SPONSORS

SPONSORS

From Risk, to Issue, To Crisis

Is Your Program Prepared?

 

SECOND EDITION

By Deidre C. Hicks

Washington, DC, USA

 


 

As program and project managers, we are all raised on the idea of managing risks and issues. It is a part of our DNA to identify and manage risks, including developing mitigation plans to try to avoid the risk and developing contingency plans in case a risk is realized. We are also well versed in issue management―whether it is a realized risk or an unplanned event. We know that the success of our projects and programs is dependent on utilizing a structured risk and issue management processes. What about a crisis?

More importantly―what is a crisis? Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the word was abused in our society―not having coffee available in the morning was a crisis to some, or a question from senior leadership or oversight entities, or news coverage of your program was viewed as a crisis. Those things are simply events and not a crisis.

A crisis is “a catastrophic event, or series of escalating events, that threatens the strategic objectives, reputation, or viability of the program or its parent organization.”

While crisis management is related to risk and issue management, crisis management has its own set of international standards and best practices. Please note that crisis management is focused on how an organization prepares for, manages, and is impacted by a crisis.

Good examples of a crisis include Hurricane Katrina and last year’s Boeing 737 MAX airplane crashes, as well as the current COVID-19 pandemic.

What do these events share that make them a crisis? It is how these events affect the program or organization responsible for managing the program when:

  • Objectives are not met.
  • Reputation is severely damaged.
  • Viability of the organization is threatened.

So what about your program? Do you need to consider crisis management? I would urge you to ask yourself: Do I have any risks that, if realized:

  • Could jeopardize lives?
  • Would break the law?
  • Would jeopardize the reputation of the organization?

If you do, you should consider implementing a formal Crisis Management process.

More…

To read entire paper, click here

 

Editor’s note: Second Editions are previously published papers that have continued relevance in today’s project management world, or which were originally published in conference proceedings or in a language other than English.  Original publication acknowledged; authors retain copyright.  This paper was originally presented at the 7th Annual University of Maryland PM Symposium in May 2020.  It is republished here with the permission of the author and conference organizers.

How to cite this paper: Hicks, D. C. (2020). From Risk, to Issue, To Crisis: Is Your Program Prepared? presented at the 7th Annual University of Maryland Project Management Symposium, College Park, Maryland, USA in May 2020; PM World Journal, Vol. IX, Issue VII, July. Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/pmwj95-Jul2020-Hicks-from-risk-to-issue-to-crisis2.pdf

 


 

About the Author


Deidre C. Hicks

Washington, DC, USA

 

 

 

Deidre Hicks, PMP serves as an Assistant Division Chief in the Decennial Census Management Division at the Census Bureau. Ms. Hicks heads up the Program Management Office, which is responsible for defining and implementing program management policies, processes and the control functions for planning and implementing the 2020 Census. She spent the first 15 years of her career as a DoD contractor project manager over software development and since 2004 has been a federal employee of the Census Bureau. Ms. Hicks has been a PMP since 2006 and holds a FAC/PPM-IT Level 3 and FAC/COR Level 3.  She can be contacted at Deidre.C.Hicks@census.gov

 

 

Challenges in Construction Project Management

as faced by Millennials in Developing Countries

 

SECOND EDITION

By Jailane Atef Amer

Cairo, Egypt, and

Washington, DC, USA

 


 

ABSTRACT

Basically, this presentation will show what is happening in the industry in developing countries Vs USA and how does a millennial look at it and fit into it. As we all know that the culture of each country is one of the major aspects to take into account in stakeholder management when referring to millennials; whether they manage a project team or they are being managed by project leaders. No doubt that each country has its own different working environment.

In developing countries, the culture and the nature of each project play an important role in CPM. Currently many case studies show that it’s not anymore about the waterfall process or the new agility techniques that matter, however, it’s about how to be creative and adapt to the nature of each project in all its circumstances since each project varies in its location, time, budget and resources.

Of course, it is very beneficial to study theories but also its more important to learn from our mistakes and be down to earth; maybe we can think of new holistic approaches or come up with a model that can be used later as a tool for managing each project independently.

Also, this paper aims at understanding what challenges are, how they are formed and how they are perceived by millennials. Research involves doing a deep dive study into the mindset of millennials at the industry today and the understanding of major concerns of the industry.

INTRODUCTION

“Project” is a temporary endeavor undertaken to create a unique product, service, or result, as defined in PMBOK guide sixth edition. The keyword in this definition is the word “unique” because one has to understand that each project has to be treated independently based on many factors in order to fulfill its objectives successfully and attain its strategic position.

From my experience, managing projects in developing countries has become very challenging especially in the construction industry as the waterfall project life cycle has to be integrated and all project team and stakeholders have to understand the terms adaptability and flexibility.

All project managers are aware of the project life cycle and how projects are being managed throughout all the knowledge areas and process groups.

Figure 1. Project Life Cycle

This paper will mainly focus on the challenges faced in developing countries and the importance of having a new generation of flexible and creative project managers in the construction field. And accordingly, the paper will review the changes happened in the science of project management that is now reflected in the PMBOK sixth edition.

EVERYTHING IS CHANGING

Project Management Institute noticed that the distance between what is really happening in the market and theories written and studied in books started getting wider so they tried to respond to bridge the gap. And from here, all changes happened from PMBOK 5th to 6th took place.

First of all, some control processes have been renamed. They exchanged the word control with the word monitor which gives more sense of empowerment than controlling. As PMBOK 6th edition is focusing more on adapting, facilitating and monitoring.

More…

To read entire paper, click here

 

Editor’s note: Second Editions are previously published papers that have continued relevance in today’s project management world, or which were originally published in conference proceedings or in a language other than English.  Original publication acknowledged; authors retain copyright.  This paper was originally presented at the 7th Annual University of Maryland PM Symposium in May 2020.  It is republished here with the permission of the author and conference organizers.

