CHAPTER 7

Closing Processes

The End, and a Foundation for New Beginnings

LYNN H. CRAWFORD, HUMAN SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL LTD., INSTITUTE FOR THE STUDY OF COHERENCE AND EMERGENCE (ISCE), AND BOND UNIVERSITY

Closing processes are possibly the most important and least well executed of the activities associated with projects. They are important because they are associated with effective handover from one project phase to another, and with termination or finalization, which is one of the key distinguishing characteristics of projects. Project closeout is also the point at which the project is handed over to clients and end users and judgments are made, either formally or informally, objectively or subjectively, about its success. Furthermore, research indicates that the more involved project managers are in management of project finalization, the more likely they are to be perceived as a top performer by clients and employers.¹ Yet despite the importance of closing processes, they are often neglected. Consequences of this neglect are clearly expressed in the well-known project management proverb: “Projects progress quickly until they become 90 percent complete; then they remain at 90 percent complete forever!”² Major reasons for this phenomenon are that the initiating and planning processes of projects are more interesting and exciting, and the executing, monitoring, and controlling processes are more demanding and action-oriented, than are the closing processes. Energy and enthusiasm are often exhausted by the time the project team begins to focus on closing a project or project phase. The team members are often keen to move onto the next phase of the project, and toward the end of a project they are thinking about where they will move next. Either by natural attrition or by design, closing processes are poorly resourced or given low priority. The most effective way to reverse this trend is to give closing processes the priority they warrant, and the best way to improve their execution is to plan for the closing processes at the start of the project.

CLOSING PROCESSES IN PROJECT MANAGEMENT STANDARDS

Closing processes bring together all aspects of a project, so it is not surprising that they are generally treated as integrative activities in project management standards. In the Project Management Institute’s Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK^® Guide), closing processes are identified with project integration and procurement knowledge areas.³ The International Organization for Standardization’s Guidance on Project Management (ISO 21500:2012) also treats closing processes as integrative, primarily concerned with formal project closure and capture and use of lessons learned.⁴ The Association for Project Management’s Body of Knowledge (APMBOK) considers closing processes as part of the project or program life cycle, which also provides a structure for governance of project work.⁵ There is no specific section devoted to project closure. In the International Project Management Association’s IPMA Competence Baseline (ICB),⁶ a discussion of various competence elements refers to such closing processes as the capturing of lessons learned, contract completion, and archiving of documents. There is also a specific competence element, titled “Close-Out,” that addresses formal closure, evaluation, and documentation, checking that objectives and customer expectations have been met for each phase of the project. In the Global Alliance for Project Performance Standards (GAPPS) Project Manager Standard,⁷ closing processes are integrated throughout, with references to securing stakeholder agreement to criteria for success and completion when developing the plan for the project; in the context of product acceptance, project transitions and an entire unit are devoted to project evaluation and improvement.

Closing processes are generally considered to apply both to phases throughout the project and to final project closeout. This is made most explicit in the PMBOK^® Guide and ISO 21500:2012, in which closing processes are expected to be carried out in each phase of a project alongside initiating, planning, executing, monitoring, and controlling processes. In this sense, closing involves all the processes associated with finalization and handover, from one project phase to the next, or at the closeout of the entire project. Final closure of the project may be as planned or contracted, or it may be the result of early termination or cancellation.

Each standard places slightly different emphasis on particular aspects of phase or project closure, treating it at different levels of detail.

Closing Processes in Practice

Planning for Closure

Closing processes are most often associated with the end of the phase or project, but to be effective they have to be considered and planned for at the start of the project. The second of Covey’s Seven Habits of Highly Effective People is to “begin with the end in mind,”⁸ and this is the first principle of effective project closure. Planning for closure at the start of the project helps to counteract the challenges of reduced enthusiasm and resources toward the end.

When determining the project objectives, criteria should be developed for judging whether, at the end of the project, the objectives have been met. When developing the scope baseline, consideration should be given to how the delivery of scope will be assessed so that at closure of a phase or the entire project, there is confidence that all planned scope has been delivered. Associated with this should be clear criteria for completion.

How will the success or failure of the project be assessed? If measurable criteria for success are determined at the start of the project and agreed to by the client, the customer, and other relevant stakeholders, then the project team has a clear understanding of what it needs to achieve, and, as the saying goes, what gets measured is what gets done.

Engagement of the client, customer, end users, and other relevant stakeholders in determining and agreeing on the objectives, the scope to be delivered, and the criteria for completion and success is a vital part of the process. If they have not been involved in the process and have not signed off on it, then they may have changed their minds or forgotten what was agreed to by the time it comes to close the project. Getting stakeholders to sign off on anything is always a challenge but doing this in the early stages provides a sound basis for closure. It makes sense to keep checking back with stakeholders throughout the project to ensure that their expectations are managed and to minimize surprises.

