Every project manager knows how difficult it is to prioritize tasks. They look at their to-do list and think everything needs to be done all at once, right then. Project managers are constantly tasked with delivering, whether it be a budget constraint, task due date or any other in the umbrella responsibility of the PM…
Every project manager knows how difficult it is to prioritize tasks. They look at their to-do list and think everything needs to be done all at once, right then. Project managers are constantly tasked with delivering, whether it be a budget constraint, task due date or any other in the umbrella responsibility of the PM…
In context
- Topic: Proyectos, PMO y Riesgos — Gestión de proyectos, oficinas de proyecto y riesgo del portafolio.
- Source: Ten Six Consulting
- Published: 08/10/2026
Continue reading at the original source →
Excerpt published automatically by the site radar. The full text belongs to its publisher and is linked above.
Why it matters
Projects rarely fail on the day they are declared failed. They fail months earlier, in a meeting where somebody saw the problem coming and calculated it was not in their interest to say so. Everything else — the slipping schedule, the stretching budget — is the visible consequence of that silence.
What I look at first in a case like this is not the plan, it is how often it gets corrected. A project that replans every month with fresh data lands far closer than one that spends a year defending the baseline it signed when it knew least.
What usually goes wrong
The classic mistake is treating risk management as a deliverable of the planning phase. The matrix gets built, approved, filed. Nobody opens it again until closure, when it serves to document that the risk was foreseen — which is exactly the opposite of managing it.
What to watch
- Who the sponsor is and how often they actually show up — not on the org chart, in the calendar.
- Whether the status report shows any red projects: an all-green portfolio is a portfolio without information.
- Which risks are identified, who owns each one, and when they were last reviewed.
How I read this entry
I would use it to review how the organisation estimates. If historical estimates were systematically out by half and nobody adjusted the method, no project will land well: you are planning with a ruler that measures short and blaming the team for not reaching the mark.
This entry is an excerpt from the original source, selected by the site radar. The commentary above is the site's own and does not belong to the cited publisher.
Comments
No comments yet. Yours can be the first.
Living through this in your own team?
Open the chat and tell me how you're handling it. I'm interested in comparing notes.
