Interesting discussion is a PMI Discussion Group.

I could not help myself. I have decided NOT to continue to be offended by being called a traditional project manager (whatever that is) and focus on my favorite research topic; how do we develop an understanding of our projects? So I posed in the group discussion. The basic question that started the discussion was; what is the different between Agile PM and Traditional PM? Lots of replies; most focused on defining various aspects of Agile. Some discussed the difference between a methodology and a standard, (Agile vs PMBOK).

Here is my response.

Russ

 

The conversation rest on understanding what is Agile and what is traditional project management. Agile seems well understood. It is a methodology for executing projects, typically in the IT Industry or projects with similar profiles. When people refer to traditional, does this refer to the methodology use to build the Great Wall of China, the project management methodology used in the Apollo Space Program or the methodology to construct offshore wind turbines.

 

The IT Industry has done an excellent job of developing methodologies designed to address the project profiles of the IT industry. There are passionate champions of these methods, creating a strong brand and becoming recognized by PMI and other organizations as best practices in these industries.

 

Do we really believe there are only two methodologies for executing projects? I believe one of the most important research questions of the project management profession focuses on how we develop an understanding of our projects and develop the appropriate execution approach.

 

On three separate occasions beginning in the early 90s, PMI has chartered teams tto explore how we understand, profile, categorize projects. The last effort closed out the charter with a strong recommendation that PMI support research in this area. I just finished reviewing research proposals for funding from PMI and was disappointed; there were no proposals to address these questions.

 

I would like to change the question from what is the difference between traditional and agile project management and ask, How can we profile a project to better understand what methodology is most appropriate for a given profile?

 

Russ

PMI Presnetation at Charleston Chapter meeting

Frinday in Charleston

Yesterday I made a presentation at the PMI Charleston Chapter. It has been a couple of years since I had been to a Charleston Chapter meeting and I ended up at the wrong place. A short call to Nicole got me to the right meeting location well before the meeting start. It was great catching up with some old friends. (the friendship was enduring, not that the people were old)

I talked about one of my favorite topics; profiling projects (you thought I was going to say ME).

Although this is a personal blog I do try to add something about project management. Below is the outline I started with as I prepared the presentation. I stretched and talked about research and our profession.

Heading down to the beach

Russ

1.      Five Assumptions

a.       Project by definition are unique

b.      Projects also have common characteristics (each has a scope, schedule, etc)

c.       These project characteristics can be grouped into project types or profile

d.      There is a management approach that is appropriate for each project profile

e.       The application of the appropriate management approach, tools and skills will have a positive impact on project performance

2.      Project profiling history

a.       PMI Taxonomy Project with Gregory D. Githens

b.      Crawford, Hobbs & Turner, PMI Initiatives

c.       Aaron Shenar

d.      Robert Yonker

e.       Ruth House

f.       Construction Industry Institute   Project Definition Rating Index (2010)

g.      Stretton, (2011)

h.      Stacy Goff

3.      Darnall Preston Project Complexity Index (DPCI)

a.       DPCI Overview

                                                              i.      Project Complexity, Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS)

                                                            ii.      Stress Points

                                                          iii.      Gathering Data

b.      External Dimension

                                                              i.      Size

                                                            ii.      Duration

                                                          iii.      Resource Availability

c.       Internal Dimension

                                                              i.      Clarity of Objectives

                                                            ii.      Clarity of Scope

                                                          iii.      Organizational Complexity

                                                          iv.      Stakeholder Agreement

d.      Technological Complexity

e.       Project Environment

                                                              i.      Ecology

                                                            ii.      Cultural Complexity

                                                          iii.      Legal Complexity

4.      Implication of Project Profile for Execution Approach

a.       Leaderships: styles, knowledge skills abilities.

                                                              i.      Myers Briggs

                                                            ii.      Emotional Intelligence

                                                          iii.      Project Organization/ Span of Control

                                                          iv.      Project Lifecycles

b.      Alignment

                                                              i.      Common Understanding

                                                            ii.      Means and Methods

                                                          iii.      Trust

c.       Use of Goals

d.      Schedule development and control, use of milestones

e.       Cost estimating and control

f.       Risk analysis and mitigation

g.      Quality defining and managing

h.      Scope development and control

i.        Team building, managing

j.        Communication plan, processes

                                                              i.      Listening

k.      Managing client expectation

l.        Measurement

m.    Project culture

5.      Conclusions

It has been a while since by last blog. Seems to be a busy summer.

I am still reading the Project Management Journal with interest. The new editor, Hans Georg Gemunde, put out his fist issue in June. His letter from the editor was great. Dr. Gemunde discussed trends in project management and the need for quality research. Hard to argue his points.

As I have pointed out in past blogs, if the PMJ is a representation of the PM Research, and I believe it probably is, then we have a ways to go before we will have research that has practical application for the project manager.

 

I reviewed research proposals for PMI this summer and found some good research concepts; which I take as a good sign. Most of the proposal suggested that the authors did not have any PM experience and the research they proposed would be of little value.

 

There were six papers in the June edition of the PMJ. The article, MBTI Personality Types of Project Managers and Their Success by Cohen, Orney and Keren, all professors at Israeli Universities, is the only one that interested me. The research conducted a survey of 280 project managers identified by master’s degree students from their universities, representing several different industries. The survey included four parts. The first focused on project success; did the project manager believe the project was a success based on the PM’s satisfaction, the client’s, the manager’s and overall satisfaction.  The second and third focused on the PM’s personality type and the third focused on demographic data (years as PM, gender, age etc.) Completing the questionnaire took 20 – 30 minutes.

 

The authors concluded that Project Managers have unique personality type. Essentially, project managers were more likely to be NTs (43%) on the Myers Birggs Type Indicator (MBIT). This indicates an ability to tolerate risk, make decisions with less data and deals with uncertainty and ambiguity. These conclusions are consistent with my own observations and no surprise.

Interestingly, the survey showed that NT project managers had the lowest self- reported success rate. The SF, the MBTI with the least project managers (6.9%) showed the highest self-reported success.

The authors suggest four reasons why SFs might be more successful as project managers.

1.      SF project managers have special talents needed to be project managers

2.      They manage unique projects

3.      Success is inflated

4.      Data is insufficient

The authors conclude by suggesting that the relationship between personality types of project success need more research.

Understanding the relationship between personality type of the project manager and project success is a reasonable research question for the project management profession. Unfortunately, this research does not help us answer this question.

1.      Using the MBTI is a good tool for developing a personality type for project managers.

2.      Defining success by asking project managers to report their belief on their own success does not seem very reliable.

3.      Many times I have seen project managers be very successful on one project and fail on another project. This indicates that each project type may need a unique set of skills, knowledge and personality type.

Until we have a tool, method or process for profiling projects, all research on generic project success based on an independent variable will have serious flaws. I strongly believe that our number one research priority in project management should be the development of a method for profiling projects.

Russ