless of their employment status. 
  • Provide professional development opportunities for external training programs and cross-functional projects.
  • Implement workload management strategies by setting clear priorities and providing support resources to help balance project tasks with business operations responsibilities.

Participant Traits

Understanding the distinct traits of consultants, contractors, and permanent employees is crucial for effective team composition and resource allocation in enterprise IT projects. The table below offers a comparative analysis of typical characteristics observed across these participant types. It is important to note that these traits are generalised, and individual characteristics may vary.

Table 21. Comparative Traits of Participants by Engagement Type/span>
Trait Consultant Contractor Permanent
Strength Excel in strategic planning, presentations, and stakeholder management Highly focused on practical implementation and delivering outputs Strong adherence to established enterprise standards, with a strategic mindset and broader
Weakness May struggle to translate strategy into practical implementation and tangible outputs May lack a strategic mindset or broader organisational considerations May struggle with innovative thinking beyond established standards
Experience level Ranges from entry-level to seasoned experts Ranges from mid-level to seasoned experts Ranges from entry-level to seasoned experts
Professional confidence Backed by academic qualifications and often bring a broad industry perspective Backed by experience from varied projects with high confidence in hands-on roles Familiar with the organisation's processes and culture, though confidence may vary based on tenure
Interpersonal skills Strong communication and negotiation skills, often acting as liaisons between stakeholders Effective in team settings but may prioritise task completion over relationship building Well-versed in organisational culture with established relationships across departments but may struggle in high-stress situations

This comparative analysis serves as a guideline for utilising the unique strengths of each participant type to create a dynamic project team by:

  • Aligning participants with the project must reduce the risk of misalignment or inefficiencies. For example, engaging consultants for strategic planning and contractors for implementation.
  • Making informed decisions on participant engagement based on project demands and existing team composition.
  • Recognising the strengths of different engagement types highlights the value of diversity in enhancing problem-solving and innovation. For instance, combining a contractor's practical experience with a permanent employee's knowledge of organisational processes can lead to comprehensive solutions.

Guiding Principles

Having a well-rounded and dynamic project team functioning at its highest potential requires guiding principles to ensure interactions are professional, transparent, and aligned with project goals. Consider the following principles:

  • Accountability: Each team member takes responsibility for their roles and the quality of their tasks and deliverables.
  • Collaboration and communication: A culture of open communication and shared responsibility is fostered within the project team.
  • Professional integrity: High ethical standards are upheld in all project activities, promoting transparency and fairness. Intellectual property is respected by giving credit and avoiding misattribution.
  • Stakeholder engagement: Stakeholders are engaged with clear objectives, maximising productivity and respecting their time.
  • Documentation: Documentation is maintained systematically and thoroughly, ensuring project details are accessible to authorised stakeholders. 
  • Knowledge sharing: Promoting learning at all levels, both within the team and externally, encourages a learning environment.

Besides supporting the successful completion of enterprise IT projects, having team guiding principles promotes personal and professional growth.

Mission Possible Guiding Principles

Background

Mission Possible is an enterprise IT project at Precision Manufacturing focused on integrating a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system across multinational operations. The project team is diverse, comprising consultants, contractors, and permanent staff from various departments and regions.

Challenges

A critical meeting outlines the next steps for a significant system rollout. The project is already running behind schedule, and tensions are rising due to delays and communication breakdowns.

Billy V. Ball, the lead consultant from WiseCrack Consulting, leads the meeting. He presents an ambitious plan for deploying the ERP system across all international offices, featuring a one-page schedule that outlines key milestones and an immovable implementation date. However, he fails to provide actionable details regarding the technical aspects of the implementation. There is no explicit scope or detailed schedule illustrating task dependencies and specific delivery deadlines. This lack of critical information leaves Aimee Keys-Butt, the contractor, uncertain about the expected outputs. Aimee raises concerns about her responsibilities during the meeting but receives vague responses from Billy, leading to further confusion.

The absence of a project glossary confuses Sam Baffle, a permanent staff member of Precision Manufacturing. Although he understands concepts like deliverables and milestones, the lack of clear definitions and context makes it difficult to determine how these milestones apply to his role and responsibilities in the project. Sam attempts to voice his concerns during a meeting but is dismissed as something he will learn in his project participation journey.

Aimee, eager to move forward, attempts to complete her tasks using methods and tools from previous project experiences, which do not necessarily align with the ERP project context. As a result, the quality of her work suffers. The absence of a detailed approach leads to misalignments and rework, causing significant delays in the project timeline. Tensions arise over the lack of direction and clarity as participants begin to shift blame. Aimee points fingers at Billy for the lack of guidance, while Sam expresses his frustration with both Billy and Aimee, reflecting a breakdown in professional integrity.

Another contractor, Rollin Freedough, an Agile cowboy who believes documentation is unnecessary in Agile projects (despite the ERP project being unsuitable for Agile delivery), takes the initiative to engage with key business stakeholders. However, he fails to produce tangible outputs or record critical decisions during these interactions. When he suddenly moves on to another project, this leaves a significant knowledge gap, with no trace of the discussions or agreements made. The rest of the team struggles to pick up where he left off, causing further delays and confusion.

Turning Point

Recognising the need for structure and project leadership, Billy V. Ball serves as both Project Manager and Project Assurance Manager and implements guiding principles to align the team:

  1. Accountability: Billy establishes clear roles and responsibilities for each team member, ensuring they understand their deliverables and are answerable for their quality. He emphasises the importance of Aimee Keys-Butt knowing her specific outputs related to the ERP implementation.
  2. Collaboration and communication: Billy creates a framework for regular team meetings and feedback sessions to facilitate open dialogue. In these sessions, team members like Sam Baffle can share their progress and collaboratively address challenges, helping to reduce confusion about project milestones.
  3. Professional integrity: Billy promotes an ethical work culture where team members adhere to high standards. He ensures that all dealings are transparent and that contributions, including those from Rollin Freedough, are appropriately attributed to maintaining trust within the team.
  4. Stakeholder engagement: Billy sets clear objectives for stakeholder interactions, making meetings focused and productive. He values feedback from stakeholders, integrating it into project plans to enhance effectiveness and ensure that Aimee feels supported in her role.
  5. Documentation: Billy implements a systematic documentation process, making all project details accessible to authorised stakeholders. This ensures continuity and transparency, allowing team members to understand the context of their tasks and decisions.
  6. Knowledge sharing: Billy encourages continuous learning, promoting initiatives that enable team members to share insights and experiences. This approach helps Aimee and Sam develop their skills and adapt to the project’s needs, fostering a collaborative learning culture.
Outcome

After implementing the guiding principles, the project team sees improved accountability and collaboration. Aimee Keys-Butt understands her responsibilities better, resulting in higher-quality work. Regular meetings foster open communication, allowing Sam Baffle to express his concerns confidently. Enhanced professional integrity builds trust, ensuring proper attribution of ideas. Stakeholder engagement improves, integrating valuable feedback into decisions. A systematic documentation process increases transparency, while a knowledge-sharing culture promotes continuous learning. Ultimately, these changes establish a foundation for successful project delivery and a cohesive team environment.

Conclusion

This case study highlights the challenges of managing a mixed team without guiding principles. By establishing clear expectations and aligning diverse participants—consultants, contractors, and permanent staff—the team overcomes obstacles and ensures a more structured, efficient project execution.

Copyright © 2024 Mae Gajo. All rights reserved. No part of the content on enterpriseitprojects.com may be reproduced, transmitted, or stored in any form, including screenshots or recordings, without written consent from the author.