How to cite this paper: Amer, J.A. (2020). Challenges in Construction Project Management as faced by Millennials in Developing Countries; presented at the 7th Annual University of Maryland Project Management Symposium, College Park, Maryland, USA in May 2020; PM World Journal, Vol. IX, Issue VII, July. Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/pmwj95-Jul2020-Amer-challenges-in-construction-project-management2.pdf

 


 

About the Author


Jailane Atef Amer

Cairo, Egypt
Washington, DC, USA

 

 

Jailane Amer, PMP, Born and raised in Cairo – Egypt, she graduated from Cairo University, Faculty of Engineering, Architecture and Engineering technology program in 2013. She conducted several studies related to project management starting 2015 with mini MBA from Cairo University, then she took her Project management professional – PMP- certification. While studying for her Bachelor’s degree, she attended several workshops related to sustainable architecture and environmental studies at Lincoln School of Architecture, Lincoln University, UK.  She was also chosen to represent Cairo University in workshops and architecture competitions at the American University in Cairo. She also participated in architectural design workshops with students from Politecnico Di Milano University, Italy at Cairo University.

In 2015, she was working as a teaching assistant at the German University in Cairo for urban economics course. She worked as an architect in several reputable engineering consultant companies. In 2017, she joined a community development project as a project coordinator. This project was a collaboration between Ain Shams University in Egypt and Stuttgart University in Germany that aimed to develop and turn the attention to the different hidden cultures in informal settlements.

She is now a PMI member in the Washington DC chapter and she aims to continue her academic studies in engineering management. Jailane has also started volunteering in social and educational reform activities. In 2019, she joined the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum and participated in the project management symposium at the University of Maryland. She can be contacted at eng.jailane.a@gmail.com

 

 

Post Disaster Engineering & Construction

Program and Project Management

 

SECOND EDITION

By Bob Prieto

Jupiter, Florida, USA

and

Charles (Al) Whitaker

Texas, USA

 


 

The post-disaster environment changes both engineering and construction requirements as well as the framework within which it is undertaken. These changes drive post-disaster program and project managers to address different considerations than those encountered on a more traditional global scale program while simultaneously dealing with the added constraints imposed by an evolving logistical situation.

Previously in, “Personal Perspective: Program Management and Events of Scale” (PM World Today; July, 2008) the focus was on programmatic features common in the preparation and planning to resist, respond and recover from so-called events of scale. This paper looks more deeply at how the engineering and construction model changes post disaster and how various logistics affecting activities are modified from those employed on global scale programs undertaken in a non-disaster environment.

Types of Disasters

Before jumping directly into the post disaster environment it is worth spending a minute to understand the range of disasters that engineering and construction program and project managers are likely to be called to engage in. We have tried to characterize these simply as those with a broader scale (both natural and human caused) and those that are more discrete in nature. The later however may have consequences as severe as the broader scale disasters depending on the facility involved. We have specifically included so called “Natech” disasters or naturally induced technological failures. The most recent example of such a Natech disaster is at Fukashima.

  • Broader Scale Disasters
    • Human
      • War, civil strife, terrorism
    • Natural
      • Regional – wind, water, earthquake, geological
    • Discrete Disasters (Specific facility)
      • Human – terrorism, explosion, fire
      • Natural – tornado, fire
      • Natech – naturally induced, technological failure

Each of these disasters moves through three phases but in this paper we will focus only on the later two.

  • Resist (pre-disaster)
  • Response
  • Recover and reconstruct
    • Enhance resiliency for each phase

Simplified Engineering & Construction Project Model

In order to understand how the engineering and construction project model changes post-disaster, it is first necessary to construct a simplified model for the non-disaster scenario. Such a simplified model is reflected in the following figure and includes a set of project inputs which are transformed at a project site, within a well-defined framework, to deliver the desired project outputs.  Framework elements include:

More…

To read entire article, click here

 

Editor’s note: Second Editions are previously published papers that have continued relevance in today’s project management world, or which were originally published in conference proceedings or in a language other than English.  Original publication acknowledged; authors retain copyright.  This paper was originally published in PM World Today in September 2011.  It is republished here with the author’s permission.

How to cite this paper: Prieto, R. and Whitaker, C. (2011). Post Disaster Engineering & Construction Program and Project Management, Second Edition, PM World Journal, Vol. IX, Issue VII, July 2020.  Originally published in PM World Today, Vol. XIII, Issue IX, September 2011. Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/pmwj95-Jul2020-Prieto-Whitaker-post-disaster-program-and-project-management2.pdf

 


 

About the Authors


Bob Prieto

Chairman & CEO
Strategic Program Management LLC
Jupiter, Florida, USA

 

 

 Bob Prieto is a senior executive effective in shaping and executing business strategy and a recognized leader within the infrastructure, engineering and construction industries. Currently Bob heads his own management consulting practice, Strategic Program Management LLC. He previously served as a senior vice president of Fluor, one of the largest engineering and construction companies in the world. He focuses on the development and delivery of large, complex projects worldwide and consults with owners across all market sectors in the development of programmatic delivery strategies. He is author of nine books including “Strategic Program Management”, “The Giga Factor: Program Management in the Engineering and Construction Industry”, “Application of Life Cycle Analysis in the Capital Assets Industry”, “Capital Efficiency: Pull All the Levers” and, most recently, “Theory of Management of Large Complex Projects” published by the Construction Management Association of America (CMAA) as well as over 700 other papers and presentations.

Bob is an Independent Member of the Shareholder Committee of Mott MacDonald. He is a member of the ASCE Industry Leaders Council, National Academy of Construction, a Fellow of the Construction Management Association of America and member of several university departmental and campus advisory boards. Bob served until 2006 as a U.S. presidential appointee to the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Business Advisory Council (ABAC), working with U.S. and Asia-Pacific business leaders to shape the framework for trade and economic growth. He had previously served as both as Chairman of the Engineering and Construction Governors of the World Economic Forum and co-chair of the infrastructure task force formed after September 11th by the New York City Chamber of Commerce. Previously, he served as Chairman at Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB) and a non-executive director of Cardno (ASX)

Bob can be contacted at rpstrategic@comcast.net.

