If you were a project owner or a project manager, how would you measure the worth or success of a project? Counting project success beyond the triple constraint -- what does it mean? 

Well, let's begin with the triple constraint. It's widely known and accepted that a project is considered successful if it is delivered within the triple constraint: on time, within budget, and according to specifications. Therefore, if Project A was delivered according to specifications, within budget but late; or Project B was delivered on time, according to specifications, but beyond budget -- means both projects were not successful. Right?

That's right. Judging purely from the triple constraint's point of view -- the measure and mind set of "traditional" project management -- both projects were not successful.  Well, consider this one, then ...

The Sydney Opera House*
The project was envisioned in 1950s by the New South Wales government. The approved budget was about 7 million Australian dollars and to be constructed in five years. 

Five years passed. Budget consumed. No opera house. What happened? 

The construction experienced multiple difficulties: terrible conflicts; painful delays; budget overruns. 

It was eleven years later when finally the construction of the Sydney Opera House completed; and surprise surprise it consumed more than 100 million dollars!  If I stop the story right here, right now -- if you were to judge this project, what would you say? "Unimaginable! A case of total project failure." Totally agree with you.

However, ask every traveller who has been to Sydney and visited the Opera House: How awesome its architecture is. Does anyone care anymore if the project was a total failure because it was delivered 11 years behind the schedule, and under a much-inflated budget? 40 years, since its opening by Queen Elizabeth II in 1973, have passed: the Opera House still stands tall as ever -- a beauty beyond compare. A work of wonder visited by millions of tourists every year. And it continues bringing in revenue to the city of Sydney. 

Would you still consider it as a project failure? 

What about another example: The construction of the Los Angeles Metro*. Designed to be a "world-class" subway system for the Los Angeles community. By triple constraint measures, it was a complete success: completed eight months ahead of schedule, best of all within budget. The project was even selected as "Project of the Year" by the Project Management Institute (PMI) in 1993. However, it failed to attract the community -- they were reluctant to leave their cars at home and use the train instead. Hence, the train usage was significantly lower than expected. Realising there was not much return from its investment, the remaining phases of the project were dropped a few years later.

See the difference?

So, what makes a project successful then? How do you measure it?
Is the triple constraint no longer valid as a project's success measure? In my opinion, it is still valid, but only as a short term measure. In today's dynamic world, success of a project must be assessed by the value that it brings, which often takes time. Therefore, it is advisable to judge a project success beyond its short term goal, because merely meeting time, budget and specification is not the true measure. What's the true measure then? It is how the project, in the long run, contributes to the overall business results; how it brings value.

Beyond time, budget, and specification
Next time, you are tempted to criticise your project team (or yourself as a project manager) just because the project they (or you) manage potentially is not going to meet the triple constraint: take a deep breath, think about the Sydney Opera House. Look beyond time, budget and specification. 

Trace back your overall business strategy -- your business expectations -- connect them with your project's goal. How you expect your project output will contribute to your business -- will it help improve operational efficiency, create new market share, or bring in more revenues? See if the long term goal of your project is aligned with these expectations: If so, don't fret: allow delay, adapt to change of scope or specification, and adjust your budget. 

This way, you pave a safe path to success for your team and your business.

*A.J. Shenhar and D. Dvir, Reinventing Project Management, Harvard Business School Press
The Sydney Opera House image by Melissa Mu Photography.

About the author:
Fourteena, a trained bid manager and business strategist, is a certified professional in P3O -- Portfolio, Programme and Project Offices. Since 2000, she's been involved in turning numerous business opportunities into projects that delivered outcomes. View her profile http://www.linkedin.com/pub/fourteena-p-d-halim/27/41a/932

Nine out of ten will react: My gosh! Silent sales person? Not exist. 

It's widely known, to be a sales person, one must be able to sell (for sure) through talking (over the phone) or meeting prospective clients -- to explain, seek clarification, convince, hence sell. All is done through persuasive "speeches" -- not in silence.

Understand. From that point of view -- having silent sales persons sound good-for-nothing. Totally agree! 

But what about business proposals? Do you know that they are silent sales persons?

It's not a trick. It's true. Business proposals are silent sales persons. In bidding/tendering situation, sometimes, sales person is not allowed to speak with prospective clients. The only way to communicate with them is through proposal submission -- thus, this turns a proposal into a "silent sales person". 

The proposal, a response to a tender or a bid, though is regarded as a "silent" person doesn't mean that it cannot "act" as a living and talking sales person. When it is written well, it can be even more powerful than a real talking sales person. 

Destiny of well written proposal
A very well written proposal presents and communicates  solutions and ideas so clearly as if they all jump off the pages by themselves and straight into the mind of the readers -- the proposal evaluators. A very well written proposal has contents that resonate with the evaluators' personal experiences and professional expectations. Hence, as they read through, they nod and nod their heads in agreement. A well written proposal leads to a smooth negotiation, and its destiny ends with a contract award. 

As simple as that? Not quite. 

In fact, it takes a whole of hard work before the writing part kicks in. So where do we start?

Well, traditionally we start with understanding the prospective client's requirements -- while this may still be a good place to start, but along the way, it is imperative to investigate the unspoken or unrecognised needs. These are the needs when well addressed in the proposal will make the evaluators' heads nod and nod.

Discover something beyond the stated needs
In early 2010, I led a team to bid for an airport IT infrastructure project. The solution requirements were not difficult and it was not a complex project either. Yet, the prospective client issued a tender in search for a perfect supplier. 

