Managing Scope Creep

I have yet to be part of any project that did not experience some level of scope creep. Scope creep occurs when the client or members of the project team “try to improve the project’s output as the project progresses” (Portny, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer, Sutton & Kramer, 2008, p. 346). Scope creep is inevitable, but if change processes are controlled carefully and in a formal manner, scope creep will not be the downfall of a project.

The hospital I work for is implementing an integrated electronic medical record (EMR). This is huge project spanning several years. Part of this project is to implement the EMR in our many outpatient clinics. We have a large primary care network and over 60 specialty clinics. For those of you who may not be familiar with healthcare, the term “clinic” does not always refer to a physical location. Our clinics occur to treat patients with different types of problems and sometimes share space. For example, we have an Orthopedic clinic, a Pulmonary clinic, a Surgery clinic, an Allergy clinic etc. Within these specialties, there are often different types of clinics that focus on different disorders held on different days of the week. For instance, the Pulmonary clinic may hold an Asthma clinic on one day and a Cystic Fibrosis clinic on another.

Each clinic’s EMR implementation is a separate project under the larger umbrella of the hospital’s EMR implementation. Each clinic “Go-Live” has its own project manager and build team from the IS Department. Our team is responsible for training physicians and medical staff; we are part of the Medical Education department. Another team from the Professional Development department is responsible for training nursing and ancillary clinical staff, and yet another team is responsible for training administrative staff on non-clinical applications (billing, scheduling, etc.).

Each clinic go-live project has experienced scope creep. Most often, this is related poor workflow analysis. Unfortunately, the project managers try to employ a “cookie cutter” approach to bringing these clinics live on the EMR.  All of our clinics are unique. They have their own procedures and workflows yet the project managers repeatedly try to use the same plan. Many of our clinics are multidisciplinary meaning that more than one specialty may see them in a given clinic. The project team often does not anticipate this and inevitably leaves people and workflows out. Over the course of project meetings, these workflows and other roles are identified and the project team has to scramble to incorporate them.  In the past, this has led to delays in build, delays in training and delays in implementation.

If I were managing these projects, I would perform more upfront analysis in each clinic. Asking some basic “who, what, why, when, where, and how” questions would go a long way in identifying the unique workflows. I would outline all of the workflows and work to be performed in the “Define Phase” of the project in order to clarify details with each clinic (Portny et al, 2008). I would have this approved in writing by the clinic representatives before work began. Despite performing a better upfront analysis, scope creep is still likely to occur so I would include a change control process in the project plan.  I would ensure that the project stakeholders agreed upon all changes after identifying how the changes would affect the project plan, schedule, and budget.

Thanks,

Brandey

Reference:

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.

Communicating Effectively

This week, we are asked to review the following communication in three modalities, email, voicemail, and face-to-face:

“Hi Mark, I know you have been busy and possibly in that all day meeting today, but I really need an ETA on the missing report. Because your report contains data I need to finish my report, I might miss my own deadline if I don’t get your report soon. Please let me know you think you can get your report sent over to me, or even if you can send the data I need in a separate email. I really appreciate your help. Jane.”

I began by reviewing the email message. My thoughts were that Jane recognizes the fact that Mark is busy. She needs his report to finish her report so she is relying on him. If he does not have time to send the full report, just the data will do. The message conveys urgency but is very cordial as she says “please” and that she appreciates his help.

The voicemail message was also cordial, but the tone of voice indicates increased urgency. Jane is saying please and that she appreciates his help, but based on her tone, she sounds a little annoyed. The voicemail did not “sound” as friendly as the email.

The face-to-face communication was awkward. Although Jane is explaining the urgency, she is speaking very calmly and slow, so it does not seem as urgent. Also, her saying “please” and that she appreciates his help do not seem as genuine as in the email or even the voicemail message.