 


Charles (Al) Whitaker

Texas, USA

 

 

 

 Al Whitaker has served as program manager for DOE, DOD, FEMA and other U.S. government agencies and programs and has been responsible for managing large federal programs in the area of environmental services (facilities permitting, design, and construction and site remediation) and disaster relief.   He was Fluor’s program manager for the FEMA Individual Assistance Technical Assistance Program.  This program provided temporary housing to disaster victims.  The scope for the program included full engineering, procurement, construction, and maintenance services.  As Program Manager his responsibilities included the execution of all task orders for disaster response anywhere FEMA is called upon to respond.  Task Orders included work in Florida, Wyoming, Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Kansas and Texas.  Revenues from this program exceeded $1.5 billion and over 900 million safe work hours were executed during 1976-1980.  Al Whitaker has a Bachelor of Science degree in Civil Engineering (Chi Epsilon, Civil Engineering Honorary Fraternity) from the University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, USA  (1976-1980); and a Masters of business Administration from Texas A&M University, Mays Graduate School of Business, College Station, Texas, USA (2002 – 2004).

 

 

Operationalizing resilience for Srinagar Smart City

 

SECOND EDITION

By Omar Bashir

RICS School of Built Environment
Amity University

Noida, India

 


 

ABSTRACT

Smart City Mission was launched by the Government of India in 2015, aims to develop 100 smart cities across India. The primary objective of the program is to transform existing cities into smart cities by incorporating urban renewal and redevelopment, both brownfield and greenfield and retrofitting thereby making the cities smart, sustainable and citizen friendly. The secondary objective of this program is to foster economic growth through these smart cities, which in turn will have a “rub-off effect” on neighboring cities and towns. India is vulnerable to several types of disasters – natural and man-made and such a large-scale program of urban renewal and redevelopment could have been useful in make a selected few cities disaster resilient. However, the Smart City Mission loses out on an opportunity to incorporate resilience in the newly developed smart cities.

The focus of this study is the city of Srinagar in North India, which is currently being developed as one of the Smart Cities in India. Srinagar is one of the most disaster-prone cities in India. The city has developed a detailed system with several layers of policies and procedures for disaster management, but that system is majorly reactive in approach and does not emphasize on resilience.  Though several frameworks exist for incorporating resilience at a city level, there are none for operationalizing resilience at a city level. To overcome this research gap, a detailed study was carried out in association with experts related to disaster management and allied fields to develop a stage-wise holistic resilience maturity model. Though cities face unique disasters, due to their geographies, complexities, urbanization and culture, this Resilience Maturity Model can be adopted by any city of the world.

INTRODUCTION

Srinagar, the winter capital of the state of Jammu and Kashmir, has witnessed unprecedented levels of unplanned urbanization over the past few decades.  The population has increased from 2.85 lakhs in 1961 to 4.57 lakhs in 1971, 6.06 lakhs in 1981, 11.10 lakhs in 2001 to 20.84 lakhs in 2011. (Nengroo, et al., 2017).  Same is the case with rest of India where the urban population has seen an increase of around 4% from 2001 to 2011 and is projected that 40% of total Indian population will be residing in urban areas by 2030, and nearly 50% by 2050. (Census of India, 2011). Globally as well, the trend of urbanization continues at a steady rate.

In general, urbanization does not pose any threat to the environment or development, however, access to several basic amenities is restricted by unplanned urbanization. (Nengroo, et al., 2017). Further, if the urbanization is at a rapid rate it may lead several other issues like lack of suitable dwelling units, slums, overburdened transportation system, pollution, environmental degradation and an overall burden on the existing infrastructure. (Aijaz & Hoelscher, 2015). In India, due to the lack of strict regulations and planning cities have seems unorganized and unplanned growth. There is a large-scale migration across the country from rural to urban areas, as urban areas provide better employment opportunities and better quality of life. It is estimated that around 30% of the Indian population now live in urban areas as compared to around 18% in 1960 (World Bank, 2020). This constant, rapid and unregulated urbanization has led to the overburdening of existing city infrastructure. (Bashir, 2020) which is an underlying cause of low FDI (foreign direct investment) in India (Aijaz & Hoelscher, 2015).

NATIONAL SMART CITY MISSION IN INDIA

The National Smart City Mission launched by the Government of India in 2015 as an urban renewal program to make existing cities citizen-friendly and sustainable. It emphasized on development of core infrastructure; technological interventions and area-based development. The basic objective of this program is to drive economic growth in the 100 selected Smart city which other cities can emulate. (Praharaj & Han, 2019) (Gupta & Hall, 2017) (Smart Cities Mission, 2015).

SRINAGAR – INTRODUCTION

Srinagar is the capital and the largest city of the state (now Union territory) of Jammu and Kashmir, the northern state of India. It is located at the foothills of the Himalayas at an elevation of 1585 meters from sea level. The city is located on both the banks of river Jhelum, which divides the city into two parts and is connected by 9 bridges. The total area of the city is around 294 square kilometers.

 

More…

To read entire paper, click here

 

Editor’s note: Second Editions are previously published papers that have continued relevance in today’s project management world, or which were originally published in conference proceedings or in a language other than English.  Original publication acknowledged; authors retain copyright.  This paper was originally presented at the 7th Annual University of Maryland PM Symposium in May 2020.  It is republished here with the permission of the author and conference organizers.

How to cite this paper: Bashir, O. (2020). Operationalizing resilience for Srinagar Smart City; presented at the 7th Annual University of Maryland Project Management Symposium, College Park, Maryland, USA in May 2018; republished in the PM World Journal, Vol. IX, Issue VI, June. Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/pmwj94-Jun2020-Bashir-Operationalizing-Resilience-for-Srinagar-Smart-City.pdf

 


 

About the Author

 


Omar Bashir

Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India

 

Omar Bashir is currently working as an Assistant Professor at RICS School of Built Environment, Amity University, Noida, India. Omar has a Bachelor’s degree in Civil Engineering and MSc in Civil and Structural Engineering from the University of Bradford, United Kingdom. He has more than 5 years of experience in Academics and Industry. His research interests are primarily Construction Project Management, Quality Management, Occupational Health and Safety and Construction Materials.  He can be contacted at omarbashir86@gmail.com

 

 

Phases of an Event of Scale

from a Relief, Response and Reconstruct Perspective

 

SECOND EDITION

By Bob Prieto

Jupiter, Florida, USA

 


 

Events of scale whether they are manmade or natural are becoming increasingly common events in an increasingly complex and networked world. The impact of natural events is further amplified by growing populations in vulnerable areas, prone to earthquake, wind or water driven disasters. Preparing for and addressing these events requires increased levels of engineering and logistical support, often requiring the mobilization and reconfiguration of global supply chains. Anticipating and understanding the nature of this engineering and logistical support and the prerequisites and lead times associated with effectively deploying it are essential to today’s disaster response and reconstruction efforts.

