The problem with projects: an ex-development perspective

Many development practitioners have an ongoing obsession with “projects.” Some go so far as to anthropomorphize the projects they manage. This may sounds ridiculous, I’m serious. I’ve heard project managers discuss at great lengths the project’s “needs and requirements” and how important it is that this “project’s needs be met in order for the project to survive and succeed.”

The way I understand it, PEOPLE have needs, projects do not. After all, aren’t projects just different combinations of people and actions? A means to an end? Come to think of it, what exactly is a “project”? How do we define this entity?

Here is one definition I found: A project is “a unique venture with a beginning and an end, undertaken by people to meet established goals within defined constraints of time, resources, and quality.” That sounds pretty benign. In Haitian Creole, on the other hand, the translation of project literally means “money.”

It seems to me that development is much more of a long-term, nonlinear, complex and holistic process, and that “projects,” with their associated short-term plans, imposed goals and rigid timelines, are not always the most appropriate mechanisms for advancing this process.

Whether we are talking about constructing a school, training a teacher, developing a functioning healthcare system, or building a democracy—we should remember that the key to lasting change is the PEOPLE (leaders, workers, residents, technicians) who commit and remain involved, and lasting PARTNERSHIPS among committed groups and individuals.

I, for one, am going to try to be more careful about the way I use the word “project.” Instead, I will try to use more intentional language that highlights people and actions and processes that promote social change.