BUSINESS
Project Management Training A formal course can reap benefits. By Bryan Leach
12
CANADIAN CONSULTING ENGINEER
course, a program of project management audits was also introduced. These audits were undertaken in the firm’s offices every three months. They involved checking a random selection of projects against a 12-point list of essential project management documentation— e.g. signed agreement with conditions, authorization to proceed, approved change orders and review of final work product. This list was introduced as part of the course as a tool to guide the firm’s project managers. While the firm’s stated goal for the course and the list was to improve project delivery, it never explicitly defined the desired outcomes. The implicitly desired and discussed outcomes were to reduce the project write-offs and claims and to increase profitability and client satisfaction. The success of the course was internally evaluated, using the participants’ course satisfaction ‘scores.’ After the course had been in place for about four years, five courses had been presented in one of the company’s major offices. Independent of the company, this author undertook an evaluation of the benefits of the course to that office. This evaluation focused on the
54%
Average score for consistenly meeting participants' expectations.
extent to which the course had resulted in: • Participant satisfaction. • Implementation of the requirements of the list. • A decrease in write-offs and claims. • A positive change in profitability and client satisfaction. The process was undertaken using the Kirkpatrick Model’s four levels of evaluation for the course: • Reaction (Level 1) – Did they like it? • Learning (Level 2) – Did they learn it? • Behaviour (Level 3) – Did they use it? • Results (Level 4) – Did it make a difference? Did they like it? The firm’s target was an average participants’ satisfaction score above 7.0 out of 9.0 (i.e. 78%). Following the evaluation, the firm considered the course to have been a great success, based on the conNovember/ December 2023
PHOTO: © NOL A V IG L I ET T I / A D OB E STO C K.
S
uccess in consulting engineering depends in part on the effective management of projects for (or on behalf of) clients. Most young engineers entering the field, however, receive little to no project management training during their academic schooling. Such training is available through the Project Management Institute (PMI) and its book, A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge. This process can lead to Project Management Professional (PMP) certification. In consulting engineering workplaces, on the other hand, formal project management training is often absent. Instead, the relevant skills are acquired ‘on the job,’ under the guidance of an experienced project manager. Such guidance, however, is not always sufficient. In response to an undesirable level of project writeoffs, claims and client pressure, an international consulting engineering firm introduced a more formal, three-day project management training course. The intent was to provide the knowledge and tools to help the firm’s staff become better project managers. In parallel with the
