The Pressure to Prioritise Speed Over Adequate Preparation
When embarking on major projects, organisations often feel intense pressure from deadlines and stakeholder expectations to rush into action without adequate preparation to demonstrate progress and efficiency.
However, this urgency frequently leads to severe cost overruns, inefficiencies, and, ultimately, project failure. High-profile examples, such as the HS2 project, illustrate how rushing to start without adequate preparation undermines project success.
Lessons from HS2 – The UK’s High-speed Rail Network Project
In December 2024, Mark Wild, HS2’s new Chief Executive, attributed the spiralling costs of the £multi-billion project to a rushed start, acknowledging that insufficient time was spent determining the project’s true cost. This did not surprise me, as I had identified in my 2010 research article published in the Construction Management and Economics journal, as well as in my latest book Project Control Methods and Best Practices: Achieving Project Success, that the premature commencement of work without sufficient planning is a critical factor impeding project success.
Wild emphasised the need for a fundamental reset of the project, indicating that developing a robust new plan would take up to 18 months. The HS2 case highlights a critical failure in pre-project planning, leading to the project experiencing significant cost overrun. When there is insufficient lead time between awarding contracts and starting work, project teams often lack the opportunity to establish structured and systematic project controls.
Effective project control approaches must be established early to align the management team and ensure coherent execution. Without these foundational elements, even the best intentions are unlikely to yield success.
The Consequences of a Rushed Start
Rushing to initiate projects often leaves insufficient time to properly plan how the project will be controlled. This leads to several cascading problems:
- Disorganised Project Control: Without a structured framework for managing costs, timelines, and deliverables, projects become vulnerable to inefficiencies and delays. The absence of systematic project controls frequently results in reactive management practices rather than proactive problem-solving.
- Insufficient Processes and Systems: Proper project control systems require time to install and refine. A rushed start often hinders the establishment of these processes, severely limiting the project’s ability to monitor progress effectively.
- Compressed Timelines: The period between awarding a contract and commencing work is often ‘telescoped,’ leaving critical activities rushed or overlooked. This not only creates immediate challenges but also sows the seeds for longer-term problems.
- Neglecting Early-Stage Project Monitoring: A significant consequence of inadequate planning is the lack of attention to project progress during the early stages. Delivery teams may assume there is ample time to recover from delays. However, as the project progresses, small setbacks often escalate into significant obstacles, shifting from non-critical issues to items on the critical path.
The Cost of Neglecting Adequate Planning
The absence of a robust planning process can have significant consequences:
- Higher Costs: Projects that start without a clear control strategy are more likely to encounter budget overruns due to inefficiencies and reactive problem-solving.
- Delayed Timelines: A lack of alignment and clarity at the outset often leads to delays as teams grapple with unforeseen issues.
- Frustrated Stakeholders: When projects fail to meet expectations, stakeholders lose confidence, potentially jeopardising future opportunities.
- Reputational Damage: Repeated failed projects can tarnish the image of the organisations involved. With this being seen as a sign of poor management and the inability to deliver as promised.
The Importance of Adequate Preparation and Pre-Planning
Proper preparation ensures that teams can address foreseeable challenges systematically, reducing the likelihood of costly mistakes later in the project lifecycle. Early-stage planning and control is vital to project success by providing a clear framework for tracking and managing progress.
Practical Recommendations
To avoid the pitfalls of rushing into projects, organisations must adopt a more deliberate approach:
- Plan How the Project Will Be Controlled: During the planning phase, prepare detailed documentation outlining control measures. This includes specifying how cost, schedule, and performance will be monitored and managed.
- Early Involvement of Key Delivery Partners: Involvement of key delivery partners early in the preparation phase fosters collaboration and ensures their expertise is integrated into the project delivery approach, minimising risks and inefficiencies. This proactive engagement often sets a strong foundation for project success.
- Developing Robust Project Control Guidance: These should be established at the outset to align the team and provide a roadmap for monitoring progress and taking corrective actions. This means developing comprehensive project control guidelines and procedures during the planning phase including roles and responsibilities.
- Align the Team with Project Goals: Ensure the project team understands the budget, schedule, and control systems. This alignment helps in managing costs effectively and responding proactively to deviations.
- Implement Continuous Monitoring: From the outset, establish processes for regular reporting and corrective actions. Early identification and resolution of issues are critical to maintaining control.
- Integrating Control Systems into Planning: Cost estimates, schedules, and budgets should be designed with control mechanisms in mind, ensuring they can be effectively utilised during execution. For project success, control mechanisms must be embedded in the planning stage. Unfortunately, many organisations devote considerable effort to execution planning without giving sufficient thought to how these plans will be used for project control.
Conclusion
Starting a project without sufficient planning is a false economy. While it may seem expedient, it often results in higher costs, delays, and a greater risk of failure. By prioritising robust pre-project planning and embedding robust control systems from the beginning, organisations can set the stage for successful project delivery.
The lessons from HS2 and other similar endeavours should serve as a warning: taking the time to plan is not a delay but an investment in success. In project management, slow and steady truly wins the race.
By Prof. Yakubu Olawale