In Communicating with Project Stakeholders (Laureate Education Inc., 2010), Dr. Stolovitch tells us that important information should be communicated face-to-face. I generally agree, but in this case, I think email was a perfectly appropriate way to communicate this message. Email does not allow for tone or body language; the words must be taken at face value. As long as some basic “netiquette” is employed as is the case here, email can get the point across very well. Additionally, email has the benefit of being date and time stamped and can easily be accessed later for review. Voicemail is also date and time stamped, although may not be as easy to retrieve because people often delete voicemails as soon as they listen to them. The voicemail in this case did have the benefit of relaying an increased sense of urgency, but sent a bit of a mixed message in that Jane sounded a bit annoyed at Marc even while acknowledging that he was very busy. The face-to-face communication here was very mixed as Jane was telling Marc that she needed the report soon, but her tone indicated that it was no big deal. Furthermore, the face-to-face communication in this context cannot be tracked; it can easily be misinterpreted or forgotten. This is one reason why it is so important during project team meetings to keep written minutes of what was discussed (Portny, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer, Sutton & Kramer, 2008).

Thanks,

Brandey

References:

Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2010). Communicating with Stakeholders[Video webcast]. Retrieved March 12, 2012 from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=6493367&Survey=1&47=7098459&ClientNodeID=984650&coursenav=1&bhcp=1

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.

Learning From a Project Postmortem

Most projects I have been directly involved with in my professional career have been fairly successful. I'm pretty lucky in that respect. Years of working as a nurse prepared me to expect the unexpected and act swiftly when the unexpected occurs. I am a planner. I recognize that what can go wrong will go wrong so it is best to be ready for anything. This attitude has served me well where project work is concerned.

I cannot recall being part of a truly unsuccessful project, but I was part of a project that was very mediocre. Some of you may be able to relate, I’m referring to the group instructional design project we completed in EIDT 6100 – Instructional Design. I’ll admit, I’m no fan of group work in when it comes to school. I understand the purpose of group work and in the real world, I like to work as part of a team, but I do not like having to depend on others when my grades are concerned. My fears related to group work came true while working on the EIDT 6100 project. The project was not a complete failure, but it wasn’t the caliber of work that I was used to producing. Greer’s “Postmortem” questions (2010) have been helpful in identifying some obvious mistakes our group made.

As I’m sure most of you know, in EIDT 6100, we worked in groups to develop an Instructional Plan. Each member of the group was assigned to take the lead on a phase of the ADDIE model. Groups with six members also had a dedicated project manager. I was part of a group that had six members and had volunteered to be project manager. My role was to review the assigned parts of the project submitted by each team member for each week, then format and compile them into one cohesive document. Our topic, applying for financial aid, was suggested by a group member who worked in a university financial aid office. She agreed to serve as the SME for the project.

A summary of the project’s challenges and issues:

·         Members of our group were living in different time zones and even different countries which made collaboration difficult. All of our communication occurred over the project message board and by email, so it was pretty disjointed.

·         After week one, a member of the group dropped the class, so I was shifted to the development role and we were left without a designated project manager. This shift in roles caused some confusion at first. One member thought I would serve as developer and PM for the whole project, rather than each individual taking the lead for their designated phase of the project.

·         Over the course of the project, our SME provided very little input about our topic; in fact she barely replied when we posed questions. We were each left to research the topic on our own.

·         Although due dates for all assigned work were expressly stated in the course, some members of the team had difficulty meeting deadlines or understanding what was due and when. Work was frequently submitted at the last minute which made it difficult for the leader to compile it cohesively.

·         We each seemed to have a different “vision” for what the project should be. It was difficult to come to an understanding and produce a unified project plan. Some members of the team were very thorough and others did the bare minimum.

What contributed to the project’s success or failure?

Although the project was not a total failure, it was certainly not a success. Lack of communication was a major contributing factor. The message board was very confusing; there were multiple threads and comments layered upon comments. It was not an effective way to communicate. Another problem was that the project team never seemed to be on the same page. There were misunderstandings, misinterpretations, and general differences in opinion about what should be done, when, how and by whom. Expectations of work were not clearly set in the beginning. I mistakenly assumed that the guidelines set forth by the instructor would suffice, but they did not.

