A VUCAA-Mindset and VUCAA-Model

For Project Business Management in the 4th Industrial Revolution

 

SECOND EDITION

By Darrel G. Hubbard, PE, 
President & CEO, D.G.Hubbard Enterprises, LLC
California, USA

and

Peter W. Rogers, CEO, P17 Group LLC
Senior Consultant, The Experience Praxis Group, Inc.
Georgia, USA

 


 

INTRODUCTION

The new norm is a business environment where the challenges caused by Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity, and Ambiguity (VUCA) are accelerating. The 4th Industrial Revolution is entering its exponential-change phase which is accelerating the disruptive VUCA forces that business, portfolio, program, and project leadership must address. This has created the VUCA-Accelerated (VUCAA) business conditions within today’s marketplace. This Fourth Industrial Revolution, the era of Digital Transformation commonly called “Industry 4.0,” arrived with the advent of the 21st century. Klaus Schwab, in his 2016 book, The Fourth Industrial Revolution [36], has opined that digitalization, emerging technologies, and broad-based-innovation will revolutionize everything. He noted that “major technological changes are on the brink of fueling momentous change throughout the world.”

Industry 4.0 refers to the current trend of extensive automation and data exchange in communications, manufacturing, production, and services, and the increasing miniaturization of technology. It is driving the integration of digital and physical technologies across all areas of business, society, production, mobility, and communications. This technological revolution is blurring the lines between the human, physical, digital, robotic, and biological spheres. It includes a wide range of current and coming changes, such as: cyber-physical systems; Internet of Things; Internet of Robotic Things; Internet of Systems; cloud computing; cognitive computing; predictive analytics; device interoperability; information transparency; decentralized decision-making; artificial intelligence; cognitive technologies; consumer software applications; smart manufacturing; ubiquitous mobile supercomputing; intelligent robots; self-driving cars; neuro-technological brain enhancements; genetic editing; technological convergence; integration of operational technology with information technology; combining big data and materials science; and bi-directional assistance between humans and machines [21].

Leaders in most industries are finally becoming aware of the emerging technologies that will drive disruptions within their marketplace. Those businesses are working on being able to function in the new digital economy that is driven by knowledge, powered by technology, and fueled by information. Fred Rogers, in his 2013 book Ride the Wave: How 12 Technologies Will Change the World and Make You Rich, and subsequent presentations at the Harvard Business School, has given his view on how information technologies will transform every aspect of people’s lives, and business and project management operations. Four of his points are:

  • Moore’s Law will “keep rolling along” improving price-performance by at least 6400% before jumping on a totally new and steeper [exponential] performance curve;
  • Over a trillion devices will be accessible on the world-wide-web by 2030 transforming virtually everything in our lives;
  • By 2030, Artificial Intelligence (AI) combined with the Internet of Things (IoT) and robotics will grow the real American economy by roughly 80% – while the workforce will grow only 5%; and
  • Information technology will provide transformative solutions to the mega-challenges of our age: health care, potable water, elder care, national security, transportation, global poverty, etc.

The speed of current breakthroughs has no historical precedent. When compared with the relatively linear changes brought by the three previous industrial revolutions, Industry 4.0 is evolving at an exponential rather than a linear pace – change and its related disruptions are accelerating as indicated below in Figure 1.

Figure 1:  INDUSTRY 4.0    Disruptive Transformative Forces

The breadth and depth of these changes foreshadow the transformation of entire systems of production, management, governance, line-organizations, and whole enterprises. Moreover, major disruptions are happening in almost every industry in every country, and no enterprise is too big to fail. It used to be about the big eating the small; now the fast and agile annihilate the slow and ponderous. An International Data Corporation (IDC) report “FutureScape: Worldwide CIO Agenda 2016 Predictions [22]” emphasized that, “One-third of the top 20 firms in industry segments will be disrupted by new competitors within five years,” and that it is a matter of “transform or perish.”

By creating, applying, and embedding smart and connected technology, Industry 4.0 is transforming enterprises, economies, jobs, and even society and countries. Changes and innovation within the multilateral worldwide marketplace are now accelerating and this acceleration will be sustained. The related impacts can be seen in the multiple interrelated demographic, entrepreneurial, sociological, geo-political, structural, operational, economic, and technological disruptions that are continually occurring within the global marketplace.

These business disruptors are keeping project and business management operations in flux and demand timely, proactive, agile, and adaptive responses. This requires business analysis, systems thinking, active-listening, leveraging various forms of increased diversity, and a different mindset to move from reactive to proactive agile leadership within the operations, development, and project management disciplines.

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: Hubbard, D.G., Rogers, P.W. (2019). A VUCAA-Mindset and VUCAA-Model for Project Business Management in the 4th Industrial Revolution; presented at the 13th Annual UT Dallas Project Management Symposium, Richardson, Texas, USA in May 2019; PM World Journal, Vol. VIII, Issue VII, August. Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/pmwj84-Aug2019-Hubbard-Rogers-VUCAA-Mindset-and-VUCAA-Model-in-4th-Industrial-Revolution.pdf

 


 

About the Authors


Darrel G. Hubbard, P.E.

California, USA

 

 

Darrel Hubbard is President of D.G.Hubbard Enterprises, LLC providing executive consulting and assessment services. He has over 50 years of experience in consulting, line management, and technical positions. He has served as a corporate executive officer; managed information technology, proposal, accounting, and project management organizations; managed the due diligence processes for numerous mergers and acquisitions; was a program manager on engineering projects; was a project manager on commercial projects; and a designated “key person” under government contracts. He has also held executive positions in, and was professionally licensed in, the securities and insurance industries.

He assists organizations, as a Subject Matter Expert (SME) consultant, to achieve their enterprise’s strategic business and tactical objectives. He provides analysis of their management structures, business processes, general business operations, and project and business management capabilities, while supplying specific recommendations on business, methodology, toolset, and process improvements. Mr. Hubbard also assists companies, as an out-side third party, with the intricacies of the due diligence process in their merger and acquisition activities. He also supports companies in the managerial development and establishment of Organizational Project Management (OPM) and their Project/Program/Portfolio Organizations (PMOs) and provides work­shops and seminars focusing on the business management aspects of the project management discipline.

