What Are The Common Pitfalls When Creating a Project Charter
- Michelle M
- 3 days ago
- 6 min read
The project charter is a foundational document that authorizes a project, defines its scope and objectives, names key stakeholders, identifies high-level risks, and establishes success criteria.
A well-crafted charter sets the tone for clarity, alignment, and successful delivery. But many charters fall short and when they do, the consequences ripple across teams, budgets, timelines, and outcomes.
In this blog 'What Are The Common Pitfalls When Creating a Project Charter', we explore why they happen, what happens next, and how to avoid them. Understanding these missteps equips project sponsors, managers, and stakeholders to build stronger, smarter charters that drive results.
1. Lack of Clear Objectives and Purpose
Why It Happens
Sponsors treat purpose as a checkbox, not a strategic narrative
Vague language (“improve efficiency”, “increase revenue”) without targets
Charters written first, objectives debated later
The Impact
Teams lack direction, leading to misaligned efforts
Success becomes subjective or weakly defined
Vital trade-offs (scope vs time vs cost) remain unclear
How to Avoid It
Align with organizational strategy and existing strategic documents
Frame objectives using SMART criteria (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Time-bound)
Ask: “How will we measure success? What numbers matter?”
2. Overloaded Scope
Why It Happens
Stakeholders squeeze in every possible deliverable
Charter becomes dumping ground for all ideas
Fear of leaving out beneficial features
The Impact
Scope creep becomes inevitable
Project timelines and budgets spiral
Complexity overwhelms the team
How to Avoid It
Draft a focused minimum viable scope
Use clearly prioritized buckets or a MoSCoW method
Plan phased delivery, with later phases addressing lower-priority features
3. Missing Stakeholder Alignment
Why It Happens
Stakeholder identification is rushed or ignored
Single stakeholder or department drives charter with limited input
Early feedback is deprioritized under time pressure
The Impact
Sudden requests mid-project derail scope or alignment
Lack of buy-in undermines momentum
Political disputes or change orders arise
How to Avoid It
Map stakeholders visually by power/interest or influence/impact
Conduct early interviews or workshops
Obtain formal sign-off from all stakeholder groups
4. Ignoring High-Level Risks
Why It Happens
Fear that listing risks will slow approval
Misplaced confidence that small teams won’t face risks
Organizers lack risk awareness expertise
The Impact
Surprise collisions midstream derail timelines
Cost overruns from emergency mitigation
Reputational damage if risks materialize publicly
How to Avoid It
Include a specific risks section outlining top 3–5 potential issues
Identify mitigation strategies at charter stage
Update risk register regularly through project life
5. No Defined Success Criteria
Why It Happens
Teams assume “deliver on time and budget” suffices
Sponsors assume qualitative satisfaction aligns naturally
Success definition is left to the delivery team
The Impact
Conflicting interpretation of project success
Lack of scorecard prevents lessons learned
End-of-project “closeout” debates on whether goals were met
How to Avoid It
Define quantitative metrics in the charter (e.g., 95% uptime, 15% cost savings)
Include quality, cost, time, and stakeholder satisfaction criteria
Assign responsibility for data collection and measurement
6. Poor Governance Structure
Why It Happens
Sponsors assume the project manager will handle all decisions
No clear accountability outside day-to-day work
Steering committees established too late, or not at all
The Impact
Confusion over who makes final decisions
Delays when escalation path is unclear
Missed strategic red flags
How to Avoid It
Define roles in the charter: sponsor, project manager, steering committee, delivery leads
Document escalation paths and thresholds
Include meeting cadence (e.g., “Steering Committee meets monthly”)
7. Treatment of Resources as Unlimited
Why It Happens
Charters assume teams, budget, or time without constraints
Lack of clear resourcing planning
Optimism bias underestimates availability
The Impact
Skills shortages, lead times blown out
Over-allocation fatigue for critical roles
Budget gaps emerge midstream
How to Avoid It
Specify planned resource groups and availability
Convene people managers early to confirm allocations
Include rough estimates of effort and cost
8. Ignored Dependencies Interference
Why It Happens
Charter writers overlook integration with other initiatives
Desire to “break down silos” may blindside coordination needs
Teams are unaware of outside system or build dependencies
The Impact
Delays from parallel or conflicting projects
Unanticipated re-engineering when integration surfaces
Functional gaps due to mismatched deliverables
How to Avoid It
Conduct a pre-charter dependency analysis in draft charter
