PMI Conference in New Orleans

In an earlier blog, I indicated I would reflect on my experiences at the project management Institute global conference in New Orleans. New Orleans is a great place to visit and Teri Beth traveled with me to this conference. One morning, we were able to have coffee and beignets at Café du Monde.  The hotel room was overpriced and the food at the hotel did not meet your typical New Orleans standards. But for October, the weather was great and the walk from the hotel to the conference was an enjoyable little stroll.

The conference itself seemed to have fewer attendees and this is a trend over the past few years. It may be that the cost of the conference is prohibitive, or that the value of the conference relative to the cost is decreasing. It was a large contingent of attendees from Nigeria. Looking at some of the data, Nigeria was the third largest represented country.

Complexity still seems like a hot topic because several presentations had the term complexity in the title. I attended one of these presentations and even though the presentation provided a basic overview of risk there was never mention of complexity in the presentation. So I assume that the author included complexity in the title to increase the likelihood that the subject would be accepted for the conference.

Most of the keynote speakers were high-priced presenters that make the conference circuit based on book sales and some overriding for developing creative topics of interest to readers. Daniel Pink talked about leadership in the principles of influence, Mark Sanborn talked about leadership without titles and John Grotzinger discussed the NASA Mars Rover Mission. Each of these presentations was interesting and although only lightly connected project management, the provided an opportunity for reflection.

I attended a couple of presentations on agile project management and there still seems to be the need for those with a focus on agile to compare agile and traditional project management. As I discussed in other posts, I find this mental construct less helpful in understanding projects and maybe even damaging. One presenter grounded his presentation by discussing the Standish research, which concluded that most projects fail. This research has some major flaws pointed out by a number of researchers, but that has not stopped people from quoting the data to justify the point of view.

During my breakfast, lunch and break conversations I asked people why they were attending the conference. A large majority indicated that they came to the conference to get the PDUs they needed for their PMP recertification. With all the free webinars in the numerous PMI chapter events that provide PDUs, this seems like an expensive way to obtain the PDUs requirements.

Over the years, I found the PMI conferences an opportunity for me to reflect on project management from a number of different perspectives and the latest thinking by the presenters. Typically, I will fill a notebook full of notes and ideas for later development. I walked away from this conference with very few ideas in my notebook.

Russ

Podcast on Agile Estimating

I listened to a PM Podcast where Cornelius Fichtner interviewed Mark Layton, in Episode 258 of his Podcasts. I enjoy his broadcasts; See more about the Podcasts below.  

Agile Estimation is Faster, Easier and More Accurate.. (Did not say faster than what?)

Layton contrasted Waterfall estimating* and his estimating process that he labeled Agile estimating. Layton explains that Waterfall estimating approach is a holistic view of all your requirements. You start by gathering all requirements that sound like a “good idea” and as long as it sounds “like a good idea”, they will be included in the project. Then you will guess how long it will take to complete all of those requirements. Once you establish how long it will take, you can then determine how much the project will cost.

If one of my students suggested that any idea that sounded good would be included in the project scope they would have a difficult time passing my course.

Layton went on to explain that an Agile approach is the exact opposite. You determine the maximum that can be spent and still deliver the return on investment then you complete the priority items until reach that maximum. The maximum that can be spent is what was promised the funding committee when we got approval. I wonder what was promised to get the funding approved. If you do not deliver on what is promised, is your project successful?

The Project Management Body of Knowledge describes different methods for estimating. The estimating approach depends on the profile of the project. This seems like a much better approach than defining Agile estimating against one perception of an estimating approach. A perception that is inconsistent with project management best practices.

What do you think?

·         Waterfall is a recent term originally found in Agile literature that describes a sequential design, or in this case estimating process,  in which progress is seen as becoming more detailed or flowing downhill, like a waterfall.

http://www.project-management-podcast.com/index.php/about-us

The host of The Project Management Podcast™ is Cornelius Fichtner, PMP.

Cornelius has been working as a Project Manager in his native Switzerland, in Germany and in the USA since 1990 and received his PMP credential in April 2004. He has led projects for a management consulting company, a national retailer, an internet startup company, and for one of the oldest financial service providers in the USA. His passions are Agile, project management methodologies and PMOs.

Cornelius is the 2007 Chair of the Project Management Institute Orange County Chapter. He currently lives in Silverado, California, USA with his wife and their four computers.

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

Project Profile Matters and Agile

One of my most often used statements in project management is "it depends", because it does.

How long should the project charter be? How many activities should I use? Who should I include as stakeholders on my project? These are all questions with answers that begin; "it all depends"

A construction project in Argentina, an IT project in New Delhi and a drug development project in Denver require very different execution approaches and differing knowledge, skills and abilities to successfully manage the project. A construction project in Argentina can vary significantly by size, by the complexity of the technology, by the tightness of the schedule, by the knowledge and expectations of the client. To understand the knowledge skill and abilities needed by the project manager and the project team, it is important to understand the profile of the project, even within the same industry.

The IT industry has developed a set of project execution tools, methods and techniques that apply to a project profile that is most common in the IT Industry. Agile is the label that has emerged to describe this set of methods, tools and techniques. (more on Agile in later blogs)

Profiling project has been an interest of mine for over 20 years. I presented in first draft of a profiling method in the mid 1990s. I continue to develop my thought and will be publishing more later.

The Project Management Institute has a long and varied approach to profiling projects. The Project Management Institute Standards Committee chartered a Taxonomy Project with Gregory D. Githens as project manager (PMI, 1999). I served on this team and we provided a framework for classifying projects for the purpose of understanding and developing better methods of managing projects. The committee presumed that a greater understanding of projects was a necessary for developing improved project management approaches. The committee explored several different approaches to understand how projects are similar, and develop a method for classifying projects. Before our work was published things changed at PMI. During a reorganization of the Project Management Institute, the PMI Standards Committee was dissolved and replaced with a Standards Program and the Taxonomy Project was abandoned.

Later the Project Management Institute chartered research to study project categorization systems within organizational contexts (Crawford, Hobbs & Turner, 2002). This research resulted in a model for practitioner organizations to analyze and design a project categorization system. Crawford et al. (2002) stated that an organization adopting one of these project categorization systems would do so to identify the project management practices best suited to each of the different types of projects. Crawford also recommended that the Project Management Institute, despite the potential arbitrariness of a standard for categorizing projects, charter a project for establishing standards for project categorization. I recommended that PMI include the work on Crawford et al in the 5th Edition of the PMBOK. This suggestions was deferred for later consideration.

To my knowledge, PMI has not followed up on this research.

I will talk about profiling projects during later blogs because the is my special area of interest within project management.

Best
Russ

Crawford, L., Hobbs, J. B., & Turner, R. J. (2005). Project categorization systems: Aligning capability with strategy for better business results.  Newton Square, PA: Project Management Institute.