Mr. Hubbard holds a bachelor’s degree in mathematics and physics with a minor in chemistry from Minnesota State University at Moorhead. He is a registered Professional Engineer in Control Systems in California. Mr. Hubbard joined the Project Management Institute (PMI) in 1978 (#3662), is a charter member of the PMI San Diego Chapter, and was deputy project manager for the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK®) Guide Third Edition ANSI Standard by PMI. He was the Exhibitor Chairperson for the 1993 PMI North American Congress/Seminar/Symposium, is a published author of many articles, a presenter at many PMI Congresses and other Project Management Symposiums, a keynote speaker, and a guest speaker at PMI and IIBA Chapter meetings. Darrel is also a Life-Member of the International Society of Automation (ISA).

He is a contributing author to The AMA Handbook of Project Management, AMACOM, 1993 and The ABCs of DPC: A Primer on Design-Procurement-Construction for the Project Manager, PMI, 1997. He is the co-author with Dennis L. Bolles of The Power of Enterprise-Wide Project Management: Introducing a Business Management Model Integrating and Harmonizing Operations Business Management and Project Management, hardcover – AMACOM, NY, 2007; revised and retitled in paperback, The Power of Enterprise PMOs and Enterprise-Wide Project Management – PBMconcepts, MI, 2014; A Compendium of PMO Case Studies – Volume I: Reflecting Project Business Management Concepts – PBMconcepts, MI, 2012; and A Compendium of PMO Case Studies – Volume II: Reflecting Project Business Management Concepts – PBMconcepts, MI, 2016.

He can be contacted at Darrel.Hubbard@dghellc.com and LinkedIn at http://www.linkedin.com/in/DarrelGHubbard. Visit the PBMconcepts website at www.PBMconcepts.com for information about current and future book projects.

 


Peter W. Rogers

Georgia, USA

 

 

Peter Rogers is CEO of P17 Group LLC, and Senior Innovation Consultant at The Experience Praxis Group, Inc. He has over 40 years of experience in consulting, training, and executive management. He has served on boards of directors; and as head of an enterprise PMO; master facilitator; master trainer; master scheduler; lead consultant; portfolio, program, and project manager; adjunct professor and guest lecturer at Florida International University and several other colleges and universities; and speaker. Peter has founded and launched four of his own successful companies, and contributed to the startup and success of several other companies, including one that went public on NASDAQ.

Peter works with CEOs, top teams, other leaders, and managers in the space between strategy development and implementation to assure that organizations have the optimal structure, culture, and project/work delivery systems to achieve their goals and strategies. He assists with organizational restructuring and shifting culture to include a ‘culture of innovation’, and innovative and growth mindsets. He has provided these services to many Fortune 500 companies, including Microsoft, Starbucks, Chevron, Hewlett Packard, Boeing, PACCAR, Weyerhaeuser, Abbott, and others.

Peter holds a bachelor’s degree in biological oceanography, and masters’ degrees in economics and marine policy, all from the University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. He joined the Project Management Institute (PMI) in 1985 and was a work stream lead as a member of the core team of PMI’s Organizational Project Management Maturity Model (OPM3) project. He is a published author of several articles, a presenter at various project management symposiums, a keynote speaker, and a guest speaker at various functions. He has recently spoken at conferences in Dallas, Singapore, Shanghai, Prague, Noosa, and other locations on topics ranging from business agility and Agile, managing culture, managing innovation, to influencing, presenting, and emotional intelligence.

He is co-author of Project Management Made Simple and Effective, Dog Ear Publishing, IN, 2016, and contributing author to Business Innovation Results: How to Avoid 5 Innovation Traps the Doom Bottom-Line Results, Dog Ear Publishing, IN, 2017; Turn Great Ideas into Reality: Develop and Present a Winning Business Case, Dog Ear Publishing, IN, 2011; and Passing the PMI Scheduling Professional (PMI-SP) (c) Certification Exam the First Time, Dog Ear Publishing, IN, 2017.

He can be contacted at Peter@p17group.com and Peter.Rogers@experiencepraxis.com , and LinkedIn at https://www.linkedin.com/in/peter-rogers-982a7214/

 

 

Can complex adaptive systems help

the wicked problem that is project management?

 

SECOND EDITION

By Dr Michael Pace

Mays Business School
Texas A&M University

College Station, TX, USA

 


 

ABSTRACT

Wicked problems are among the most challenging and complex issues faced. They are often defined by the complexity, by the presence of contradictory information or knowledge, the network of opinions and stakeholders involved, and the interconnected, often interdisciplinary, nature of the problem.  Project management (PM) is the set of practices, procedures, and tools used to organize work and deliver unique results through group activities, within a specific time frame. The benefits of project management have been well documented over the past several decades; yet, the reality of project management maturity and adoption is that not every organization deploys PM practices and those that do so in an immature way. In fact, organizations continue to question the relevance and need for project management despite the empirical evidence of its effectiveness. In the context of a wicked problem, no two projects (or project environments) are the same, and the solution (often a project management methodology) deployed in one setting rarely is successful unilaterally. The resulting occurrence is what is currently seen – consistent project success remains just out of reach.  Using the perspective of complex adaptive systems (CAS) may provide a useful lens to bridge the dichotomy between project management benefit and project management methodology. At the base layer, CAS consist of agents who interact and learn from each and from the environment. These interactions are nonlinear. The interactions and evolutions, however, can generate emerging behaviors that are less non-linear (though still unpredictable). To illustrate this concept within project management, a case study of two project organizations within a decentralized setting is presented. The findings of inconsistent success within each organization, despite consistent methods deployed, support the assertion that project management as a complex adaptive system should be treated as a wicked problem

Keywords:  Complex Adaptive Systems; PM Methodology; Project Management; VUCA

INTRODUCTION

A continuing conundrum persists regarding project management success.  Longitudinal analysis of projects that succeed, fail, or are considering challenged reveals decades of stagnation in spite of repeated attempts at improvement.  Even the tag of “challenged” carries a weight, as those involved in projects prefer not to admit failure but recognize the lack of success.  A new perspective on project management approaches is therefore warranted.

