The role of many project managers has been defined in a way that can easily destine them to failure for contemporary projects. Success for these managers is measured by using the traditional criteria of delivering projects on time, on budget, on quality and on requirements. This approach to success has an intrinsic heads-down, singular focus for essentially the duration of the project.

Surprisingly though, as quoted frequently in project management literature, 70 to 80 percent of projects fail based on that criteria. This singular focus creates behaviors and attitudes that, while zeroing in on the project itself, tend to shut out the rest of the world. Ignoring and not being able to adapt projects to changes that may be happening all around it can become almost a predictor of failure for a project.

A project exists within something larger than itself, a larger context such as an organization, company or group. Every project also represents change in some way, even if it is just the fact that by the end of the project, something will be done that hasn't been done before.

Projects are essentially a physical manifestation of some part of the vision of the larger company or entity. To not know or include or respond to that vision may allow a project to succeed using the traditional criteria, yet fail in its overall effect. An example of this could be delivering a quality product on time and on budget, yet having the market reject it because of external changes that weren't taken into account by the project team. By not considering the impact of market changes, not bringing information and suggestions about new market developments into the ongoing work of the project, the project team and its manager have essentially failed.

What the traditional and static measures of success don't take into consideration is that we are living in a changing world - one with market, economy, companies, and organizations in flux, and with people themselves undergoing change within that flux.

The truer measure of success for a project is how well it manifests the targeted vision and strategy of a company. Frequently this impact can be assessed only long after the project has been delivered, delayed or canceled. Paradoxically, NOT moving ahead is sometimes exactly the right thing to do to ensure eventual success! For the right reasons, delaying a project, lowering quality standards, offering fewer features, or even canceling the project completely can be the best thing to do if it furthers the larger goals and strategies of an organization. Canceling or delaying a project in this way clearly is a more difficult position to take, and to justify. It requires a very skilled and seasoned manager to do this. Even more difficult after making this kind of project redirection, is helping people to understand it.

Expanding peoples' view of the project in terms of its role within the larger company context can be useful. This allows people to connect to the larger and longer-range goals of the company, rather than just seeing the cancellation as a screw-up. It is just human nature to want to find a human reason for changes, and a savvy manager can help people incorporate a larger and more useful view of their efforts. Success measurements for projects must ultimately be based on whether or not the vision and strategy of the larger entity are, in fact, furthered by the outcomes of the project.  For this reason, I'm including some suggestions for incorporating awareness of outside change into the planning and ongoing work of a project:

1. During the initial planning phase, ensure that the project will have outcomes that are clearly tied to the vision and strategy of the larger entity.
2. Put a process in place for a communication strategy should the project need to be redirected or cancelled.
3. Plan for regular discussions about ongoing events and the effects of possible changes.
4. Set out checkpoints and milestones to assess and incorporate possible external changes that may need to be reflected in the project's outcomes.

Some questions that could be useful to discuss with the project leaders, the team, and the company vision and strategy holders are:

• How is this project furthering or changing our company's strategies or overall vision?
• What processes do we have in place for adapting to outside changes – in the market, the economy, in vendors, and in people?
• What lessons might this project have for us about the vision and strategies that we operate under?
• How will what we learn from this project be incorporated into our process, or next project, or daily operations?
• After the project is delivered how will we track its impact?
• How will we know if this project has furthered the long-term vision of this organization?

Companies need to develop a culture where it is acceptable for projects to be canceled or changed as a rapid and intentional response. One way to do this is to purposefully redefine and enlarge the criteria for a project's success.

Star Dargin is an independent coach, consultant and trainer and is a partner of Shared Learning International: www.sharedlearningint.com. As a professional coach and consultant she collaborates with individuals and teams to provide focus and balance in achieving personalized results. Reach Star at 978-486-4603 or Stars@StarDar.com.