Recently, a number of the world's top project management companies have taken important initiatives to show executive management in regards to the strategic value and benefits of project management. The focus is always to move from specific project management to organisational project management, which these companies preserve is a strategic advantage in a competitive economy.
In this essay, Ed Naughton, Director-general of the Institute of Project Management and present IPMA Vice-president, requires Professor Sebastian Green, Dean of the Faculty of Commerce and Professor of Management and Marketing at University College Cork (formerly of the London Business School), about his views of strategic project management as a car for competitive advantage.
Ed: What do you issue proper Project Management is?
Prof. Green: Strategic project management may be the management of those tasks that are of critical importance to allow the organisation as a whole to get competitive advantage.
Ed: And what defines a competitive advantage, then?
Prof. Green: You will find three characteristics of getting a core competence. The three characteristics are: it adds value to customers; it is maybe not easily imitated; it opens up new opportunities in the future. If you have an opinion about data, you will seemingly need to learn about image.
Ed: But how do project management generate a competitive advantage?
Prof. Green: You can find two factors to project management. One element is the actual collection of the sort of projects that the enterprise engages in, and secondly there is execution, how the projects themselves are maintained.
Ed: Competitive advantage - the importance of selecting the correct projects - it is not easy to define which projects must be selected!
Prof. Green: I think that the selection and prioritisation of tasks is something that's not been done well within-the project management literature because it is essentially been thought away through reducing it to financial analysis. The strategic imperative gives another way to you of prioritising projects since it is saying that some projects might not be as profitable as others, but when they add to our proficiency relative to others, then that is going to be important.
Therefore, to just take an example, if a company's competitive advantage is introducing new services more quickly than the others, drugs, let's say, finding product to market more quickly, then the projects that allow it to get the product more quickly to market will be the most significant types, even if within their own terms, they do not have higher profitability than some other projects.
Ed: But if we are going to select our tasks, we've to establish what are the details or measurements we are going to select them against that provide us the competitive advantage.
Prof. Green: Completely. The organisation has to know which activities it's involved in, which are the critical ones for it then and competitive advantage, that drives the choice of projects. Organisations aren't great at doing that and they could not even know what these activities are. They will believe that it is everything they do due to the power system. Identify more on this affiliated site by clicking https://asea.applicantpro.com/.
Ed: If its strategy is formulated by a company, then what the project management group says is that project management may be the method for delivering that strategy. Then, if the enterprise is good at doing project management, is there any strategic advantage?
Prof. Green: Well, I suppose that comes back to this problem of the difference between the form of projects that are opted for and the way you manage the projects. Demonstrably choosing the sort of projects depends on being able to link and prioritise projects according to an understanding of what the capability of a company is relative to others.
Ed: Let's assume the strategy is defined. So that you can produce the strategy, it has to be broken down, decomposed into a number of tasks. Consequently, you should be proficient at doing project management to deliver the strategy. Now, the literature says that for an operation to be great at doing jobs it's to: put in project management procedures, train people on how best to apply/do project management and co-ordinate the efforts of the people qualified to work to procedures in and built-in way using the idea of a project office. For extra information, consider glancing at: found it. Does using those three ways provide a competitive advantage for this organisation?
Prof. Green: Where project management, or how you handle tasks, becomes a source of competitive advantage is when you may do things a lot better than others. The 'better-than' is through the ability and thinking and the knowledge which is built-up as time passes of managing projects. There's an event curve effect here. As to the information they've built up to control these components of tasks where the rule book is limited two companies will be at different points in the experience curve. You'll need management thinking and experience because however good the rule book is, it will never deal entirely using the complexity of life. You have to manage down the ability curve, you've to manage the learning and knowledge that you've of these three areas of project management because of it to become proper.
Ed: Well, then, I do believe there's a gap there that's to be resolved as well, in that we have now produced a competency at doing project management to do projects, but we have not aimed that competency to the choice of projects which can help us to offer this competitive edge. Is project management able to being imitated?
Prof. Green: Not the softer aspects and not the devel-opment of tacit understanding of having run many, many jobs over-time. Therefore, like, you, Ed, have significantly more knowledge of how-to work projects than other people. That is why people came to you, since while you both might have a regular book like the PMBoK or even the ICB, you've produced more experiential knowledge around it.
In essence, it could be imitated a certain amount of the way, although not if you align the smoother tacit knowledge of knowledge into it.
Ed: Organisational project management maturity versions are a hot topic right now and are closely linked to the 'experience curve' effect you mentioned early in the day - how should we view them?
Prof. Green: I really believe in moving beyond painting by quantities, moving beyond the simplistic idea that that is all you need to do and you can impose this set of processes and capabilities and text book methods and an organisation is totally plastic. In a way, just the same problem was experienced by the developers of the experience curve. If you show companies the experience curve on cost, it's very nearly like, for every single doubling of volume, cost reductions occur without you having to do anything. What we know is however, that the experience curve is a potential of a chance. Their' realisation is dependent upon the skill of administrators.
Ed: Are senior executives/chief executives in-the mind-set to appreciate the potential advantages of project management?
Prof. Green: Until recently, project management has offered it-self in technical terms. Then it would become more appealing to senior managers, if it was offered in terms-of the integration at normal management, at the ability to manage throughout the features lending method processes with judgement. So, it's about the ability which makes project management so effective, the techniques together with the judgement and the mixing of the soft and the difficult. If senior executives don't grasp it at this time, it is maybe not because they're wrong. It is because project management has not promoted it-self as effectively as it should've done.
Ed: Do we must offer to senior executives and chief executives that it will provide competitive advantage for them?
Prof. Green: No, I think we must demonstrate to them how it does it. We must get in there and really show them how they could put it to use, not merely in terms of offering jobs on time and within cost. Get more on site link by going to our unusual use with. We must show them how they can use it to over come organisational resistance to change, how they can use it to enhance capabilities and actions that cause competitive advantage, how they can use it to enhance the tacit knowledge in the business. There is a complete range of ways that they are able to put it to use. They should observe that the proof-of the outcome surpasses the way in which they're currently doing it..
文章定位：
