#project-management #instructional-design #multimedia-design #course-design #teaming > [!summary]+ Summary > This page describes the project management system that I helped to design and co-lead while serving as an Instructional Designer at the International Monetary Fund. # Project management for online course design and development at the IMF This project management framework was built from the ground up. We were a new unit with a young team, launching a global learning initiative with an entirely new approach to online education at the IMF. I was the newest member of the team and the only one formally trained and experienced in creating educational content. After about a year, I began documenting, shaping, and refining a project management system in collaboration with team members, and I continued to evolve this process throughout my time there. The goals of project management were the following: 1. scale up the delivery of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), 2. collect performance data, 3. distribute work across specialists, and 4. increase opportunities for cross-functional teaming. ## A hybrid form of project management The project management system created blended elements of **Waterfall**, **Agile**, and **Six Sigma**. I spent many hours iterating on system steps, drawing concepts on whiteboards, and developing documents to test ideas with the team. The resulting system drew on many project management methodologies. | Methodology | Characteristic(s) included | | -------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | Waterfall | Linear and sequential; identified clear phases; established milestones | | Agile | Strategic iterations with design and production phases; incorporated partner feedback early | | Six Sigma | Adjusted step priorities based on (prior) performance data | This system emerged from the combined expertise of economists, program managers, creative professionals, and my own research into design and project systems. This resulted in a model that was rigorous, human-centered, and usable in practice. --- ## The project context This project management system was designed to guide the planning, design, development, and evaluation of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). Key parts that needed consistent coordination included instructional design, multimedia production, and course development. These courses were built with teams and experts across the organization, often involving between two and ten subject-matter experts and a core staff team of four to eight people. ### Problems to solve A shared project management system was needed that supported daily team operations and coordination with the work of multiple subject-matter experts. The system needed to be measurably efficient and effective. Just as importantly, it needed to enable us to scale course production over a relatively short period of time without overextending people or compromising standards. ### Project management goals Leadership and I wanted to achieve the following: 1. Scale up the delivery of MOOCs; 2. Have a system that supported performance data collection; 3. Distribute work effectively across specialists; and 4. Increase opportunities for cross-functional teaming. ### People involved I designed this system with input from leadership, collaboration with team members, and careful coordination with program managers who would help drive its implementation. The framework shaped the work of subject-matter experts, program managers, research assistants, creative professionals, information technology staff, and myself. From it we had a shared understanding of responsibilities, workflows, and expectations across everyone involved. ### Challenges The most common challenge was the need to continually explain and advocate for why a structured project management system was necessary. Building the system took time, and during that period many of the SMEs we regularly partnered with wanted their preferred approaches incorporated. Negotiating priorities, aligning expectations, and *explaining the rational* of a shared process were difficult but important to establishing a sustainable system. ## The solution The initial work of creating the concept and iterating ideas was done on my office whiteboard. (See [[2017, IMF Project planning]].) From here a project management plan was created that covered 6 phases. - **Phase 1: Conceptualization of the story** - Involved the Instructional Designer (ID) and Multimedia Producer (MP) sitting with each SME and talking through the course from a high-level. Initial breakdown of goals and modules happened here, starting content was reviewed, and we jointly created a visual concept that guided creating various graphics. - See [[2017-2018, FCBLx video design]]. - **Phase 2: Designing the instruction** - This was the dedicated instructional design period. The goal was to create a learning architecture (i.e. course architecture) for the course level and modules. With hours of independent work and weekly design meetings with SMEs, the Instructional Designer produced course and module level learning objectives, the instructional content order, draft unit/page content, assessments, presentation files, draft diagrams and other visuals, discussion questions, and learning activities. - **Phase 3: Developing the instructional materials** - This was a period for the ID and MP to work both independently and collaboratively. The ID focused on generating materials to be used in the course and HTML used to structure the course. The MP focused on creating visual elements from draft diagrams and visuals produced by the ID, proposing their own visual elements, and having design meetings to further shape visual style. The ID and MP collaborated on all potential materials and styling for video production. - **Phase 4: Production of the instructional videos** - Ran concurrently with Phase 5. Here the MP led all aspects of recording and post-producing multimedia. - **Phase 5: Development of the learning environment** - Ran concurrently with Phase 4. Here the ID led the construction of the online course in the LMS/CMS. The ID also continued to work on phases 2 and 3 as it applied to other parts of the course. - **Phase 6: Testing the learning experience** - The project manager led testing of each module with various testers. ### Plans for 9 and 10 months The following is the 9-month plan for a 6-module course project. <div class="container"><iframe class="responsive-iframe-pdf-land" src="https://1drv.ms/b/c/13829E5D2EB238DE/IQRVHHmV9ibeSbknknC59FfBAd-c4Jhk11v8DKoyCwaH8_w" width="100%" height="450" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe></div> The following is the 10-month plan for a 12-module course project. <div class="container"><iframe class="responsive-iframe-pdf-land" src="https://1drv.ms/b/c/13829E5D2EB238DE/IQQ8J4P_PBADQ6q0slrWeLd8AWiduMno5dS9DhCoMjHFutw" width="100%" height="450" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe></div> ### Checklists for phases The following are the developed checklists for each phase detailing deliverables and those responsible. <div class="container"><iframe class="responsive-iframe-pdf-port" src="https://1drv.ms/b/c/13829E5D2EB238DE/IQSJU6U9mhTnSIyh0h3s_sGrAYOqjhtxVvNGqAjre_1hqxw" width="100%" height="550" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe></div> ## 🎯 Results This project management system enabled the team to scale from producing **one** Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) per year to **three** per year. Although project plans were structured for 9–10 months, the shared framework made it possible to accelerate timelines when needed. The joint pathway established predictable feedback points, removed dependencies, and helped everyone to work more efficiently. There were still occasional disruptions but the system provided enough structure and flexibility to adapt.