Each of the subprocesses discussed below should be considered at start up and planned into each phase and project.

Product Acceptance

Gaining acceptance of the product or output of the phase or project from the customer or sponsor is a key closing process. It is made much easier if key stakeholders have agreed to measurable criteria for acceptance in the early stages of the phase or project. Delivery may be progressive, throughout the project, and good records of acceptance of each deliverable are necessary at closing to avoid potential disputes.

Good quality management practices suggest that customers and end users should be involved in determining, at the start of the project and at closure, what is to be delivered and at what quality. The quality of the product is a factor in gaining acceptance. For some product types, acceptance testing is required. Such testing processes need to be planned at the start so that the time required is factored in, the resources are available for testing, and the acceptance criteria are agreed upon.

Opportunities for customer feedback should be considered and planned into the overall project process. It should not be an afterthought. Seeking feedback progressively throughout the project is good practice because it enables corrective action to be taken while it still has the potential to favorably affect the customer experience.

At closing, the product of the project or phase, in addition to being accepted “by the sponsor on behalf of the users,”⁹ needs to be handed over and transitioned into operation.

Commissioning and Handover

Commissioning is a term often associated only with large engineering projects where it entails all the processes involved in checking, inspecting, testing, and generally ensuring that everything has been delivered in accordance with specification and is functioning as intended. In settings such as hospitals, data centers, and power plants, commissioning may be treated as a separate project conducted by a specialized team. Here the project team will hand over to the commissioning team.

Commissioning does not apply only to large and complex engineering projects. All projects need to be commissioned, although this means different things for different projects. Even if all that is being handed over at the end of a project is a report, thought should be given to how the report will be used, and work should be planned into the project to address this issue. Where the deliverable is a report, ensuring that it is both usable and used when handed over may involve planning a presentation to senior management and other specific stakeholder engagements. Where new information systems or organizational change are the intended result of a project, good change management processes entail the preparation of users to embed change and ensure that new systems can and will be used. Many projects, on completion, are handed over to the business to support it in its operations and to deliver specific benefits. Research suggests that facilitating the integration of the product of the project into the business is a critical success factor for all projects.¹⁰ Commissioning the project to ensure it is operational, whatever that may mean for the particular project type, is therefore an important aspect of successful transfer and handover.

Commissioning and handover also require attention to warranty conditions that may need to be updated or agreed to, and there may be follow-on work involved in transitioning to the next phase or to production or operations. Such work might include setting up maintenance agreements, product support, training, or providing “as built” documentation. Processes should have been established early in the project to deal with any outstanding issues.

Much of the work involved in commissioning and handover may be specified in contracts, and wise clients will be sure that everything they want is specified in a contract.

Contractual Closure

Contractual closure involves finalizing all agreements with contractors and other suppliers, completing all financial transactions, and closing the project accounts. To do this it is necessary to ensure that all contracted work is completed. Often it is only the work that is specified in the contract that is completed at the end of a project because of the legal and financial ramifications associated with failing to meet the terms of the contract. As contracts are set up at the start of a project or phase, this underlines the importance of planning upfront with closure in mind. Closing processes associated with contract finalization are normally spelled out in the contract. All contracts entered into, therefore, need to be carefully read to ensure that all obligations are met.

If for any reason a project is terminated prior to completion, the contractual implications need to be carefully considered, as this may results in claims and disputes.

Administrative Closure

Contractual closure is generally given priority over administrative closure because there are usually penalties associated with contractual nonperformance. Administrative closure, which involves finalizing and archiving all project records, is often seen as something that is less urgent and can be done in due course. It is particularly affected by the dispersal of the project team to new projects.

Good quality management systems and ISO certification can be useful in ensuring that project records are signed off and systematically archived. It is important to understand any legal and other compliance issues relating to storage of documents, such as confidentiality and security.

There are many benefits of paying attention to administrative closure, although they are not necessarily obvious at the time it needs to be done. First, it is important to be sure that all records are in order, in case any disputes arise after the project is closed. This can happen, for instance, as a result of faults discovered some time after the product of the project has gone into operation or where unexpected safety issues arise. Where there is any form of post-project investigation, well-organized and archived documentation will be of benefit to all concerned. There are often legal requirements that documentation be maintained and available. A repeat project may be initiated requiring the reuse of project documentation. Similarly, a client may request follow-on work. Good documentation makes this much easier to do.

