Challenges and Pitfalls of Different Status Reports

This article discusses the challenges and pitfalls of different status reports in project management. It explores the influence of individual traits, work climate, and cultural differences on status reports. The article also highlights the differences between status reports for teams, sponsors, and steering committees. It concludes with recommendations for improving the accuracy and effectiveness of status reports.

Running Head: CHALLENGES AND PITFALLS OF DIFFERENT STATUS REPORTS
Challenges and Pitfalls of Different Status Reports
Author’s Name
Instructor’s Name
Course Number and Name
Date

Challenges and Pitfalls of Different Status Reports
Challenges and Pitfalls of Different Status Reports
According to Keil, Smith and Thompson (2014), there are varied pitfalls and challenges of
different status reports. Firstly, individual traits of team members in different positions tend to
influence the status reports to a large extent. For example, individuals with higher ambition in an
organization tend to misreport about their progress in a project or that of their team members. Some
individuals are often identified to shift blame onto others in their status reports in case of inability to
meet the project timeline. Secondly, work climate and cultural differences have often influenced the
difference in the reports. Thirdly, a major pitfall of different status reports is the inability to identify
the exact effects of misreporting of project information or status by the team. Auditors find it
extremely difficult to point out the true status due to the shift in blame and a difference of
perspective of the situation among all team members. The primary consequence and challenge of
such pitfalls is the loss of trust in the senior executives and the dysfunctional reporting causes an
irreversible damage to the project and the company’s reputation in many cases.
Nalewaik and Witt (2009), estimate that the senior executives made in charge of projects
often increase the chances of misreporting and thus there is significant amount of damage to the
morale of the team and the employees. There is no doubt that senior leaders of an organization offer
more support and visibility to the project; however, researchers have identified its negative effect on
the ability of the team members to prepare reports from the short term and long-term perspective
both. Thus, scholars advise a reduction in the allocation of responsibility of team leadership to senior
executives and transfer of leadership to one of the team members. It was recommended that a joint
project status report should be taken from the team from time to time to track the actual progress of a
project. Lastly, executives often rely on team members to make the project reports. However, their
lack of experience and inbuilt biased objectives may influence the outcome of the reports that are
formalized.

Challenges and Pitfalls of Different Status Reports
Difference Between the Status Reports for Teams, Sponsors and Steering Committee
The first primary difference between the status reports of the team members, sponsors and
steering committee is that they are responsible for different types of projects. The teams handle one
single project, while the sponsors handle multiple small projects. The steering committee on the
other hand handles medium to large sized projects that require more attention, are more valuable and
demand daily updates. The sponsors are required to submit their status reports to the steering
committees and other stakeholders of the organization (Starovic, 2018). Certain other differences
have been enlisted in the following pointers:
 It was noted that the features of the status reports of the teams include aspects such as status,
progress, summaries and other important information pertaining to the project that they may
be working on. Project sponsors are made responsible for tracking the progress of all small
projects. Hence, their responsibilities include the analysis of the project status reports
submitted by the small teams and formulation of a progress summary of each of the small
projects in one status report. The status reports of steering committees are much more
comprehensive since they include projects that are spread out on a large scale.
 The purpose of the status report of the teams include the status, individual assigned tasks and
deliverables of each along with new developments and issues with the project. On the other
hand, the purpose of the status report of sponsors and steering committees include progress
on major milestones, activities undertaken, status of the crucial milestones, costs and
forecasts on changes, new issues and the status of them.
 The teams are required to only highlight task level details in their status reports while steering
committees or sponsors are required to add program level details
 The status reports of teams are required to be submitted in a weekly manner while the status
reports of the latter two are submitted two-weekly

Challenges and Pitfalls of Different Status Reports
 The format of the status reports of team members include status report for the project
manager and a verbal power point presentation to be submitted for the project manager to
review. On the other hand, the format of the status reports of sponsors and steering
committees include dashboards and KPI indicator report (Patton and Shechet, 2009).
Apart from the above-mentioned differences in the status reports of the teams, sponsors and steering
committees, it was also learnt that a project manager is assigned for every small project run by
teams. This is done to ensure that the project is completed within the deadline and meets the quality
parameters. Project managers work with the team, take individual status reports on a daily basis and
formulate a weekly report that can be submitted to the sponsors. Although these are the basic
differences in the status reports of teams, sponsors and steering committee, but these are subject to
change based on the customized organizational structure of any company.

Challenges and Pitfalls of Different Status Reports
References
Keil, M., Smith, J., Iacovou, C. L. and Thompson, R. L. (2014). The Pitfalls of Project Status
Reporting. MIT Sloan Management Review. Retrieved from:
https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/the-pitfalls-of-project-status-reporting/. [Accessed: 1st May
2019]
Nalewaik, A. A. and Witt, J. (2009). Challenges Reporting Project Costs and Risks to Owner
Decisionmakers. AACE International Women in Project Controls. Retrieved from:
http://www.icoste.org/ICMJ%20Papers/Nalewaik1.pdf. [Accessed: 1st May 2019]. Pp 1-9.
Patton, N. and Shechet, A. (2009). Wisdom for Building the Project Manager/Project Sponsor
Relationship: Partnership for Project Success. The Journal of Defence Software Engineering.
Retrieved from: https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a487472.pdf. [Accessed: 1st May 2019].
Pp 1-8.
Starovic, D. (2018). Performance Reporting to Boards: A Guide to Good Practice. CIMA Global.
Retrieved from:
http://www.cimaglobal.com/documents/importeddocuments/perfrpttoboards_techguides_2003.
pdf. [Accesses: 1st May 2019]. Pp 6-11.