Is the PID dead?

I was catching up with a colleague I hadn’t seen for a good ten years and he was lamenting the fact that Project Managers have stopped planning. Specifically, he yearned for a Project Initiation Document at the start of a project.

That got me thinking. I can't remember the last time I saw a Project Initiation Document. It must be a decade.

Do PIDs still exist?

Straight from the PRINCE2 website:

“The purpose of the Project Initiation Documentation (PID) is to define the project in detail so it can be used by the Project Board to assess the project and see how it performed. The Project Initiation Documentation gives the direction and scope (Project Plan) of the project and along with the Stage Plan forms the ‘contract’ between the Project Manager and the Project Board.”

OK, so it looks like they still exist.

So why is no one writing PIDs any more?

The phrase that doesn’t sit well with me, and may offer some insights as to where all the PIDs went, is “define the project in detail”. The detail is the issue. I see nothing wrong in defining the project before it is started, creating a baseline, roles & responsibilities, defining the major scope items and a level of understanding on the outcomes the project is responsible for. But in detail?

There is no doubt that back in the PRINCE2 heyday, PIDs slowed things down a little at the start. To produce what was often a 30 page plus document took some time. To get agreement on it could sometimes take even longer.

In our strive for improving productivity, we have eliminated many of those long steps in preference for “just getting going”.

Has the pendulum swung too far the other way?

Certainly there are occasions where the pendulum has swung too far. I recall in recent history being asked to sign a contract to deliver a project, where the deliverables section of the contract was entirely empty. My refusal to sign it got me branded as someone who was slowing down the project. No one was clear what I was slowing down, because the deliverables hadn’t been defined, but there was outrage that I was slowing things down.

Motion is not the same as action.

What replaces (the good parts of) the PID?

I don’t want to see a return to the PID. For a start, I really didn’t like writing them. But I do advocate for a little more pause, a little more thought and a little more planning before we hurl headlong down a particular route.

I still believe there is value in knowing the outcomes, having a level of agreement on the big scope items, knowing who is doing what. Sure, it can all change. The production of it should be light. But it should still be done.

A project rarely delivers well without starting strong. Let’s not throw the planning out with the PID.