Resource Allocation and Budgeting

This week our resources focused on resource allocation and budgeting. Portny et al. (2008) define a project budget as “nothing more than the project plan, based on the Work Breakdown Structure, expressed in monetary terms”. Our task this week was to search the web for resources that would be useful in estimating costs, effort, and/or duration of activities connected with instructional design projects.

One resource that came up during my search is one that I have utilized in previous instructional design courses: Don Clark’s Big Dog & Little Dog’s Performance Juxtaposition website. What I found most helpful on this site were some actual budgeting guidelines from different expert sources that could be plugged into a budget. For example, the eLearning Guild (2002) estimate suggests that to create one hour of simple asynchronous e-learning, 117 hours of development time should be budgeted. This site reminds us that the budget is an estimate and may not be correct the first time, but should be evaluated and adjusted as more information is obtained (Clark, 2010). The link contains many more project details that are useful to begin your cost estimates.

A second site that I found helpful is Freelance Switch and an article by Jennifer Stakes Roberts titled 6 Budget Planning Steps to Professional Project Estimates. This article comes from the perspective of a freelancer and walks the reader step-by-step through creating both top-down estimates and bottom-up estimates. In the top-down approach, the article breaks the estimating down into direct costs and indirect costs. For someone new to budgeting, I like that this article reminds the reader to include those indirect costs such as office costs, equipment, and administrative costs. The author also gives suggestions on questions to ask the client and what to do if your estimate is too high.

A third site that I found helpful as someone studying instructional design and project management was the Microsoft Office Project 2013 site and the section titled 5 steps to prepare your project budget. This area of the Microsoft site goes through the three different types of cost associated with a project: resource rates, fixed costs, and per-use costs. There are also key terms in red that when clicked on give a definition. Embedded within the steps to preparing the project budget are also the steps on creating the budget using Microsoft Office Project. So, for someone like me who is trying Microsoft’s Office Project for the first time this week, this support site is a great resource.

References

Clark, D. (2010). Estimating costs and time in instructional design. Retrieved from http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/costs.html

Microsoft Corporation (2013). 5 steps to prepare your budget. Retrieved from http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/project-help/5-steps-to-prepare-your-project-budget-HA001141182.aspx

Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E. (2008). Project management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Resource allocation image retrieved from http://www.strategicmanagementbureau.com/home/2013/7/18/are-resource-allocation-decisions-the-key-to-achieving-agili.html

Roberts, J. S. (2013). 6 budget planning steps to professional project estimates. Retrieved from http://freelanceswitch.com/the-business-of-freelancing/plan-project-estimate-budgets/

Communicating Effectively

Leadership Communication:  Relations for Introvert Leaders Image by:  kenfagerdotcom

Dr. Stolovitch in Communicating with Stakeholders advises that project managers are diplomats (Laureate Education, n.d.).  The website dictionary.com defines a diplomat as someone “who is tactful and skillful in managing delicate situations, and handling people”.  Dr. Stolovitch also suggests that clear, concise, and focused communication helps everyone stay on target; however communication is more than just words (Laureate Education, n.d.).  We need to be mindful of our spirit and attitude, tonality and body language, time, and the personality of the person with whom we are communicating (Laureate Education, n.d.).  
This week we examined how the mode of communication can affect how the message is received or interpreted.  During our Walden presentation, we received the same message as an email, voicemail, and delivered face-to-face.  Here are my reactions to these different modes:

Email

• The most formal of the three communication modes
• The message came across as casually polite, but made it clear that the missing report/data was needed.
• The message was documented in writing.  The information could easily be reread for clarity and understanding.  It could also be printed and filed or added to an email folder as part of the project record.  Mark should also take note that because it is in writing, Jane has documented her request for the needed information.
• There was no specific timeframe given, just that an ETA was needed and let me know when you can do it.

Voicemail

• Less formal because the request was not documented in writing
• Tone still came across as fairly polite, but the sense of urgency was apparent in the tone of voice and some of the words that were emphasized.
• As the receiver, I needed to listen to the message several times to get all of the details.

Face-to-Face

• At first glance appears very casual and informal – over the partition conversation, not even sitting down
• The tone, body language, and facial expressions however seemed condescending.
• Jane could have kept the visit friendlier by sitting down for a moment to “chat” first, and then ask the question about the needed data.
• If the message is delivered in person, it is harder to ignore than a voicemail or email message.
• There is nothing in writing to Mark about this request, but Jane could document the conversation with Mark for her records.

What can we learn from these scenarios about how to communicate (or how NOT to communicate) with project team members?

• After receiving the same message in three different modalities, it helped me to realize that how a message is delivered is as important as the content of the message.  Vince Budrovich recommends that project managers tailor their communication strategy to fit the specific needs of each stakeholder (Laureate Education, n.d.).  Jane needs to put her request in the context of the project and consider her working relationship with Mark in order to select the best communication mode for that message.