Which parts of the PM process, if included, would have made the project more successful? Why?

Looking back, incorporating some basic project management strategies could have really improved the relationship of the project team and helped to develop a more successful project. Synchronous communication through conference calls or web chats would have been very helpful for our group, but unfortunately were not really feasible. A well-defined communication plan would have helped to ensure everyone on the team was receiving the right information in a way that was best suited to them (Allen & Hardin, 2008). A Statement of Work (SOW) providing written confirmation of what would be produced and under what terms could have helped the team agree, up front, what would be done and when (Portny, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer, Sutton & Kramer, 2008). A linear responsibility chart would have helped to identify each member’s roles and responsibilities (Portny et al., 2008). A formal timeline could have helped to emphasize deadlines.

Using Greer’s postmortem questions, I have been able to look back at the EIDT 6100 project with a critical eye and identify what I would do differently. I still prefer to work independently, but if faced with another group course project, I am confident integrating some simple project management tools will provide for a better group dynamic and more successful project.

References:

Allen, S., & Hardin, P. C. (2008). Developing instructional technology products using effective project management practices. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 19(2), 72–97. 

Greer, M. (2010). The project management minimalist: Just enough PM to rock your projects! (Laureate custom ed.). Baltimore: Laureate Education, Inc.

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.

Welcome

Welcome EDUC 6145 classmates. I began this blog as part of Learning Theories and Instruction and continued using it for Distance Learning. I will be using it again this quarter for Project Management in Education and Training. Enjoy!

-Brandey

Reflection: The Future of Distance Learning

Acceptance of distance learning is growing and will continue to do so over the next 5-10 years. In 10 to 20 years it may be as widely accepted as traditional learning. The simplest explanation for this is that more and more people are participating in distance programs. According to Siemens in The Future of Distance Education (2010), after students complete one or two courses online, they often find distance learning preferable to traditional learning. Based on my experience with this and other online courses, I agree with Dr. Siemens. Now that I have participated in distance courses I would find it difficult to complete in traditional courses held in a classroom.

Increased participation and growing acceptance can be attributed to other factors as well. As a society, we are gaining comfort with the online and environment and communicating online more (Siemens, 2010). We use the internet to get information (news, weather, directions) and communicate with each other (e-mail, instant messaging, social networking) because it is accessible, fast, and convenient. People want that same accessibility, speed and convenience when it comes to learning. Additionally, as we use the internet more, we get more practice using online tools (Siemens, 2010). Now, when a student enrolls in an online course, they often already know how to use the technology involved; it is one less hurdle to overcome. More confidence in the use of online tools means people more will be more likely to consider an online education versus a traditional education. Another factor propelling online education is business use of the internet and online tools. As the internet technology becomes more immersed in business, the need for a tech savvy workforce increases.

In 20 years, internet technology will be just as much a part of our lives as radio or television. It will be difficult to imagine a time without it. The technology will continue to grow, evolve and improve as will how we use it. The technology will drive us to replace traditional ways of doing things with new ways of doing things, and that includes learning. Online schools and universities will probably not replace brick and mortar institutions, but the programs within those institutions will change dramatically based on the technology. In 20 years, the online learning component will likely be commonplace.

Quality distance learning programs with successful outcomes will help to improve overall opinion of distance learning. As an instructional designer I can improve societal perceptions of distance learning by developing effective programs based on solid design and distance learning principles. Furthermore, as a product of the distance learning environment, performing my job well and maintaining high professional standards will help me set an example for others and demonstrate the value of my online education. I will become a positive force for continuous improvement in distance education by keeping abreast of the latest research, incorporating proven principles, and becoming familiar and proficient with new technologies as they emerge.

