SPONSORS

SPONSORS

Construction Management at Risk

(CM@Risk) Delivery Method from an Owners Representative Perspective (The Good, The Bad and The Ugly)

 

SECOND EDITION

By Kevin M. Wills, CCM, LEED AP

and

Steve R. Pancham, CCM

McDonough Bolyard Peck, Inc. (d/b/a MBP),

Virginia, USA

 


 

Abstract

This paper is based upon lessons learned from Owner’s Representative perspective managing and auditing over 60 construction management at-risk (CM@Risk) projects for public owners over the past 10 years. The paper provides an overview of the benefits, risks and lessons learned to owners associated with the CM@Risk delivery method from selection through construction to closeout. Our discussion will provide insightful solutions to manage the process efficiently, to guide the owner, and to provide a check that will keep the project on the right path. Owners want to keep projects on schedule, under budget, and to have high quality, so our solutions mentioned in this paper will help facilitate trust amongst the parties of the project through transparency (not only the Good aspects of a project, but also the Bad and Ugly and how to openly address them in a collaborative and tactful manner). Our discussion also provides a unique perspective, gathered from lessons learned from the auditing of public CM@Risk projects.

Introduction

CM@Risk delivery method has been utilized for over 30 years and continues to be used as a popular method for construction project delivery. Like all project delivery methods, there are pitfalls, benefits, costs, and risks. The objective of this paper is not to provide a comparison of the various delivery methods, but rather to examine the use of CM@Risk delivery method for the owner’s benefit and discuss what issues and challenges can be anticipated in its use. The information presented is based upon lessons learned developed as an Owner’s Representative on CM@Risk projects and providing financial auditing of CM@Risk projects. The result is a list of recommendations and solutions to assist owners in this delivery method for achieving better results and better outcomes for construction projects that employ this method of delivery.

Definition of CM@Risk

The Association of General Contractors (AGC) defines CM@Risk as:

“A specific variation of construction management in which the public owner engages both a project designer and a qualified construction manager under a negotiated contract to provide both preconstruction services and construction. The CM@Risk (CM/GC) provides consulting and estimating services during the design phase of the project and acts as the general contractor during construction, holding the trade contracts and providing the management and construction services during the construction phase. The degree to which the CM/GC provides a cost and schedule commitment to the public owner is determined during the negotiation of the final contract. (This is a risk issue. If there is no risk involved, it is not CM/GC.)” [1]

The Construction Management Association of America (CMAA) defines CM@Risk as:

“A delivery method which entails a commitment by the construction manager to deliver the project within a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP). The construction manager acts as consultant to the owner in the development and design phases, but as the equivalent of a general contractor during the construction phase. When a construction manager is bound to a GMP, the most fundamental character of the relationship is changed. In addition to acting in the owner’s interest, the construction manager also protects him/herself.” [2]

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 6th Annual University of Maryland PM Symposium in May 2019.  It is republished here with the permission of the author and conference organizers.

How to cite this paper: Wills, K. and Pancham, S. (2019). Construction Management at Risk (CM@Risk) Delivery Method from an Owners Representative Perspective (The Good, The Bad and The Ugly); presented at the 6th Annual University of Maryland Project Management Symposium, College Park, Maryland, USA in May 2019; PM World Journal, Vol. VIII, Issue IX, October.  Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/pmwj86-Oct2019-Wills-Pancham-construction-management-at-risk.pdf

 


 

About the Authors


Kevin Wills

Virginia, USA

 

 

 

Kevin Wills, CCM, LEED AP MBP, is a Senior Project Manager at McDonough Bolyard Peck, Inc. (d/b/a MBP).  Kevin brings 33 years of experience in program management, construction management, inspection, scheduling, cost estimating, and claims analysis. His breadth of experience includes hospitals, prisons, k-12 schools and higher education buildings, heavy civil construction, environmental mitigation and remediation, and maintenance for new construction and the renovation of existing facilities. Kevin can be contacted at kwills@mbpce.com

 


Steve Pancham

Virginia, USA

 

 

 

Steve Pancham, CCM MBP, is Vice President, Service Executive at McDonough Bolyard Peck, Inc. Steve brings 32 years of experience in transportation, utility infrastructure, and new building and renovation projects. Steve has served as project engineer/manager in charge of more than $500 million in highway and building construction projects.  Claim to fame -Steve was on the San Francisco Bay Bridge during the 1989 Loma Preita earthquake and was part of the earthquake response team inspecting bridges for the California Department of Transportation (CALTRANS).  Steve can be contacted at spancham@mbpce.com

 

[1] CM/GC Guidelines for Public Owners, second edition 2007 by the Association of General Contractors and the National Association of State Facilities Administrators.

[2] CMAA: Construction Management Standards of Practice 2003

 

Enhancing Value Creation through Digital Transformation

Architecting Project Management for Embracing Disruptions – Digital Transformation

 

SECOND EDITION

By Dr Badri N Srinivasan,

Enterprise Agile Coach and AVP
Societe Generale Global Solutions Center

Bangalore, India

 


 

ABSTRACT

Enhancing Value Creation through Digital Transformation

Large organizations in the world are currently grappling with profound disruptions related to technology and competition that is taking place in the world all around us. In order for the organizations to survive in the future they need to acknowledge, understand, maneuver and manage the disruption carefully. The existing operating model of the organizations may not be sufficient to manage these disruptions effectively.

The focus on machine learning, AI, big data, analytics, agility, block chain and digital has led to additional disruptions. The role of the Project Managers has also been disrupted and changed considerably on account of the disruption. Organizations can survive for the future through the optimization of its operating model through a project based digital transformation approach.

This paper has been developed based on the live experience and the real time implementation that is proven at the workplace, especially for large enterprises in the IT domain.

This paper will focus on the following areas –

  1. Why Disruption? How to focus on the bigger Purpose
  2. How a digital transformation can manage the disruptions effectively
  3. How to aid the digital transformation through Agility and Innovation
  4. How do anti-fragility, removal of Retrospective coherence and Klein bottle concept enhance the focus of a digital transformation
  5. Role based organization design to manage disruptions effectively
  6. Proposed framework (tools, technology, structure, roles) to address these issues
  7. Benefits of using the framework

By adopting a suitable framework, the organization will be able to reinvent itself to meet the changing market requirements.

INTRODUCTION

Digital transformation is a fundamental change in how an organization delivers business value to its customers. It is a radical focus on how an organization uses technology, processes and people to fundamentally change the way it is doing business. Digital transformation is perceived to lead to enhanced value creation provided all the other existing attributes and constraints are managed appropriately.

Large organizations in the world are currently contending with profound disruptions related to technology and competition that is taking place in the world all around us. In order for the organizations to survive in the future they need to acknowledge, understand, maneuver and manage the disruptions carefully. The existing operating model of the organizations may not be sufficient to manage these disruptions effectively. Hence, the focus on digital transformation which changes and reshapes the organization to effectively meet the disruptive threats in the market place.

