Does Every Project Need a Project Manager?

Organizations have a habit of calling almost everything a project. Once something gets that label, the next step seems obvious: assign a project manager, develop a plan, schedule status meetings, create reports, and introduce the processes needed to manage the work. Before long, a relatively straightforward effort can acquire a surprising amount of overhead.

But does every project really need a project manager? The answer depends on what we mean by "project manager." Every project needs some level of project management, but that doesn't necessarily mean assigning a dedicated person. Sometimes a department manager, team leader, technical lead, or even the person doing the work can handle the necessary planning and coordination. In other situations, bringing in a project manager can make the difference between a successful effort and one that struggles to get across the finish line. The challenge is determining how much project management a particular effort requires and whether assigning a dedicated project manager will provide sufficient value to justify the expense and overhead.

What Is a Project?

The PMBOK® Guide, Eighth Edition defines a project as “a temporary initiative in a unique context undertaken to create value.” This definition is worth considering because it emphasizes more than simply producing a unique product, service, or result. Projects exist to create value, and that value depends on the circumstances surrounding the initiative.

The temporary nature of a project means the work has a beginning and an end, although the benefits it creates may continue long after the work is finished. The unique context reminds us that projects differ in their objectives, stakeholders, environments, approaches, and other characteristics. Even when an organization performs similar projects repeatedly, each initiative has circumstances that can affect how it should be managed.

The definition, however, doesn't tell us whether a project needs a dedicated project manager. A project can be temporary, have a unique context, and be intended to create value without requiring someone whose full-time responsibility is managing it.

Consider a small office relocation, a modest website update, or an internal process improvement. Each might qualify as a project, but the management requirements could differ significantly. A straightforward office move involving a handful of employees may need little more than a schedule, a few assignments, and regular communication. A website update involving multiple departments, external vendors, security reviews, and customer-facing changes could require considerably more coordination.

This leads to three questions that organizations should consider separately. The questions are related, but they don't necessarily have the same answers:

• Is this a project?
• What project-management practices does it need?
• Does it need a dedicated project manager?

Don't Create Unnecessary Overhead

Once an organization decides that an effort is a project, there can be a tendency to apply its standard project-management procedures regardless of the work's size or complexity. The project may receive a charter, a detailed schedule, a risk register, formal change control, recurring status meetings, and multiple layers of approval.

Those practices can be valuable when they address real needs. The problem arises when the administrative burden becomes disproportionate to the work. A small project shouldn't require the same management infrastructure as a major business transformation. Requiring a team of three people to prepare extensive reports, attend multiple governance meetings, and submit change requests through several levels of approval may consume more time than the activities are intended to save.

The answer isn't to abandon project management. Instead, it's crucial to tailor the approach to fit the project's size and complexity. In my article, Project Management Scalability: Small Projects Need Big Principles, I discussed considerations for managing smaller efforts. The same principle applies here: use the practices that help the project succeed without creating unnecessary bureaucracy.

A useful question to ask is, “What level of project management will improve our chances of success without adding more overhead than the project warrants?” That question encourages managers to think about the value of project management rather than automatically assuming that every project requires the same processes and resources.

Establish Practical Thresholds

Organizations can make these decisions easier by establishing some practical criteria for determining when an effort requires formal project management or a dedicated project manager. I've personally used a rule of thumb that considers three factors: a duration of at least three months, a budget of at least $50,000, and a team of four or five people. When an effort meets these thresholds, it may warrant closer consideration as a project requiring formal management.

These are my own practical guidelines, not universal standards. An organization should establish parameters that make sense for its environment, the types of work it undertakes, and the risks associated with that work. Each factor provides useful information. A longer duration generally means there is more time for circumstances to change and more need to monitor progress. A larger budget increases the potential financial consequences of poor decisions. A larger team introduces additional coordination requirements, particularly when people have different responsibilities or report to different managers.

