Six Critical Mistakes in the Pre-Launch Phase

A Comprehensive Guide to Project Success

August 19, 2025 by

Alain Vanderbeke

| No comments yet

The pre-launch phase of any project is where success is truly determined. Despite careful preparation, numerous projects fail during this crucial period due to predictable yet avoidable mistakes. This comprehensive analysis examines six fundamental errors that consistently derail projects before they even begin, incorporating two critical but often overlooked mistakes that distinguish between project completion and actual production success.

1. Inadequate Stakeholder Communication and Alignment

The Problem

Poor communication stands as the primary contributor to project failure one-third of the time, with ineffective communications having a negative impact on project success more than half the time1. The Project Management Institute found that companies risk $135 million for every $1 billion spent on a project, with $75 million of that amount (56 percent) put at risk by ineffective communications1.

This mistake manifests in several ways: failing to involve key stakeholders in the planning process, unclear project vision communication, and cognitive biases that lead to failure to understand the project's "big picture"2. When stakeholders aren't properly aligned, projects suffer from different expectations, disappointment, bruised egos, and unnecessary stress due to lack of overview2.

Real-World Example

NASA's Mars Climate Orbiter disaster exemplifies this mistake perfectly. NASA engineers used imperial measurements (feet, pounds, inches) while European Space Agency engineers used the metric system. Both sides incorrectly assumed understanding had occurred, resulting in the lander crashing into Mars rather than landing safely2. This $125 million failure could have been prevented with proper communication protocols and verification procedures.

Solution

Implement formal communication plans and stakeholder engagement strategies:

Create comprehensive stakeholder maps identifying all parties by their power, influence, and interest levels3 4
Establish regular communication checkpoints with structured meetings, progress reports, and feedback loops1
Use collaborative planning sessions where stakeholders can voice concerns and align on objectives before execution begins5
Document all agreements clearly and ensure sign-off from key stakeholders before proceeding6
Implement change control processes that require stakeholder approval for scope modifications7

High-performing organizations create formal communications plans for nearly twice as many projects as their lower-performing counterparts1.

2. Poorly Defined Project Scope and Goals

The Problem

Unclear objectives and scope creep represent fundamental planning failures. In 2018, PMI's research found that 52% of all projects face scope creep8. This mistake occurs when project boundaries are not properly defined, documented, or controlled from the outset9. The result is continuous or uncontrolled growth in a project's scope, generally experienced after the project begins9.

Common causes include poorly defined initial scope, failure to capture all requirements, lack of project management practices, and communication gaps between stakeholders9. Without clear, measurable goals, teams lose direction and struggle to prioritize work effectively10.

Real-World Example

Apple's Copland operating system project became a classic example of scope creep. Originally intended to compete with Windows 95, the project derailed when managers began pushing for their products to be incorporated into the new system. The expanding scope made the project unmanageable, ultimately forcing Apple to abandon the project entirely and seek external solutions11.

Solution

Establish robust scope management from project initiation:

Define clear project objectives using SMART criteria (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound)12
Create detailed scope statements outlining what will and will not be included in the project8
Develop work breakdown structures (WBS) that clearly define all deliverables and their relationships8
Implement formal change control processes that evaluate, approve, and document all scope changes13
Regular scope reviews with stakeholders to ensure alignment and catch potential creep early7
Use scope management tools to track and visualize project boundaries throughout the lifecycle14

3. Inadequate Risk Assessment and Dependency Management

The Problem

Failing to identify and manage dependencies represents a critical planning oversight that can derail even well-planned projects. Dependencies are relationships where one task or entity relies on another to proceed15. Common mistakes include failing to identify all dependencies, inadequate communication with stakeholders about dependencies, and lack of accountability for dependency management15.

Risk assessment failures compound these issues. Projects often fail because teams focus only on task-level dependencies while ignoring external factors, resource dependencies, and organizational constraints16. This narrow focus creates blind spots that lead to unexpected delays and cost overruns.

