Post-project Reviews Research Articles

Book Review: Post-Project Reviews to Gain Effective Lessons Learned

Book Review: Post-Project Reviews to Gain Effective Lessons Learned

Learning from Postproject Reviews: A Cross‐Case Analysis*

Every new product development (NPD) project should not only deliver a successful new product but also should generate learning for the organization. Postproject reviews (PPRs) are recognized by both practitioners and academics as an appropriate mechanism to stimulate and capture learning in NPD teams. However, relatively few companies use PPRs, and those that do use them often fail to do so effectively. Although they are widely perceived to be a useful tool, empirical research on how PPRs are typically organized and the learning that results is limited. The present article addresses this gap in the extant knowledge and describes five in‐depth case studies, which were conducted at leading companies in Germany. A detailed investigation was made of how PPRs are conducted and of the type of learning that can result. Three main sources of data were used for each case: company documentation, in‐depth interviews with managers responsible for NPD, and observation of an actual PPR. The different data sources enabled extensive triangulation of data to be conducted and a high degree of reliability and validity to be achieved. The analysis enabled a number of key characteristics of the way PPRs are managed to be identified. Various characteristics of PPRs influence their utility, such as the time at which they take place and the way discussions are moderated. In addition, the data show that participants in the discussions at PPRs often use metaphors and stories, which indicates that PPRs have the potential to generate tacit knowledge. Interestingly, the data also show that there are various different ways in which metaphors and stories appear to stimulate discussions on NPD projects. Based on the cross‐case analysis, a wide range of implications are identified. Researchers need to investigate PPRs further to identify how they can generate tacit and explicit knowledge and support project‐to‐project learning. The generation of tacit knowledge in NPD is a topic that particularly needs further investigation. The research also led to a range of recommendations for practitioners. Companies need to strongly communicate the purpose and value of PPRs, to run them effectively to stimulate the maximum possible learning, and to disseminate the findings widely. PPRs have the potential to create and transfer knowledge amongst NPD professionals, but, as they are seldom currently used, many companies are missing an important opportunity.

Knowledge management with focus on the innovation process in collaborative networking companies

Knowledge lies at the very heart of innovation. A company's ability to create, store and transfer knowledge about technologies, customer needs and the innovation process itself may well determine success in bringing new products or services to the market. Yet, little is known as to how companies treat these issues in practice. This paper presents the results of a research project assessing practices and challenges for innovation-oriented knowledge management within four global technology-based companies in Switzerland. Results are discussed from both company-internal and external network perspectives. For company-internal knowledge management, broad differences in terms of both practices and challenges were found between the companies mainly because of different ways of implementing the innovation process and very different company cultures. Common issues included poor implementation of post-project reviews as well as a need for better integrating market and customer knowledge into all stages of the innovation process. For the external perspective, a more homogenous picture emerged where companies network with different partners throughout the innovation process and where knowledge creation and transfer were substantially greater for long-term partnerships.

Learning from New Product Development Projects: An Exploratory Study

Knowledge generation is a cornerstone of new product development, and post-project reviews (PPRs) are widely recognized as a facilitator of project-to-project learning. Empirical research on PPRs is sparse, so this paper describes four in-depth exploratory case studies that look at how PPRs are conducted and the learning that can result. The results indicate that appropriately managed PPRs can make a significant contribution to knowledge generation and exchange. In addition, the study indicates the urgent need for more research into this important area.

Identifying the hard lessons from projects – easily

Learning lessons from projects is important, but the practice of project post-mortems does not occur frequently in practice. Recent work suggests that, one reason might be the difficulty in identifying the “hard”, non-intuitive lessons from projects, such as those resulting from feedback and dynamic, systemic effects (which are difficult to discern intuitively and can greatly exacerbate initially small effects). However, while there are bodies of work to explain such effects, what are needed are simple, practical analysis methods that can be used routinely in post-project reviews to explicate how the project out-turn resulted and to identify the lessons which need to be learned. This paper reports a post-project review in NCR Financial Solutions Group Ltd., as an example of using just such simple techniques. It describes the procedures used, outlines the results found and discusses when and where such techniques might add value. Finally, it points the way ahead to more wide-ranging research in this field, to enable managers to identify the real lessons from the projects, including the hard lessons, but practically and easily. This paper will hopefully contribute to managers' ability to learn from projects.

Organizational learning through post–project reviews in R&D

Post–project reviews are one opportunity to systematically improve performance in subsequent projects. However, a survey reveals that only one out of five R&D projects receives a post–project review. Post–project reviews – if they take place – are typically constrained by lack of time and attention as well as lack of personal interest and ability. They focus mostly on technical output and bureaucratic measurements; process–related factors such as project management are rarely discussed.In this paper we review the role of post–project meetings as a tool to improve organizational learning at the group level. Based on 27 in–depth interviews with R&D managers carried out between 1997 and 2001, we categorize four classes of learning impediments. These difficulties are not easily resolved, as is illustrated by examples from Hewlett–Packard, DaimlerChrysler, SAP, Unisys, the US Army, and others. We propose a five–level post–project review capability maturity model, identifying some of the key capabilities that need to be in place in order to advance to the next process maturity level. Most companies reside on the first or second maturity level. Our conclusion is that many companies give away great potential for competence building by neglecting post–project reviews as a tool for systematic inter–project learning.

An Assessment of Post-Project Reviews

A detailed analysis of post-project reviews was conducted to assess whether such reviews should be conducted, and, if so, how they should be conducted. It was found that post-project reviews are effective in disseminating knowledge about good practices, correcting errors in individuals’ knowledge (especially their knowledge about other functions within the organization), and predicting how well alternative practices would have turned out. At the same time these reviews demonstrated several limitations. The diagnosis that took place in reviews tended to be shallow, remedies were planned only at a very superficial level, and explanations of events tended to be overly specific. Participants also made potentially misleading assumptions: for example, that unimportant problems implied unimportant causes. Nonetheless, post-project reviews are important learning mechanisms and their value seems to be underestimated by individuals who do not appreciate the need to disseminate insights throughout the organization.