Why do project’s controls fail?

Juggling with risks

Controls are set to reduce risks

This sheds a different light on this matter. At least this introduces logic for setting procedures that cost and, if not properly set, hamper the production.
The focus is on the single control. The success of the whole project, where success is the acceptance of the outcome from the stakeholders, shall not obliterate the simple fact that some resources designated to check at least one dimension (i.e. scope creeping, time for completing a task, number of mistakes in code) did not work. Either the results did not reach the people responsible for taking the decisions, or these data influenced a wrong determination.
This situation creates some of the following consequences:

1. Those resources were squandered.
2. The human (professional) relationships were tarnished. After that the leadership / trustfulness is lamed.
3. The confidence in the adopted method is reduced. Hence, further resources will be allocated for reviewing the rules. More energy will be spent (wasted?) for convincing people to abide to the company’s standard.

Instead of blaming more or less specific cultural attitudes, the attention shall be moved on the motive(s) that sustained the application of those controls.

Every action has a cost

People (and machineries) that have been made available for completing the project must be held accountable for their action(employment). Does it mean that is it feasible to audit every bit of the people assigned? Forget any though about 1984 novel or Plato’s Republic.
The controls themselves cost; moreover, they are carried out by people. “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?” “Who watches the watchers?”
The efficiency and the effectiveness of controls depend upon the power (willingness to accept them) used for applying them. Therefore, to work out the required efforts for implementing controls, the management’s energy shall be considered as part of the whole job.
The process of controlling is composed by these elements:

1. The matter to be gauged. This has to include a metric.
2. The performing subject.
3. The target. How much output’s measurement has reached the acceptance’s point?
4. The controller. Who/what read the measurement and then to confirm its validity.
5. The user. Who receive the output and “shall” perform with it.

To set up any control is a daunting project itself. Nevertheless, they are unavoidable. Accepting the assumption that controls are necessary for reducing risks, it is easier to find a common source (denominator) for them.

Conclusion

Controls are just tools for checking the reality. The surrounding world is plenty of signals; however, we are able to pay attention to few of them. Make a stark choice about what is really important helps us to survive. In a complex business environment, like a project, the implementation of a strategy is paramount. To be accepted by all stakeholders, it has to be broad enough for containing, at least a slice of everyone’s interests.