Setting the right Criteria
Traditional project management often refers to the classical “Iron Triangle” – cost, time and quality, being the key drivers when setting the project success criteria. This traditional method succeeds when the project’s requirements and user specifications can be defined upfront. This is often called the “Waterfall” model. Most implementations follow a sequential implementation process, which have advantages of control- and task planning.
When implementing an Identity Management and Governance solution, the key benefits are automation, audit, and control of the user identity lifecycle. Primarily supporting the quality parameter while optimising the process.
When optimising administrative processes, other parameters define the success criteria – set by the contextual condition of the project, which may be assessed in order to maximise potential benefits.
Thinking out of the box may imply a square
It may be an added value, prior to the implementation, to assess the organisation’s readiness for change, since involving your organisation is crucial. In order to validate whether the proposed workflows and pilot solution meets the quality improvement goal of the project, it is evident to ensure that the proposed workflows are aligned to benefit the organisation, and not to be dictated by the system.
Contextual parameters, as the stakeholder community, are critical to maximise benefits after handover and endorse ownership of Audit and Governance features.
Beside the Iron Triangle – three more categories of success criteria are proposed to consider:
Setting Success Criteria right
Setting the Success Criteria right, must relate to the categories of success criteria in all categories, to enable a process that may be true to findings during the improvement process, and where there is a direct measurable impact post project implementation. To maximise benefits of the Audit and Governance features, setting the criteria right is important, in order to measure the effect of your investment.