The change that occurs when new business models and digital technologies affect the value proposition of existing goods and services is called as digital disruption. A successful digital transformation includes enabling the business to manage large amounts of “big data” – which is the capability to analyse all aspects of the behavior of the customer and use those insights to manage the growth of the business line. Digital disruption is a transformation that is caused by emerging business models and digital technologies. These innovative new models and technologies impact the value of the existing products and services offered by the organization.

Digital disruption is an opportunity for the organizations to reshape their business areas. It is no longer a hypothetical state across all the industrial domains and it is a reality today… One of the key steps in this transformation is extending the concept of digital disruption beyond the IT department and into business operations. The whole organization is impacted by the digital transformation and it should not be restricted only to the IT department. The focus on machine learning, AI, big data, analytics, agility, block chain and digital has also led to additional disruptions. In business, a disruptive innovation is an innovation that establishes and creates a new market and value network and it eventually leads to the disruption of the existing market and value networks, thereby dislocating established market-leading organizations and products. Figure A gives the details pertaining to the reign of digital disruption in the near future.

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 PM Practitioners Conference, Bangalore PMI Chapter, India in July 2018.  It is republished here with the author’s permission.

How to cite this paper: Srinivasan, B.N. (2019). Enhancing Value Creation through Digital Transformation: Architecting Project Management for Embracing Disruptions – Digital Transformation; PM World Journal, Vol. VIII, Issue IX, October.  Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/pmwj86-Oct2019-Srinivasan-enhancing-value-creation-through-digital-transformation.pdf

 


 

About the Author


Badri N. Srinivasan    

Bangalore, India

 

 

 

Dr. Badri N. Srinivasan is AVP and Enterprise Agile Coach at Societe Generale Global Solutions Center (SG GSC), Bangalore and Karnataka, India. He is responsible for the implementation of continuous delivery and agile practices in the organization. He has 20+ years’ experience and has extensive experience in process implementation and organizational change management processes and process improvement initiatives in the travel, retail, manufacturing, real estate, mortgage and banking, healthcare and financial services domains. He is a Certified Scrum Master (CSM), Accredited Kanban Trainer (AKT), Certified Scrum Product Owner (CSPO), Project Management Professional (PMP) ® from the Project Management Institute (PMI), USA and a certified Six Sigma Green Belt (SSGB), apart from other certifications. His extensive experience includes coaching, managing, mentoring and training ScrumMasters, product owners, and project/program managers and implementation of enterprise agile practices in the organization. He has published numerous articles in various magazines/online forums – Scrum Alliance, InfoQ, PMI – Knowledge Shelf, DZone, Agile Record, Agile Journal, Sticky Minds, techwell.com and Methods and Tools and PM World Journal.

He can be reached by email at thirumazhisaiazhwar@gmail.com, and through his LinkedIn Profile – https://in.linkedin.com/in/badrisrinivasan.

 

How to Recognize Project Failures

and Initiate Project Recovery

 

SECOND EDITION

By Shiven Sompura & James Roessling

California, USA

 


 

Abstract

This paper is to feature the importance of recognizing several causes of project failures and initiating the recovery of the construction projects at the initial stage. Project failure can happen to any organization and to any level project. There are numerous reasons for failure and sometimes it is out of control of a project manager or team members to control failure. Failed projects and people involved with the failure have few things in common. In such cases, they are directed for quick fixes which typically prove to be ineffective and sometimes causes catastrophic side effects. In this paper, we will discuss and emphasize several factors causing project failures, how to classify and categorize project failures, how to conduct, plan and develop an assessment process for project failure. With these key focus areas for assessment, project controls and management review process could be analyzed and can be selected. The study will also help to clarify the necessity and a suitable process an organization should develop to analyze project failures.

Introduction

For contractors, both GC’s and subs, an effective project is one finished on time and within budget. The client is happy with the finished product and the contractor leaves with a clean benefit. Everyone wins. At the point when construction project comes up short, it’s regularly because of conflicts and issues that cause cost overruns and delays in the schedule.

If not properly managed, it will eventually lead to running over budget and blowing past the scheduled substantial completion date. Going over budget eats into the GCs or subs profit in addition to being hit with liquidated damages for every day past the agreed upon completion date. It can also impact upcoming projects if a contractor’s workers and equipment are tied up trying to finish up a failing project.

So, what causes the project to fall flat? Any number of variables can lead to project failures, yet often it comes down to how well the project manager or leadership performs regulating the project.

Factors affecting project failures

a) Under estimating the project: A standout amongst the most widely recognized – and expensive! – reasons a project may fall flat is because of an inaccurate estimate. Miscalculations, specification errors, oversights, excluded permits, and changing economic situations (e.g., costs of materials and work) can all lead to costly overruns, leaving the contractor stressed and the client unhappy.

b) Scope Creep & Change Orders: Scope creep depicts the procedure in which the amount of work grows beyond the original contract or DPP (Detailed Project Plan). The three-fundamental driver of scope creep include:

    1. Owner requests that are out of the scope of work originally settled upon
    2. Unforeseen or general conditions that are unknown to the contractor at the time the contract is signed
    3. Owners not doing thorough preliminary work (e.g., site surveys, proper planning, Geotech report etc.)

While the number one goal of any project is a happy Owner, this can now and again move toward becoming traded off if they consistently make demands without thinking about the cost or don’t give you the most exact data forthright.

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 6th Annual University of Maryland PM Symposium in May 2019.  It is republished here with the permission of the author and conference organizers.

How to cite this paper: Sompura, S. and Roessling, J. (2019). How to Recognize Project Failures and Initiate Project Recovery; presented at the 6th Annual University of Maryland Project Management Symposium, College Park, Maryland, USA in May 2019; PM World Journal, Vol. VIII, Issue IX, October.  Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/pmwj86-Oct2019-Sompura-Roessling-recognize-project-failures-initiate-recovery.pdf

 


 

About the Authors

 


Shiven Sompura, Assoc. DBIA

Engineer at Clark Construction Group in Southern California.

San Diego, California, USA

 

 


James Roessling, PE, PMP, CCM, DBIA

Senior Project Manager at Clark Construction Group in Southern California.

San Diego, California, USA

 

 

 

 

Successful Project Management

in a Low Authority Environment

 

SECOND EDITION

By Joseph Lukas

New York, USA

 


 

Abstract

A frequent complaint by project managers is that they do not have the authority to do their job. Project managers are expected to elicit top performance from all members of the project team, often in an environment of high responsibility and low authority, coupled with the use of borrowed resources in a matrix organizational structure. This paper will explain how to strengthen your ability to effectively work with project teams and other stakeholders to achieve project success without formal authority. This paper will explore the difference between a leader and manager, the sources of power available to all project managers, the role of emotional intelligence, and how personality styles impact the application of leadership and management. Also covered in this paper are suggested methods for getting results and dealing with conflict in an environment of low authority.