Thanks,

Brandey

Reference:
Siemens, G. (2010). The future of distance learning. Lecture presented for Laureate Education, Inc. Retrieved October 24, 2011 from

Converting a Traditional Course to Blended Learning

This week, I am sharing a best practices guide that I have developed on converting traditional courses to blended courses. The guide discusses pre-planning strategies, moving elements to the online environment, and the role of the facilitator. The guide includes a diagram of the instructional systems design process, a planning map, and a checklist for converting courses.

Converting Traditional Courses to Blended Learning

Thanks,
Brandey

The Impact of Open Source

Introduction:

This week, I will evaluate an open source Nursing Fundamentals course offered by Kaplan University. I located this course through The Open Courseware Consortium at http://www.ocwconsortium.org/. The site provides links to thousands of courses in several languages, encompassing a wide variety of subjects. I decided to examine a nursing course because my undergraduate degree is in nursing. I completed my degree in the mid-nineties at a traditional, brick and mortar university. I thought it would be interesting to look at subject matter I have studied in the face-to-face setting to see how it is applied in the distance setting. Although the focus of my evaluation of this course is on its function in the distance environment, my familiarity with the subject matter offers a unique perspective.  

Background:

The course I am evaluating is Nursing 101 – Nursing Fundamentals offered through Kaplan University and available at http://ocw.kaplan.edu/medical/nursing-fundamentals. To provide some background, as the name suggests, this is low-level, introductory nursing course. The course description indicates that the course includes principles of patient safety, vital signs, initial assessment, bathing and grooming, personal care, mobility and effective documentation. In my undergraduate program, this was a sophomore-level course, available only after the completion of a number of science courses such as Biology, Anatomy and Physiology, Organic and Inorganic Chemistry, Psychology, and Human Growth and Development.  Although Nursing Fundamentals is simply an introduction, I would argue that certain prerequisite knowledge is essential to this or any nursing study. 

Course Description:

Nursing Fundamentals is divided into ten distinct units. Each unit, along with a short description, is listed in a navigation menu on the left of the screen. Although it is not explicitly stated, it is intuitive that one should complete the units in order. The homepage provides a description of the course, but no other instructions. There is a “next” button on the bottom right of the screen which is easy to miss. As I was exploring the course, I initially jumped from the homepage directly into unit one. In doing this, I skipped over some important course information, including the course guide, recommended reading and resources, course assignment guidelines, plagiarism policy, and course outcomes.

Each unit consists of some or all of the following elements:

·         Introduction including learning outcomes for the unit

·         Overview of the content in the unit

·         Reading assignments  to be completed using recommended text books

·         Discussion questions

·         Virtual Clinical Excursions to be completed using a recommended CD Rom

·         Project assignments

·         Skills lab assignments to be completed using skills checklists in a recommended workbook

·         Quiz which provides the student’s score and the answers compared with the correct answers following submission.

The student moves through the content of each unit using “next” or “back” buttons at the bottom of each page. The left navigation menu allows students to jump from one unit to another; however there is no way to jump to a specific content page within a unit. For example, if I wish to see the project assignment in unit four, I must jump to unit four and then click the “next” button several times until I reach the project assignment page.

It is important to note that while there are discussion questions in several units, there is no online discussion board or forum in which to answer them. The course guide encourages students to keep a journal in which they can answer discussions question and complete project assignments; these are not evaluated.  Additionally, the skills “lab” does not really exist. Each unit lists a number of skills for the student to master like providing surgical wound care and managing drainage devices however the student is not actually evaluated on their ability to complete these skills properly.