Particularly important is the maintenance of historical data that can be used to provide comparative performance information on projects within an organization. This is fundamental to an organization’s ability to benchmark and improve the performance of projects over time.

Review and Learning

Capturing of performance data and the conduct of various types of end-of-phase and end-of-project review contribute to project and corporate knowledge management and organizational learning. The GAPPS Project Manager Standard has a unit that deals with evaluation and improvement of performance. This unit has the following three elements:

 

6.1 Develop a plan for project evaluation.

6.2 Evaluate the project in accordance with the plan.

6.3 Capture and apply learning.¹¹

Sadly, the practices in this unit are used significantly less than those in the other five units in the standard, supporting the widespread experience that there is considerable room for improvement in review and learning within and between projects. Closing processes, including administrative closure (capture of project data), and reviews, provide an opportunity to support learning.

Various types of review and audit are recommended and may at times be required. The APMBOK defines a review as a “critical evaluation of a deliverable, business case or P3 [project, program, and portfolio] management process”¹² and identifies three specific types of review:

• Gate review: conducted at the end of a phase to confirm ongoing viability

• Post-project review: conducted after handover of project deliverables but before formal closure of the project or program to document lessons learned for future use

• Benefit review: to measure the achievement of benefits against the business case.¹³

In 2001, the United Kingdom government initiated a formal gateway review process that has been widely adopted with only minor modifications by other governments and by public and private sector organizations worldwide.¹⁴ The primary intention of these gateway reviews is to evaluate the readiness of a project or program to progress to the next phase. The original U.K. government process identified six key stages or gates in the life of the project, as shown in Table 7-1.¹⁵

Many private sector organizations now have similar gateway review processes that form part of their project and corporate governance processes. The gates are designed to suit the specific needs of each organization but primarily occur at the end of each project life cycle phase.

While primarily intended to assess readiness to progress to the next phase, these gateway reviews can also be used to stimulate the progressive review and gathering of lessons learned. Gathering and disseminating learning from projects in flight is far more effective than waiting to do so at the completion of the project. It provides opportunities for immediate implementation of learning for the benefit of the current project and, if effectively disseminated, to other concurrent projects. It is a far more timely and immediate approach especially where projects take place over several years. Many of the objectives of post-project reviews can be beneficially incorporated into reviews conducted periodically throughout the project, thereby enhancing the opportunities to capture learning and learn from experience (Table 7-2).

Sources: The State of Queensland (Queensland Treasury and Trade), Gateway Review Guidebook for Project Owners and Review Teams (Queensland Government, Department of Instrastructure and Planning, 2013);

State of Queensland Office of Government Commerce (OGC), Successful delivery toolkit. [On-line]. Accessed September 13, 2013 at http://www.best-management-practice.com/?DI=571293;

State of Queensland Department of Finance and Deregulation, Gateway Review Process [On-line]. http://www.treasury.qld.gov.au/office/services/financial/gateway-review-process.shtml

State of Victoria Department of Treasury and Finance, What Is the Gateway Review Process? [On-line]. Accessed September 13, 2013 at http://www.dtf.vic.gov.au/Investment-Planning-and-Evaluation/Understanding-investment-planning-and-review/What-is-the-Gateway-review-process

Source: APMBOK,⁵ p. 197.

It is important to note that the APMBOK recommends that post-project reviews be conducted after the handover of project deliverables but before formal project closure. Adopting this approach and ensuring that reviews are planned at the start of the project will increase the likelihood that this aspect of closing is done well. Further assurance is provided where such review processes form part of the required governance of the project or projects within an organization.

Releasing Resources

Different types and numbers of resources may be required at various phases of the project so human resources and other assets should be reviewed and refreshed, released or redeployed at each phase and finally at the end of the project. Project managers must also obtain release from their project management role at the end of the project, handing over responsibility to the project owner. The organization established to carry out the project must be disbanded or in some cases may be partially transitioned to take on a new project.

In addition to review of the project, the performance of all team members should be assessed and feedback given, and, as with reviews, it is most beneficial if feedback is provided progressively throughout the project, offering opportunities for improvement. This can also be an important factor in maintaining motivation of team members, ensuring that they have opportunities for individual development. Processes for assessment of performance of individuals may be done entirely within the context of the project or it may be done in consultation with the organizational human resources function in which case specific processes may be required. However it is done, it is good practice to ensure that the processes for performance assessment are clearly outlined and equitable with associated appeal processes. As with all other closing processes, assessment of individual team member performance should be planned at the start, ideally in consultation with those that will be affected.