Leaders versus Managers

Let’s start out by clarifying the difference between a leader and a manager. A leader is someone who influences and inspires people. A leader will motivate, bring out the best in others, and get people to work together to achieve a common goal. A manager is a person who is responsible for directing and controlling the work of others. A manager will organize, control, balance priorities and make sure the work gets done. Developing and championing a new idea is leadership, while implementing the idea is management. A quote that nicely summarizes the difference between managers and leaders is “managers do things right while leaders do the right things” (Hitt, 1998, p. 5.).

So are leadership or management skills more important to be a successful project manager, or are they equally important? The projects undertaken by a company or organization should align with the corporate vision and strategy, which is typically determined by middle and top management. This level of management also decides on the projects that will be done to support the strategic plans. Note that project managers are responsible for getting these projects successfully done by directing and controlling the work of others. Key responsibilities for project managers include organizing, coordinating, resolving issues and conflicts, and communicating. These descriptors are all about managing the project. You will frequently see in the job description for a project manager a statement about “leading the project team.” However, the reality is that most of what project managers do is simply not leadership. While having a project manager who is a good leader is highly desirable, the manager function is more critical in order to successfully implement the project. The project team may look at the sponsor, some other key executive, or even a respected team member as the person providing the leadership. This isn’t something that gets listed in the role and responsibilities for a project, but the project manager should consider for a project whether the team sees her/him as a leader; or if that will come from another source. Don’t take this as a personal insult since leadership is situational.

The Role of Power

The dictionary defines power as the capacity to do something and includes the control and influence over other people and their actions. In a notable study of power conducted by social psychologists John French and Bertam Raven in 1959, power was divided into five separate and distinct forms: coercive, reward, legitimate, referent, and expert (MindTools, ¶1-5). Although the French and Raven list is frequency cited, listed below is a composite list more specific to the different types of power that are relevant to project managers (Changing Minds, ¶1, 2, 4-8):

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 6th Annual University of Maryland PM Symposium in May 2019.  It is republished here with the permission of the author and conference organizers.

How to cite this paper: Lukas, J.A. (2019). Successful Project Management in a Low Authority Environment; presented at the 6th Annual University of Maryland Project Management Symposium, College Park, Maryland, USA in May 2019; PM World Journal, Vol. VIII, Issue IX, October.  Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/pmwj86-Oct2019-Lukas-successful-project-management-in-a-low-authority-environment.pdf

 


 

About the Author


Joseph Lukas

New York, USA

 

 

 

Joseph A. Lukas, PMP, CSM, PE, CCP has been involved in project management for over 35 years. His work experience spans engineering, manufacturing, construction, project controls, estimating, contracting and project, program and portfolio management. His projects experience includes information systems, product development, construction and manufacturing. Joe joined PMI in 1986 and has held many Chapter Board positions in Rochester, NY including two terms as President. He is a registered Professional Engineer, Project Management Professional, Certified Scrum Master and Certified Cost Professional. Joe has over 50 published articles on project management topics and is a frequent guest speaker for companies and organizations across the country. Joe teaches and consults on project management topics and interpersonal skills.

Joe Lukas can be contacted at Joe.Lukas@PMCentersUSA.com

 

 

Leading Transformational Change

Winning the Hearts and Minds

 

SECOND EDITION

By James Fette

Texas, USA

 


 

Abstract

We are in a period of rapid change. To remain competitive, companies need to move fast and adapt to changes quickly. Some of these changes require significant transformation of a company’s culture, process and operating model. While the change may be important and unstoppable to the company, many individuals will always be hesitant to take on something new and leave behind what they have been familiar with for a long time. Change can create fear, uncertainty and loss of confidence and job security among employees, supervisors and the managers.  Project managers need to be able to manage transformational change efforts and drive business benefits. Managing change efforts requires a different approach than traditional project management. The Learning Objectives of this article include the following:

  1. Define change management and transformational change
  2. Understand why transformational change efforts fail
  3. The key to leading successful change- winning the hearts and minds
  4. Three “batteries” you can use to energize and win the hearts and minds
    • Purpose – improvement vs. change
    • Human Needs – Esteem and Self-Actualization
    • Engagement though experiences, connections and community

5. Traditional project management vs. change management – communication

 

I. Introduction: Change Management and the Era of Rapid Change

Define change management and transformational change

Project managers lead many different types of projects. One of the most complex projects to manage is a transformational change project. Change Management goes beyond project management and refers to any approach to transitioning individuals, teams, and organizations using methods intended to re-direct the use of resources, business process, budget allocations, or other modes of operation that significantly reshape a company or organization. This transformation, reshaping the business or operation, requires different approaches and techniques because the project goes beyond just delivery of a tangible output i.e., product, service, technology, infrastructure, it requires changing the behaviors and at times, the mindset of the individuals performing the work. Many times, it requires a shift in the business culture of an organization resulting from a change in the underlying strategy and processes that the organization has used in the past. The management team may have been the people that built and enjoyed the fruits of the very culture that is needed to change.

For decades in business, change came at a relatively slow pace, technological advances were slow to roll out and be adopted. In the last 30 years, this has changed drastically. The pace of change is faster than any time in our history due to technological advances. Barriers to entry for many business’ have disappeared and the power of innovation and a laptop have the ability to shift business away from some of the largest corporations. With the rapid pace of change companies need to be able to rapidly adapt to new competitors and new opportunities. This may require drastic changes to operating models, development approaches and decisions making processes. Successful change management is key to business success in era of rapid change.

Despite mature, robust project management tools and techniques, a McKinsey study on change efforts has found that 70% of all change programs fail to achieve their goals. This is a very alarming number given the need to quickly and successfully change the business’ and operations function. Let’s look at why these efforts fail.

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 13th Annual UT Dallas Project Management Symposium in May 2019.  It is republished here with the permission of the author and conference organizers.

How to cite this paper: Fette, J. (2019). Leading Transformational Change: Winning the Hearts and Minds; presented at the 13th Annual UT Dallas Project Management Symposium, Richardson, Texas, USA in May 2019; PM World Journal, Vol. VIII, Issue IX, October. Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/pmwj86-Oct2019-Fette-leading-transformational-change-winning-hearts-and-minds.pdf

 


 

About the Author


Jim Fette

Texas, USA

 

 

Jim Fette, PMP is a Financial Services and Experience Management executive, with over 25 years of experience leading global teams. Jim has developed a robust portfolio of skills and experience and gets his energy by helping projects, organizations and people achieve their potential. Passions include driving innovation, leading change, developing talent, career coaching and defining corporate strategy. Jim is a Program Success Principal with Qualtrics where his focus is to partner with Qualtrics’ largest and most strategic customers to close experience gaps and deliver breakthrough results. He consults on Experience Management (XM) program design, adoption and maturity and unlocks the most value from Qualtrics’ products and services. Incorporating Project Management tools and techniques, Jim has developed approaches to leadership, strategic planning and change management which can be applied to your career, your project or in developing the strategy for your organization

Jim shares insights at events, conferences and workshops as a speaker and coaches on career and leadership development.