The intersection of complexity theory and wicked problems may provide one such avenue.  Projects exist in VUCA-environments – volatile, uncertain, complex, ambiguous.   The initiatives themselves are complex, difficult to predict, and lacking linearity.  Rationalistic attempts at resolution are met with futility (e.g. wicked problems).  Complex adaptive systems and wicked problems seem to synergistic suggest customization is required beyond contemporary project management approaches.

As illustration of this point, a case study is presented of a large, decentralized organization.  A cross-section of two organizations, each with a successful and a failed project, are discussed.  Rationalistic thinking would suggest success is repeatable within an organization charged with similar projects.  The present case study challenges this perspective, as success remains inconsistent.

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: Pace, M. (2019). Can complex adaptive systems help the wicked problem that is project management? 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 VII, August.  Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/pmwj84-Aug2019-Pace-can-complex-adaptive-systems-help-wicked-project-management.pdf

 


 

About the Author


Dr Michael Pace

Texas A&M University
College Station, TX, USA

 

 

Dr. Michael Pace currently serves Texas A&M University as Executive Professor within Mays Department of Management. As a practitioner, Dr. Pace has held various positions related to project, program and portfolio management across a broad variety of organizations and industries. Dr. Pace received his doctorate from Capella University in Business Management with a specialization in Project Management, Master’s degree from Sam Houston State in Forensic Science, and Bachelor’s degree from Baylor University in Forensic Science. In addition to his Mays appointment, he serves in adjunct roles with Texas A&M Corpus Christi, Texas A&M Energy Institute, and Texas A&M Engineering.

Dr. Pace’s research is focused on project management methodologies, especially the customization of a method to fit the project need. He teaches courses in project management, strategic management, and organizational behavior. He can be contacted at wpace@mays.tamu.edu

 

 

Managing for Meaningful Outcomes

 

SECOND EDITION

By Charles G. Chandler, PhD

Texas, USA

 


 

ABSTRACT

Management has been called the technology of human accomplishment, yet traditional management approaches often fail to produce meaningful results. Management technology needs to be reinvented because it remains primarily organization-centric and locked into a largely meaningless input-output model that values efficiency as the highest good. Historically, this approach has been the basis for a vast constellation of organizations in business, government, and nonprofits sectors, but it generally fails to produce meaningful and timely evidence for management decision support, and frequently creates negative side-effects among internal actors and within the environment. Going forward, management technology needs to adopt a more meaningful input-outcome model that values positive organizational effectiveness as the highest good and serves to sustain or improve the health of both the organization and its environment as a holistic system. This is what managing for meaningful outcomes aims to achieve.

RECOGNIZING THE PROBLEM

From 1982-1985, I was based in New Delhi India, working for the World Health Organization (WHO) in the regional office for SE Asia. It was during the UN’s International Drinking Water Supply & Sanitation Decade, 1981-1990 (better known as the UN Water Decade). At the time, I was the project manager for WHO/UNDP’s Advisory Services Project that was part of the Decade. My job entailed visiting countries in the region to see what was going right and what was going wrong with the Water Decade and helping participating government organizations improve their programs.

Government agencies in participating countries thought they knew what end users needed, since they had been providing water and sanitation services for decades. They said they just needed more funds to build more facilities. But completed facilities were frequently in disrepair, and others were not utilized by end users for the purposes intended due to a variety of reasons.

The goal of the UN Water Decade was to expand the ‘coverage’ of safe water and adequate sanitation in participating countries. The focus on coverage (i.e., access to services) turned out to be an unfortunate choice because the goal typically resulted in a numbers game in each country, where success was measured in rural areas, for instance, by how much of the population was covered with hand pumps & latrines. If rural users were within a few minutes’ walk from a hand pump, they were deemed to have access to safe water supply. The fact that some of the hand pumps were in disrepair and others were not being used for their intended purposes was not easily reflected in the system.

Much of the problem was due to a conceptual gap between the planners and the end users. They didn’t understand each other. The planners were delivering engineering solutions based on their technical training, but the adoption and use of their solutions was hampered in traditional societies by the embedded patterns of thought found in the social and cultural narratives of the past. Later in the UN Water Decade, WHO urged governments to look beyond coverage, to ensure the continued functioning of the completed facilities and their utilization by end users (for the intended purposes).

This example highlights a fundamental problem at the heart of traditional management approaches, that is, what counts as meaningful accomplishment. As we will see, the overall program goal for the UN Water Decade was set at the wrong level (a largely meaningless supply-side output which focused on ‘coverage’), which then drove what was delivered during implementation, and the subsequent evaluation of completed activities. Traditional management does not distinguish between arbitrary output-level objectives and meaningful outcome-level objectives during the objective setting process, and later during program implementation and evaluation. This problem was baked into management science at the beginning and has not been corrected since. Historical examples of this fundamental problem can be found in the Scientific Management movement of Frederick Winslow Taylor (Taylor 1911), the Management by Objectives approach pioneered by Peter Drucker (Drucker 1954), as well as some more recent management remedies such as OKRs — or Objectives & Key Results (Doerr 2018).

TRADITIONAL MANAGEMENT

This paper is about managing for meaningful outcomes, a new approach to management that offers significant benefits for projects, programs, and organizations more generally, as well as the wider world. It would have made the UN Water Decade much more effective and sustainable.

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: Chandler, C.G. (2019). Managing for Meaningful Outcomes; presented at the 6th Annual University of Maryland Project Management Symposium, College Park, Maryland, USA in May 2019; PM World Journal, Vol. VIII, Issue VII, August.  Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/pmwj84-Aug2019-Chandler-managing-for-meaningful-outcomes.pdf

 


 

About the Author


Charles G. Chandler, Ph.D.

Texas, USA

 

 

Charles G. Chandler graduated from the University of Texas at Austin (B.S. and Ph.D.) and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (M.S.), where he studied engineering sciences. He served in the US Peace Corps in Nepal, and later worked at the Texas Water Development Board in Austin, where he managed the state’s program in water conservation and drought contingency planning. In 1982 he founded a management consulting firm (Assumption Analysis, Inc) and has undertaken assignments for clients related to project design, evaluation, and organizational management in 25 countries. Clients have included USAID, the World Health Organization, the UN Development Programme, the World Bank Group, the Asian Development Bank, and the African Development Bank, among others. Dr. Chandler is a member of the Academy of Management, is married, and lives in the Texas hill country.

 

 

Project Manager Transition

A new skill set for managing large and complex projects

 

SECOND EDITION

By Richard Wyatt

United Kingdom

 


 

ABSTRACT

As projects grow in size their level of complexity grows exponentially. History has shown that many project managers struggle to deliver larger and more complex projects while others transition successfully.

Project managers typically follow a similar initial career trajectory; learn key techniques and tools, deliver small projects under supervision. Over time they are trusted with larger and larger projects as they demonstrate success with the smaller ones. Progress continues until the individual starts to struggle and supervisors limit coaching to reiterating the basic tenets of project management. Why do only some project managers continue their success with large and complex projects? What do those who are successfully with large project do differently?

Successful managers of large and complex project transition to executive level management, leaving behind those colleagues who continue to focus on project administration. Specifically they; loosen their grip on project detail, there is too much in a large project. They organize autonomous but accountable work streams. They focus on where challenges are most likely to occur, recognizing that organizations are an integrated web of sub goals. They also anticipate there will be constant changes develop plans that are flexible. All these skills enable the successful project manager to reduce the time spent on tactical project administration and so they can spend their time working strategically to preempt potential issues.

THE CHALLENGE OF SUCCESSFULLY MANAGING LARGE PROJECTS

Over the last 30 years I have observed hundreds of project managers and thousands of projects. The majority of these efforts have been well organized and delivered successfully. However, an analysis of these projects has shown that the success rate declines as the projects get large and more complex. Literature that describes big project failure is widely available and makes compelling reading. Examples such as: Mars Climate Orbiter(1), Denver Airport Baggage Handling System(2). and Westpac CS90(3). To be fair, there are many large, complex projects that are delivered successfully. So, this raises a question, why do some project managers transition to large projects successfully while so many others begin to flounder as complexity increases?

Three stages to struggling with large projects

Typically, a project manager’s journey starts at a junior level. A personal choice of career direction combined with an organizational need to guide discrete bodies of work through successful delivery. The individual will receive training in core project management techniques. The training may be anywhere from in-house coaching to full certification from an organization such as the Project Management Institute.

Stage 1: Managing small simple projects

Initial assignments will encompass small projects, likely self-contained within a single part of the organization. The enthusiastic new project manager will create a detailed Work Breakdown structure often with tasks down to durations of an hour, predecessors for every task and a constantly updated percent complete field. This is all good. The supervisor of the new project manager constantly emphasizes managing the detail.

The initial projects are all a success with the new project manager on top of every detail. I equate this to juggling with two tennis balls, it needs some coordination but is not too difficult.

Stage 2: Managing more complex projects

As the project manager’ reputation for success grows so does the complexity of the projects they are asked to manage. Projects will grow in size and complexity. The projects will include resources from other organizations, may involve more complex technology and will generally have more moving parts. The project manager continues to utilize the core techniques and seeks to stay on top of the detail to ensure everything happens per the plan.

Project managers are still successful, but it is becoming much harder. The project plan needs to change frequently to account for better understood requirements and stretched due dates. There are more relationships to manage some of which become contentious. Staying on top of the detail becomes a time sink. Supervisors tend to reiterate by the book techniques focused on managing the detail.

I equate this to juggling 3 balls, with the occasional superstar managing 4 or 5. Even the skilled juggler begins to find their limit.

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: Wyatt, R. (2019). Project Manager Transition: A new skill set for managing large and complex projects; presented at the 6th Annual University of Maryland Project Management Symposium, College Park, Maryland, USA in May 2019; PM World Journal, Vol. VIII, Issue VII, August. Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/pmwj84-Aug2019-Wyatt-project-manager-transition.pdf

 


 

About the Author


Richard Wyatt

United Kingdom

 

 

 

Richard Wyatt is the Director of Strategic Programs at TIAA, a leading Financial Services provider. He has worked across the globe in UK, US, Australia and Indonesia delivering project of growing size and complexity. He currently manages projects with budgets in excess of $100m. During his career he has observed project managers struggle and the size of their project increase and has researched and articulated the skills set required to be successful. Richard has a BA in Computing in Business and an MBA from Durham University, UK.

 

 

The Nature of International Development Projects

 

SECOND EDITION

By Bob Youker

Maryland, USA

 


 

Introduction

International organizations like the World Bank and Governmental and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) plan and implement development projects with the aim of improving living conditions in developing countries.   These projects are different from other types of projects for a number of reasons and the approach to implementation must also be different.  This presentation will define those differences and specify approaches that are necessary for project success.  The paper is based on results of the evaluation processes of the World Bank and on the work of a committee of the PMI International Development Specific Interest Group (SIG) that is developing an International Development Body of Knowledge. (BOK). For a look at a model of how to define different types of projects see my paper presented at PMI Philadelphia in 1999. (Youker, 1999, October)

Definition: What are International Development (ID) Projects?

ID Projects are medium to large size public projects and/or programs in all sectors of developing countries financed by the following types of institutions:

  1. Multilateral Development Banks such as the World Bank and regional development banks (ADB, AfDB, IADB, CDB etc.)
  2. United Nations Associated Agencies (including UNDP, FAO, ILO, WHO, UNIDO etc.)
  3. Bilateral and multi-lateral government agencies (such as USAID, European Union or CDA)
  4. Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) (such as CARE, Catholic Relief Services or Save the Children)
  5. Government agencies in developing countries.

Thus, by definition, ID Projects involve a number of different actors including donor agencies, (often more than one), government organizations at several levels, consultants, contractors, trainers, evaluators, researchers, and local beneficiaries including local organizations.

