Some dualisms that need specific identification
and descriptors to facilitate mutual understanding
of contexts and contents
FEATURED PAPER
By Alan Stretton, PhD (Hon)
Sydney, Australia
PLURALISM AND DUALISM IN PROJECT MANAGEMENT (PM)
Pluralism in project management
The first time I saw the descriptors “pluralism” and “pluralistic” used in relation to projects and project management was in Fangel 1993, who pointed out that,
A global trend in project management is the broadening of its applications, concepts and methods. ….
However, the broadening implies that the project management profession has changed its nature. By accepting the pluralistic character of project management, a platform can be created for the improvement of the profession and for learning from each other’s theories and experiences.
It would appear safe to suggest that project management has become even more pluralistic in the three decades since Fangel’s observations – indeed, so much so that it is doubtful that anyone could claim to have a comprehensive picture of its entire scope. One of the most evident consequences of this is that there are multitudes of different perceptions and understandings of the nature and scope of project management, and of many of its attributes, both within, and outside, the project management avocation.
In the course of writing various articles for this journal in the past decade or so, I have been increasingly aware of a group of two-type pluralisms which have significantly different content, but the same, or very similar, descriptors; and/or which are simply not recognised as having significantly different content. In both cases this can, and does, result in substantial misunderstandings and confusion.
It appears to me that most of these types of problems can be at least mitigated, if not overcome, by a combination of being aware of the situation, and adopting more precise descriptors of the components/versions of these types of two-type pluralisms.
These topics are the subject of this article, which will discuss four examples of such two-type pluralisms. For the sake of brevity, I have adopted the descriptor dualisms to cover such two-type pluralisms.
Some attributes of the dualisms to be discussed in this article
The key attributes of the dualisms in the following discussions include the following.
- Both components/versions of the dualism are widely used
- The two components/versions share many common project processes
- However, there are also some important and key differences between the two
One, or both, of the following are also relevant to the dualisms discussed in this article.
o In situations where it is not widely recognised that there is such a dualism, the unrecognised differences can, and often do, result in misunderstandings.
o In situations where both versions of the dualism have the same, or similar, descriptors, ensuing confusion can, and often does, cause problems.
As will be seen, the most important of the recommendations for helping avoid misunderstandings and attendant problems is for the nature of the version being discussed to be very clearly stated at the outset. In some cases, I will also be proposing specific descriptors for each version of particular dualisms to facilitate such clarification.
We will discuss four specific project-related dualisms in the following order.
- An existing ‘basic project management’ dualism
- A “hidden” dualism re PM differences in Supplier vs. Owner Organisations
- A proposed program management dualism
- A proposed portfolio management dualism
We now discuss each of these in turn.
More…
To read entire paper, click here
How to cite this work: Stretton, A. (2024). Pluralism in project management: Some dualisms that need specific identification and descriptors to facilitate mutual understanding of contexts and contents, PM World Journal, Vol. XIII, Issue IX, September. Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/pmwj145-Sep2024-Stretton-Pluralism-in-project-management.pdf
About the Author
Alan Stretton, PhD
Life Fellow, AIPM (Australia)
Sydney, Australia
Alan Stretton is one of the pioneers of modern project management. In 2006 he retired from a position as Adjunct Professor of Project Management in the Faculty of Design, Architecture and Building at the University of Technology, Sydney (UTS), Australia, which he joined in 1988 to develop and deliver a Master of Project Management program. Prior to joining UTS, Mr. Stretton worked in the building and construction industries in Australia, New Zealand and the USA for some 38 years, which included the project management of construction, R&D, introduction of information and control systems, internal management education programs and organizational change projects. Alan has degrees in Civil Engineering (BE, Tasmania) and Mathematics (MA, Oxford), and an honorary PhD in strategy, programme and project management (ESC, Lille, France). Alan was Chairman of the Standards (PMBOK) Committee of the Project Management Institute (PMI®) from late 1989 to early 1992. He held a similar position with the Australian Institute of Project Management (AIPM), and was elected a Life Fellow of AIPM in 1996. He was a member of the Core Working Group in the development of the Australian National Competency Standards for Project Management. He has published 270+ professional articles and papers. Alan can be contacted at alanailene@bigpond.com.au.
To see more works by Alan Stretton, visit his author showcase in the PM World Library at http://pmworldlibrary.net/authors/alan-stretton/.