To assist in better planning for the deployment of engineering and logistical elements post-disaster, a phased event of scale framework is laid out in the following figure. The intent is not to suggest that each of these activities is sequential but rather to define major phases for purposes of delineating precursor activities and required capabilities. Only then can the often-missing event master schedule be created at an early stage.

Pre-Event

Not all events of scale occur without warning and all do benefit from some degree of pre-planning and preparation. This paper will not look at preparedness as a precursor condition for an event of scale but rather only look at it in its aftermath. Having said that, certain events of scale do offer a narrow pre-event period. These may be measured in minutes to hours for tsunami and certain flooding events to days in the instance of major tropical storms, cyclones and hurricanes. Pre-event activities during this period should include:

  1. Emergency notification, including a real time assessment of the emergency notification system for potential use during the event and the first response phase.
  1. Evacuation or sheltering, including an engineering and logistical assessment of evacuation routes or major shelters for the extent of the operation anticipated.
    1. For example, attempting to evacuate populations in excess of logistical capability may result in a more exposed population than under a partial shelter in place scenario
    2. Similarly, sheltering decisions should consider ability to withstand the anticipated event and begin consideration of first response challenges posed by the selected sheltering strategy deployed
  1. Pre-positioning of engineering first response and logistical teams
    1. Engineering first response teams should be focused on assisting first response efforts associated with life saving and rescue opportunities. Such activities may include structural advice associated with ruble entrapped individuals or continued habitability of damaged buildings. Risks to first responder operations would also be assessed.
    2. Damage assessment teams or dispatch and management functions related to such teams may be pre-positioned
    3. Logistical and communication teams may be pre-positioned during this period to quickly bring vital logistical communications up immediately after the event and to quickly identify available logistical routes and staging areas.

Event

Engineering and logistical activities during the event and continuing into its immediate aftermath should be focused on predictive forecasting of the nature, type, extent and pattern of damage. Areas at risk from secondary effects (such as flooding) should be identified and prioritized. Geospatial models may need to be updated to reflect any significant modifications caused by the event itself (new or blocked flow channels or basins as an example).Additional event phase activities should include:

 

More…

To read entire article, click here

 

Editor’s note: Second Editions are previously published papers that have continued relevance in today’s project management world, or which were originally published in conference proceedings or in a language other than English.  Original publication acknowledged; authors retain copyright.  This paper was originally published in PM World Today in July 2008.  It is republished here with the author’s permission.

How to cite this paper: Prieto, R. (2010). Phases of an Event of Scale from a Relief, Response and Reconstruct Perspective, Second Edition, PM World Journal, Vol. IX, Issue VI, June 2020.  Originally published in PM World Today, July 2008. Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/pmwj94-Jun2020-Prieto-phases-of-an-event-of-scale-2nd-ed.pdf

 


 

About the Author

 


Bob Prieto

Chairman & CEO
Strategic Program Management LLC
Jupiter, Florida, USA

 

 Bob Prieto is a senior executive effective in shaping and executing business strategy and a recognized leader within the infrastructure, engineering and construction industries. Currently Bob heads his own management consulting practice, Strategic Program Management LLC. He previously served as a senior vice president of Fluor, one of the largest engineering and construction companies in the world. He focuses on the development and delivery of large, complex projects worldwide and consults with owners across all market sectors in the development of programmatic delivery strategies. He is author of nine books including “Strategic Program Management”, “The Giga Factor: Program Management in the Engineering and Construction Industry”, “Application of Life Cycle Analysis in the Capital Assets Industry”, “Capital Efficiency: Pull All the Levers” and, most recently, “Theory of Management of Large Complex Projects” published by the Construction Management Association of America (CMAA) as well as over 700 other papers and presentations.

Bob is an Independent Member of the Shareholder Committee of Mott MacDonald. He is a member of the ASCE Industry Leaders Council, National Academy of Construction, a Fellow of the Construction Management Association of America and member of several university departmental and campus advisory boards. Bob served until 2006 as a U.S. presidential appointee to the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Business Advisory Council (ABAC), working with U.S. and Asia-Pacific business leaders to shape the framework for trade and economic growth. He had previously served as both as Chairman of the Engineering and Construction Governors of the World Economic Forum and co-chair of the infrastructure task force formed after September 11th by the New York City Chamber of Commerce. Previously, he served as Chairman at Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB) and a non-executive director of Cardno (ASX)

Bob can be contacted at rpstrategic@comcast.net.

To view other works by Bob Prieto, visit his author showcase in the PM World Library at https://pmworldlibrary.net/authors/bob-prieto/

 

The Interfaces Between Strategic Management of an Enterprise

and Project Portfolio Management Within the Enterprise

 

SECOND EDITION

By Russell D. Archibald

San Miguel de Allende, Mexico

 


 

ABSTRACT

The aim of this paper is to define the interfaces or inter-relationships between the business processes used to manage the strategic growth of an enterprise and those used to manage the program/project portfolios within the enterprise. It will clarify the boundaries between strategic management processes and project portfolio management processes, and identify who holds primary responsibilities for these inter-related sets of management processes. The main issues to be considered include:

  • Is it possible to define a clear boundary between strategic and program/project portfolio management processes? It is concluded that this is possible and a boundary definition is presented for consideration.
  • How should we differentiate between strategic project management and operational project management? An approach to such differentiation is proposed.
  • Which, if any, of the strategic project management practices and processes should be considered to be within the domain of ‘project management’? A descriptive list of these is proposed.
  • What should be the role of a typical PMO in relation to 1) strategic management processes, and 2) both strategic and operational project management processes? A definition of this role is proposed.

The importance of identifying the major categories of project portfolios and of major categories projects within those enterprises is also discussed.

Keywords: Project management, strategic management, strategic project management, operational project management, project management office.

  1. The Strategic Growth Management Processes Within an Enterprise

Building on strategic planning and related management processes developed over the past 50 years, well-managed enterprises today utilize integrated strategic growth management processes to define, approve and control their current and future growth plans and the actions – principally the execution of portfolios of programs and projects — needed to achieve their agreed strategic objectives. “Strategic management is the art and science of formulating, implementing and evaluating cross-functional decisions that will enable an organization to achieve its objectives” [“Strategic Management” Wikipedia 2008.]