Characteristics of ID Projects

  1. The objectives of ID projects are for economic and social development often involving poverty reduction and the usual profit motive is often missing. The financing agency often has motives and objectives of its own.

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 2003 PMI Global Congress in Baltimore, MD, USA.  It is republished here with the author’s permission.

How to cite this paper: Youker, R. (2003). The Nature of International Development Projects; originally presented at the PMI Global Congress: North America, Baltimore, Maryland, USA in September 2003; republished in the PM World Journal, Vol. VIII, Issue VI, July 2019.  Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/pmwj83-Jul2019-Youker-the-nature-of-international-development-projects.pdf

 


 

About the Author


Robert Youker

World Bank (retired)
Maryland, USA

 

 

 

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/

 

 

Adaption of selected PMBOK processes

to fit SCRUM developments

 

SECOND EDITION

By Philipp Rosenberger
FH Campus Wien
Vienna, Austria

and

József Tick
Óbuda University
Budapest, Hungary

 


 

Abstract

Project managers managing agile developed IT projects often find themselves in difficult situations. Their frameworks, like PMBOK project management framework of PMI Organizations, demand a deep level of planning, control and active management. On the other side, agile development frameworks like SCRUM demand self-management, flexibility and appreciate change. This article proposes solutions for five PMBOK processes that have been identified as critical in SCRUM development environments in the previous publication Suitability of PMBOK 6th edition for agile-developed IT Projects, by Rosenberger and Tick. The process of “Manage project execution” is adapted by introducing Strike Events; “Work Breakdown Structure Plan creation” and “Scheduling” processes are changed by dividing large backlogs into phases and break down individual phases into Macro and Micro level planning; “Cost Estimation” processes uses velocity of development teams as planning reference; “Developing and Managing Teams” is adapted by introducing the project manager as SCRUM master and if needed apply again the Strike System in case of serious problems. These proposed solutions adapt the classical PMBOK project framework to cope with SCRUM developed project to an “Agile IT Project Management Framework”. These process specific solution results are based on literature research. The actual applicability in agile developed projects and adaptations will researched and applied in a following step of this research topic towards the way of creating an optimized, tailored agile IT project management framework.

Key words: SCRUM, IT-Project Management, Agile, PMBOK

JEL code: M15 (IT-Management)

Introduction

Published in 2001 the agile manifesto (Agile Manifesto, 2001) provided the basis for SCUM framework of agile development in IT projects. The goal was to make development processes more flexible and to achieve early results for customer feedback. But the SCRUM framework as defined in the SCRUM Guide (SCRUM Guide, 2017, Schwaber K.& Sutherland) describes only an agile process of software development. It was not meant to be seen as a project management approach.

But in reality, SCRUM is often used as a “agile project management” framework. By adopting agile tools and methods, or sometimes even just terminologies used in SCRUM organizations pretend to use agile project management approaches, without even deeply understanding the real nature of agile project management. However, these organizations are not being blamed. There is no real finalised “agile IT project management” framework existing at the moment. There are classical project management frameworks like PRINCE2 (Prince 2 Handbook, 2017, Axelos Global Best Practice) or PMBOK (PMBOK-Guide) – Sixth version, 2017,  Project Management Institute, Pennsylvania, USA) of PMI organization. And then there are agile development models like SCRUM, which are used in classic project environments.

So when agile IT project management is defined as classical project management, including an agile development approach, problems can develop due to the fact that these two frameworks focus sometimes on completely different values. This cultural inaptitude, often results in decreased overall project success, problems in communication and understanding of project participants.

Basis and approach for this research

This article sets up the basis for an adapted PMBOK project framework specially focussed on agile, with SCRUM, developed IT projects. PMI organisation already took a first step in this direction by adding an “agile guideline” document to its newest sixth version of the PMBOK framework. But this guideline is only an introduction in agility and agile methods and tools. It does not change the processes defined in PMBOK as such.

To now completely redefine the PMBOK processes and make them suitable for SCRUM developed IT projects two steps need to be taken:

  • Critical areas of the PMBOK processes have to be defined.
  • Solutions regarding these areas have to be investigated, analysed and evaluated

The first step of identifying critical processes has already happened. In the IEEE publication “Suitability of PMBOK 6th edition for agile-developed IT Projects” (Rosenberger P. & Tick J ,2018) five processes have been identified to cause problems:

  • Manage project execution
  • Develop project structure plan
  • Develop project schedule
  • Estimate and define costs based on requirements
  • Develop and manage team

This article now uses these identified critical areas as starting point and proposes approaches to be integrated into the existing PMBOK framework. These proposed solutions are based on existing tools and methods identified by literature research and followed by an assessment of applicability using a KPI evaluation. Please note, that the last step of proofing the applicability of the proposed solutions via a large-scale online survey is yet not finalised and therefore not part of this article.

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 presented at the 8th Scientific Conference on Project Management in the Baltic States at the University of Latvia in April 2019.  It is republished here with the permission of the authors and conference organizers.

How to cite this paper: Rosenberger, P. and Tick, J. (2019); Adaption of Selected PMBOK Processes To Fit SCRUM Developments; presented at the 8th Scientific Conference on Project Management in the Baltic States, University of Latvia, April 2019; republished in the PM World Journal, Vol. VIII, Issue VI, July.  Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/pmwj83-Jul2019-Rosenberger-Tick-pmbok-processes-to-fit-scrum.pdf

 


 

About the Authors


Prof. DI Philipp Rosenberger

Vienna, Austria

 

 

 

Philipp Rosenberger is a professor at FH Campus Vienna at master program technical management focusing on IT project management in an agile development context.  After many years in consulting focussing on technical aftersales and business as well as project management and especially IT project management development in Europe and China, he got into the financial sector, managing the implementation of a current account financial product implementation project at ING DiBa Online bank in Vienna and in parallel starting his own small consulting company ROSCON.at. In his current PhD program Philipp is focussing on improving agile IT project management models. Prof Rosenberger can be contacted at Philipp.rosenberger@fh-campuswien.ac.at