However, none of these factors should be treated as an absolute requirement. A project lasting six weeks could have serious regulatory or operational implications. A $10,000 initiative could involve a critical system. A project involving only two people could still be difficult to coordinate if they have competing priorities and limited availability. The thresholds are a starting point for deciding how much management an effort needs. They shouldn't replace judgment.

Complexity and Risk Can Matter More Than Size

Some of the most demanding projects aren't necessarily the largest. A relatively small initiative can become complicated when it involves several departments, external vendors, unfamiliar technology, regulatory requirements, or stakeholders with conflicting expectations.

Imagine a company undertaking a modest software change that affects customer billing. The development work might be straightforward, but the change could require coordination among multiple departments. The budget might be small, and the technical team might consist of only a few people. Yet the consequences of a mistake could be significant. In this situation, some form of structured project management is clearly warranted, and a project manager may provide substantial value.

Now consider a larger effort involving familiar work that an experienced team performs regularly. If the requirements and expectations are clear, an existing manager can coordinate the work effectively; a dedicated project manager may not be necessary. The point is that size alone doesn't determine the need for project management. Complexity, risk, stakeholder involvement, organizational impact, and the consequences of failure all deserve consideration.

My Experience Managing Multiple Projects

Earlier in my career, I managed three or four projects simultaneously. Each had a team of four or five or more people working in different roles, and project budgets ranged from approximately $50,000 to $300,000. In addition to managing the projects, I was responsible for requirements. Once we identified the needs, I worked with the team to develop the plan. After that, I stepped back into the project management role, coordinating work, managing the schedule and resources, communicating with clients, and addressing issues as they arose.

The projects had enough similarities that I could establish routines and use my time efficiently. I could coordinate tasks and resources across projects without reinventing my approach each time. For example, Friday mornings were generally reserved for preparing client status reports for the week. If I had to travel on Friday, I would complete the reports over the weekend or on Monday morning.

That arrangement worked because the workload and project characteristics allowed it. I had responsibilities beyond project management, but I could organize those responsibilities in a way that allowed me to manage multiple projects effectively. This experience illustrates an important possibility: one project manager can sometimes manage several smaller projects without being assigned full time to any single one.

Of course, that approach has limits. The number of projects one person can manage depends on the demands placed on the project manager. The goal is to find a workload that ensures each project receives the attention it needs.

A Project Manager Shouldn't Have to Do Everything

There's another important distinction in my experience. Managing multiple projects worked because I could take responsibility for requirements, help develop the initial plans, and then step back to coordinate and manage the work. That isn't the same as expecting someone to serve as project manager, business analyst, developer, tester, technical expert, and administrative assistant all at once.

Organizations sometimes assign project-management responsibilities to the person who seems most familiar with the work. A technical lead may be asked to manage a software project while still expected to complete most of the development work. A department manager may be assigned a project while continuing to handle a full workload of operational responsibilities. This can work when the effort is small, and the additional responsibilities are manageable. But it can also create a situation where project management receives attention only when something goes wrong.

One of the benefits of assigning a dedicated project manager is that it allows the people doing the specialized work to concentrate on their responsibilities. The PM can coordinate resources, manage stakeholder expectations, facilitate decision-making, and address organizational distractions that would otherwise disrupt the team. Sometimes that benefit alone justifies the role.

Even Small Efforts Need Project Management

Let's consider an even smaller effort, one that might not meet my practical thresholds for a formal project. I'm nearly finished writing a new book. I don't have a dedicated project manager, nor do I have a formal project-management office overseeing the work. But that doesn't mean I'm ignoring project management.

I've informally scheduled my own time and the time of others involved in the effort. I have a budget for the book's launch, and I've considered the communications needed to promote it. I'm paying attention to the work that remains. In other words, I'm applying project-management practices even though I haven't formalized every activity in a document or created a separate management structure.

I haven't necessarily written everything down, but I am thinking about the work in terms of planning, time, resources, costs, stakeholders, risks, and communications. I'm also considering what needs to happen for the book to deliver the value I want. This is a useful example because it demonstrates that project management doesn't have to look like a formal project-management process to be effective. The practices can be applied informally and scaled to fit the effort. The absence of a dedicated project manager doesn't mean the absence of project management.