Fig. 1 illustrates a typical and widely used five-step strategic growth management process that has been developed and applied across a number of industries, business sectors, and governmental and non-governmental agencies in many countries. The integrated processes summarized in Fig. 1 incorporate and use the fundamentals of several strategic planning approaches, including competitive strategies, business environment assessment, industry structure analysis [Porter 2008]; portfolio analysis and analysis using the Boston Consulting Group’s Box [BCG 2008]; plus a number of others.

Responsibilities for Strategic Management Plans, Decisions and Processes: In the 1970s and 1980s it was common practice for a senior staff person, typically with a title like Vice President — Planning, to hold responsibility for preparing a company’s long range or strategic plan for the coming 3 to 5 years. In those years such plans were then usually elaborate projections to which the key senior executives of the company were not necessarily fully committed, and the plans were rarely fully implemented. Today in well-managed companies the same senior executives who are responsible for execution of strategic management decisions at the corporate and at major operating division levels of an organization are also held responsible for creating the integrated strategic growth plans that incorporate these strategic decisions.

These persons include the chief executive officer/CEO and other senior corporate level executives, managers of subsidiary business units, functional area managers within a subsidiary business unit, and directors or managers of major operating departments and product line and geographic units. In addition, the strategic roles of a typical board of directors are to [Thompson & Strickland (1995), slides 49 and 53]:

 

More…

To read entire article, click here

 

Editor’s note: Second Editions are previously published papers that have continued relevance in today’s project management world, or which were originally published in conference proceedings or in a language other than English.  Original publication acknowledged; authors retain copyright.  This paper was originally presented at the 11th Annual DYNAMICS 2010 Project Management Symposium in Istanbul, Turkey in April 2010.  It was the subject of Russ Archibald’s keynote address at that event.  This paper was previously published in the May 2010 edition of PM World Today (Vol XII, Issue V) with the consent of the author and the Istanbul Project Management Association. Russ Archibald passed away in May 2020 of natural causes.  We are republishing this paper in order to “get his work out there.” It is republished here with consent of the Archibald family. 

How to cite this paper: Archibald, R.D. (2010). The Interfaces Between Strategic Management of an Enterprise and Project Portfolio Management Within the Enterprise; keynote presentation at the 11th Annual DYNAMICS 2010 Project Management Symposium in Istanbul, Turkey. PM World Today, Vol. XII, Issue V, May. Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/pmwj94-Jun2020-Archibald-strategic-management-and-portfolio-management-second-edition.pdf

 


 

About the Author

 


Russell D. Archibald

San Miguel de Allende, Mexico

 

 

Russell Archibald is one of the best-known experts and consultants in the field of project and program management.  With a career spanning more than 50 years, Russ has broad international experience in engineering, operations, program and project management. He has experienced three project management related careers: Management Consultant, Corporate Executive, and Military/Aerospace.  Russ Archibald is the author of the best-selling book, Managing High Technology Programs and Projects (3rd edition 2003, English, Chinese, Italian and Russian), 1st edition 1976, 2nd  edition 1992, and the co-author of Network Based Management Information Systems (PERT/CPM) (1967).  Russ has presented many articles and papers over the years at PMI and International Project Management Association (IPMA) conferences in North America, South America, and Europe, and is widely published in periodicals on professional project management. He holds Bachelor of Science (University of Missouri) and Master of Science (University of Texas, Austin) degrees in Mechanical Engineering. In recent years, Russ has consulted to a wide variety of large and small organizations in many industries worldwide. Russ Archibald is a Fellow and Certified Project Management Professional (PMP) of the Project Management Institute (PMI®) (member No. 6, one of the five original trustees), an Honorary Fellow of the Association of Project Management (APM) in the UK, and is listed in Who’s Who in the World.  Russ is also a Global Advisor to PM Forum and a consultant to the US government.  As a pioneer in the field, Russ received an honorary Ph.D. in strategy, program, and project management from the Ecole Superieure de Commerce de Lille (ESC-Lille) in Lille, France in August 2005.

Editor’s note: The above author summary appeared at the end of this paper when it was originally published in 2010.  He authored many additional works after this one.  Russ Archibald, a true pioneer and icon in the field of project management, passed away in May 2020 at the age of 96.  Find additional information about Russ Archibald along with access to Russ’ other works at https://pmworldlibrary.net/authors/russell-d-archibald/ .

 

 

 

Stop the Press

The Project at the End of the Line

Reflections on the end of PM World Today, Funerals and other Projects at the end of Programs, Projects and Life

 

SECOND EDITION

By David L. Pells

Addison, Texas, USA

 


 

Introduction

This is the final edition of PM World Today.  Following months of uncertainty, the board of directors determined in late 2011 that the organization should be terminated, the pmforum.org website shut down and publication of the monthly PM World Today stopped.  So this is it!  After 14 years of publication in some form, and five plus years of monthly production, this well-known global resource for continuous learning will end.

But perhaps this is not such a bad thing.  As the saying goes, and as Max Wideman reminds us in his letter to the editor this month, all good things must come to an end.  At the end of every program or project, there should be cause for celebration – of accomplishments, of growth and progress by people and organizations, and sometimes of just being successful or alive for so long.  This editorial is therefore to reflect on the end of this eJournal and of PMForum, with an emphasis on what has been accomplished over the last six years.

Over the last few months, as the end of these websites came into focus, I have been thinking a lot about how programs and projects end.  Sometimes they are terminated for unexpected reasons, at other times according to plans.  But stopping a program or project is not as easy as it looks on paper, and often involves many serious and important activities.  In fact, I would argue that ending a project or program is a project in its own right, by nearly any definition.

And what if the end is not just of the program or project but of the underlying organization, which is often the case when a joint venture or legal entity has been formed for the sole purpose of completing the project?  Shut down activities can involve administrative, financial, legal, logistical, organizational and many other actions, all to achieve the shutdown project objectives.  The project can last many months, consume many resources, and require a great deal of management attention.