You can learn more about Jim and view his blog at jimfette.com

 

Project Management: Changing

the way Cyber Security works in an organization

 

SECOND EDITION

By Bhavyatta Bhardwaj

Canada

 


 

ABSTRACT

Cyber security forums and practices are at their peak with digital transformation of organizations all around the world. To address the issue of security, several models and frameworks have been developed and several practices have been introduced. These ideas need to be customised based on the business needs of the organization. A project management approach for cyber security is more comprehensive and effective for implementation of these practices. Unfortunately, the IT specialists and security gurus are not the only ones who log into the networks. A project manager can help the cyber security team to run projects smoothly within budget, and on time for completion, while ensuring security of the network and data. There can be a variety of recurring tasks or a major one-time task along with short-term and long-term priorities. A project manager can help run these responsibilities smoothly along with day-to-day functions of the team.

Keywords: cyber security, streamlined execution, strategic alignment, continuous improvement, business continuity, asset management, framework, models, practices, training

  1. INTRODUCTION

According to John Chambers, Executive Chairman of Cisco System, “At least 40% of all businesses will die in the next 10 year, if they don’t figure out how to change their entire company to accommodate new technologies” [19] This is the truth of digital transformation. Information Technology (IT) has become widespread across every industry and is a backbone to business operations. Michelle Pruitt (Program Analyst at U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs) stated that project-based firms usually depend on system developers and project managers to ensure the security aspects of concerned projects. For a company to call itself a digital enterprise, it must implement profound changes such as making large investments in the latest technologies adopting new business models, modify existing models, using change management to train the organization for digitization, thereby attaining business continuity. Without considering security one may not consider an IT project as complete. A company should consider enhancing their IT infrastructure to improve its security posture and ensure reliable business operations. This paper explains how a project manager can help achieve these results for the company and describes a framework to clarify communication between the security team and development team. According to SysAdmin, Audit, Network and Security (SANS) Institute, security should be an input in communication planning [7] This paper will also explain how project management can help streamline security and compliance. As of 2017, 31% of organizations have experienced cyber attacks on operational technology infrastructure, according to Cisco [19] and cyber security venture projects damages related to cybercrime to hit $6 trillion annually by 2021 [19] Therefore, the main point of distinction for the success or failure of an IT project is the adoption of best security practices.

  1. IT SECURITY, IT PROJCTS AND IT MANAGEMENT

According to IT governance, cyber security involves technologies, processes and controls designed to protect systems, network and data from cyber attacks. [18] A digital environment may also face major external threats unrelated to cyber environment, such as natural hazards, civil strife or terrorism. Any of these attacks may directly or indirectly impact an organization. Cyber security infrastructure includes devices and components to secure the digital environment and facilitate secure communication both within and outside of the organization. Organizations must ensure the digital security of assets that make it easy to control and overcome any cyber security issues to ensure that the organization is digitally secured.

In addition to securing the infrastructure, a company must also consider the specific security profile of the industry in which it operates. Upon the successful implementation and testing of a new and improved security profile, an organization may gain greater confidence in the level of protection it provides for its information assets [1]. Some of the factors that are likely to shift in the information security environment are [4]:

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 13th Annual UT Dallas Project Management Symposium in May 2019.  It is republished here with the permission of the author and conference organizers.

How to cite this paper: Bhardwaj, B. (2019). Project Management: Changing the way Cyber Security works in an organization; presented at the 13th Annual UT Dallas Project Management Symposium, Richardson, Texas, USA in May 2019; published in the PM World Journal, Vol. VIII, Issue IX, October. Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/pmwj86-Oct2019-Bhardwaj-changing-the-way-cyber-security-works.pdf

 


 

About the Author


Bhavyatta Bhardwaj

Canada

 

 

 

Bhavyatta Bhardwaj is an early professional from Atlantic Canada with interest in Project management practices and cyber security. Previously with Bell Canada, she is now an IT consultant currently working for a utilities client. She has a Bachelor’s degree in IT from Uttar Pradesh Technical University in India and Master’s in Computer Science from University of New Brunswick in Canada. Bhavyatta specializes in optimal solution delivery for software development, implementation methodologies and frameworks, and IT operations management. She can be contacted at bhavyatta@gmail.com

 

The Project Stakeholder Analysis Process

 

SECOND EDITION

Aurangzeb Z. Khan

Department of Management Sciences
COMSATS Institute of Information Technology
Islamabad, Pakistan

and

Miroslaw J. Skibniewski and John H. Cable

Project Management Center for Excellence
James A. Clark School of Engineering
University of Maryland
College Park, Maryland, USA

 


 

ABSTRACT

A general consensus prevails in the project management community that stakeholders are a prime critical success factor on all pro­­jects, especially on large and in technical and managerial perspective complex ones such as those often encountered in construction and civil infrastructure development. Conse­quently, in order to boost project performance, reduce risk to projects, and to realize to the maximum attainable ex­tent the benefits brought about by the pro­jects after their completion, it is imperative to manage and engage the stake­holders profession­ally and effectively over the project life-cycle. A thorough stakeholder analysis constitutes the foundation of effective stake­hol­der manage­ment and engagement.

The importance of stakeholder analysis is now widely acknowledged and used in practice. Though its application across the project category spectrum, including on con­struc­tion and civil infrastructure development projects is widespread, there still appears to exist a need to further educate project owners, planners and other key decision-makers about unexplored possibilities offered by the stakeholder analysis process and how its practical usefulness can be enhanced. What seems to be lacking at present is a rigorous analy­tical framework which incorporates a set of integrated and sophisticated tools capable of de­li­vering detailed and multi-dimensional insights about project stakeholders with a consistently high level of accuracy over time.

Based on their research on the subject of project stakeholder manage­ment and enga­ge­ment, their decades of experience with projects, and a careful study of existing stakeholder analysis approaches and tools contained in avail­able docu­mentation taken from numerous large and complex projects undertaken in several project categories and across the globe, the authors present in this paper a compre­hen­sive project stakeholder analysis process framework which they believe can supplement and add value to existing approaches used by projects to analyze their stake­hol­ders. Themes discussed include the process bene­fits, challenges and constraints, and the importance of having an enabling environment and acquisition of quality informa­tion on project stake­hol­ders for the analysis to deliver optimal results. Highlighted in this paper are five powerful stakeholder analysis tools which, if applied in a coordinated manner, may deliver all the salient insights and knowledge needed by projects to effectively manage and engage their stakeholders over their life-cycles. These tools are the Stakeholder SWOT-Analysis, the Stake­holder Attribute Analysis, the Stakeholder Issues & Complications Ana­ly­sis, Stake­holder Scoring Models, and the Stakeholder Scenarios & Project Impact Analysis.

