Search Cornel

Recommended Process for Efficiently Gathering Project Document Approvals for CIT & Divisional Projects
Added by Lisa Stensland, last edited by Lisa Stensland on May 21, 2009

The purpose of this document is to recommend a process that can be used to collect project document approvals most efficiently and with minimal reminders being needed. While the process does not require a certain tool to be used, SourceForge's built in document review functionality works very well for this purpose. The goal of the Project Document Review and Approval process is to ensure that team members, appropriate resource managers, sponsors, and other key stakeholders have an opportunity to review, comment. For resource managers, sponsors and key stakeholders, they are required to grant approval in order for the project to proceed. This process has been designed ensure that key stakeholders are asked to review the document at the right time for those stakeholders in the approval process. An example of this is that CIT Directors will wait to approve a document only after they are confident that their ADs and resource managers have reviewed and approved the document. The following staff/roles should be involved in the review/approval process: Role Team members Resource managers for team members CIT AD for CIT team members CIT Director for CIT team members Project Director/Sponsor Executive Sponsor Steering Committee Advisory Group CIT Finance Rep for Division Cross-Divisional Architecture Team Director, IT Security Office Responsibility Review Approve Approve Approve Approve Approve Review, May Approve Review, May Approve Review Review Review

Recommended mechanism for collecting approvals

For CIT Staff that have to approve SourceForge is the currently recommended tool for collecting document approvals from CIT staff for three reasons: 1. Functionality exists for reviewing, collecting feedback, and providing approvals in an automated fashion. 2. All CIT staff have a SourceForge account. 3. It is an authenticated mechanism for collecting digital approvals For those that are outside of CIT that have to approve

SourceForge can be used, though staff may need training on how to use document approval functionality. You can route a hardcopy of the document to collect signatures. While you can collect initial approvals via email, you should follow with collecting actual signatures for audit purposes.

Process for Charters and PIPs

It is recommended that the document review be performed in "rounds" with earlier rounds focusing on getting feedback from project team staff and resource managers. Later rounds will secure the higher-level approvals and should not be pursued until all approvals from earlier rounds are completed. The following "rounds" are recommended. Round Who 0 Project Team Role Review Required/Optional Required (this is assumed to be part of the PIP development process)

Resource Managers of Project Team Members ADs for CIT Team Members

Approval Required

Approval Required for those whose team is contributing Review resources Optional for those whose team does not contribute resources Approval Project Director: Required CIT Directors: Required for those whose team is contributing resources

Project Director and CIT Directors for CIT Team Members

Executive Sponsors

Approval Required

Questions
Should the process be that the group gets "review" in round before they are to approve? When should PD and Exec Sponsors get first glimpse? When should Steering Committees and Advisory Groups review/approve? How long should each round be? Role for PMO and C-D PMO members?

Process for Change Orders

Change orders should follow the same process, but how far up the governance body should be determined by the impact of the change. Questions What should be the AD and CIT Dir role in approving change orders?

Labels: None

Printed by Atlassian Confluence 3.5.16, the Enterprise Wiki.