Finally, as I watched the memorial (funeral) for the late American singer Whitney Houston on 18 February 2012, [1] I was struck by what a big project that seemed to be.  Lasting four hours, with the participation of celebrities, family and friends, and with international media coverage, it was a grand production in honor of a truly beloved and talented artist.  And it occurred exactly one week after Ms. Houston’s death.  Absolutely amazing!  It was really fantastic, a fitting memorial to a very popular singer.  So who organized, planned and managed that “project”?  Aren’t all funerals projects?  And funerals for political leaders, famous personalities or important public figures can be enormous, involving hundreds of people and costing millions. It occurred to me that here is another type of important project that we must all consider one day in our families, whether for ourselves or other family members.

In the May 2011 edition of PM World Today, in my editorial entitled “The Royal Wedding – What a Project!”, [2] I discussed the wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton in the UK as a big project.  I went on to review weddings as projects, looking at various activities associated with planning and conducting weddings from a project management perspective.  Now I am suggesting that funerals should also be considered as projects, important personal projects that can be planned and managed with well known PM concepts.  Perhaps this is insensitive, but perhaps this perspective can also ease someone’s burden for dealing with a personal loss.

So this month’s editorial is not only to reflect on the end of PM World Today and PMForum but to broaden this topic to project terminations, funerals and the “project at the end” of nearly anything – a life included.  After all, don’t all programs and projects have a life and a “life cycle” according to most definitions and textbooks?

PM World Today – a Celebration

The March edition of PM World Today is the final edition for this venerable eJournal.  Beginning in 1998 as a quarterly eNewsletter produced by the late David Curling, PM World Today was converted to a bi-monthly online publication by former editor Hugh Woodward in 2005.  In January 2007, PM World Today was transformed into a robust monthly eJournal with its own identity and website.  Growing to a monthly readership of around 40,000 by December 2011, PM World Today was recognized as one of the most international and popular online publications in the project management world.

Here are some of the accomplishments for PM World Today over the last 63 months:

  • Increased subscribers from around 2,000 to 13,600 worldwide
  • Grew readership from a few hundred to around 40,000 per month
  • Published 695 regional reports from International Correspondents around the world
  • Published 269 featured papers from authors in various countries…

More…

 

To read entire article, click here

 

Editor’s note: Second Editions are previously published papers that have continued relevance in today’s project management world, or which were originally published in conference proceedings or in a language other than English.  Original publication acknowledged; authors retain copyright.  This paper was originally published in PM World Today in March 2012.

How to cite this article: Pells, D. L. (2012). Stop the Press! The Project at the End of the Line: Reflections on the end of PM World Today, Funerals and other projects at the end of programs, projects and life. PM World Today, March. Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/March-2012-Pells-Stop-the-Press-pmwt-Editorial.pdf

 


 

About the Author

 


David L. Pells

Managing Editor, PMWJ
Executive Director, PMWL
Texas, USA

 

 

David L. Pells is Managing Editor and publisher of the PM World Journal (www.pmworldjournal.com) and Managing Director of the PM World Library (www.pmworldlibrary.net). David is an internationally recognized leader in the field of professional project management with more than 40 years of experience on a variety of programs and projects, including engineering, construction, energy, defense, transit, technology and nuclear security, and project sizes ranging from thousands to billions of dollars. He occasionally acts as project management advisor for U.S. national laboratories and international programs, and currently serves as an independent advisor for a major U.S. national security program.

David Pells has been an active professional leader in the United States since the 1980s, serving on the board of directors of the Project Management Institute (PMI®) twice.  He was founder and chair of the Global Project Management Forum (1995-2000), an annual meeting of leaders of PM associations from around the world. David was awarded PMI’s Person of the Year award in 1998 and Fellow Award, PMI’s highest honor, in 1999. He is also an Honorary Fellow of the Association for Project Management (APM) in the UK; Project Management Associates (PMA – India); the Istituto Italiano di Project Management (ISIMP); and the Russian Project Management Association (SOVNET).  Since 2010 he is an honorary member of the Project Management Association of Nepal.

Former managing editor of PM World Today, he is the creator, editor and publisher of the PM World Journal (since 2012).  David has a BA in Business Administration from the University of Washington and an MBA from Idaho State University in the USA.  He has published widely and spoken at conferences and events worldwide.  David lives near Dallas, Texas and can be contacted at editor@pmworldjournal.com.

 

 

Program Management and Events of Scale

 

Personal Perspective

 

SECOND EDITION

By Bob Prieto

Jupiter, Florida, USA

 


 

Since early 2001, I have observed the impact of a series of high-profile events of scale. These events of scale have encompassed both manmade as well as naturally occurring events and the lessons outlined below are derived from a systems perspective and are to a large degree independent of the initiating event. Much has been written about individual events, the failures and successes in being prepared, the lessons learned in the immediate aftermath and the challenges during recovery.

This paper looks more broadly, focusing on programmatic features common in our preparation and planning to resist, respond and recover from these events. Careful consideration may improve our overall infrastructure resiliency and improve outcomes in the future. Table 1 summarizes my perspective in observing each of these events and to the extent possible the lessons learned have been grouped into three phases of resiliency:

– Resist phase

– Respond phase

– Recover phase

Clearly the list is not all encompassing but provides a starting point and framework for future development.

Where My Involvement Began

Maybe it was the high-altitude air and snow-covered mountains of Davos, Switzerland or perhaps the eclectic collection of people from around the world that inspired nobler ideas. But whether from within or without, I came to a crossroads that very much changed how I thought about many things in life. How I perceived the world, or more specifically the infrastructure systems that enabled the day-to-day functioning of the world we live in, changed in several fundamental ways.

That day was January 26, 2001 and the Governors of the Engineering & Construction community of the World Economic Forum were due to have their annual meeting. Traditionally, this meeting was a time to renew global friendships and make new ones. But this day was different. We awoke to the news that Gujarat, India, had experienced a terrible earthquake the night before, with widespread failures in buildings and supporting infrastructure.

We also awoke to find one of our members from India exhausted from a sleepless night on the telephone trying to mobilize the heavy equipment and other resources he had to respond to this horrific tragedy and to his anger and frustration that “doing the right thing” was hampered by the lack of an efficient way for these new first responders, engineers and constructors, to engage with the public sector.

 

It was out of this frustration and perhaps the thin air of the Swiss mountains that the Disaster Resource Network (originally called Engineers without Borders in those early days) or DRN was first conceived. Later we were to come to learn that at the same time in another hotel in Davos, the Transportation and Logistics Governors were arriving at the very same conclusion.

