Writing project terms of reference (TORs)
“If you don't know where you're going, any road will get you there.”
Lewis Carroll, English writer (1832-1898)
When initiating a project, it is important that all those involved agree what the project is to achieve before it starts.
One very positive thing about the drafting of project terms of reference (TORs) is that - from the outset - the very act engages the entire group in the planning process. TORs also provide a quick way of delivering all the necessary information to the project's stakeholders. It's a lot more digestible than a lengthy project initiation document when they're looking for a quick but detailed overview of the proposed project.
So when you're seeking support and approval for your next project, it might be worth writing terms of reference using BOSCARD. The acronym stands for background, objectives, scope, constraints, assumptions, risks and deliverables.
Background - why we're doing this
Background information that includes the reasons for creating the project and mentions key stakeholders who will benefit.
Objectives - what we expect to achieve
Describes the project goals and links each with related SMART project objectives:
specific, measurable, attainable, relevant and time-based.
Scope - what's in and what's out
Clarifies the group's overall remit and provides a high-level description of what the project group is expected to include in the project's remit and what's beyond the group's purview.
Constraints - any limitations
Identifies the specific constraints or restrictions that limit or place conditions on the project.
Assumptions - what we are assuming
Specifies all factors that are, for planning purposes, considered to be true. During the planning process, these assumptions must be validated.
Risks - what can go wrong
Outlines the risks identified at the start of the project. Includes a brief assessment of the significance of each risk and how to deal with it.
Deliverables - how we know when we've achieved our goal(s)
Defines the key deliverables that the project is required to produce to achieve the stated objectives.
Final thought....don't confuse activity for effectiveness
Regrettably many projects in the UK's public and private sectors get underway without adequate planning and/or stakeholder support. You could be forgiven for thinking that those involved feel that it's more important to be seen to be taking action than using the 'grey matter' to plan. Is this yet another sign of British macho-management in action? I have often commented that many managers confuse activity for effectiveness. So is it any surprise that the lack of planning and a gung-ho attitude continue to blight many UK public and private projects?
My experience in the commercial world and the NHS suggests that a better path is that trodden by those I knew in the Far East who - in the eyes of many - seemed to spend an inordinate amount of time planning. But look no further than the Cross Harbour Tunnel, MTR and International Airport in Hong Kong. Each multi $$$$$s project was meticulously planned, constructed in the blink of an eye, on time, within budget and generated profits in no time.
​