My intuition told me, at once, that the key to win the bid was not just understanding the requirements (which were obvious and common) and offering the same solution that others offered at a competitive price, but finding something beyond the stated needs written in the tender document -- the unspoken needs. 

The silent sales person revealed the client's unspoken needs
True enough. It was not a solution that only involved hardware and software that made the evaluators nodded their heads in agreement. It was the unspoken need! The needs, which we eventually uncovered through persistent investigation, were the human resources part: the client had too many ground staff. It didn't know what to do with them. 

We addressed these needs in the proposal-- how to handle the client's extra resources. In fact, we proposed to engage them as our onsite support team, and offered skills upgrade through technical training. 

With that, guess what? Our silent sales person (our proposal) spoke the loudest. We won the project!

Now you believe me: A silent sales person does exist. If you haven't seen one, perhaps, it's a time for you to create one yourself. All the best!

About the author:
Fourteena is a trained and experienced bid manager who acquired her strategic bid management skills in Geneva, Switzerland. Since 2000, she has led virtual bid teams to successfully win about 45 airport's IT Infrastructure tenders/bids, worth $US80 million, across Australia; New Zealand; the Asian Pacific countries: India, China, Taiwan, Japan; and countries in the South Pacific Islands. View her profile http://www.linkedin.com/pub/fourteena-p-d-halim/27/41a/932

Ask every sales professional, whatever his/her title is -- sales manager, account executive, sales executive, sales director, account director, etc -- if he/she knows who his/her customer is.

"Of course, I know!", I bet everyone will say that. 

Really? 

Supposedly, your customer is "Onion, Inc". 

A simple question, if I may ask: How do you spell your customer names? "Easy", you said, "O-N-I-O-N". 

Are you sure? The question is -- how do you spell your customer "names"? It is not just one name, not a company's name that you have spelled correctly. 

Recently, I was offered a short-term contract role by a company I used to work for for many years. I was thrilled. But the whole process to bringing me back on board was absolutely complicated; even though the need of my skills and services were very obvious and critical. It was the process and "bureaucracy" that made it complex for such a simple request. There were a number of people, from different functions and even companies,  involved before I finally received the "go" ahead.

First, the engagement manager (called him Bill) who highlighted the need of my expertise urgently; apparently, he was supported 100% by people around him -- the main stakeholders -- who recognised my expertise and the need of it. 

Second, Bill's direct manager (called him Matt). After some serious and persuasive talks, Matt, a reluctant manager who acted as a "goal keeper" of the team, finally agreed to bring the matter up to the decision maker, his boss -- the vice president of the business unit. 

Third, this vice president -- the decision maker, called him Tim, like Matt, was only convinced after hearing the loud cry that was supported by his direct report, Matt, and the main stakeholders around Bill.

Fourth, the purchasing manager (Tom), who authorised suppliers as well as contractors (including consultants), mandated that an agent to be assigned as a mediator between an individual contractor (me) and the Company. 

Fifth, a potential agent (represented by Jim). It was brought in (by me) as part of the condition of my engagement. Upon rigorous reviews and after I have stated a strong and rational reason why I have to use this agent (instead of Tom's suggested agent) to represent me for administrative and payroll purposes, finally the use of my nominated agent was approved.

Was it all? No. 

Connect the whole players
Now that all the players were identified, the whole process must be completed. I had to connect each player according to the process. Behind the scene, I must keep track the progress to ensure all moved to the direction that took me to the Company.

If you were the sales person offering professional services under the above scenario, could you tell  "who was your customer?" or "who were your customers?": No doubt, now you would mention Bill, Matt, Tim, Tom, and Jim. 

And not to forget behind them there were still more names that influenced and impacted the final decision indirectly. They too were your customers!

In this real example, one important step had been skipped: The evaluation of my capability to provide the services -- my capability had been well known and proven. In many other business situations, the  products and services offered might have not been known, let alone proven. In this case, first things first is to find the "Bill" of the company -- sometimes we refer "Bill" as the user, and find out whoever behind him and what they need.

Although sometimes a sales person feels sure of winning the deal because his/her main contact is "Tim" the decision maker. Right? 

Not true! This was not the case. Even Tim must listen to the rest of the players: Bill --the user, who was supported by Matt and influenced and urged by others (the main stakeholders); Tom -- the purchasing manager; and perhaps  Jim -- the third parties. If any of these parties was ignored there would be no guarantee of winning the deal. 

An entire team behind every customer
Dr. E.H. Edhersheim, in her book titled The Definitive Drucker, says: "In this interconnected environment, there's an entire team behind every customer. The user, the buyer, and the influencer are linked together as never before. We need to do more than understand them; we need to engage with them, alone and in groups, and understand how they want to be engaged. This is a whole new type of relationship, with the customer influencing other customers."

It is, indeed, an interconnected environment.  A whole new type of relationship -- between seller and buyer. Selling is no longer straight forward, worst, it becomes so complicated these days. The key is to be persistent in uncovering the whole players. Know them by their first names, establish relationship and connection with each one of them to know what they really, really, really needs. And spell them out in your selling strategy. 

So, next time someone asked: "Who is your customer?" You may rephrase the question: "Who is the people behind my customer, you mean?" That's more like it. 

A customer can never be a company. It is people: an entire team. Know them well: who they are; what they want, spell them out then sell.

Not easy. But isn't it only through difficulties that our knowledge grows?