Project Reviews, Assurance and Governance

Citation

Walker, D.H.T. (2009), "Project Reviews, Assurance and Governance", International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 457-459. https://doi.org/10.1108/17538370910971108

This book is a very useful project management (PM) practitioner‐oriented book that would also be valued by many PM scholars with an interest in project reviews. It is useful for project and program managers because it has a strong focus on the process of defining how to evaluate expected project outcomes and how to proceed with undertaking a number of review types. It is somewhat disappointing in its lack of reference to relevant theory in any depth though it does cite the work of others, most notably the Office of Government Commerce in the UK. It is an authoritative work from a practitioner's perspective but it does miss many opportunities to anchor what are described as best practices in a more firmly rooted empirical foundation.

This book is about the nature of project reviews, it presents a justification for such reviews which in many fields of PM (such as IT and IS) are normal, expected and often demanded. It does present a convincing case for their need and explains clearly through the book why reviews are useful, how they should be conducted and what benefits they can be expected to deliver. The author (according to the dust jacket) is an expert and well seasoned practitioner in this field so the “tips and traps” theme of much of the book is invaluable for those with limited knowledge of this area.

Themes discussed in the book include: project success and failure in Chapter 1; the nature of project reviews in Chapter 2; the review process in Chapter 3; review parameters in Chapter 4; reviews and organizational learning in Chapter 5; the importance of evidence in Chapter 6; logistics matters in Chapter 7; governance issues that features triggering effective action in Chapter 8; gaps and overlaps in governance in Chapter 9; organizational issues in Chapter 10; and team issues in Chapter 11. I felt that as a primer, and as a reference book it has some good value. Because it is a “how to” type book it includes lots of checklists and suggested templates which can be very handy for anyone faced with the task of either undertaking a project review or selecting a consultant to review a project (by being aware enough to see past potential waffle or salesmanship pitches to being better able to judge what a reviewer should be able to deliver). It is also good at explaining the nature, value and pros and cons of various types of project reviews. It has some strength in its honesty about the need for reviewers to be aware of sub‐text, politics, aim of the process from a variety of participant perspectives and how to explain what value can be derived from a review.

The book has governance in its title and that part of the books theme appeared to introduce the concept well, in addition to fitting in the type of review to the various levels of authority and accountability within an organisation responsible for delivering programs and projects. In this respect it fits in well with leading PM ideas of how projects fit into programs, portfolios and is linked to business strategy. Templates and suggested formats that are presented are useful, though a series of a page of listed questions to be addressed could be daunting and off‐putting to many readers who are looking for a “how‐to” that provides answers rather than suggested approaches. Table 1‐4 on page 230 for example compares gate reviews with regular reviews and this table provides some very insightful elements. Similarly, the suggested capability maturity model descriptors for a review process on page 238 is very valuable. It seemed to me an honest book in that it points out difficulties and potential hazards in undertaking reviews.

The book does have a major draw back in that it is extremely skimpy on theoretical background. It does cite the excellent methodologies and work undertaken by the Office of Government Commerce in the UK, it also cites a number of books from little know publishers which leads one to suspect that many of these may be airport self‐help how‐to books. This is a pity because this book struck me as being much more authoritative than the magic‐wand books that some practitioners use as a sales gimmick for their services. I think this has some genuine value.

There are sections in the book that appear simplistic and highly normative, telling the reader what they should do and not do. Many of these instances are really about how to be a true professional, so I felt that these sections might undermine the more valuable parts of the book. I was slightly amazed in one part for example on page 251 in a section on developing reviewer skills that it lists a set of bullet points that include explanation but it fails to mention critical analysis skills which I would have thought essential – maybe that is my academic bias showing through. I was irritated with the number of times that terms are introduced that are jargon as well as highly technical terms that are not defined or explained using authoritative sources – the author's opinion is no doubt very valuable but some more detailed discussion of definitions would make the book more credible. Anyone with an organisational development or organisational learning background would find the lack of literature reference very irritating in a number of the chapters as it makes the content look very simplistic. I think that even a separate chapter that provides a good literature review basis for the book would have strengthened the credibility of the book's content. For example, much is made of gaining trust and commitment as well as many aspects that would relate to change management processes. These could have been framed with the relevant literature in a way that would have turned the style from an avuncular one to a more credible authoritative account.

In general, I would recommend this book as a primer and a practical resource in an area that does not have a lot of direct literature. For background theory readers could go to (Busby, 1999; Williams, 2007). There are many sources of theory that are also relevant such that surrounding reflective practitioners and action learning. However, this book seems to have excluded some of those aspects from its scope and of course, that is the author's dilemma in any book – what to include and what to exclude.