 

More…

To read entire paper, click here

 

Second Editions are previously published papers that have continued relevance in today’s project management world, or which were originally published in conference proceedings or in a language other than English.  Original publication acknowledged; authors retain copyright.  This paper was originally published in PM World Today in July 2008.  It is republished here with the author’s permission.

How to cite this paper: Prieto, R. (2008). Personal Perspective: Program Management and Events of Scale, Second Edition, PM World Journal, Vol. IX, Issue V, May 2020.  Originally published in PM World Today, July 2008. Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/pmwj93-May2020-Prieto-program-management-and-events-of-scale-2nd-ed.pdf

 


 

About the Author

 


Bob Prieto

Chairman & CEO
Strategic Program Management LLC
Jupiter, Florida, USA

 

 

 Bob Prieto is a senior executive effective in shaping and executing business strategy and a recognized leader within the infrastructure, engineering and construction industries. Currently Bob heads his own management consulting practice, Strategic Program Management LLC.  He previously served as a senior vice president of Fluor, one of the largest engineering and construction companies in the world. He focuses on the development and delivery of large, complex projects worldwide and consults with owners across all market sectors in the development of programmatic delivery strategies. He is author of nine books including “Strategic Program Management”, “The Giga Factor: Program Management in the Engineering and Construction Industry”, “Application of Life Cycle Analysis in the Capital Assets Industry”, “Capital Efficiency: Pull All the Levers” and, most recently, “Theory of Management of Large Complex Projects” published by the Construction Management Association of America (CMAA) as well as over 600 other papers and presentations.

Bob is an Independent Member of the Shareholder Committee of Mott MacDonald. He is a member of the ASCE Industry Leaders Council, National Academy of Construction, a Fellow of the Construction Management Association of America and member of several university departmental and campus advisory boards. Bob served until 2006 as a U.S. presidential appointee to the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Business Advisory Council (ABAC), working with U.S. and Asia-Pacific business leaders to shape the framework for trade and economic growth.  He had previously served as both as Chairman of the Engineering and Construction Governors of the World Economic Forum and co-chair of the infrastructure task force formed after September 11th by the New York City Chamber of Commerce. Previously, he served as Chairman at Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB) and a non-executive director of Cardn0 (ASX)

Bob can be contacted at rpstrategic@comcast.net.

 

 

Milestone Planning

A Participatory and Visual Approach

 

SECOND EDITION

By Eduardo Miranda

Pennsylvania, USA

 


 

ABSTRACT

This paper introduces a participatory and visual approach to milestone planning called the Visual Milestone Planning (VMP) Method. VMP promotes involvement and commitment, through the reification of the planning artifacts and their direct manipulation by team members who collectively create the plan. Once a project scope is defined via a work breakdown structure and relevant milestones identified, a novel construct called the milestone planning matrix is used to systematically and visually capture dependencies among milestones and map WBS elements to the milestones they help realize. The milestones due dates are later determined by accommodating sticky notes representing the work to be done on a resource and time scaled milestone scheduling canvas. The method is applicable to traditional as well as to agile projects.

Keywords:     Milestone planning; participative planning; collaborative planning; milestone planning matrix; visual planning; agile project management

Introduction

Milestone planning is a planning approach pioneered by Andersen (Andersen E. , 1996) and Turner (Turner, 2004) in which projects are planned in terms of their outcomes, the attainment of significant process states, external dates and customer commitments, instead of on the basis of the tasks to be performed. Milestone plans are more robust, comprehensive, easier to understand, and accept and confer great flexibility in terms of how to achieve the milestones, which makes them a very apt tool to be combined with agile approaches. According to both authors, milestone planning should be performed by the group, as “it is important that a sense of community develops around the plan” (Andersen, Grude, & Haug, 2009) and “developing the plan in a group session builds greater commitment than if the project manager develops it on his or her own and tries to impose it on the team” (Turner, 2004), but they do not offer a systematic method for how to do this. This paper address that gap by proposing a participatory and visual approach to construct milestone plans called the Visual Milestone Planning (VMP) Method.

While thinking and expressing a plan in terms of milestones rather than tasks certainly contributes to the plan’s robustness, comprehensiveness, understandability and acceptability; these three properties are mainly the result of the how the plan is constructed and who is involved. Restating Turner’s words, a milestone plan developed in isolation by a project manager and later communicated or simply handed down to those responsible for its implementation, would not be as comprehensive, understandable and acceptable as one developed with the participation of the team using visual techniques.

In the context of this paper, participatory planning, is a practice in which the people responsible for the execution of the plan is actively involved in its formulation. Successful examples of this way of working are numerous: the pull planning process in the “Last Planner System” used in the construction industry (Ballard, 2000) and “Blitz Planning” (Cockburn, 2004) and “Cards on the Wall” (Phillips, 2001) on software development to cite a few. The benefits of participation in the planning process are many: better and more comprehensive plans as consequence of the involvement of a mixture of people which brings different perspectives to the process, greater commitment as plans are talked through and advance the thinking of the group, the development of a common framework and vocabulary for decision making which extends well beyond the “high” of a successful planning session and an overall higher probability of success as people that participates in the shaping of the plan better understand the needs, the goals and where their responsibilities lay with regards of those of others (Moss Kanter, 1989).

Visual planning is an approach by which a team plans its work and controls its progress through the use of physical representations of tasks in combination with frequent and interactive meetings. Visual planning provides cognitive, social and emotional benefits (Eppler & Platts, 2009). The cognitive benefits of visual representations include facilitating elicitation and synthesis of information, enabling new perspectives to allow better, more exhaustive comparisons and facilitating easier recall and sequencing; the social benefits include integrating different perspectives, assisting mutual understanding, and supporting coordination between people; and the emotional ones include bolstering involvement and engagement, providing inspiration, and aiding convincing communication. Visual planning variants are being used in a number of different contexts, e.g., lean product development (Lindlöf & Söderberg, 2011) and (Jurado, 2012) and construction projects (Tjell & Bosch-Sijtsema, 2003) among others.