Through their research the authors hope to motivate projects to improve the quality of their stakeholder analysis. A robust stakeholder analysis will serve the inte­rests of the projects significantly in the sense that it can reduce the risk of conflicts occurring between projects and their stakeholders and also provide projects with guidance how to respond appropriately in the event that con­flicts with stakeholders do occur over the project life-cycle. The interests of the stakeholders will also be served accordingly.

Introductory Comments

Stakeholder analysis has been an integral part of the project planning process for decades. Many documented examples taken from actual projects undertaken in fields as diverse as water resource management, forestry, social development, mining, urban regeneration and con­struc­tion and civil infrastructure, some dating back to the early 1990s, were discovered by the authors while researching for this paper. Interestingly, most of the stakeholder analyses reviewed are actually quite recent speci­mens, having appeared after the advent of the new millen­nium with increasing frequency of appearance as well as complexity of con­tent over time. Presumably, this reflects an increa­sing awareness of the importance of stake­­hol­ders on pro­jects and broad concurrence among project key decision-makers of the need for understand­ing them and managing and engaging them effectively. In fact, stakeholder analysis is almost a universal feature on all projects today.

It is now generally accepted that project stakeholders basically fall into two major categories: The ‘primary stake­hol­ders’ which encompasses all those entities having contractual obliga­tions or some legal responsibility towards the project, and the ‘secondary stakeholders’ which include all those entities having neither contractual obligations nor legal responsibility to the project but which are affected by it directly or indirectly in some way or the other, and posi­tively or negatively, or both, over time. Examples of key primary stakeholders typically en­coun­tered on large and complex projects, as in construction and civil infrastructure de­ve­lop­ment, are the pro­ject owner or client, steering committee, financers, designers, consul­tants, contractors and sub-contrac­tors, vendors, project manager and project team, and govern­ment agencies involved in the pro­ject. More significant secondary stakeholders on such projects would usually include affect­ed local communities, civic and professional organizations, advocacy groups and environ­men­talists, media and academia, and some government agencies. All stakeholders have their respective interests in and views of the project and these can vary widely and change over time.

If primary and secondary stakeholders come to view the project as constituting a threat to their interests than it is logical to assume they will resist it using the means available to them. Resis­tance which is active, strong and sustained can seriously affect the project causing it to expe­rience cost and schedule overruns, image loss, demotivation of its employees, reduced benefit realization after completion, non-attainment of some of its objectives, or in the ex­treme case even endanger the project’s existence through the possibility of enforced pre­mature termination. Secondary stakeholders who, unlike the primary stakeholders, lie outside the project’s formal control and may not be known well to the project, at least initially, but neverthe­less may pose an especially high risk to it by excercizing against the project a spectrum of options which are available at their disposal. Many high-profile projects have been seriously affected by hostile stakeholder action and several examples were discussed by the authors in a previous paper on the subject.

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 6th Annual University of Maryland PM Symposium in May 2019. It is republished here with the permission of the authors and conference organizers.

How to cite this paper: Author last name, first initial. (2019). The Project Stakeholder Analysis Process; presented at the 6th Annual University of Maryland Project Management Symposium, College Park, Maryland, USA in May 2019; PM World Journal, Vol. VIII, Issue VIII, September. Available online at  https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/pmwj85-Sep2019-Khan-Skibniewski-Cable-project-stakeholder-analysis-process.pdf

 


 

About the Authors


Dr. Aurangzeb Z. Khan

COMSATS Institute of Information Technology
Islamabad, Pakistan

 

 

 

Dr. Aurangzeb Z. Khan is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Management Sciences at the COMSATS Institute of Information Technology in Islamabad, Pakistan. He introduced Pakistan’s first master degree program in project management at his university in the fall semester 2008. His prime areas of research are project stakeholder management, and project monitoring and evaluation, which he teaches to project management graduate-level students.  He can be contacted at aurangzeb_khan@comsats.edu.pk

 


Dr. Miroslaw J. Skibniewski

University of Maryland
College Park, MD, USA

 

 

Dr. Miroslaw Skibniewski is a Professor in the Center of Excellence in Project Management at the University of Maryland.  He is also Editor-in-Chief of Automation in Construction, an international research journal published by Elsevier, and North American Editor of the Journal of Civil Engineering and Management published by Taylor & Francis.  An author/coauthor of over 200 research publications, he lectures on information/automation technologies in construction, construction equipment management, and legal aspects of engineering.  Miroslaw can be contacted at mirek@umd.edu

 


John Cable

Director, Project Management Center for Excellence
University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA

 

 

 John Cable is Director of the Project Management Center for Excellence in the A.J. Clark School of Engineering at the University of Maryland, where he is also a professor and teacher of several graduate courses in project management.  His program at the University of Maryland offers masters and PhD level programs focused on project management. With more than 1,300 seats filled annually with students from many countries, including more than 40 PhD students, the program is the largest graduate program in project management at a major university in the United States.

John Cable served in the newly formed U.S. Department of Energy in 1980, where he was involved with developing energy standards for buildings, methods for measuring energy consumption, and managing primary research in energy conservation.  As an architect and builder, Mr. Cable founded and led John Cable Associates in 1984, a design build firm. In 1999 he was recruited by the University of Maryland’s Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering to create and manage a graduate program in project management.  In his role as founder and director of the Project Management Center for Excellence at Maryland, the program has grown to offer an undergraduate minor, master’s degrees, and a doctoral program. Information about the Project Management Center for Project Management at the University of Maryland can be found at www.pm.umd.edu.

In 2002, PMI formed the Global Accreditation Center for Project Management Educational Programs (GAC).  Mr. Cable was appointed to that inaugural board where he served as vice chair.  In 2006, he was elected as chairman, a role he held through 2012.  As Chair of the PMI GAC, John led the accreditation of 86 project management educational programs at 40 institutions in 15 countries in North America, Europe, the Middle East, Latin America and the Asia Pacific Region. John was awarded PMI’s 2012 Distinguished Contribution Award for his leadership at the GAC.  He can be contacted at jcable@umd.edu.

 

 

Capturing Costs and Value of Research Products

 

SECOND EDITION

By Anne Johnson

Demographic Statistical Methods Division
U.S. Bureau of the Census

Washington, DC, USA

 


 

ABSTRACT

The nature of research projects does not lend itself to project management. Requirements are rarely concrete, scope is evolving, and each project is an entirely new problem to find solutions for. With so much unpredictability, how can we possibly estimate research costs accurately? Is there a way to determine the value of research products?

This paper will discuss the project management methods and processes developed to help estimate costs, manage budgets, and better determine the value of products for research initiatives. I will also discuss useful tips on how to effectively manage costs and budget from the planning phase through project closeout.