Real-World Example

Denver International Airport's baggage handling system demonstrates catastrophic dependency management failure. The airport authority partnered with BAE to implement an automated system, but both organizations assumed different deadlines and failed to account for technical dependencies. An unrealistic 2-year schedule led to project underscoring, with the final cost exceeding initial estimates by hundreds of millions of dollars17.

Solution

Implement comprehensive dependency and risk management:

Conduct thorough dependency mapping identifying internal, external, resource, and logical dependencies18
Use dependency management frameworks following a six-step process: Identify, Agree, Plan, Validate, Monitor, and Communicate15
Create risk registers documenting potential issues and their impact on project dependencies16
Establish regular dependency reviews with cross-functional teams to identify emerging issues19
Build buffer time into schedules to accommodate dependency-related delays20
Use project management tools that visualize dependencies and critical paths18

4. Underestimating Time, Effort, and Resource Requirements

The Problem

Cognitive biases significantly impact project estimation accuracy. The planning fallacy, one of the most common biases, occurs when individuals underestimate the time, resources, or effort required to complete a project21. This bias manifests through optimism bias, anchoring bias, and overconfidence bias, leading to unrealistic schedules and budget overruns22.

Time and resource estimation biases refer to the tendency to systematically misjudge the amount of time, effort, or resources required to complete tasks22. These biases can lead to problems such as underestimation of costs, missed deadlines, and project failure22.

Real-World Example

The F-35 Lightning II fighter jet program exemplifies estimation bias consequences. Initial cost estimates were approximately $233 billion, but total program costs now exceed $1.7 trillion due to significant overruns and delays. Overly optimistic projections and underestimation of technical challenges, combined with anchoring bias on initial estimates, led to one of the most expensive military programs in history23.

Solution

Implement bias-aware estimation techniques:

Use reference class forecasting comparing projects to 20-30 similar historical projects to adjust estimates24
Apply multiple estimation methods including expert judgment, analogous estimating, and bottom-up estimation23
Include contingency buffers of 20-30% for uncertainty and unforeseen circumstances24
Conduct estimation workshops with diverse teams to avoid groupthink and challenge assumptions21
Track estimation accuracy over time to identify and correct systematic biases22
Use data-driven approaches leveraging historical project data rather than intuition alone23

5. Misunderstanding Between Development Time and Production Delay

The Problem

This critical mistake involves confusing the time required to complete development tasks with the actual time until a feature is released to production. Development time represents only one component of the total delivery timeline, while production readiness involves additional steps subject to unpredictable impediments such as team member illness, sudden resignations, testing delays, deployment issues, and approval processes.

The problem extends beyond simple task dependencies to encompass random events that disrupt planned timelines. These unpredictable impediments create a gap between when development is "complete" and when users can actually access the functionality in production.

Real-World Example

Healthcare.gov's launch perfectly illustrates this mistake. While development teams completed coding work, the production launch faced catastrophic delays due to inadequate testing, server capacity issues, and integration problems. On the first day, four million users visited the portal, but only six successfully registered. The development was "complete," but production readiness was months away25.

Solution

Distinguish between development completion and production readiness:

Map the complete value stream from development through production deployment26
Build production readiness checklists including testing, deployment, monitoring, and rollback procedures26
Plan for deployment lag time accounting for testing, security scans, and approval processes27
Implement continuous integration/continuous deployment (CI/CD) to reduce the gap between development and production28
Create realistic delivery forecasts using probabilistic methods like Monte Carlo simulations29
Establish transparent communication with stakeholders about the difference between development milestones and production availability26

6. Defaulting to Feature Elimination Rather Than Complexity Reduction

The Problem

When facing time constraints, teams typically default to removing features entirely ("lesser features") rather than exploring options to deliver all features at reduced complexity levels ("lower features"). This binary thinking limits creative problem-solving and often results in incomplete user experiences that fail to meet stakeholder expectations.