VMP implements participatory and visual planning techniques through the reification of the planning constructs: work packages, milestones and schedules employed in the planning process and their direct manipulation by team members who collectively create the plan…

More…

To read entire paper, click here

 

Editor’s note: Second Editions are previously published papers that have continued relevance in today’s project management world, or which were originally published in conference proceedings or in a language other than English.  Original publication acknowledged; authors retain copyright.  This paper was originally published in the Journal of Modern Project Management (MIRANDA, E., Milestone Planning: A Participatory and Visual Approach. The Journal of Modern Project Management, North America, 7, oct. 2019. Available at: https://www.journalmodernpm.com/index.php/jmpm/article/view/488)  It is republished here with the author’s permission.

How to cite this paper: Miranda, E. (2019). Milestone Planning: A Participatory and Visual Approach; PM World Journal, Vol. VIII, Issue XI, December.  Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/pmwj88-Dec2019-Miranda-milestone-planning-participatory-and-visual-approach.pdf

 


 

About the Author


Dr. Eduardo Miranda

Pennsylvania, USA

 

 

 

Dr. Eduardo Miranda is an Associate Teaching Professor at Carnegie Mellon University where he teaches courses in project management and agile software development at the Master of Software Engineering Program and at the Tepper School of Business. Dr. Miranda’s areas of interest include project management, quality and process improvement.

Before joining Carnegie Mellon Dr. Miranda worked for Ericsson where he was instrumental in implementing Project Management Offices (PMO) and improving project management and estimation practices. His work is reflected in the book “Running the Successful Hi-Tech Project Office” published by Artech House in March 2003.

Dr. Miranda holds a PhD. in Software Engineering from the École de Technologie Supérieure, Montreal and Masters degrees in Project Management and Engineering from the University of Linköping, Sweden, and Ottawa, Canada respectively and a Bachelor of Science from the University of Buenos Aires, Argentina. He has published over fifteen papers in software development methodologies, estimation and project management.

Dr. Miranda is a certified Project Management Professional and a Senior Member of the IEEE. He can be contacted at mirandae @ andrew.cmu.edu.

For more, visit the author’s website at http://mse.isri.cmu.edu/facstaff/faculty1/core-faculty/miranda-eduardo.html

 

 

First Worldwide Project Management

Distance Learning Course

 

SECOND EDITION

By Bob Youker

World Bank (retired)

Maryland, USA

 


 

Most afternoons at about 5:00 p.m. I switch on the computer in my study and connect via a modem into the Dialcom electronic mail network.  There in my “mailbox” are “messages” from around the world from students in the first worldwide distance learning course on project management. After reviewing the material, I send comments and answers by electronic mail directly back to the students.  We know each other quite well now after several months of the course and regular telephone conference calls.

An innovative program to train telecommunications project managers in Africa, Asia and Latin America through distance learning is being sponsored by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), Center for Telecommunication Development (CTD) through a contract with Telecom/Telematique International (T/TI), a Washington, DC firm specializing in instructional telecom consulting. The pilot semester length course in Project Management for Telecommunication began in the Fall of 1989. Teams from the Telecom companies remain on the job while participating in the global electronic classroom with counterparts in other countries.  The faculty include staff from the World Bank and other experts in training project managers and telecom engineers in developing countries.  The curriculum builds on World Bank EDI (Economic Development Institute) courses.  The design of the course is similar to one I teach in the Masters Program in Engineering Administration at George Washington University.

Tools, techniques and theory of project management taught include modules on the project life cycle, work breakdown structure, scheduling and control, CPM, risk and uncertainty, and start-up and transition to operations.  Segments on project accounting include modules on project estimating and budgeting, cost control, reporting and MIS, and project control.  Management modules, procurement, negotiation, and contractor cost control are also taught.

This interactive, electronic classroom is delivered to each country through packet-switch network computer conferencing, together with video and audio teleconferencing. The computer conferencing is interactive, flexible and asynchronous.  Teams of participants from each company can meet, watch video tape lectures and assignments, respond, comment and ask questions at the time most convenient to them, their work schedules and their time zones.

More…

To read entire article, click here

 

Editor’s note: This paper was written in 1990 for a PMI conference, but was never presented or published.  The author thinks it was the first worldwide distance learning course on project management.  Long before email became popular, the course was developed with the International Telephone Union (ITU) for telecommunications project managers in many countries.  It’s a little bit of newly discovered project management history.

How to cite this paper: Youker, R. (1990); First Worldwide Project Management Distance Learning Course; paper written for a PMI Seminar/Symposium in 1990 but never presented; PM World Journal, Vol. VIII, Issue X, November 2019.  Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/pmwj87-Nov2019-Youker-first-worldwide-project-management-disatnce-learning.pdf

 


 

About the Author


Robert Youker

World Bank (retired)

 

 

 

Robert (Bob) Youker is an independent trainer and consultant in Project Management with more than forty years of experience in the field.  He is retired from the World Bank where he developed and presented six-week project management training courses for the managers of major projects in many different countries. He served as the technical author for the bank on the Instructors Resource Kit on CD ROM for a five-week training course on Managing the Implementation of Development Projects.  He has written and presented more than a dozen papers at the Project Management Institute and the International Project Management Association (Europe) conferences many of which have been reprinted in the Project Management Institute publications and the International Journal of Project Management (UK).

Mr. Youker is a graduate of Colgate University and the Harvard Business School and studied for a doctorate in behavioral science at George Washington University.  His project management experience includes new product development at Xerox Corporation and project management consulting for many companies as President of Planalog Management Systems from 1968 to 1975.  He has taught in Project Management Courses for AMA, AMR, AED, ILI, ILO, UCLA, University of Wisconsin, George Washington University, the Asian Development Bank and many other organizations. He developed and presented the first Project Management courses in Pakistan, Turkey, China and across Africa for the World Bank.

A few years ago Mr. Youker conducted Project Management training in Amman, Jordan financed by the European Union for 75 high level civil servants from Iraq who implemented the first four World Bank projects in Iraq. He is a former Director of PMI, IPMA and asapm, the USA member organization of IPMA. Most recently he has been consulting for the US Government Millennium Challenge Corporation on project management training in Africa.  Bob can be contacted at bobyouker@att.net

To view other works by Bob Youker, visit his author showcase in the PM World Library at https://pmworldlibrary.net/authors/robert-bob-youker/

 

 

%d bloggers like this: