Archive for Juli 15th, 2008

Management competences, not tools and techniques: A grounded examination of software project management at WM-data (Rose et al., 2007)

Dienstag, Juli 15th, 2008

7 Competencies of SW Project Mgrs

Rose, Jeremy; Pedersen, Keld; Hosbond, Jens Henrik; Kræmmergaard, Pernille: Management competences, not tools and techniques – A grounded examination of software project management at WM-data; in: Information and Software Technology, Vol. 49 (2007), No. 6, pp. 605–624.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2007.02.005

Rose et al. approach software management with a competence perspective and identify 7 competencies for a successful software project management by using an qualitative approach of grounded theory. They investigate the project managers of a medium sized software development company in Denmark. The 7 competencies they find are

  1. Technical management (code and techniques)
  2. Process management (traditional project mgmt. processes)
  3. Team management (form and develop a team)
  4. Customer management (maintain customer relationships)
  5. Business management (achieve financial results)
  6. Personal management (develop soft skills)
  7. Uncertainty management (manage interrelated complex problems)

Posted in Critical Success Factors, Leadership | 1 Comment »

The impact of project portfolio management on information technology projects (De Reyck et al., 2005)

Dienstag, Juli 15th, 2008

De Reyck, Bert; Grushka-Cockayne, Yael; Lockett, Martin; Calderini, Sergio Ricardo; Moura, Marcio; Sloper, Andrew: The impact of project portfolio management on information technology projects; in: International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 23 (2005), No. 7, pp. 524-537.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2005.02.003

In their article de Reyck et al. argue that project portfolio management (PPM) is essential to create value with IT project. The research focus is the management of resources and risk. Moreover most articles are from vendors of the software, promoting the value of the PPM process, a claim not based on any empirical evidence.

Based on findings from a survey about PPM adoption, de Reyck et al. introduce a three-stage classification scheme of PPM adoption. Furthermore they show that a strong correlation exist between increasing adoption of PPM processes and a reduction in project related problems, and between PPM adoption and project performance.

Their maturity model shows how the elements of PPM (centralisation of project control, financial analysis, risk analysis, interdependencies, constraints, overall portfolio analysis, categorisation/selection/accountability and governance, optimisation, and specialised software) are adopted in each of their 3 stages:

PPM Maturity Model (de Reyck et al. 2005, p. 530)

from: De Reyck et al. (2005), p. 530

In my opinion the question remains if organisations in stage 3 follow a controlling agenda more than they actually empower their project managers.

Posted in Maturity Model, Portfolio Management | 1 Comment »

Managing Knowledge and Learning in IT Projects: A Conceptual Framework and Guidelines for Practice (Reich, 2007)

Dienstag, Juli 15th, 2008

Knowledge gaps and risks

Reich, Blaize Horner: Managing Knowledge and Learning in IT Projects – A Conceptual Framework and Guidelines for Practice; in: Project Management Journal, Vol. 38 (2007), No. 2, pp. 5-17.

This paper won the PMI award for the best paper in 2007. She identifies 10 risks on the projects which arise due to knowledge gaps. Reich structures the risks from a systems and process perspective. Risks 1&2 are project inputs, Risks 3&4 are linked to the project governance, Risks 5-8 are operational risks, Risk 10 is an output risk.

  1. Previous lessons are not learned
  2. Team selection is flawed
  3. Volatility in the governance team
  4. Lack of role knowledge
  5. Inadequate knowledge integration
  6. Incomplete knowledge transfer
  7. Exit of team members
  8. Lack of knowledge map
  9. Loss between phases
  10. Failure to learn

Since learning the way to bridge knowledge gaps, Reich concludes that the best way to address the risks is 4-fold (1) establish a learning climate, (2) establish and maintain knowledge levels, (3) create channels for knowledge flow, and (4) develop a team memory.

Posted in Critical Success Factors, IT Project, Knowledge Management, Risk Management | No Comments »

Project management information systems: An empirical study of their impact on project managers and project success (Raymond & Bergeron, 2008)

Dienstag, Juli 15th, 2008

 PMIS

Raymond, Louis; Bergeron, Francois: Project management information systems – An empirical study of their impact on project managers and project success; in: International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 26 (2008), pp. 213-220.

To make a long article short: Project management information systems (PMIS) have a positive impact on project managers and project success. The cause-effect-chain is as follows: PMIS Quality –> PMIS Information Quality –> PMIS Useage –> Project Manager –> Project Success.

Posted in PMIS | No Comments »

How to build a critical chain!