 


Dr. habil József Tick

Budapest, Hungary

 

 

 

Dr. habil József Tick is an associate professor in the Institute of Software Design and Development, at the John von Neumann Faculty of Informatics of Óbuda University, Budapest, Hungary. He received his BSc in Computer Science in 1977, his Master Degree in Meseure- and Controlsystems in 1986, and his PhD degree in Computer Science in 2007 from the University of Veszprém. His research areas are Simulation of controlsystems, Object-oriented Software Development, Software Reuse, User Interface Design and Embedded System-control. He did a one year research in the field of Software Engineering at the Research Centre for Informatics in Karlsruhe Germany. Since 2000 he is the Vice rector of Óbuda University. He is an author and co-author of numerous conference papers; he has given several presentations on national and international conferences. He has acted as a Program and Technical Committee Member on several international conferences. József can be contacted at tick@uni-obuda.hu

 

 

It’s No Longer Enough to Simply Be Agile

 

SECOND EDITION

Johnny D. Morgan, PhD

General Dynamics Information Technology

Washington, DC area, USA

 


 

ABSTRACT

A tremendous amount of literature has been published about the merits of agile development practices.  But in today’s environment, agile development practices are quickly being supplemented with major technology breakthroughs that enhance software quality, improve enterprise performance and provide business resiliency.  This paper describes three major breakthroughs; services-based architectures, cloud computing, and DevOps practices.   A brief overview of each technology is discussed and how the three technologies working together provide enterprise value.  The paper concludes with a discussion on the skills and talents required to implement these technologies.

Key Words: agile, cloud, cultural shifts, development, DevOps, elastic computing, information technology, IT skills, operations, organizational structures, pipelines, DevSecOps, software development, software services, testing

This paper is based on empirical observations, current literature, and engineering and project management experiences.

INTRODUCTION

Since the Manifesto for Agile Software Development was published in 2001, a tremendous amount of literature has been published that documents many agile software development frameworks such as Scrum, Kanban, and Extreme Programming.  These software development frameworks have similar characteristics.  All potential product features are placed into a feature backlog and prioritized for development, with the highest value features being developed first.  Agile teams execute time-boxed work periods, typically called sprints, to develop these features.

These sprints typically range from two to four weeks. Each agile team is composed of a small group of multi-disciplined developers that are focused on the continual delivery of valuable software.   Within each team there is a Product Owner who is the voice of the customer, prioritizes the feature backlog, and accepts the delivery of each feature.  There is also a person that facilitates team meetings and eliminates blocking issues that are inhibiting team progress.  Within the Scrum methodology, this person is called the Scrum Master.  There is a regular cadence of meetings within each sprint. The sprint commences with a Sprint Kickoff Meeting that determines what features the team will develop within the sprint.  There are Daily Standup Meetings where the team reviews progress, identifies any blocking issues, and assigns work to be perform next.  A Sprint Completion Meeting is held at the end of each sprint to review, with customers and users outside of the agile team, the actual delivery of the features that were developed during the sprint.  Within the agile team, a Sprint Retrospective Meeting is also held where the team can identify and address potential improvements to team performance.

More recently, frameworks have been developed to scale agile development practices from a single team to multiple agile teams working in parallel to deliver larger systems.  The most popular framework is the Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) which adds additional team resources and process elements to synchronize the alignment, collaboration, development, and integration mechanisms of multiple agile teams to deliver large, more complex systems (Leffingwell and others 2017).

In today’s environment, agile development practices are quickly being supplemented with major technology breakthroughs that enhance software quality, improve enterprise performance, and provide business resiliency.  This paper describes three major breakthroughs; services-based architectures, cloud computing, and DevOps practices.

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: Morgan, J.D. (2019). It’s No Longer Enough to Simply Be Agile; presented at the 6th Annual University of Maryland Project Management Symposium, College Park, Maryland, USA in May 2019; published in the PM World Journal, Vol. VIII, Issue VI, July.  Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/pmwj83-Jul2019-Morgan-No-Longer-Enough-To-Simply-Be-Agile.pdf

 


 

About the Author


Johnny D. Morgan, PhD

General Dynamics Information Technology
Virginia, USA

 

 

 

Dr. Morgan has 39 years of systems engineering and project management experience. While serving in the United States Navy and then employed with IBM, Lockheed Martin and currently General Dynamics, he has assisted numerous Department of Defense and Intelligence Community customers in the management and execution of their information technology portfolios. Supplementing his experience, he has received a Bachelor’s degree in Computer and Information Sciences from the University of Florida, a Master’s degree in Systems Management from the University of Southern California, and a Doctorate degree in Systems Engineering from the George Washington University. Dr. Morgan’s industry certifications include the Project Management Institute’s Project Management Professional certification, the International Council on Systems Engineering Expert System Engineering Professional certification, and multiple agile and Amazon Web Services certifications. He can be contacted at johnny.morgan@gdit.com

 

 

An Analysis of Project Management Programs

in the State University of New York System (SUNY)

 

SECOND EDITION

By Michael J. Littman, PhD

SUNY: Buffalo State
Fellow: Brandeis University

New York, USA

 


 

Abstract

The Project Management Institute (PMI) estimates that 6.2 million project management positions will be created in the USA from 2010 to 2020. This points to a critical need for academic training in this field. There are a number of project management academic programs in colleges and universities throughout the United States and the world.  In the State University of New York system, SUNY, project management courses can be taught online, hybrid, or face to face as part of professional development, as an individual course, as part of a certificate program, or taught as an undergraduate or graduate level program. There is a small number of each type in SUNY schools. Three recommendations are made to meet the projected need for project management trained individuals.

Introduction

Ramazani and Jergeas (2015) noted a gap between what education providers are offering and what is needed to deal with projects in today’s complex work environment. Universities were established to bridge this academic preparation and skills gap by offering appropriate educational opportunities. Are universities doing this appropriately today?

According to the Project Management Institute study Job Growth and Talent Gap 2017 to 2027, (PMI, 2017), across the globe, there is a widening gap between employers’ need for skilled project management workers and the availability of professionals to fill those roles.