Planning and Design:

Does this course appear to be carefully planned and designed for the distance learning environment? Yes and no. Components of a successful learning system are the learners, the content, the method and materials, and the environment (Dick et al., 2004 as cited in Simonson, Smaldino, Albright & Zvacek, 2009). This focus of this course is unmistakably the content. Based on my personal knowledge of nursing fundamentals, the course content is relevant, appropriate, and presented in an order that makes sense. Unfortunately, consideration of the learners, method and materials, and environment are seriously lacking. As I mentioned, previous knowledge is necessary for nursing education. This course does not address learners’ previous knowledge or discuss who this course may be appropriate for. The methods, while well-intentioned, completely miss the mark. Without interactivity, the discussions, projects, and skills sections do not accomplish much. “A series of activities alone cannot lead to learning; it is only with the careful planning for their balance and interface that learning is the result” (Simonson et al., 2009, p.127). Furthermore, the environment is difficult to navigate. It is not likely that a student will complete the entire course in a linear fashion. The designers should have allowed for more direct navigation to the content within units.

Recommendations for Online Instruction:

Does this course follow recommendations for online instruction as listed in our textbook? The answer is mostly no. Simonson et al., (2009) consistently warn of the dangers of “dumping” a face-to-face course onto the web. “Online activities for students should have specific pedagogical or course management purposes” (p. 248). This course is structured like a face-to-face course without the benefit of an instructor or peer interaction. An element of this course that makes it seem like “shovelware” is the inclusion of “skills lab” activities that cannot actually take place in the online environment.

Another recommendation of our text is to integrate the power of the web into courses, primarily through the use of Web 2.0 tools, to engage students and foster collaboration and communication (Simonson et al., 2009). Although it is available online, the course does little more than organize, outline, and refer to information in text books and outside sources. Most of the activities occur outside of the actual course. The only interactive online activity is the quiz. Other than the immediate feedback that the quiz provides, there is not much benefit to having this course online.  

Our text also endorses making the organization and requirements of an online course very clear (Simonson et al., 2009). In order to be successful, distance students should be provided explicit instruction on how to navigate the online environment. Simonson et al., suggest providing training or online tutorials at the beginning of a course. This course does not provide any instruction up front and that may cause a lot of frustration for students. A student may jump right in to Unit One without realizing there are course texts, CD Rom’s, and workbooks they need to obtain before beginning the course.    

Course Activities for Active Learning:

Did the course designer implement course activities that maximize active learning for the students? Again the answer is yes and no. Strategies for active learning include hands-on manipulation of learning objects, case study analysis, structured discussion, and virtual field trips (Simonson et al., 2009). This course makes an attempt to foster active learning by including case study analysis within project assignments, discussion questions, virtual clinical excursions, and skills lab assignments. On the downside, students do not receive feedback on their case study analyses and cannot participate in actual discussions in this course. Virtual experiences are usually a great way to encourage active learning in a distance setting, however I worry that the “virtual clinical excursions” referred to in this course cannot replace the hands-on learning that occurs in actual clinical rotations with real patients; this is an essential component of nursing education. Skills practice is also essential and should be closely evaluated by an experienced nursing instructor. Would you allow a nurse to perform a complicated procedure on you if he or she had learned the steps from a book, practiced without proper equipment, and had no evaluation by an instructor? If so, good luck.

Conclusion:

My impression of Kaplan University’s open Nursing Fundamentals course is that it is not really intended for students who simply wish to acquire knowledge or engage in a unique learning experience. This seems like a “teaser” to show potential nursing students the type of content and course structure they will encounter in Kaplan’s nursing program. The course has the feel of a face-to-face course that has been dumped into an online environment; it simply outlines subject matter and refers students to outside textbooks and software. The materials needed for this course would be quite pricey to purchase. Additionally, if one were to pursue a nursing degree, this course would not offer any credit. I do think this course has potential for a blended learning or web-supported type of environment, but would not stand alone as an online course.   

Thanks,

Brandey

References: 

Nursing Fundamentals. (2009, January 05).  Kaplan University — Open Course Ware — Free Courses Web site. Retrieved October 06, 2011, from http://ocw.kaplan.edu/medical/nursing-fundamentals.

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2009). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (4th ed.) Boston, MA: Pearson.