Dienstag, Juli 15th, 2008

This is not a summary of an article per se; but it summarizes the description on how to build a Critical Chain as it was published in
Rand, Graham K.: Critical chain – the theory of constraints applied to project management; in: International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 18 (2000), No. 3, p. 173-177. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(99)00019-8

Critical Chain

The Theory of Constraints was outlined by Eliyahu M. Goldratt in his book „Theory of Constraints“, which subsequently Goldratt applied to project management in „Critical Chain“, which interestingly is a novel similar to Tom DeMarco’s Deadline.  Anyway, the basic idea of the Theory of Constraints is according to Wikipedia

[…] every organization has – at any given point in time – at least one constraint which limits the system’s performance relative to its goal. These constraints can be broadly classified as either an internal constraint or a market constraint. In order to manage the performance of the system, the constraint must be identified and managed correctly […] (from Wikipedia)

The Theory of Constraints outlines a 5 step process to tackle the whole problem

  1. Identify the constraint
  2. Decide how to exploit the constraint
  3. Subordinate everything else to above decision
  4. Elevate the constraint
  5. If constraint has been broken, go back to (1) and never allow inertia to cause a system’s constraint

So what is the constraint on a project? Of course it is the time of critical resources. What is the problem with them? They do suffer from something called student’s syndrome – no matter how much buffer they get, the work is only done in the last few days.
The solution? Exploit the constraint – then elevate it. In other words: finish task on time before trying to decrease total time.
How can one exploit the constraint? Remove all buffers into a big one at the end of the project. All tasks or streams which are not on the critical path get a feeding buffer right before they feed into the critical path again.
How do I manage it? Project Management needs to ensure that no time is lost on hand-overs. Furthermore if the time comes everything must be dropped and everyone works on tasks on the critical chain only. Never ever shall multi-tasking occur!

Posted in Critical Chain | No Comments »

The changing paradigms of project management (Pollack, 2007)

Dienstag, Juli 15th, 2008

Changing Paradigm

Pollack, Julien: The changing paradigms of project management; in: International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 25 (2007), No. 3., pp. 266-247.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2006.08.002

This article is closely related to the 2006 article by Atkinson et al., which are all based on the hard-soft-framework first published in

Crawford, Lynn; Pollack, Julien: Hard and soft projects – a framework for analysis, in: International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 22 (2004), No. 8, pp. 645-653.

In this article Pollack analyses project management literature in order to identify paradigms associated with project management research. He uses the concept of the paradigm as defined by Kuhn in 1962 as a „commonly shared set of assumptions, values and concepts within a community, which constitutes a way of viewing reality. Individuals within the community may embody these assumptions in different ways, and so paradigm is used in his context to refer to a general tendency for thought“ (Pollack 2007, p. 266).

Pollack then describes the hard and soft paradigm he helped establishing with research on best practice organisational change projects. The hard paradigm is characterised by

  • Predefined project goals
  • Positivist and Realist philosophies
  • Emphasis on control
  • Quantitative measures
  • Reductionist techniques
  • Emphasis on structure
  • No need for participation
  • Project Manager as Expert

Whereas the soft paradigm is characterised by

  • Ill-defined and ambiguous goals
  • Qualitative measures
  • Emphasis on learning
  • Need for participation
  • Interpretivist philosophies
  • Emphasis on social processes
  • Project Manager as Facilitator

Furthermore Pollack argues that most of the current research is deeply rooted in the hard paradigm, although the literature on the soft paradigm is growing significantly. He then argues that a paradigmatic expansion could provide increased opportunity for practitioners and researchers. Since choosing a paradigm automatically defines certain assumptions for the research and thus limiting it. Nevertheless he points out that neither one perspective is appropriate to all situations.

Posted in Literature Review, Research, Theory | 1 Comment »

How to fail in project management – without really trying (Pinto & Kharbanda, 1996)

Dienstag, Juli 15th, 2008

 How to ensure failure

Pinto, Jeffrey K.; Kharbanda, Om P.: How to fail in project management – without really trying; in: Business Horizons, Vol. 39 (1996), No. 4, pp. 45-53.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0007-6813(96)90051-8

Since Pinto popularised the critical success factor and failure factor research, which established a large body of research I wanted to include this paper though it is a bit dated. Pinot & Kharbanda basically illustrate how one can ensure complete and utterly failure as an owner of an IT project:

  • Ignore the environment (espy. stakeholders)
  • Push a new technology in a market too quickly
  • Don’t bother building fall back options
  • When problems occur shoot the most visible one
  • Let new ideas starve to death by inertia
  • Don’t bother conducting feasibility studies
  • Never admit project is a failure
  • Over manage project managers and their team
  • Never ever conduct post-failure reviews
  • Never bother to understand project trade-offs
  • Allow political expediency and infighting dictate crucial project decisions
  • Make sure project is run by a weak leader