INTRODUCTION   

Research is an approach to solving problems, developing new methods, and improving existing processes. Research involves creativity, trial and error, and exploration, exposing it to variability, unknowns, and risk. How can we possibly assign a level of effort to a research initiative when all these factors are at play?

From my experience managing externally sponsored, reimbursable research projects at the U.S. Census Bureau, the budgets for these initiatives are never large, scope is complex and ever-evolving, and the process for initiating and tracking these projects was often informal and inconsistent. Due to the nature of research projects, it was challenging to avoid issues, such as poorly estimated costs, budget overruns, and scope creep. It was also difficult to determine the value of the final ‘product’.

In this paper, I will discuss methods to improve cost estimation, budget management, and how to better determine the value of research.

COST ESTIMATION

The goal of cost estimation is to produce an estimate that is accurate, all-encompassing, reasonable, and defensible. Achieving all of these factors is not easy, especially when estimating costs for research initiatives. Here is an eight-step cost estimation process that can help accomplish this goal.

Cost Estimation Process:

  1. Determine Scope
  2. Provide Historical Data
  3. Estimate Effort
  4. Estimate Costs
  5. Review & Update Cost Estimate
  6. Develop Cost Estimate Memo
  7. Send & Negotiate Cost Estimate
  8. Follow Up & Finalize

Below I will go into each step in more detail, adding in some best practices and lessons learned.

Step 1: Determine Scope

Work with the project sponsor to determine the scope.

  • Start with the overall goals of the project then break that down further into requirements
  • Ensure that the final deliverable is defined (i.e. a final report on project findings)
  • Discuss constraints, initial risks, and any information that could be useful to the project
  • Determine if the project is feasible given staff skillsets, availability, and timeframe
  • Make sure key project stakeholders are in agreement and fully understand the scope
  • Set realistic expectations

Lesson Learned: This step is crucial! It sounds simple, but too often projects have ill-defined scope and the final product is unclear. You are almost guaranteed to experience scope creep and/or budget issues down the line if you do not thoroughly discuss and agree to expected outcomes of the project.

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 6th Annual University of Maryland PM Symposium in May 2019.  It is republished here with the permission of the author and conference organizers.

How to cite this paper: Johnson, A. (2019). Capturing Costs and Value of Research Products; presented at the 6th Annual University of Maryland Project Management Symposium, College Park, Maryland, USA in May 2019; PM World Journal, Vol. VIII, Issue VIII, September.  Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/pmwj85-Sep2019-Johnson-capturing-cost-and-value-of-research-products.pdf

 


 

About the Author


Anne Johnson

Washington, DC, USA

 

 

 

Anne Johnson graduated from the University of Pittsburgh with a Bachelor’s of Science in Mathematics and Economics in 2012. Shortly after graduating, Anne began her career at the US Census Bureau working in the Economic Directorate as an analyst on the Service Annual Survey and the 2012 Economic Census.

Anne joined the Demographic Statistical Methods Division as a project manager in February of 2015. She has provided project management support to the American Housing Survey, National Survey of College Graduates, the Current Population Survey Supplements, and Survey Methodology research projects. In this role, Anne has developed and managed over 50 project schedules, produced cost estimates for survey work and research projects, monitored the budgets for reimbursable projects, created reports to assist management with resource allocation and budget management, developed training materials, and managed contracts as a COR.

Anne received a Master’s Certificate in Project Management, her PMP certification in 2016 and her COR certification in 2017.

Anne Johnson can be contacted at anne.e.johnson@census.gov

 

 

Project Management in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

 

SECOND EDITION

By Chaitali D. Chheda

North Texas, USA

 


 

Abstract

Have you ever wondered how the Project Management role will evolve after Artificial Intelligence (A.I.) is operational? Are you wondering whether Project Management roles will become obsolete with Artificial Intelligence?

This paper aims at presenting the ways in which the evolution of AI is likely to change the Project Management role. Project Management is globally accepted, used in various industries and translates distinctly in every industry. In the past few decades, it has become a highly desirable and sought-after role, as businesses demand that project work be completed on time, within budget and prescribed quality constraints. We constantly implement processes and changes that enable us to meet these demands. In doing so, we hear a lot about Artificial Intelligence becoming the ultimate game-changer across all industries and as Project or Program managers we wonder how it will change or eliminate our roles. In this paper, the author presents the evolution of AI, its components and how it is likely to change certain aspects of Project Management. It is based on the author’s research on this subject.

VUCA – Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity and Ambiguity

Our existence is characterized by VUCA now more than ever. Internet gained popularity at the start of the century and then came smart phones; smart gadgets and we are now headed into a more advanced era of intelligent machines or Artificial Intelligence (A.I.). ‘Artificial Intelligence’ signifies that which is manufactured but has the capability to learn just like humans and compute at a much higher capacity than an average human. As A.I. progresses, more people are contemplating that large sectors of workforce are likely to be taken over by machines, thus bringing mass scales of global unemployment due to the volatility and the uncertainty associated with it. How accurate is this conclusion? It is definitely not a simple answer as it cannot be common across all the industries across the globe, thereby making it complex and ambiguous.

This paper will address the factors of VUCA associated with Artificial Intelligence as applied to Project Management and is based on the author’s research on the subject.

Background: Rise of Artificial Intelligence

Artificial Intelligence is one of the emerging technologies that we increasingly hear about, along with others like Renewable Energy, Cloud Computing and Cryptocurrency. We begin to ask ourselves – Why is this so important? Why are the progressive countries gearing towards it? Why are governments reserving budgets for A.I. capability? The seed for A.I. enablement was planted in March 2016 when Lee Se-Dol, a South Korean master, was defeated by the board game AlphaGo. Google’s AlphaGo is a complex computer program that generates a board game that requires intuition, strategic and creative thinking. It is trained to mimic human play by matching the moves of expert players to generate a more complex algorithm. The main objective of the gaming community that is comprised of scientists and researchers is for the computer to defeat an expert human player and then enhance the algorithms further as part of research for Artificial Intelligence systems. Prior to AlphaGo, some researchers had claimed that computers could never defeat humans, thus maintaining that a human brain is far more superior to a computer. The defeat of Lee Se-Dol had a profound impact on the political community in China whose main concern has been its decline in population owing to its one-child policy that was followed for decades until 2015. In May 2016, Google brought AlphaGo to China where it defeated Ke Jie of China. This paved the way for a fresh flow of investments from the Chinese government into strengthening A.I. According to a recent study, the U.S. tech giant IBM had the highest A.I. patent portfolio of 8,920 patents, followed by Microsoft at 5,930, whereas China accounted for 17 of the top 20 academic institutions involved in patenting A.I. With the world’s largest economies competing for the top spot, the White House issued an executive order on February 11, 2019, announcing that it will encourage research in the field of A.I in the United States.

The key factor that differentiates the systems employing the latest capabilities of Artificial Intelligence is their ability to learn and apply these learnings progressively without any modifications to their algorithms. AlphaGo is more successful than its previous versions because of its ability to learn from other games and apply its learnings to the future games. The latest version of the game, called AlphaGo Zero is the most advanced. It is loaded with the rules of the game without any other data from the past games. It learns from the random games that are chosen until it is able to apply these learnings progressively.

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 13th Annual UT Dallas Project Management Symposium in May 2019.  It is republished here with the permission of the author and conference organizers.

How to cite this paper: Chheda, C.D. (2019). Project Management in the Age of Artificial Intelligence; presented at the 13th Annual UT Dallas Project Management Symposium, Richardson, Texas, USA in May 2019; PM World Journal, Vol. VIII, Issue VIII, September.  Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/pmwj85-Sep2019-Chheda-project-management-in-age-of-artificial-intelligence.pdf

 


 

About the Author


Chaitali Chheda

North Texas, USA

 

 

 

Chaitali D. Chheda is employed by ECOM consulting INC. and works at Citigroup as a Program Manager. She has over 18 years of experience in the Information Technology Industry and has worked globally with financial services’ companies like American Express and Capital One, in Information Technology as well as in other areas. She can be contacted at chaitalichheda@gmail.com

 

 

Big data from social media and scientific literature databases

reveals relationships among risk management, project management and project success

 

SECOND EDITION

By Maria Papadaki2, Nikolaos Bakas4, Edward Ochieng2, Ioannis Karamitsos3 and Richard Kirkham1

1Univerity of Manchester, UK. 2British University in Dubai, UAE. 3Rochester Institute Technology, Dubai, UAE.  4School of Architecture, Engineering, Land and Environmental Sciences, Neapolis University Pafos, Paphos, Cyprus

Corresponding author: Maria Papadaki (maria.papadaki@buid.ac.ae)

 


 

Abstract

The literature review highlights that previous studies have been identifying risk management as an essential tool for project management and could increase the chance of successfully meeting project objectives. In addition, as found from the reviewed literature, risk management has been seen as a tool of allowing the project team to communicate risk information, so as to enhance the decision-making process towards balancing threats and opportunities. Thus, this research aims to examine participants’ views on the alignment of risk management, project management and organizational project success. Machine learning algorithms are employed to explore collective data from posts on twitter in order to obtain valuable knowledge about discussions regarding risk management, and project management. Additionally, the corresponding scientific literature obtained from Scopus database was analyzed utilizing bibliometric tools, in order to investigate diverse perceptions in academia and industry. Findings of this study will have implications for practitioners’ perception of project risk management.

Keywords: Risk management, Project success, Decision making, Project management, Machine Learning, Big Data, Bibliometrics

 

  1. Introduction

In this work, we investigated significant concepts surrounding the project management (PM) and risk management (RM), the related concepts, as well as whether any relationship among them exist in academia or professional practice. Increasing the understanding of the relation between project management, risk management and people perception will lead us to gain knowledge about the use of the risk data regarding the decision making process.  This will contribute on building project risk aware culture.  Shi in [1] argues that proper implementation of project management, creates added value holistically to an organisation, both in strategic and operation level. In other words, effective risk management must be defined broadly in order to avoid strategic failures, that may lead operational ones. In addition, Drew et al [2] introduce five integrated elements that underpin a firm’s ability to manage risks, engage in effective corporate governance, and implement new regulatory changes: Culture, Leadership, Alignment, Systems, and Structure. Benjamin Franklin in 1748 when offering advice to a young tradesman; said “Remember that time is money”. The definition of this statement is very pragmatic; any delay to project execution by unexpected or unpredictable factors makes cost increase, thereby directly affecting one another.

Risk is a subjective concept, highly related to people’s perception, and many times extremely rare phenomenon occur, which cannot be quantified by statistics or forecasting methods [3].  This may be an outcome of tradition, attitude, and perception. People have a different behavior to the way that they perform risk management; some of them do it more than others or others do not do it at all, because is seen as unnecessary overhead [4]. Hence, human perception in the execution of the risk management process plays a vital role in the successful deployment of the process.

It is essential that decisions taken in a project take account of the level of risk in the project. Therefore, risk management plays a vital role throughout decision making process. Project managers and all the parties that are affected by risks have to be fully aware of the risk and their impacts on the project objectives.  A primary characteristic of a decision according to Charette [5] is that “a decision process must be visible, repeatable, and measurable”. In the decision process, project members have to make decisions with consideration of risk in a daily basis. Therefore, Risk management and more generally risks have to be a part of daily thinking and know-how. It is like a culture; project members have to be fully aware of risk and the consequences positive or negative and be able to manage or mitigate them in the most efficient way.

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 6th Annual University of Maryland PM Symposium in May 2019.  It is republished here with the permission of the author and conference organizers.

How to cite this paper: Papadaki, M., Bakas, N., Ochieng, E., Karamitsos, I., Kirkham, R. (2019). Big data from social media and scientific literature databases reveals relationships among risk management, project management and project success; presented at the 6th Annual University of Maryland Project Management Symposium, College Park, Maryland, USA in May 2019; PM World Journal, Vol. VIII, Issue VIII, September. Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/pmwj85-Sep2019-Papadaki-et-al-big-data-reveals-relationships.pdf

 


 

About the Authors


Dr Maria Papadaki

United Kingdom

 

 

 

Dr Maria Papadaki obtained her first degree in Business Economics from Salford University. Part of her undergraduate study was carried out in IPAG University in Nice (France). Maria completed her MSc in Management of Projects from The University of Manchester (UoM) in 2005. As an internship, Maria undertook an economic study into the viability of establishing Formula 1 racing in Crete. In 2006, she joined the UoM PhD programme and also worked as a research associate and teaching assistant for the school of Mechanical Aerospace and Civil Engineering (MACE). In 2008, she conducted an internship with the Risk Function in Rolls-Royce plc.. In 2009 was appointed as an Enterprise Risk Management Professional at Rolls-Royce’s. In 2011 she joined Rolls-Royce plc. Supply Chain Function as a Risk Manager in order to work cross functionally and across all Rolls-Royce plc sectors (Civil, Defense, Energy, Nuclear and Marine) to design, develop and implement integrated and standardised tools and processes to enable the business to proactively identify, manage and mitigate delivery risks across the global supply chain. In 2013, she completed her doctoral studies in the field of risk from The University of Manchester.