Performance of the project team can also be assessed. NASA has found that assessment of team performance at various points throughout a project is one of the key contributors to improved project performance.¹⁶

Emotional Closure

One of the most important but often overlooked aspects of project closure is attending to the emotional aspects affecting all stakeholders. Effective emotional closure can positively impact stakeholder perceptions of project success, paving the way for repeat business and providing motivation and encouragement for good teams and team members to work together again in the future. If you handle the emotional aspects of project closure well, you will build a stock of great team members who will want to work with you in future.

People often become passionate about their projects. They may have to work long hours, so their projects become an important part of their lives. Project closure represents a big change and even perhaps a sense of letdown that may be mitigated by the excitement of moving on to a new project but may be exacerbated by some anxiety about what comes next. It is therefore important to plan some form of celebration, not only at completion but also at important milestones throughout the project, such as when key resources change. Some industries have their own celebratory traditions. Examples are the ceremonies held for naming and launching of ships and the “topping out” of a completed building by placing a tree on the structure to symbolize growth and to bring luck. Everyone involved in the project is invited to the ceremonies, which may be treated as a media event for public relations purposes. Recognition of the performance and contribution of individuals, teams, and even suppliers and contractors may form part of a completion event.

One organization has a small team of people who are responsible for capturing on video footage projects in progress and upon completion, including interviews with stakeholders. At the end of the project the video team produces a CD/DVD of the “successful” project, copies of which are given to the client, project team members, and other stakeholders. This is a very clever way of taking control of the lasting image and memories the project manager would like all stakeholders to have of their performance on the project.

Not every project is big enough or of long enough duration to warrant such an investment or a major celebratory event, but budget provision should be made in the planning of the project to enable the project team, at a minimum, to get together to celebrate a successful completion. This recognition may be fairly low key but should be genuine and should not be overlooked.

CONCLUSION

Clients and employers value seamless and effective handover and closure of their projects, so doing it well contributes positively to the project manager’s career and reputation.

The impression that is left with the project owner and users at the end of the project, and the way they talk about it, significantly affect the reputation of the project, the performing organization, and the project manager and teams involved.

REFERENCES

¹ Lynn Crawford, “Senior managment perceptions of project management competence,” International Journal of Project Management 23 (2005), pp. 7–16.

² I first encountered this “proverb” in the 1990s when it was in a list of project management proverbs on the NASA APPEL website. When writing this chapter I could no longer find it on the NASA site. An internet search provided numerous hits but no original source.

³ Project Management Institute, A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK^® Guide), 5th edition (Newtown Square, PA: PMI, 2013).

⁴ International Organization for Standardization, ISO 21500:2012 Guidance on Project Management (Geneva, Switzerland: ISO, 2012).

⁵ Association for Project Management, APM Body of Knowledge, 6th edition (Princes Risborough: Association for Project Management, 2012).

⁶ International Project Management Association, ICB: IPMA Competence Baseline Version 3.0. (Nijkerk, The Netherlands: International Project Management Association, 2006).

⁷ GAPPS, A Framework for Performance Based Competency Standards for Global Level 1 and 2 Project Managers. (Johannesburg: Global Alliance for Project Performance Standards, 2006, with technical revision, 2007), p. 29.

⁸ Steven Covey, The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People (New York: Fireside–Simon and Schuster, 1990).

⁹ Association for Project Management, 2012, p. 28.

¹⁰ Lynn Crawford, A. Aitken, and A. Hassner-Nahmias, Project Management and Organizational Change (Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute, 2013).

¹¹ GAPPS, 2007, p. 29.

¹² Association for Project Management, 2012, p. 196.

¹³ Association for Project Management, 2012, p. 26.

¹⁴ The State of Queensland (Queensland Treasury and Trade), Gateway Review Guidebook for Project Owners and Review Teams (Queensland, Australia: Queensland Government, Department of Instrastructure and Planning, 2013).

¹⁵ Office of Government Commerce (OGC) (2008). Successful delivery toolkit [online] originally at http://www.ogc.gov.uk/resource_toolkit.asp, and then moved to http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100503135839/
http://www.ogc.gov.uk/what_is_ogc_gateway_review.asp. Also, Department of Finance and Deregulation (2013). Gateway review process [online] at http://www.finance.gov.au/gateway/review-process.html; and Department of Treasury and Finance (2013). What is the gateway review process? [online] at http://www.dtf.vic.gov.au/Investment-Planning-and-Evaluation/Understanding-investment-planning-and-review/What-is-the-Gateway-review-process.

¹⁶ C. J. Pellerin, How NASA Builds Teams: Mission Critical Soft Skills for Scientists, Engineers, and Project Teams (Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2009).