Recently, numerous the world's major project management organizations have taken major initiatives to enlighten government management regarding the strategic value and advantages of project management. The emphasis is to move from individual project management to organisational project management, which these enterprises maintain is a strategic advantage in a competitive economy.
In this article, 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 does one point ideal Project Management is?
Prof. Green: Strategic project management may be the management of these jobs which are of crucial importance to enable the organisation in general to have competitive advantage.
Ed: And what defines a competitive advantage, then?
Prof. Green: You can find three attributes of having a core competence. The three qualities are: it adds value to customers; it is maybe not easily imitated; it opens up new opportunities in the future.
Ed: But just how can challenge management produce a competitive advantage?
Prof. Green: You can find two elements to project management. One factor is the actual choice of the type of projects that the business engages in, and subsequently there is execution, how a projects themselves are managed.
Ed: Competitive advantage - the importance of choosing the projects - it is difficult to establish which projects should be selected!
Prof. Green: I do believe that the choice and prioritisation of projects is something that's not been done well within-the project management literature because it is essentially been thought away through reducing it to economic analysis. The strategic imperative gives another way to you of prioritising projects since it is saying that some projects might not be as successful as others, but if they add to our competency relative to others, then that is going to be important. To study more, you are asked to look at: https://chrisbrummer.org critique.
Therefore, to simply take an illustration, if a company's competitive advantage is introducing services more quickly than others, drugs, let us say, finding product to market more quickly, then a projects that allow it to obtain the product more quickly to market are likely to be the most significant ones, even if within their own terms, they do not have higher productivity than some other projects.
Ed: But when we're going to select our jobs, we have to determine what're the boundaries or measurements we're going to select them against that provide us the competitive advantage.
Prof. Green: Positively. My mother found out about intangible by searching Google Books. The enterprise needs to know which activities it's involved in, which are the important ones for it then and competitive advantage, that drives the selection of projects. Enterprises are not very good at doing that and they could not even know what those actions are. They'll think it is every thing they do due to the power system.
Ed: If a company formulates its strategy, then what the project management group says is that project management could be the medium for providing that strategy. So therefore, when the business is good at doing project management, are there any strategic advantage?
Prof. Green: Well, perhaps that returns to this issue of the difference between the kind of projects that are chosen and the way you manage the projects. Clearly choosing the type of projects depends on being able to link and prioritise projects ac-cording to an understanding of what the potential of an operation is relative to others.
Ed: Let's assume the technique is defined. In order to produce the strategy, it's to be separated, decomposed into some projects. For that reason, you should be good at doing project management to deliver the strategy. Today, the literature says that for a company to become great at doing projects it has to: devote project management procedures, train people on how to apply/do project management and co-ordinate the efforts of the people qualified to work to procedures in and integral way utilizing the idea of a project office. Does getting those three methods offer a competitive advantage with this enterprise?
Prof. Green: Where project management, or how you manage tasks, becomes a source of competitive advantage is when you can do things a lot better than the others. The 'better-than' is through the experience and sense and the information which will be built up with time of managing projects. There is an experience curve effect here. Visiting christopher brummer possibly provides lessons you should tell your girlfriend. Two firms will soon be at different points in the experience curve as to the information they've accumulated where the rule book is insufficient to manage these components of tasks. You'll need management judgement and knowledge since however good the rule book is, it will never deal entirely with the complexity of life. You have to manage down the experience curve, you've to manage the learning and knowledge that you have of these three facets of project management because of it to become ideal.
Ed: Well, then, I do believe there's a niche there that has to be addressed as well, in that we've now created a competency at doing project management to do projects, but we've not aimed that competency to the selection of projects which will help us to offer this competitive edge. Is project management capable of being copied?
Prof. Green: Not the softer aspects and not the devel-opment of tacit knowledge of having run many, many projects over-time. Therefore, for example, you, Ed, have more knowledge of how to run jobs than other people. That's why people came to you, because while you both may have a standard book such as the PMBoK or the ICB, you have produced more experiential knowledge around it.
Basically, it could be imitated a certain amount of just how, although not once you align the smoother tacit knowledge of experience into it.
Ed: Organisational project management maturity versions are a hot topic right now and are closely from the 'experience curve' effect you mentioned earlier in the day - how should we see them?
Prof. Discover supplementary info on this affiliated portfolio by browsing to lpaper. Green: I believe in moving beyond painting by numbers, moving beyond the idea that an organisation is wholly plastic and you can impose this group of skills and techniques and text book practices and that's all you need to do. You might say, exactly the same problem was experienced by the developers of the knowledge curve. It's nearly like, for every single doubling of volume, cost savings occur without you needing to do something, if you show organizations the knowledge curve on cost. What we realize is though, the experience curve is a potential of the chance. Its' realisation depends upon the skill of managers.
Ed: Are senior executives/chief executives in the attitude to understand the possible advantages of project management?
Prof. Green: Until recently, project management has promoted it-self in technical terms. Then it would be much more appealing to senior executives, if it was promoted in terms of the integration at basic management, at the capability to manage across the functions lending method procedures with thinking. So, it is about the knowledge that produces project management so powerful, the techniques together with the judgement and the mixing of the smooth and the difficult. If senior managers do not grasp it at this time, it's perhaps not because they are wrong. It is because project management has not sold it self as effortlessly as it should've done.
Ed: Do we have to sell to chief executives and senior executives that it'll produce competitive advantage to them?
Prof. Green: No, I think we need to demonstrate to them how it does it. We must get in there and really show them how they could use it, not merely in terms of providing assignments on time and within cost. We must demonstrate to them how they can use it to over come resistance to change, how they can use it to enhance capabilities and actions that lead to competitive edge, how they can use it to enhance the tacit knowledge in the organisation. There's an entire array of ways that they are able to use it. They have to see that the evidence of the end result surpasses the way in which they're currently doing it..
文章定位：