Not a Job Title

A project manager is a role; project management is the work required to guide an initiative toward its objectives and intended value. For a small effort, a department manager, team leader, technical lead, or business owner may be perfectly capable of handling the necessary planning and coordination. Someone still needs to make sure the work is organized, responsibilities are understood, progress is monitored, and problems receive attention.

The important question isn't necessarily who has the title. It's whether someone is taking responsibility for managing the work. That responsibility becomes particularly important when the people doing the work are busy with other priorities. If everyone assumes someone else is managing the project, the project can quickly lose direction.

For a small, uncomplicated effort, a few well-chosen practices and a clear understanding of responsibility may be enough. For something more complex, a dedicated project manager may be the most effective way to provide the necessary coordination and accountability.

When Is a PM Needed?

The decision ultimately comes down to the value the role provides. A project manager may be particularly useful when the effort involves several groups that need to coordinate their work, when dependencies are difficult to manage, or when stakeholders need help reaching agreement. The role may also be valuable when someone needs to facilitate planning, monitor progress, manage risks, and ensure that decisions are made at the right time.

In some organizations, the project manager serves as a useful buffer between the people doing the work and the management structure surrounding them. Developers, engineers, analysts, and other specialists can focus on their responsibilities while the PM deals with competing demands, status requests, resource conflicts, and organizational issues.

A dedicated project manager may also be appropriate when nobody else has the authority or capacity to coordinate the work effectively. On the other hand, a small effort involving a few experienced people, familiar work, limited dependencies, and low risk may not need a separate PM. If someone already has the time and authority to coordinate the work, adding another person may accomplish little beyond increasing the cost. The key is to evaluate the actual need rather than making the decision solely based on budget, duration, or team size.

The Right Level of Management

Organizations don't need to choose between elaborate project-management bureaucracy and no project management at all. There is a wide range of options between those extremes.

A small effort might need only an informal plan and occasional progress discussions. A somewhat larger initiative may benefit from a documented plan, assigned responsibilities, regular status updates, and a simple approach to managing risks and changes. A complex project may require a dedicated project manager, formal governance, and more comprehensive planning and reporting.

The appropriate approach depends on the work and the environment in which it will be performed. The PMBOK® Guide, Eighth Edition emphasizes tailoring project management practices to the context. These practices aren’t a one-time prescription.

That is an important principle to apply when deciding whether a dedicated project manager is necessary. Don't begin by asking which processes must be implemented. Start by understanding what the initiative needs to succeed, who is available to provide the necessary management, and where a dedicated PM would make a meaningful difference. Then scale the approach accordingly.

Not Every Project Needs a PM

Organizations should resist two opposite mistakes. The first is treating every small effort as a major project that requires a dedicated project manager and layers of formal process. The second is assuming that small efforts don't need project-management discipline at all.

My own thresholds of three months, $25,000, and a team of four or five people provide one possible starting point for deciding when formal project management may be warranted. But those numbers are less important than the judgment behind them. Complexity, risk, stakeholder involvement, organizational impact, and the availability of someone to manage the work may matter far more.

A dedicated project manager is worthwhile when the benefits justify the cost, whether those benefits come from better coordination, reduced risk, stronger stakeholder management, or protecting the people doing the work from unnecessary distractions.

For smaller efforts, the same principles still apply. You may not need a formal charter, an elaborate schedule, a comprehensive risk register, or change requests in triplicate. You do, however, need someone who pays attention to the work, the time available, the resources involved, the risks that could impede progress, and the value the effort is intended to create.

Every project needs project management. The trick is knowing how much management it needs—and whether you need a dedicated project manager to provide it.

 Related Articles:

What Project Managers Actually Do

Project Management Scalability: Small Projects Need Big Principles

Additional Resources:

What is Project Management?

10 Reasons Your Project Needs a Project Manager