One of my many Management Consulting practices is in the performance of formal “Independent Validation and Verification (IV&V)” services. I have provided IV&V services to several Government Agencies in addition to a number of Commercial clients as a Legal “Expert Witness”. “IV&V” and/or “Expert Witness” services are typically provided on a per problem contract basis. However, IV&V services can be also be provided on a “Retainer” basis.

IV&V services are used when projects are not meeting “Objectives and Key Requirements (OKRs)” despite extensive internal efforts to redefine, redesign and restructure the failing project. The key value added by an “Independent” examiner is to look beyond “finding faults” and “assigning blame” (which the teams and upper management have presumably repeatedly tried), to what additional types of resources and capabilities are needed to remedy the existing teams’ demonstrated inability to meet expectations.

Standard IV&V practice is for the examiner to provide leadership/management a confidential detailed report of findings of possible factors that contribute to the failures, and identify possible sources of the resources that might improve the situation. Then the examiner leaves -> since any further interaction would no longer provide an “Independent” assessment of the ongoing project.

For example, one very large federal agency had a multi-year information technology (IT) Infrastructure Enhancement (IE) project that was years late – and was on track to be significantly over budget. After multiple meetings with the Chief Information Officer (CEO) at headquarters in Washington, DC, an IV&V consulting agreement was reached.

Existing project documents available at headquarters were reviewed and summarized without involving any Agency staff – to ensure that the investigation of historical project documents did not alert staff, and possibly result in organizational efforts to modify history to cloud or hide issues that may have contributed to the documented management failure of the project.

With no prior warning, late in the afternoon, the Agency CEO was asked to schedule an early morning meeting for the next day with the development project “Program Project Manager (PPM)” and include the senior IT staff selected by the PPM. When the independent examiner arrived, the strategy and schedule for the day’s IV&V meetings was shared with the development PPM:

1. The development PPM would immediately schedule a meeting with all members of the development team to review the IV&V strategy, mission and process.

2. After the key concept of NOT “finding fault” or “assigning blame” was presented, the meeting attendees would be asked to suggest which teams and team members should be scheduled for later meetings to better characterize the challenges that have lead to the continuing failure to meet expectations.

3. Team meetings were to be chaired by the individual team leaders, with the IV&V examiner auditing the meeting. Where appropriate, the IV&V examiner might ask a “leading” question to ensure that the underlying issues were fully explored while attempting to minimize the often unavoidable team member attempts to “assign blame” or “find fault”. Focusing on the management process, rather than the individual results that the existing team failed to deliver, the IV&V examiner will challenge the team to further identify areas of management challenges and deficiencies.

4. After the individual team meetings were concluded, a final meeting, chaired by the PPM with the team leads, would review and summarize the findings identified during the team meetings.

Failure to effectively communicate with the project teams during the IV&V meetings can negatively impact the effectiveness of the IV&V review. During the IV&V’s introductory meeting with the project PPM, the importance of establishing clear and effective communication with the project teams during the IV&V meetings is emphasized. The project PPM is encouraged to share information on team dynamics and management challenges characteristic of the internal project organization – as well as its contributing external teams, contributors and suppliers.

Once the final full team meeting is completed, the IV&V examiner leaves, and then prepares the confidential report. The confidential report does not address the details of the failures themselves, but rather focuses on the teams inability to effectively manage the project. The focus is on the institutional, team and individual associate attributes that appear to be contributing to the ongoing management failure.

Since projects with these types of continuing management failures are often already being considered for cancellation, it is typically too late to consider additional remedial training to enhance the project management effectiveness of the existing staff in a timely fashion.

Rather, the IV&V examiner strives to identify the specific types of required management expertise needed, how this expertise will enhance performance, and suggests how this expertise might be obtained either within or outside the organization. Strategies for incorporating these additional resource are also addressed, based on observations of the management culture encountered.

Remedies may sometimes necessarily include the reassignment of existing staff whom have shown their inability, or even unwillingness, to remediate and resolve the identified management failures observed on this project. When this happens, it is important to communicate to the individual(s) affected, and the project team at large, that these actions are not to be interpreted as punishment, but they are being reassigned to other responsibilities that more closely reflects their unique capabilities and opportunities to shine.