<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: How to Recover from Unacceptable Variances Arising from the Project Plan</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pmhut.com/how-to-recover-from-unacceptable-variances-arising-from-the-project-plan/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pmhut.com/how-to-recover-from-unacceptable-variances-arising-from-the-project-plan</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 09:59:21 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: JohnD</title>
		<link>http://www.pmhut.com/how-to-recover-from-unacceptable-variances-arising-from-the-project-plan/comment-page-1#comment-13813</link>
		<dc:creator>JohnD</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Dec 2009 14:11:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pmhut.com/?p=4415#comment-13813</guid>
		<description>I would add a 3rd dimension to your model of project variance corrective planning: customer recovery planning.

When delivering a project for an external customer (although it could be argued that internal customers deserve the same consideration), the first set of alternatives that should be considered are those that present the minimum impact to the customer. These alternatives may not be optimized for their impact on the project costs or schedules, because such outcomes may be smaller than the risk of loss of future business, or the value of goodwill built up by putting the customer's needs first.

Interaction with the Project Sponsor is critical in order to balance the project-specific needs with the "Big Picture".</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would add a 3rd dimension to your model of project variance corrective planning: customer recovery planning.</p>
<p>When delivering a project for an external customer (although it could be argued that internal customers deserve the same consideration), the first set of alternatives that should be considered are those that present the minimum impact to the customer. These alternatives may not be optimized for their impact on the project costs or schedules, because such outcomes may be smaller than the risk of loss of future business, or the value of goodwill built up by putting the customer&#8217;s needs first.</p>
<p>Interaction with the Project Sponsor is critical in order to balance the project-specific needs with the &#8220;Big Picture&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