Posted in Critical Success Factors, Failed Projects | No Comments »

Defining uncertainty in projects – a new perspective (Perminova, 2008)

Dienstag, Juli 15th, 2008

 Uncertainty

Perminova, Olga; Gustafsson, Magnus; Wikström, Kim: Defining uncertainty in projects – a new perspective; in: International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 26 (2008), No. 1, pp. 73-79.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2007.08.005

Perminova et al. argue that traditional project risk management focuses on risk and that the notion of uncertainties is generealy overlooked. In their literature review the authors show the difference between risk and uncertainties in 6 selected areas of research – Economics, Psychology, Philosophy, Organisational Theory, Dictionary, Project Management. Finally they establish a working definition for project managers: „[uncertainty occurs] when existing factors/assumptions are questioned and therefore the basis for calculating risks is questionable“. Perminova et al. argue that essential for managing uncertainty are reflective learning and sense-making, since they enable  flexibility and rapidness in decision-making especially since they do not restrict the choice of alternative actions in response to the situation.

Posted in Theory, Uncertainty management | No Comments »

The importance of context in programme management: An empirical review of programme practices (Pellegrinelli et al., 2007)

Dienstag, Juli 15th, 2008

 Context in Programs

Pellegrinelli, Sergio; Partington, David; Hemingway, Chris; Mohdzainb, Zaher; Shah, Mahmood: The importance of context in programme management – An empirical review of programme practices; in: International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 25 (2007), No. 1, pp. 41-55.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2006.06.002

Pellegrinelli et al. study actual practices on programs which mainly consist of projects. Surprisingly they find that the OGC’s Managing Successful Programmes framework (MSP) is not consistently adopted even when its use is mandated by the organisation. Furthermore they found that following MSP rigorously leads to a controlling dominated management agenda and not a empowering agenda. Their main findings for each MSP category are

  • Organisation & Leadership – mostly living on paper only, IT rather than business counterparts perform the roles needed
  • Benefits Management – mostly unquantifiable benefits or intangible benefits, general perception that this approach doesn’t fit RUP  (or any of the other unified processes of software development)
  • Stakeholder Management & Communication – n/a
  • Risk Management & Issue resolution – mostly risk management is missing completely on a program level
  • Program Planning & Control – often overruled by central head quarter
  • Business Case Management – Only symbolic artifact or only used to secure funding and never updated afterwards
  • Quality Management – are more adoptions of organisational practices already in place than the MSP processes

In short Pellegrinelli et al. revealed significant and on-going crafting of programme content, structures and processes to reconcile divergent aims and interests, to expedite progress in the face of adversity and to engage multiple sponsors, contributors and stakeholders. Thus the authors showed the importance and influence of context, namely the dynamic cultural, political and business environment in which the programmes operate, and the organisationally embedded nature of programme management.

Posted in Context, Prince 2, Program Management | 1 Comment »

Inquiring into the temporary organization: New directions for project management research (Packendorff, 1995)

Dienstag, Juli 15th, 2008

Inquiring temp orga

Packendorff, Johann: Inquiring into the temporary organization: New directions for project management research; in: Scandinavian Journal of Management, Vol. 11 (1995), No. 4, pp. 319-333.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0956-5221(95)00018-Q

Firstly Packendorff gives a brief overview about the research on project management. He roots PM research in operations research with the development of the Gantt-Chart in 1910. The other big themes of research Packendorff identifies are

  • scheduling techniques (1950s and onwards)
  • Organisation Theory/HR Management/Leadership (1960s and onwards)
  • software tools/2nd generation Operations Research (1980s and onwards)
  • critical success factor research (1990s and onwards)
  • team building and matrix organisations (1995 [the year the article was written])

In this article Packendorff identifies three main shortcomings of project management research and theory. (1) Project Management is usually seen as a general theory and a theoretical field in its own right, (2) research on project management offers an abundance of normative advice despite being not sufficiently empirical, and (3) projects are seen as “tools” and not organisations.

Furthermore Packendorff recommends three changes in project management research to overcome these shortcomings. (1) Middle range theories for different kinds of projects should replace the general theory focus. (2) The aim of research should be to provide a descriptive theory (instead of the normative advice) which is grounded in empirical narrative studies on human interaction on projects = comparative case studies. (3) Projects should be seen as temporary organisations (instead of management tools) which are an aggregate of individuals temporarily enacting a common cause.

Posted in Organisation, Organisational capabilities, Temporary organisation | No Comments »