There are several catalysts for this gap:

  • A dramatic increase in the number of jobs requiring project-oriented skills.
  • Attrition rates, including professionals retiring from the workforce
  • A significant uptick in demand for project management talent, especially in rapidly developing economies such as China and India professionals. (PMI, 2017)

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to review the academic programs available in project management across SUNY Schools to see if the universities and colleges curriculum provided sufficient courses and programs to meet the future growth needs for employees with project management skills and training.

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 presented at the 8th Scientific Conference on Project Management in the Baltic States at the University of Latvia in April 2019.  It is republished here with the permission of the author and conference organizers.

How to cite this paper: Littman, M.J. (2019); An Analysis of Project Management Programs in the State University of New York System (SUNY); presented at the 8th Scientific Conference on Project Management in the Baltic States, University of Latvia, April 2019; republished in the PM World Journal, Vol. VIII, Issue VI, July.  Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/pmwj83-Jul2019-Littman-analysis-of-project-management-programs-in-suny-system.pdf

 


 

About the Author


Michael J. Littma, PhD

Buffalo, New York, USA

 

 

Prof. Dr. Michael J. Littman (SUNY: Buffalo State, USA. University of Haifa, Israel). Michael J. Littman, chair and associate professor of business, is recognized for his consistently superior, student-focused, and innovative teaching skills, sound scholarship, and exceptional level of service to Buffalo State students. His strong commitment to students’ starts with advisement, extends into the classroom, and stretches to their post-graduate careers.

Prof Littman has a long record of positive impact on student growth and performance through a variety of offerings, including freshman seminars, senior seminars, honors sections, and graduate-level courses, plus courses cross-listed in history and communications. He has taught 42 different undergraduate and graduate courses at Buffalo State. The focus of his teaching has been to instill and develop the positive personal and professional skills that students need for a rewarding role as ethical leaders in their profession and community. He has also mentored international faculty through the Fulbright program and African Regional International Scholar Development Internship program.

Littman also has a strong record of scholarship that supports his excellence in the classroom. He is an internationally recognized scholar and consultant who is often requested to collaborate with a European network of partners. He has participated in projects in the Netherlands, Latvia, and Germany. He has a long history of being a requested reviewer by journals and textbooks in a variety of business areas. He also has served his community as a two-term president of the Williamsville Central School District Board of Education and has served as a member of the Buffalo’s Superintendent Advisory Council on Occupational Education.

Prof. Littman can be contacted at LITTMAMJ@BuffaloState.edu.

 

 

Schedule Adherence and Rework

 

SECOND EDITION

By Walt Lipke

Oklahoma, USA

 


 

Abstract

When project performance is such that the product is delivered with expected functionality at the time and price agreed between the customer and supplier, it is deemed “successful.” The rework, encumbering any project, has a measurable impact on whether a project can achieve success. The project manager, who exercises control of the contributors to rework, can greatly enhance the prospect of delivering the product within its constraints. A significant portion of rework is caused by deviating from the project plan and its associated schedule. The measure of schedule adherence is derived from applying Earned Schedule to Earned Value Management data. This paper first reviews the concept of schedule adherence and then develops an approach to understanding the cost impact from not adhering to the schedule. Finally, an index is proposed which provides information to assist project control and to forecast the cost associated with imperfect schedule adherence.   

Background

An extension to Earned Value Management (EVM), Earned Schedule (ES), was introduced in the March 2003 issue of The Measurable News [Lipke, 2003]. The purpose of ES was to overcome the anomalous behavior of the EVM schedule performance indicators by providing reliable time-based indicators.[1] After ES was initially verified [Henderson, 2003] it was, subsequently, applied to forecasting project duration [Henderson, 2004]. Since that time has ES propagated globally and is now a generally accepted practice with its recent inclusion in the 2nd edition of the PMI Practice Standard for Earned Value Management [PMI, 2011].[2]

One unique quality of the ES measure is that it facilitates identifying the specific planned value (PV) which should have been accomplished for the reported earned value (EV). This characteristic was first explained and examined in the article, “Connecting Earned Value to the Schedule,” published in the Winter 2004 issue of The Measurable News [Lipke, 2004].  Subsequently, this extended capability of ES was more fully elaborated in the April, 2008 CrossTalk article, “Schedule Adherence: a useful measure for project management” [Lipke, 2008].  

Because the task specific PV is identifiable, comparisons can be made to the task EV reported. The differences in PV and EV for each task are utilized to isolate problems occurring in the execution of the project. When the difference, EV – PV, is negative, there is a possibility of a constraint or impediment preventing task progress. This information is extremely useful. Having these tasks identified, allows the project manager to focus on investigating and relieving problems that are causing workarounds. Minimizing the impact of constraints and impediments, in turn, minimizes the extent of workarounds, thus maximizing execution in agreement with the schedule. The more execution agreement there is between actual accomplishment and the schedule, the greater the performance efficiency becomes – for both cost and schedule.

Along with the negative differences previously discussed, there are positive differences identified for specific tasks. The positive differences expose areas where rework may occur. There are many causes of rework:

  • poor planning stemming from requirements misinterpretation, incorrect task sequencing, and poor estimation
  • defective work
  • poor requirements management
  • schedule compression during execution
  • overzealous quality assurance

However, the rework identified when EV – PV is positive is none of the ones cited above. The rework for which we are concerned is solely caused by project execution not in the activity sequence prescribed by the schedule. Although out of sequence performance is only one of the six contributors to rework mentioned, it has a major impact. Out of sequence performance is pervasive in that it is not aligned with a single aspect or project event. Rather, it occurs dynamically and can involve any, and possibly all of the project team throughout the entire period of performance.

For readers who have some background in quality and process improvement activity, the discussion thus far may bring to mind the idea of process discipline. The lack of process discipline leads to the creation of defects and inefficient performance. As has been described thus far, ES provides a way to identify and measure process performance discipline.

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 on-line journal (July 2011). The article is no longer accessible as the journal ceased publication with its last issue in March 2012. The article has been published, as well, in The Measurable News (2011, Issue 1), and CrossTalk (2012, Vol 25, No. 6, on-line).  It is republished here with the author’s permission.

How to cite this paper: Lipke, W. (2019). Schedule Adherence and Rework; originally published in PM World Today (July 2011) and in The Measurable News (2011, Issue 1), and CrossTalk (2012, Vol 25, No. 6, on-line); PM World Journal, Vol. VIII, Issue VI, July.  Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/pmwj83-Jul2019-Lipke-Schedule-Adherence-and-Rework.pdf

 


 

About the Author


Walt Lipke

Oklahoma City, USA

 

 

 

Walt Lipke retired in 2005 as deputy chief of the Software Division at Tinker Air Force Base, where he led the organization to the 1999 SEI/IEEE award for Software Process Achievement. He is the creator of the Earned Schedule technique, which extracts schedule information from earned value data.

  • Credentials & Honors:
  • Master of Science Physics
  • Licensed Professional Engineer
  • Graduate of DOD Program Management Course
  • Physics honor society – Sigma Pi Sigma (SPS)
  • Academic honors – Phi Kappa Phi (FKF)
  • PMI Metrics SIG Scholar Award (2007)
  • PMI Eric Jenett Award (2007)
  • Who’s Who in the World (2010)
  • EVM Europe Award (2013)
  • CPM Driessnack Award (2014)
  • Australian Project Governance and Control Symposium established the annual Walt Lipke Project Governance and Control Excellence Award (2017)
  • Albert Nelson Marquis Lifetime Achievement Award (2018)

To view other works by Walt Lipke, visit his author showcase in the PM World Library at https://pmworldlibrary.net/authors/walt-lipke/

 

[1] The schedule performance indicators derived from Earned Schedule are Schedule Variance-time (SV(t) = ES – AT) and Schedule Performance Index-time (SPI(t) = ES / AT), where AT is the time duration at which an EV measurement is reported.

 

 

 

[2] Since the initial publication of this paper, ES has been recognized and included in the PMI Project Management Body of Knowledge, 6th Ed. (2017), PMI Practice Standard for Scheduling, 3rd Ed. (2019), and the ISO 21508:2018: Earned value management in project and programme management.

 

The Facilitating PMO

How to Implement Project Success Across the Organization

 

SECOND EDITION

By Susan Hostetter and John Walsh

U.S. Census Bureau

Washington, DC, USA

 


 

Executive Summary

This paper explores the Project Management Office’s (PMO) role of facilitating project success within an organization. This paper will cover challenges a PMO has to overcome to effectively facilitate project success such as: staying informed of project progress; developing and documenting effective project management processes; developing effective tools and communicating with stakeholders.

This paper will cover the tools that the Demographic Statistical Methods Division PMO has developed to facilitate project success in the division. These tools include: deliverable based schedules and timesheets, cost estimation processes, the project management best practice program and project status reports for stakeholder communication.

Additionally, this paper will cover the benefits of facilitating project success. These benefits will include: supporting many projects at once; maintaining standards for project management practices across the organization; relieving subject matter experts of project management tasks and improving project reporting and stakeholder communication across the organization.

Introduction        

The Project Management Institute defines the Project Management Office (PMO) as “a strategic driver for organizational excellence, which seeks to enhance the practices of execution management, organizational governance, and strategic change leadership.” The term “driver” implies aggressive force that is sometimes required but, for the day-to-day operations, the PMO has a greater role as a facilitator for the project manager. Merriam Webster defines facilitation as “to make easier: help bring about” and it is in this role of the supporter and helper where the PMO can affect project success across the organization.  Stated simply, the PMO can affect project success by the support processes and tools it creates and implements for its project managers.

The PMO in the Demographic Statistical Methods Division (DSMD) at the U.S. Census Bureau has been working to understand the challenges faced by its project managers. The PMO found that the project managers struggled to stay informed of project status due to poor access to project data, functioned from word of mouth instructions for important processes, spent a lot of their time developing and updating status reports, needed guidance on how to integrate schedules and timesheet reporting, struggled with the many details of creating accurate cost estimates and lacked tools for communicating project information to stakeholders. To better support its project managers and facilitate their success, the PMO evaluated their work environment and developed products to help project managers overcome their work challenges. The sections below provide details into the facilitative tools developed by the DSMD PMO to support their project managers.

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 authors and conference organizers.

How to cite this paper: Hostetter, S. and Walsh, J. (2019). The Facilitating PMO: How to Implement Project Success Across the 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 VI, July.  Available online at https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/pmwj83-Jul2019-Hostetter-Walsh-The-Facilitating-PMO.pdf

 


 

About the Authors


Susan Hostetter

U.S. Census Bureau
Texas and Washington, DC, USA

 

 

Susan Hostetter, PMP, is a Project Manager at the U.S. Census Bureau in Washington, DC, USA. As a data analyst and project management professional, she has been instrumental in standing up and improving PMO processes for risk management, project management, portfolio management, schedule management, cost management, performance management and strategic planning. Her papers have been published in the PM World Journal and she has presented project management topics at PMI chapter events and at the University of Maryland’s and University of Texas at Dallas’ PM Symposiums. She has a Master’s Certificate in Project Management from George Washington University, a Master’s Degree in Management with Project Management emphasis from University of Maryland’s University College and a Bachelor’s Degree in Business Administration, with a minor in Economics, from Mary Baldwin College. Susan can be contacted at susan.lynn.hostetter@census.gov

 


John Walsh

U.S. Census Bureau
Washington, DC, USA

 

 

John Walsh, PMP, is Chief of the Management Operations Office in the Demographic Statistical Methods Division (DSMD) at the U.S. Census Bureau in Washington, DC, USA. As a project management professional over the last 12 years, he has been instrumental in implementing project management processes for large-scale programs across the Census Bureau, including the Economic Census, as well as the Current Demographic and Current Economic survey programs.  He received an undergraduate degree in Economics from the University of Maryland at College Park.  John can be contacted at john.c.walsh@census.gov