• Assuming Jane is the project manager, has she created and shared a project timeline with her stakeholders?  A well communicated plan with due dates may have helped avoid this confrontation with Mark and helped Jane to receive her data in time to create her own report.

• Another important communication strategy is to hold regularly scheduled team meetings.  This would give team members the opportunity to give and receive progress updates as well as “sustain productive and trusting interpersonal relationships” (Portny et al., 2007). 

• Sometimes as the project manager, we don’t have direct authority over some or all of the project team members.  Portny et al. (2007) offer some suggestions to overcome this. 

1. First, make sure your communications are clear and specific and formalize agreements in writing.  
2. Also, make the person accountable to the team, because his/her actions affect the progress of the team.  Let team members know about commitments made and acknowledge when those promises are met and also communicate to the team when they are not (Portny et al., 2007).

Communicating to team members clearly about the objectives and goals of the project will help them to better understand the big picture or vision AND how their piece(s) fits into the goal.  The Project Management Institute (PMI®) website suggests that successful project managers “translate strategy for the team”.  The project manager, through communicating the objectives, can help team members see how individual parts of the project support the big picture.

References

dictionary.com retrieved from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/diplomat?s=t

Laureate Education, (n.d.). Communicating with stakeholders. Retrieved from 
https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_4065699_1%26url%3D

Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E. (2008). Project management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Project Management Institute, Inc. (2013). Three must-have communications skills. Retrieved from http://www.pmi.org/Professional-Development/Career-Central/3-Must-Have-Communications-Skills.aspx

Creating an Inquiry-Based Unit

The principal at our elementary school hired a consultant to work with our grade levels during a school-day workshop to learn more about creating and using inquiry-based units with our students.  During the morning session the speaker delivered some background information about inquiry-based learning and showed some examples.  After a break for lunch, each grade level was charged with creating two complete units of study for social studies or science that we would then use later in the school year.  The project timeline for the teachers included preparatory work prior to the workshop, attending the workshop and creating units, and finally the implementation of the units in our classrooms.

This project was a partial success in the sense that we developed a better understanding of inquiry-based learning.  We were not able to create two complete units, but we did get a start.  The two main reasons for this lack of success were:

• Lack of clear communication:  The literacy coach, who was the school liaison for the consultant, apparently did not explain the expectations or goals clearly to the grade levels.  The preparatory work that we completed prior to the actual meeting day to define and outline the theme for the units of study was not what the consultant was looking for and we basically had to start from scratch that afternoon.

• Lack of buy-in:  As with any type of change, there can be resistance.  Many of the teachers were less than thrilled to attend this workshop.  Using these units meant changing teaching models in the middle of the year.  There were concerns that with minimal training, teachers would not be prepared to change from a more teacher-direct approach to a student-directed approach.

Looking back at the workshop, there were some steps that the project manager (our principal) could have taken to enable her teachers to be more successful. 

• During the planning phase, the project manager (PM) ensures that the specific results to be achieved are clearly defined (Portny et al., 2008).  When determining the project scope and the objectives, I think that the goal of learning about inquiry-based classrooms AND creating two complete units of study was too aggressive and intimidating.  Prior to even attending the workshop, teachers were already overwhelmed regarding that goal.  After the workshop, teachers were left feeling that they did not accomplish the set task and now had the pressure of more work to complete on their own time to finish creating the units.

• During the initial phase of the project, the PM could have made more of an effort to create buy-in for the workshop and the teaching style changes that it necessitated.  Dr. Bligh cautions about this very idea in her video podcast, Transformational Leadership, by suggesting that one challenge is to get buy-in because change often feels imposed (Laureate Education, n.d.).  The teachers at my school did feel that this project and change was imposed on them without any input.  

• Communication is critical.  Portny et al. (2008) suggest that a common cause of project failure is poor team communications (p. 107).  Project managers should share key information with team members “in a timely fashion” (Portny et al., 2008).  More timely information from our PM and our literacy coach about the expectations, workshop agenda, preparatory work, and materials needed would have helped contribute to a more successful project experience.

We could consider this a long-term project because the initial expectations were that we would continue to use these units during subsequent school years and increasingly use an inquiry-based model rather than teacher-directed.  However, during the same year of the workshop, our principal was promoted to the district office, so we lost our PM not too long after the workshop.  In the podcast Practitioner Voices:  Barriers to Project Success, we learn about one project “headache” – when stakeholders leave or are replaced.  In this case, our PM was replaced.  What has this meant to the long-term success of these units and inquiry-based learning?  I know that my grade level has begun the shift towards more inquiry-based learning, but it has not been fully embraced.  With a new PM and lack of follow-up, the project really has fizzled.

References

Laureate Education, (n.d.). Practitioner voices: Barriers to project success. Retrieved from

https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_4065699_1%26url%3D

Laureate Education, Inc. (n.d.). Transformational Leadership. [Video Podcast]. [With Dr. Michelle Bligh].  

Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E. (2008). Project management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.