Project Managers at small firms (5-20 people): how many of you are involved in the actual business planning / financial control of your projects, or do you let the owners handle that bit and you serve as the point of contact and PA for the project?
As an employee of a small firm where I was a PM, I only did schedules and work assignments while being kept totally in the dark on financials.
Now, as a firm owner, our PMs know everything we know about the projects.
I'm not sure a person is really a PM if they don't know what's going on money-wise. However, sometimes a small firm's financials are so weak and scary that I understand how some owners may feel justified in being secretive.
Every PM is involved in the business planning / financial control of the projects they're assigned to. It tends to be a team effort and all the managing partners are also PM's but not all the PM's are managing partners.
At a 17 person firm we're involved with contracts in the beginning to make sure we're not missing obvious scope, then we sign off on both invoices to clients & money going out the door to consultants based on completion.
So I know how much my projects bring in & how many holes are in the bucket with consultants, but I don't know the same for every other project manager. I can put a rough estimate together & the contracts are in the project folder for all to see, but it's an effort to go add them all up.
As everyone else has said, PMs should be responsible for the project financials no matter what size the firm is. That's not to say the PM is SOLELY responsible. The Principal and/or Partner in Charge must also be responsible. The PM and PIC should review the financials at each invoice even if it is only a 10-minute chat.
I'm a big advocate for each member of the team to know how the project is performing. I have seen people completely change how they handle their tasks when they know that the DD fee is running low. They should know they still have to do a stellar job regardless of project performance, but they are also responsible for the success of the project so they might as well know what is going on. Plus, you are training the next generation of PMs!
Remember: in most states, and in very rare cases when you work on public works projects, architects are exempt employees; in other words, they do not qualify for overtime pay. Accordingly, I think that as long as the milestones are aligned with the project schedule, which should be tied into the project's fee structure, then it shouldn't matter if a project team spends 40 hours a week or 60 hours a week- right? However, the 60hr per work type of work load should be compensated for through great benefits, be they cash or non-cash compensation (personally, I would prefer fatty bonus checks if my team will be working 50-60 hour weeks).
Aug 19, 24 12:31 pm ·
·
emilyselden
Agreed, as a small business owner I'd rather my entire team be aware of the larger scale aspects to a project. That way you avoid any kind of surprises.
The idea of sharing the projects fee isn't to expect the team to work for free if the project fees is struggling.
60 hour work weeks lead to burnout and low productivity.
I've never worked at a firm that has paid for all the overtime I've done as an exempt employee. As such, I NEVER work more overtime than I'm willing to do for free. That's around $3,500 a year.
Aug 19, 24 12:57 pm ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
PM's at Small Firms
Project Managers at small firms (5-20 people): how many of you are involved in the actual business planning / financial control of your projects, or do you let the owners handle that bit and you serve as the point of contact and PA for the project?
As an employee of a small firm where I was a PM, I only did schedules and work assignments while being kept totally in the dark on financials.
Now, as a firm owner, our PMs know everything we know about the projects.
I'm not sure a person is really a PM if they don't know what's going on money-wise. However, sometimes a small firm's financials are so weak and scary that I understand how some owners may feel justified in being secretive.
I'm in this situation.
Every PM is involved in the business planning / financial control of the projects they're assigned to. It tends to be a team effort and all the managing partners are also PM's but not all the PM's are managing partners.
I do all my own stunts but one of the equity partners will handle the invoicing and fees.
At a 17 person firm we're involved with contracts in the beginning to make sure we're not missing obvious scope, then we sign off on both invoices to clients & money going out the door to consultants based on completion.
So I know how much my projects bring in & how many holes are in the bucket with consultants, but I don't know the same for every other project manager. I can put a rough estimate together & the contracts are in the project folder for all to see, but it's an effort to go add them all up.
Im involved in proposal writing and setting fees as well as invoicing and billing.
As everyone else has said, PMs should be responsible for the project financials no matter what size the firm is. That's not to say the PM is SOLELY responsible. The Principal and/or Partner in Charge must also be responsible. The PM and PIC should review the financials at each invoice even if it is only a 10-minute chat.
I'm a big advocate for each member of the team to know how the project is performing. I have seen people completely change how they handle their tasks when they know that the DD fee is running low. They should know they still have to do a stellar job regardless of project performance, but they are also responsible for the success of the project so they might as well know what is going on. Plus, you are training the next generation of PMs!
/\ This. I think PM's should have a quick meeting with the project team every week to review how the project is doing financially.
Remember: in most states, and in very rare cases when you work on public works projects, architects are exempt employees; in other words, they do not qualify for overtime pay. Accordingly, I think that as long as the milestones are aligned with the project schedule, which should be tied into the project's fee structure, then it shouldn't matter if a project team spends 40 hours a week or 60 hours a week- right? However, the 60hr per work type of work load should be compensated for through great benefits, be they cash or non-cash compensation (personally, I would prefer fatty bonus checks if my team will be working 50-60 hour weeks).
Agreed, as a small business owner I'd rather my entire team be aware of the larger scale aspects to a project. That way you avoid any kind of surprises.
The idea of sharing the projects fee isn't to expect the team to work for free if the project fees is struggling.
60 hour work weeks lead to burnout and low productivity.
I've never worked at a firm that has paid for all the overtime I've done as an exempt employee. As such, I NEVER work more overtime than I'm willing to do for free. That's around $3,500 a year.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.