The mistake stems from inflexible definitions of "done" and assumptions that features must be delivered at full complexity or not at all. This approach ignores the possibility of delivering complete workflows with temporary manual steps, reduced automation, or simplified interfaces that can be enhanced in future iterations.

Real-World Example

Many software projects demonstrate this mistake when teams face deadline pressure. Instead of delivering a complete user workflow with some manual administrative steps, teams remove entire features. For instance, a project might eliminate user onboarding entirely rather than implementing a simplified version with manual verification steps that could be automated later.

Solution

Explore complexity reduction before feature elimination:

Implement user story slicing breaking features into minimum viable increments that preserve end-to-end functionality30
Design manual fallback procedures for complex automation that can be implemented later31
Use feature flags to enable/disable feature components, allowing granular control over what's delivered32
Create "walking skeleton" implementations that demonstrate complete workflows with basic functionality33
Establish graduated definitions of done allowing features to be delivered at different complexity levels30
Prioritize workflow completeness over feature perfection, ensuring users can accomplish their goals even with temporary manual steps31

Implementation Framework for Success

Pre-Launch Checklist

To avoid these six critical mistakes, implement this comprehensive pre-launch framework:

Stakeholder Management:

Conduct stakeholder mapping and analysis
Establish formal communication plans
Create regular feedback loops and checkpoints
Document all agreements and decisions

Scope and Requirements:

Define clear, measurable objectives
Create detailed scope statements and WBS
Implement change control processes
Establish scope review meetings

Risk and Dependencies:

Conduct comprehensive dependency mapping
Create risk registers and mitigation plans
Establish regular dependency reviews
Build buffer time for uncertainties

Estimation and Planning:

Use multiple estimation techniques
Apply reference class forecasting
Include contingency buffers
Track estimation accuracy over time

Production Readiness:

Map complete value streams
Create production readiness checklists
Plan for deployment lag time
Establish CI/CD processes

Feature Delivery Strategy:

Implement user story slicing
Design manual fallback procedures
Use feature flags for granular control
Prioritize workflow completeness

Conclusion

The pre-launch phase determines project success more than any other period. These six mistakes—inadequate stakeholder communication, poorly defined scope, inadequate risk assessment, underestimating requirements, misunderstanding development versus production timelines, and defaulting to feature elimination—represent the most common and costly errors that derail projects before they begin.

Success requires recognizing that project management is fundamentally about managing relationships, expectations, and uncertainty. By implementing comprehensive stakeholder engagement, robust scope management, thorough risk assessment, bias-aware estimation, production-ready planning, and flexible feature delivery strategies, organizations can significantly improve their project success rates.

The key insight is that these mistakes are predictable and preventable. Organizations that invest in proper pre-launch planning, stakeholder alignment, and comprehensive risk management create the foundation for successful project delivery. The difference between project failure and success often lies not in the complexity of the solution, but in the thoroughness of the preparation.

Remember that project success is measured not by development completion, but by successful delivery of value to end users. By avoiding these six critical mistakes, project teams can navigate the pre-launch phase successfully and set their projects up for long-term success.

Sources

in The Premium Blog

# Planning Project Management

Alain Vanderbeke August 19, 2025

Share this post

Our blogs

Archive

Sign in to leave a comment

Six Critical Mistakes in the Pre-Launch Phase

1. Inadequate Stakeholder Communication and Alignment

The Problem

Real-World Example

Solution

2. Poorly Defined Project Scope and Goals

The Problem

Real-World Example

Solution

3. Inadequate Risk Assessment and Dependency Management

The Problem

Real-World Example

Solution

4. Underestimating Time, Effort, and Resource Requirements

The Problem

Real-World Example

Solution

5. Misunderstanding Between Development Time and Production Delay

The Problem

Real-World Example

Solution

6. Defaulting to Feature Elimination Rather Than Complexity Reduction

The Problem

Real-World Example

Solution

Implementation Framework for Success

Pre-Launch Checklist

Conclusion

Sources

Share this post

Tags

Our blogs

Archive