In 2013, Dr Maria Papadaki was seconded as an Interim Head of Risk, leading the risk management for the UK Nuclear Restoration (UKNR), a joint venture between AMEC, Atkins and Rolls-Royce plc bidding for the largest nuclear decommissioning project in UK. In 2014, Maria initiated the idea and led the development of the first innovation Hub (H2B) in Crete, Greece on behalf of the Heraklion Chamber of Commerce. In 2015 Dr Papadaki joined the University of Manchester working as a Senior Relationship Manager for the British University in Dubai and the UK Alliance Universities and also acted as the Head of the Programme Management office and the DCRI (Dubai Centre for Risk and Innovation). She is now working as the Managing Director for the DCRI and an Assistant Professor for BUiD. Under this profile, she has been leading the development of digital certificates for BUiD’s graduates which made the university 1st in the Middle East and 3rd in the world implementing Blockchain technology in education. Her research and work are now focused on Innovation, Blockchain, Artificial Intelligence, Enterprise Risk Management and Cyber Security. Finally, in 2018 she was appointed to the Board of Directors for the Institute of Risk Management (irm) in London. Under this profile she is leading the global education and training standards strategy for the institute (irm). Dr Maria Papadaki is a visiting lecturer in The University of Manchester and her research is now focused on innovation, Blockchain, Artificial Intelligence, and Enterprise Risk Management. Maria Papadaki can be contacted at maria.papadaki@buid.ac.ae

 

 


Dr Nikolaos Bakas

Cyprus and Greece

 

 

 

Dr. Nikolaos Bakas is currently a Lecturer in Computational Mechanics at Neapolis University Pafos; External Collaborator of National Technical University of Athens, Director of NOESYS Consulting and External Associate at AXIA Chartered Surveyors. Dr. Bakas’ work concerns developing numerical methods and applying machine learning algorithms, in a variety of thematic areas in research and industry, for data analysis, predictive modeling, numerical optimization, quantitative insights, clustering and analysis of literature. In his recent monograph in Research, a Science Partner Journal, he provided a generic numerical solution for the hopelessly ill-conditioned mathematical problem of extrapolation, with prediction horizons 1000% higher than the existing methods in the scientific literature. He has been teaching for more than seven years in total, in the National Technical University of Athens, Engineering Intelligence and at Neapolis University Pafos, Cyprus, where he is currently appointed as a Lecturer. In the past, he has also founded and managed a lifelong training organization for engineers with more than 5000 trainees. Apart from his teaching and administrative activities, he is focused on research in applied mathematics, machine learning, data science, optimization, and relevant topics. He is also running NOESYS, for seminars, consulting and professional applications of machine learning algorithms.

Career Milestones include A recent monograph in Research, a Science Partner Journal for the numerical solution of the predictions problem of analytic functions; 40 Research works on numerical methods, optimization, data analysis, machine learning, statistics, and predictions; 10 years of professional and scientific programming (MIT’s Julia, Matlab, C++, etc.); 7 years of Teaching at Universities, Seminars, and Workshops; Foundation, growth, and management of Engineering Intelligence, an educational organization for engineering seminars with more than 5000, professional Engineers trainees. Continued as noesys.net; and Participation and management of impactful research projects with European funding (i.e. interview at Euronews). He can be contacted at n.bakas@nup.ac.cy, nibas@mail.ntua.gr

 


Prof Edward G. Ochieng

Dubai, UAE

 

 

 

Edward Ochieng, PhD, PGCertHELT, MSc, BSc (Hons), FHEA, AHEA is a Professor of Project Management in the Faculty of Business and Law at The British University in Dubai (BUiD), United Arab Emirates. Dr Ochieng’s research is focused on major project management. He has extensive experience and knowledge relating to organisational challenges and solution development for managing large capital and heavy engineering projects. Edward has published 3 books, 28 book chapters and over 85-refereed papers in refereed journals and conferences. He has supervised 9 PhD students to successful completion and over 300 MSc/MBA industrial projects by research. Edward is currently supervising 4 PhD students. He has also acted as an internal and external examiner of more than 11 PhD students in different UK universities. Edward has secured an estimated £654,538.00 from a range of funders for several projects and consultancy in project management. Email: Edward.ochieng@buid.ac.ae

 

 


Ioannis Karamitsos

Dubai, UAE

 

 

 

Dr. Ioannis Karamitsos (B.Sc., M.Sc., Ph.D.) has vast industry and research experience over 25 years as an executive manager who worked within the private and public sectors and experienced within European, Middle East and Chinese companies. From 2010 to present, Ioannis is a Regional Director Technology Consultancy at Orange Business Services. Ioannis is member of DSOA-Dubai Innovation Advisory Board. In 2016, he had joined the Department of Electrical Engineering as an adjunct professor at Rochester Institute of Technology Dubai. In addition, Ioannis is academic coordinator for the Master of Data Analytics provided by RIT Dubai.

He is particularly interested in applying Blockchain, Cryptography, Machine learning, IIoT, and data mining techniques to emerging problems related to large-scale decentralized cyber-physical systems and critical infrastructures as well as energy, mining, health care and other domains of major economic and social impact. Ioannis received his PhD in Computer Science from University of Sunderland, UK, a Master Degree in Telematics Management from University of Danube Krems, Austria, and Bachelor Degree (Laurea) in Electronic Engineering from University of Rome “La Sapienza”, Italy. His have also executive certificates from MIT (Tackling the challenge of Big Data) and from Columbia Business School (Driving Strategic Impact Program).

 


Richard Kirkham

Manchester, UK

 

 

Richard Kirkham is currently co-lead of the Management of Projects Research Group in the School of Mechanical, Aerospace and Civil Engineering at the University of Manchester, with responsibility for research. Richard is an active researcher in the field of project studies; his research and teaching interests focus on risk management in the context of whole-life appraisal of buildings and civil infrastructure. Richard’s earlier research contributions in whole-life costing for infrastructure (incorporated into ISO15686-5) continue through government advisory, particularly in the context of major government projects  This was recognized in 2016 with the award of an ESRC staff secondment to the Cabinet Office where he worked in the Portfolio Insight Team (now the Analysis and Insight Unit) of the Infrastructure and Projects Authority.

Richard is also an active participant and co-investigator in the ESRC funded ‘Project X – Improving Project Delivery’ (Grant Ref: ES/S009841/1). This is a major investment that seeks to improve the evidence base surrounding major project and programme delivery in government by generate unique insights through world-leading ‘co-produced’ research. Richard is also an active researcher in the Thomas Ashton Institute for Risk and Regulatory Research, collaboration between The University of Manchester and the Health and Safety Executive.

Richard was PI for two Cabinet Office funded projects examining risk in the context of government transformation. Richard’s teaching at Manchester covers a broad spectrum of undergraduate and postgraduate work – including ‘Civil Engineering Practice’, ‘Construction Management Professional Practice’ and ‘Risk Management’. Richard has also delivered blended learning education through the MSc Project Management Professional Development Programme and the BP Executive Education programme that was led by Manchester Business School. Richard has also held a number of internal appointments including Faculty Employability Lead and Portfolio Director for the British University in Dubai (BUiD).

 

 

%d bloggers like this: