This document explores the different aspects of Project Management and critically examines the management of the recent PPARS project. This was a project which involved the development of a personnel and recruitment system for the HSE in Ireland. It will also highlight the traps and obstacles associated with the management of this project.

1. Project Management
A Critical Examination Of The PPARS Project
Project Management: A Critical Examination Of The PPARS Project 1

2. About The Author
Olivia Moran is a leading training specialist who
specialises in E-Learning instructional design and is a
certified Moodle expert. She has been working as a
trainer and course developer for 3 years developing
and delivery training courses for traditional classroom,
blended learning and E-learning.
WWW.OLIVIAMORAN.ME
COURSES OLIVIA MORAN HAS DELIVERED:
● MOS
● ECDL
● Internet Marketing
● Social Media
● Google [Getting Irish Businesses Online]
● Web Design [FETAC Level 5]
● Adobe Dreamweaver, Flash, Photoshop
● Moodle
SPECIALTIES:
★Moodle [MCCC Moodle Certified Expert] ★ Web Design & Online Content Writer
★ E Learning Tools/ Technologies [Commercial & ★ Adobe Dreamweaver, Flash & Photoshop
Opensource]
★ Microsoft Office Specialist
Project Management: A Critical Examination Of The PPARS Project 2

3. INTRODUCTION
In this document the authors will give a brief introduction into projects and why they are so
important. They will then look at the different aspects of Project Management and critically examine
the management of the recent PPARS project. The authors will also highlight the traps and obstacles
associated with the management of this project.
Every business wants to build a profitable and sustainable position against the competition. This is
only achieved through heavy investment in time, money and effort in a bid to formulate a wining
strategy and satisfy customer needs and requirements.
Also every company at some point has undertaken some kind of project. A Project is defined by Gray
and Larson (2003:5), as “a complex, non-routine, one-time effort limited by time, budget, resources
and performance specifications designed to meet customer needs”.
According to Burke (1999:3), project management is defined by the body of knowledge as, “The
application of knowledge, skills, tools and techniques to project activities in order to meet
stakeholder’s needs and expectations from a project”.
Managing a project is not a task to be taken lightly. There are as many project failures, as there are
successes. Project managers are involved in all kinds of activities. These range from motivating their
staff to co-ordinating project tasks and activities. It is their job to ensure that the project is finished
on time, within the projected budget and that it satisfies the needs of the end users.
Project managers are often put in a position where it is necessary to make trade-offs in terms of time,
cost, scope and quality. It is their job to manage all these different trade-offs.
PROJECT INITITATION
Initiation is the first stage in any project. It usually involves a formal request from management to
consider focusing on a particular problem or the possibility of improving the way things are done.
Generally, during this stage a number of potential end users are involved in discussions to try and
determine whether or not there is a need for a particular kind of system.
In 1997, the Irish Health Authority (IHA) became aware of the fact that the majority of departments
or groups in the Health Boards did not have a formal or computerised HR system in place. Most were
using manual paper based systems. The IHA believed that these business processes could be
completed in a more efficient and effective way. Thus, the PPARS (Personnel, Payroll, Attendance
and Related Systems) project team was initiated in 1999 for the purpose of implementing the SAP
(Systems Application and Products is the name of the German software company who supplied the
software for the PPARS project) HR management system into the Irish Health Service. The National
project office is based in Sligo. Its main objectives are the development, implementation and support
of the project and the system. The project scope is wide (See Appendix 1). The SAP system is
composed of numerous modules that carry out a specific business task.
Project Management: A Critical Examination Of The PPARS Project 3

4. PRINCIPLES OF GOOD PROJECT
MANAGEMENT
IDENTIFICATION OF REQUIREMENTS
The first step in a project is the identification of requirements. This process is of major importance
and should be dedicated as much time as is deemed necessary. “The right approach is for the IT
specialist to spend as much time as it takes with potential users, finding out about their information
needs” (Bee & Bee 2001:69). Employee involvement is critical at this stage. There should be extensive
discussion with perspective users regarding the requirements for the new system. These people do
the job everyday, so it makes sense that they are in the best position to identify needs and
requirements.
In this way everyone gets to pitch in. This usually results in increased motivation and helps to gain
employee support of the new system. It also leads to smoother implementation. It is important
however not set expectations. This can lead to disappointment when the system is implemented, if it
is not what the employee expected it to be.
This stage involves utilising numerous research techniques. The most commonly used are interviews
to gather facts and opinions, questionnaires which are very cost effective and observation.
Requirements can also be determined by examining the different procedures in place. It may be
possible to look at the problems with the existing system. Reports may also be useful.
“The main deliverables from this stage are a clear and very specific statement of requirements to be
met” (Bee & Bee 2001:70). This statement is known as a system specification. From this standards for
evaluation can be drawn up.
This stage can be frustrating for all involved. The HSE changed their minds about what they wanted
and required numerous times. The scope of the project changed regularly. A sufficient amount of
time was not spent getting this stage right. People were fussy about the objectives (See Appendix 2).
This is understandable since the project encompassed many different departments and thus, it was
more difficult to establish agreed upon requirements.
It is evident that early in the project the plan was flawed. The plan was not amended as required.
Deloitte, one of the consultancies used, wanted to redefine the scope of the project after pilots were
carried out to learn from them. However, the department would not wait and carried on with the
plans they already had. As outlined in the VFM Report 5, (6:35), “The failure to pause after the pilots
and learn from the experience as well as bed down the new systems, militated against clear project
definition. A pause would have allowed for a more defined scope to be established and, potentially,
for the negotiation of a fixed price contract for the subsequent agencies”.
Project Management: A Critical Examination Of The PPARS Project 4

5. ORGANISATIONAL INTEGRATION
The approach that a project manager adopts is dependant on the type of organisational structure. A
new organisational structure was a necessity in order to reform the health service in Ireland. It could
no longer withstand the increasing pressures being weighed on it. The health service consisted of
over 60 bodies and agencies, which are each responsible for a different area of the H.S.E. The
management of all these components was a major task. Recent studies showed that they were not
being strategically managed. This in turn, lead to fragmentation and overlapping, leading to
confusion on who is responsible for the various services? The H.S.E structure that now exists was
created taking many things into consideration (See Appendix 3).
This new structure was only introduced after the initiation of the PPARS project. The HSE were
pushing a new strategy. They believed that they could use IT to bring about this strategic change.
This is a critical mistake. IT systems should only be used to compliment the business processes and the
way business is done. Business processes need to be examined first. Only then can one consider using
IT to make these processes faster or easier. Management thought that they could force the change
by using a computer system like PPARS.
TEAM MANAGEMENT
“A work team generates positive synergy through coordinated effort. Their individual efforts
results in a level of performance that is greater than the sum of the inputs” (Robbins 2001:258).
Teams are necessary for the completion of a project. By having people work together they produce
better results than working apart i.e. the concept of synergy. The sums of its parts are greater than
the whole. A project often requires a wide mixture of talents and skills.
Campion et al 1996, proposed that team effectiveness consists of 4 general categories. These include
work design, composition, context and process. (See Appendix 4).
The PPARS project suffered from poorly understood team roles. The team members did not
understand what was expected of them and what work they were suppose to do. Managers failed to
check the work that they were doing if any at all. The members were unsure as to what authority
they had to make decisions. Therefore, they avoided making decisions causing time delays and
further confusion.
The team often suffered from low morale. Different team members had highlighted problems with
the project. However, their concerns were never taken on board.
PROJECT PLANNING
A project requires a huge amount of planning if it is to run smoothly. A good plan will include an
overview that according to Mantel et al (2001:56) is a “Brief description of the project and its
deliverables, together with a list of the major milestones or significant events in the project
schedule”.
The PPARS project is the second biggest implementation of SAP in Europe. No project was ever
undertaken like this before. This added to its complexity, as there was nothing to compare it to. A
project the size of PPARS required clarity regarding outcomes to ensure it aligned with strategic
direction.
Project Management: A Critical Examination Of The PPARS Project 5

6. Also, a schedule is drawn up. This indicates major milestones. A milestone is a place where certain
tasks are expected to be completed. Keeping to the time allocated to each milestone is very
important. One task may be dependent on the completion of another. The majority of the PPARS
milestones were not met on time.
Management were responsible for carrying out an analysis of resources needed. Planners must
determine how much and what kind of resources will be required for the project. These resources
include time, finance and personnel. All these should be budgeted. Management were over-
optimistic. Their estimations were miles apart from the actual figures, as they had not carried out a
detailed cost analysis. Many decisions were based on broad assumptions.
Evaluation and assessment metrics are complied at this stage. This looks at when and how often the
various elements of the project will be monitored. Actual performance needs to be compared to the
expected.
Contingency plans need to be in place prior to the commencement of the project. The success of any
project is dependant on its ability to adapt to changes that may occur in the internal and external
environment. However, Mantel et al (2001:57) point out “No amount of current planning can solve
current crises – but preplanning may prevent or soften the impact of some”. It seems that very little
time was spent on these particular plans. They were not amended when new information came to
light.
A common vocabulary should have been complied to help clarify certain points. In this way it is clear
what is meant by a particular term and everyone can take the same meaning out of it. Thus it
reduces misunderstanding, stress and conflict.
At this point all elements in the contract need to be discussed and agreed upon. Mantel et al
(2001:56) reckons that a contract should include all of the following “all reporting requirements; the
technical specifications of all deliverables; agreements on delivery dates, incentives, and penalties
for non-compliance; specific procedures for making changes in the deliverables; project review dates
and procedures and similar agreements”.
The planning stage resulted in the production of a project mission statement. “To develop a fully
integrated Human Resource System, inclusive of payroll and attendance/ absence which would meet
the business requirements of a modern, dynamic, Human Resources Function in the Irish Health
Service” (www.ppars.ie). This statement of purpose, distinguishes it from all other projects. It is short
and concise. Ideally, it prevents project team members from drifting away from the projects goals
and objectives.
RISK MANAGEMENT
“In a project environment, because of the essential uniqueness of projects, some uncertainty must
always remain, and hence the emphasis of management becomes to manage the risk” (Turner
1999).
In 2002 the Hay document was produced. This highlighted areas for concern. The proposals set forth
in the document were simply ignored. The management of the project were responsible for
determining the possibility of these occurring, as well as the impact that they would have on the
project if they do. Management failed to put measures in place to reduce the chance of the risk
occurring.
Project Management: A Critical Examination Of The PPARS Project 6

7. It seems that little or no contingency plans were drawn up. These plans could have limited damage
done by the risk occurring. Management also neglected to amend the project plans as new
information became available. The mangers of any project should aim to eliminate, reduce or deter
the identified risks.
The authors can not understand the reasoning behind ignoring the report. Risks were identified and
nothing was done. If you knew a big storm was brewing, would you not board up the windows? If
the department intended to ignore the document and its findings, why did they have it produced in
the first place?
PROJECT CONTROL
“A management function that involves observing and measuring organisational performance and
environmental activities and modifying the plans and activities of the organisation when necessary”.
(O’Brien & Marakas 2006:554)
Controlling involves comparing projected figures with actual results. The differences between the
two figures should be identified. The reason for the deviation between the two results should be
highlighted. The manager should aim to minimise these deviations. This may involve having to
amend the project plan. The manager controls quality, human resources and finance.
The quality of work done at all stages of the project is critical to satisfying customer needs. Having
good quality controls in place ensures a more efficient project. A project must aim to stay within its
budget. Management must have measures in place in order to monitor the activities and costs of
every task. They also need to keep an eye on the performance levels of the employees.
The PPARS project was overseen by a National Steering Committee. The chairman of this committee
is Pat Harvey, who is the CEO at the North Western Health Board. This committee represents the
views of the numerous different departments which make up the HSE. The committee was set up to
“Monitor progress on the implementation on the implementation of the project at national level and
across the various agencies” (www.ppars.ie/project organisation).
PROJECT VISIBILITY
Communication is fundamental to any project. Specific goals and objectives should be communicated
to all team members and relevant project stakeholders. Communication will lead to a better
designed product that will be more easily implemented. There are numerous ways in which
management can communicate effectively with all project members. These include; face to face,
video conferencing, email, networks, notice boards and charts.
PROJECT STATUS & CORRECTIVE ACTION
Project managers must keep a close eye on the status of the project. This can be achieved through
the completion of a project status report. If the project status is not in line with the plan corrective
action may be necessary. Bee & Bee (1999:47), outline the importance of taking corrective action.
“When the American space shuttles have just climbed a few miles they can often be seen to make
some minor corrections to their altitude before they leave the atmosphere. This small correction at
the beginning of the flight is instrumental in them reaching the exact location where they are
planning to do their work. Leaving the altitude correction until later could require a much bigger
correction or make it impossible to reach the target position at all”.
Project Management: A Critical Examination Of The PPARS Project 7

8. This same principal applies to project management. It is much easier to fix a problem when it occurs
rather than later. Corrective action may result in having to get team members to work longer hours
or more shifts. It may even be necessary to change leadership.
Many of the problems encountered by the PPARS project were predicted some time before their
occurrence. Management failed to take recommendations on board that would have limited the
impact of these problems or prevented them from occurring altogether. They ignored team members
who identified problems. In June 2005 Mr John O’Brien, CEO at St. James Hospital where PPARS had
been piloted, wrote to the HSE highlighting his concerns, stating that the system threatened the
hospital’s basic functioning. He suggested that the system should not go any further until all flaws
had been sorted out. (Hunter: 2005)
PROJECT LEADERSHIP
Leadership involves “Motivating people to use their abilities and skills most effectively and
efficiently to achieve organisational objectives. Without direction people tend to do their work
according to their personal view of what tasks should be done, how and in what order”. (Hunger &
Wheelan:143)
Senior management of the HSE were responsible for choosing the project manager. The project
manager has the overall control or leadership over the project. When selected the project manager
hired other managers to look after certain aspects of the project. He had overall responsibility for
the completion of the project and reported directly to the top management.
The National Project Director of the PPARS project is Anthony Reilly. He has overall leadership of the
project. All team members have to report to him. The project had a reporting system in place, which
highlighted who reports to whom. (See Appendix 5). However, this wasn’t communicated to
employees.
Lack of project leadership was very evident from examining this case. The project manager was the
official responsible for the successful completion of the project. However, he was expected to do a
job but was not given any authority to make and implement decisions that were made. This point is
highlighted in the C & AG’s report on PPARS, where it said that neither the national project director
nor the national project team had the authority to direct when or how the implementation would
take place in individual agencies.
In some cases, individuals did not even know if they had the authority to make decisions. The
decision making process established in this project was not very effective. It was very difficult to get
all involved to agree on decisions. This was mainly due to the size and the structure of the national
projects board.
Lack of leadership lead to increased delays, bad decision-making and poor conflict resolution. It also
increased the risk of failure. It is almost impossible for a project to be successful if people are not
given the authority they need and are not held responsible for their decisions and performance.
It seems as though no one has been held accountable for the poor management of the project. The
authors feel that the Department of Children and Health should be held responsible. They were the
people who forced the project to go ahead even though many people had voiced concerns. They
continued on with the project and ignored good advice.
Project Management: A Critical Examination Of The PPARS Project 8

9. CONSULTANCY
When embarking on a new project that is like nothing undertaken before it may be wise to hire a
consultant. This is a person who has expert knowledge in a particular field of study. A consultant can
provide the company with an objective view, often turning a threatening situation into one full of
opportunities.
Consultants can come with years of experience. They learn through a trial and error process.
According to Kent “one thing consultants are extremely good at is learning from the experience
themselves. They will leave a programme with further insights into how companies work, and the
pros and cons of taking a certain approach to instigating change”.
While consultants can be a fountain of knowledge their use should be limited. They are extremely
expensive, charging very high prices for their service. The company must be able to justify the cost.
In order to do this they must in money terms measure the contribution made by the consultant. This
is hard to do, as all inputs are not necessarily tangible.
The amount of control given to the consultant should be kept to a minimum. ‚Handing over whole-
scale responsibility for a change programme to a consultancy can be more problematic . . . this
approach means the organisation losses significant control over its own change process”, argues
Whittington, professor of strategic management at oxford’s business school.
The PPARS project has been criticised for its excessive use of consultants. At one stage in the project,
they began hiring consultants to advise them on the use of other consultants. The total amount of
money spent on consultants and contractors is estimated to be in the region of €57 million. The idea
of handing off responsibility of recruiting consultants to another consultancy firm seem ludicrous.
Doing this lead to a loss in control.
In the VFM (report 51) ‚The principal consulting and contract payments were in respect of advice
and support from Deloitte - €38.5 million, project implementation assistance from BISL - €3.3 million
and payments to contractors to configure the system and provide technical support - €11.7 million”.
The consultants that were hired should have been closely monitored, however in the case of PPARS
this was not what happened. Those in charge of the project seem as though they had no idea as to
what work the consultants were doing or not doing. The consultants often failed to reach major
milestones. No penalties were ever followed up.
The PPARS project is one that is highly complex, as there is no other similar project to compare it to in
Europe. The HSE did not have the expertise required to implement the SAP product. According to
Mary Harney, The Tanaiste ‚The health service management did not have the internal capability to
manage this complex project without an over-reliance on external consultancy resources”. (Hunter
2005).
Consultants with this knowledge had to be hired. One would wonder whether or not these
consultants actually were knowledgeable in the area of SAP software. The management of the
multiple contractors made the situation more complex. This was very evident in the coordination of
activities. There were numerous hidden costs incurred from the use of consultants. There were no
controls in place to alert management or stop over spending.
Project Management: A Critical Examination Of The PPARS Project 9

