To us as IT managers running or reviewing projects, prioritizing viable initiatives is critical. Many projects appear promising initially but falter quickly due to predictable flaws. Below are key questions to ask early to separate the wheat from the chaff:
First and foremost, projects must align with an organization’s strategic priorities to avoid wasted resources. Organizations must assess how a project integrates with the mission, long-term goals, and existing initiatives.
- Use SWOT and MOST/VMOST analysis to evaluate alignment with organizational strengths and market opportunities.
- Conduct scenario planning to anticipate shifts in strategic direction.
- MoSCoW prioritization technique helps evaluate project importance; RICE scoring model evaluates Reach, Effort, and Risks; and CYNEFIN framework helps understand how much do we know about the problem at hand.
- Evaluate opportunity costs: projects that offer higher strategic value relative to alternatives should take precedence.
The business case, often a weak point in project evaluation, demands meticulous scrutiny. Benefits must be clearly defined, with a distinction between tangible outcomes (e.g., cost savings from automation) and softer, qualitative gains (e.g., improved employee morale).
- Historical benchmarking: Compare with past projects to identify patterns of over-optimism.
- Contingency clauses: Include contractual safeguards for external dependencies (e.g., vendor delays).
- Risk mitigation strategies should be embedded into the business case to address predictable challenges. For example, a product launch tied to a holiday season should include buffer timelines to account for supply chain disruptions.
Execution feasibility is another critical factor. Projects often fail due to unrealistic resource planning or stakeholder resistance.
Resource Realism:
- Assess team expertise—novel projects (e.g., AI integration) may require upskilling or external hires.
- Buffer strategies. For time-sensitive projects (e.g., holiday product launches), phase deliverables to allow slippage without missing deadlines.
- External risks, like regulatory hurdles or vendor capacity, should also be mapped.
Stakeholder Dynamics:
- Office politics can derail adoption. Map and engage stakeholders early.
- Change management: allocate budget for training and communication (e.g., workshops for a new ERP system).
Finally, projects must demonstrate endurability—the ability to deliver value over time. Emerging technologies or market shifts can quickly replace previous initiatives.
Technological Foresight:
- Monitor emerging trends (e.g., AI disrupting existing knowledge base systems).
- Build adaptability: Design modular systems (e.g., cloud infrastructure that scales with demand).
Sustainability and Compliance:
- Assess regulations.
- Plan for lifecycle costs.
Underpinning these dimensions are cross-cutting principles:
- Risk management should be embedded at every stage, with formal registers tracking strategic, operational, and technological threats.
- Portfolio balance is key: a mix of quick wins (e.g., process optimizations) and long-term bets (e.g., R&D initiatives) ensures steady growth while fostering innovation.
- Post-approval vigilance, through stage-gate reviews, allows organizations to pivot if market conditions or priorities shift.
By embedding these practices, IT leaders can build portfolios that drive value, adapt to change, and avoid costly missteps. The goal isn’t just approval—it’s cultivating a pipeline resilient to disruption.