Recently, a number of the world's major project management organisations took important initiatives to show government management regarding the strategic importance and benefits of project management. The focus would be to move from specific project management to organisational project management, which these firms keep is a strategic advantage in a competitive economy.
In this essay, Ed Naughton, Director-general of the Institute of Project Management and current IPMA Vice President, requires Professor Sebastian Green, Dean of the Faculty of Commerce and Professor of Management and Marketing at University College Cork (previously of the London Business School), about his views of strategic project management as an automobile for competitive advantage.
Ed: What does one point ideal Project Management is?
Prof. Green: Strategic project management may be the management of those jobs which are of crucial importance to help the organisation as a whole to have competitive advantage.
Ed: And what defines a competitive advantage, then?
Prof. Green: You can find three qualities of having a core competence. The three attributes are: it gives value to customers; it's not simply imitated; it opens up new possibilities in the future.
Ed: But how can project management generate a competitive advantage?
Prof. Green: There are two aspects to project management. One element is the actual collection of the kind of projects that the company engages in, and subsequently there's execution, the way the projects themselves are managed.
Ed: Competitive advantage - the value of selecting the projects - it is difficult to determine which projects ought to be chosen!
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's essentially been thought away through reducing it to economic analysis. The strategic imperative gives you an alternative way of prioritising projects since it is saying that some projects might not be as successful as others, but if they add to our skill relative to others, then that's going to be important.
So, to just take an example, if a company's competitive advantage is introducing services more quickly than the others, drugs, let's say, getting product to market more quickly, then the projects that allow it to acquire the product more quickly to market are going to be the most important types, even if within their own terms, they don't have higher success than other sorts of projects. Discover supplementary resources on an affiliated essay by navigating to the guide to asea sex com.
Ed: But if we're going to select our jobs, we've to establish what are the parameters or measurements we're going to select them against that provide the competitive edge to us.
Prof. Green: Completely. The business must know which activities it's employed in, which are the important ones for it then and competitive advantage, that drives the selection of projects. Organizations aren't excellent at doing that and they may not even understand what these actions are. Learn more on the affiliated essay - Browse this web site: asea usa. They will think it is anything they do because of the energy system.
Ed: If its strategy is formulated by a company, then what the project management group says is that project management will be the method for giving that strategy. Therefore, if the enterprise is great at doing project management, does it have any strategic advantage?
Prof. Green: Well, perhaps that comes back to this problem of the difference between the type of projects that are selected and the way you manage the projects. Certainly choosing the sort of projects depends on having the ability to link and prioritise projects according to an understanding of what the potential of a company is relative to others.
Ed: Let us assume the strategy is placed. So that you can produce the strategy, it's to be separated, decomposed into some jobs. For that reason, you must be proficient at doing project management to supply the strategy. Today, the literature says that for an enterprise to become good 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 trained to work to procedures in and integrated way using the idea of a project office. Does taking these three methods offer a competitive advantage with this company?
Prof. Green: Where project management, or how you handle jobs, becomes a source of competitive advantage is when you can do things better than others. The 'better than' is through the ability and thinking and the data that is accumulated with time of managing projects. There is an experience curve effect here. As to the information they have built up to control these bits of tasks where the rule book is inadequate two organizations will soon be at different points in the experience curve. You need knowledge and management sense because however good the rule book is, it'll never deal fully using the complexity of life. You've to manage down the ability curve, you've to manage the understanding and learning that you've of the three aspects of project management for this to become ideal.
Ed: Well, then, I do believe there's a niche there that's to be resolved as well, in that we've now produced a competency at doing project management to do projects, but we've not aimed that competency to the choice of projects which can help us to provide this competitive edge. Is project management effective at being imitated?
Prof. To get extra information, consider having a look at: mannetech. Green: Not the softer aspects and not the devel-opment of tacit knowledge of having run many, many jobs over time. If you require to be taught more about chris brummer, there are many libraries people might think about investigating. So, for instance, you, Ed, have significantly more knowledge of just how to work jobs than others. That is why people found you, since while you both might have a regular book like the PMBoK or the ICB, you've developed more experiential knowledge around it.
Essentially, it can be imitated a specific amount of the way in which, although not whenever you arrange the smoother tacit knowledge of knowledge into it.
Ed: Organisational project management maturity models are a hot topic at the moment and are closely for this 'knowledge curve' effect you mentioned earlier in the day - how should we view them?
Prof. Green: in my opinion in moving beyond painting by numbers, moving beyond the idea that that is all you need to do and you can impose this group of text book protocols and capabilities and processes and an organisation is completely plastic. In a way, just the same difficulty was experienced by the developers of the experience curve. If you show organizations the experience curve o-n cost, it's very nearly like, for every doubling of size, cost reductions occur without you having to do any such thing. What we know is however, that the experience curve is a potential of the risk. Its' realisation depends upon the skill of managers.
Ed: Are senior executives/chief executives within the mind-set to understand the possible benefits of project management?
Prof. Green: Until recently, project management has promoted itself in technical terms. Then it'd become more attractive to senior executives, if it was offered in terms-of the integration at common management, at the capability to manage throughout the features financing method methods with reasoning. So, it is about the mixing of the hard and the soft, the practices together with the reasoning and the knowledge that produces project management so effective. If senior managers do not accept it at the moment, it's not because they're wrong. It is because project management has not sold it self as efficiently as it should've done.
Ed: Do we need to offer to senior executives and chief executives that it'll produce competitive advantage for them?
Prof. Green: No, I do believe we must show them how it does it. We must go inside and really show them how they could put it to use, not merely with regards to offering projects on time and within cost. We have to demonstrate to them how they can use it to overcome organisational resistance to change, how they can use it to enhance capabilities and actions that cause competitive edge, how they can use it to enhance the tacit knowledge in the operation. There's an entire range of ways they can use it. They have to note that the evidence of the results is better than just how they are currently doing it..
文章定位：