10. IMPLEMENTATION
The system was implemented after much debate. It was rolled out in four different places, which
covered a workforce of around 37,000. Numerous flaws became apparent. Mary Harney commented
on the suspension of the rollout saying, “The extent of the incoherence was not known before
PPARS implementation work commenced”. Over 2500 variations in payment arrangements across the
entire health system were discovered. With reports of one nurse in Sligo being overpaid by 1 million
euro.
Implementation did not run smoothly. The rollout of the system to other departments has now been
suspended. Another project called Financial Information Systems Project (FISP) has also been paused.
Training is referred to as “the planned acquisition of knowledge, skills and abilities required to
perform effectively in a given role or job . . . its purpose is to improve specific skills or abilities that
will result in better work performances (Gunningle, Hearty, Morley 2000:218).
Training is a very powerful tool when it comes to implementing a new system. If employees are
trained in the skills and competencies needed to use the system, they are more likely to be committed
to it.
CONCLUSION
The HSE should have incorporated a project reporting system. Regular meetings should have taken
place (with all project members) to determine reasons why goals were not being achieved).
The schedules and budgets composed during the planning stage should have been adjusted or
modified.
The PPARS project displays many of the characteristics associated with bad project management. The
entire project was poorly planned. Budgets and projected times were seriously underestimated.
The project team lacked staff who where competent in terms of the skills and abilities required to
complete the project. This lead to the recruitment of multiple consultants and contractors. It is
evident that management had problems with managing and co-coordinating them all. This seems to
have paralyzed management’s ability to control the activities of the project.
The scope of the PPARS project had been changed numerous times as the needs and requirements of
the HSE changed. It was decided the scope of the PPARS would be widened. This resulted in reduced
clarity and lead to the project becoming more complex.
The amount of resources (time, money, personnel) allocated to the project where not controlled and
monitored. This resulted in the PPARS project coming in over time and budget.
Lack of leadership contributed greatly to the projects failure. The project manager was expected to
do a job but was not given any authority necessary to do it right.
The management of the entire PPARS project has been publicly criticized. It has caused considerable
embarrassment not only for the HSE but also for the Government. In the words of Enda Kenny, a
Finna Gael is quoted as saying “It’s like a case study in how not to run a project”.
Project Management: A Critical Examination Of The PPARS Project 10

11. BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bee, F. & Bee, R. (2001) Managing Information and Statistics. Chartered Institute of Personnel and
Development: London
Burke, R. (1999) Project Management Planning and Control Techniques, 3rd ed. West Sussex: John
Wiley & Sons Ltd
Comptroller & Auditor General (2005) Report on Value for Money Examination, Development of
Human Resource Management System for the Health Service (PPARS). Government of Ireland
Gray, C. & Larson, E. (2003) Project Management, The Managerial Process, 2nd ed. New York: Mc
Graw-Hill Irwin
Gunningle, P. & Heraty, N. & Morley, M. (2002) Human Resource Management in Ireland, 2nd ed.
Dublin: Gill & Macmillan
Hunger, D. & Wheelan, T. (2003) Essentials of Strategic Management, 3rd ed. New Jersey: Pearson
Education Limited
Hunter, N. (2005) PPARS ‘Classic Mistakes’. Irish Health [online] 13 December. URL:
http://irishhealth.com/?level=4&id=8660 [Date visited: 10 January 2006]
Hunter, N. (2005) PPARS ‘Fall-Out Continues’. Irish Health [online] 06 October. URL:
http://irishhealth.com [Date visited: 10 January 2006]
Kent, S. (2005) Outer Limits. Journal of People Management, Vol.11 No.13 :41 - 42
Mantel, S. Jr. & Meredith, J. & Shafer, S. & Sutton, M. (2001) Project Management in Practice. New
York: John Wiley & Sons Inc
O’Brien, J. & Marakas, G. (2006) Management Information Systems,7th ed. New York: Mc Graw
Hill/Irwin
Robbins, S. (2001) Organizational Behaviour, 9th ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall
Songini, M. (2005) Irish agency halts work on two SAP applications projects. Computer World [online]
17 October. URL.http://computerworld.com/managementtopics/management/project/st… [Date
visited: 26 February 2006]
Turner, J. (1999) The Handbook of Project Based Management, 2nd ed. Berkshire: Mc Graw Hill
Project Management: A Critical Examination Of The PPARS Project 11