Successful organisations learn from their experiences with projects. This is more likely if the lessons learned are somehow preserved beyond the end of the project.
This is the internal project evaluation. There may be a separate external evaluation, for example, from a quality assurance group.
The partially completed Lessons Learned Report is finalised. This is created at the outset of the project and incremented as the project progresses with observations on what aspects can usefully be noted to help future projects. It should include observations on management, technical and quality procedures.
The objectives of the process are to:
|
Assess the results of the project against what it was intended to achieve |
|
Examine the records of the completed project to assess the quality of its management, especially quality and risk management |
|
Identify lessons to be learned from the project and. applied on future projects. |
The updated Project Plan allows the Project Manager to document in the End Project Report how well the project has performed against its Project Foundation Document, including the original planned cost, schedule and tolerances.
Not all benefits will be seen to have been achieved by the time of project closure. Any achievements or non-achievements that can be defined should be part of the report. A note of any benefits that need to be measured after operational use of the final product is passed to Identifying Follow-on Actions.
The report should also take into consideration the effect on the original Project Plan and Business Case of any changes that were approved. The End Project Report should give final statistics on changes received during the project and the total impact of approved changes. Any outstanding ones should match up with follow-on actions defined in Identifying Follow-on Actions. Statistics may also be appropriate for all quality work carried out.
At the start of the project an embryo Lessons Learned Report should be created. A note should be added to this every time the Project Management Team spot something about the management, specialist or quality processes and procedures which either made a significant contribution to the project's achievements or caused a problem.
In this process all the notes should be correlated and turned into a report, including any views with hindsight on the project's management. The report should be aimed at answering the question 'What should be done differently next time?'
The report is also the repository of any useful measurements and quality statistics collected during the project that will help in the planning and estimation of subsequent projects.
The Project Manager bears overall responsibility, but additional information could come from anyone involved in the project.
Management information |
Usage |
Explanation |
Input |
The reasons for Non-Compliances may provide lessons for future projects |
|
Input |
All associated Actions. |
|
Input |
What risks were considered and what happened to them may provide lessons for future projects |
|
Quality Log |
Input |
This may indicate whether the quality policy and procedures were adequate. Statistics of the number of quality checks made and the errors found are also useful to a quality assurance function |
Update |
This should be an on-going document from the start of the project, completed with relevant notes |
|
Output |
Evaluation of the management, quality and technical methods and procedures used in the project and recommendations for changes |
|
Which management processes or procedures have worked well? |
|
Which management processes have had problems? |
|
Was it easy to achieve the required quality? |
|
Which quality procedures have worked well? |
|
Were there any weaknesses in quality procedures for specific types of product? |
|
How well did risk strategies work? |
|
Were there any unforeseen risks? |
|
How well were the risks managed? |
|
Was the contingency used? |
|
Was training in the management, quality and delivery processes and procedures adequate? |
|
Were there recognisable benefits from the level of training given, or recognisable problems caused by lack of training? |
|
How well did any support tools work? |
|
Could anything have been done to improve skill levels before the relevant work was done? |