List dependencies with owners, target delivery dates, and risk level
Commit to regular syncs with related projects
9. Weak Assumptions and Constraints
Why It Happens
Teams overlook documenting boundary conditions
Charter is created without discussion of key risks/assumptions
Belief that constraints like “funding exists” are not project’s concern
The Impact
False expectations create conflict
Deadlines or budgets are violated due to missing key conditions
Later contention over “changing requirements”
How to Avoid It
Include sections in charter for “Assumptions” and “Constraints”
Highlight critical constraints such as regulatory deadlines, vendor needs
Review with stakeholders especially on funding or technical limits
10. Ignoring Change Control Onboarding
Why It Happens
Teams assume charter is static and sufficient
Fear that change control slows agility
No formal tuning of change management process
The Impact
Scope changes slip in without review
Budget or timeline deviations go into effect retroactively
Team becomes overwhelmed by untracked new requests
How to Avoid It
Define basic change control steps in charter: identify, evaluate, approve, adjust
Include thresholds for when change must bump to steering committee
Emphasize open communication and visibility
11. Writing Too Broad or Too Technical
Why It Happens
Charters include every technical detail from design docs
Audience is so broad that tone is generic and uninspiring
Desire to “be comprehensive” results in bloated, unreadable charters
The Impact
Stakeholders skip reading, lose alignment
Technical details create confusion for executives
Delivery teams struggle to find relevant guidance
How to Avoid It
Split charter into summary and appendices
Use visual summaries charts, timelines, tables
Highlight non-technical clarity for business stakeholders
12. No Communication Plan
Why It Happens
Assume informal updates suffice
Charter gets written but team overlooks communications section
Sponsor relies on spontaneous updates
The Impact
Stakeholders feel left in the dark
Surprises breed mistrust
Engagement drops due to inactivity
How to Avoid It
Include simple communication plan: format, frequency, audiences (e.g., weekly updates, monthly business reviews)
Define communication owners (PM or coordinator)
Address stakeholder expectations upfront
13. Unrealistic Timelines
Why It Happens
Senior management applies arbitrary deadlines
Critical schedules from regulatory or commercial timing force timelines
Fast chartering process skips validation
The Impact
Race to meet timelines leads to quality issues
Morale suffers due to burnout
Technical debt grows from shortcuts
How to Avoid It
Conduct rough high-level planning and consult SMEs
Apply buffer margins and include "time contingencies"
Present scenarios: aggressive vs realistic vs conservative
14. Skipping Data and Performance Baselines
Why It Happens
Projects are forward-focused and skip “current state” metrics
Charters lack baseline insights early
Teams assume data will be available later
The Impact
No real way to measure process improvement
Unclear value or ROI submitted
Disputes at project closure over performance improvement
How to Avoid It
Require current-state data snapshots (KPIs, process metrics)
Include target post-project performance improvements (e.g., 20% faster cycle time)
Encourage SME-based benchmarking
15. Relying Solely on Templates
Why It Happens
One-size-fits-all template simplifies drafting
Project leads avoid customization
Assumption that template equals quality
The Impact
All charters look the same but don’t reflect uniqueness
Generic charters omit project-specific risks or success metrics
Stakeholder engagement suffers
How to Avoid It
Encourage template as framework, not final product
Include checklist for project-specific customization
Ask project leads to explicitly note deviations from template
Conclusion - What Are The Common Pitfalls When Creating a Project Charter
The project charter is far more than paperwork it’s the blueprint of alignment, accountability, clarity, and value delivery. Too often, organizations treat it as a perfunctory exercise, overlooking the risks of ambiguity, misalignment, and poor planning.
By avoiding these common pitfalls vague objectives; bloated scope; missing stakeholder input; ignored risk; resource assumptions; weak governance; unrealistic timelines; missing measure‑back; omission of communication, change control, and assumptions and by tailoring your charter consciously to the project, you dramatically increase the odds of success.
Creating a charter isn’t just a planning step; it’s an early test of leadership alignment, collaboration, and genuine project commitment. Get it right and you've set a powerful, clear, and actionable course. Get it wrong, and you risk watching your project stall, fragment, or spiral.
Subscribe and share your thoughts and experiences in the comments!
Professional Project Manager Templates are available here
