State of the Art of Project Management -- Underlying Theory is Obsolete.
Last week's State of the Art of Project Management got quite a bit of interest from readers. I've taken another look at Russell Archibald's report. He's covering the expected territory, but not reaching many useful conclusions. He sticks to describing the situation without making any value judgement along the way. I thought I might offer an annotated version of the paper. Instead, I've decided to offer a far less referenced commentary to spur discussion. So...here's my 2¢.
I'm offering the following assessments in the spirit of reform. I'll not repeat or defend my oft-stated position about uncertainty. By now you all know where I stand. I will offer a few perhaps far-fetched and internally conflicting views. While I can offer an essay on each statement, I prefer to respond to those statements you find most provocative. Please bear with me. I promise I will explain myself.
- (After-the-fact) project control is not possible. Projects are emergent systems. Each agent in the system needs to be equipped to exert controlling behavior for control to be possible.
- People are the source of project success.
- Be careful what you measure; you will certainly get it.We act in accord with our interests. Measurements allow us to choose among alternative actions. And still, each of us will take care of what matters most to us in the moment.
- Measurements don't matter. We act automatically, indifferent to the measures in place. We lack a mindfulness to choose among actions that address what is best for us in the moment.
- Customers are both the bane of our existence and the reason for our existence. We are the subject matter experts. They (customers) get to assess how that produces value for them.
- There is no critical path. Of course I'm not saying that one can't calculate a critical path. Of course you can calculate it. I'm saying that it is not a thing, just a characterization.
- There is no critical chain. Ditto. But I'll go one step further. The critical chain exists in a condition of unexamined policy and paradigm constraints.
- Optimization is an illusion. What might be optimal in one moment is no longer optimal in the next moment. Better is the enemy of good enough.
- Project portfolio management is an excuse not to manage each project. Each project team must be set-up for success.
- Cost control is no control. Only in-the-moment informed decision-making leads to high value projects.
- Planning, execution, and control are fabrications that no longer serve any usefulness. It's only when performers are engaged in the organizing of the project that there's a hope for project success.
- Leadership is everything. Leaders don't matter.
As I re-read this posting before actually posting it, I wondered what ire I might provoke. It's time for me to say what I really think. The emperor has no clothes. Our process mentality towards project management comes up short. Certification that someone knows a body of knowledge has nothing to do with delivering successful projects. Of course, we can create value with the use of traditional PM tools. But why are we settling for less than one success after another? A few companies are producing success after succeess. And with no help from the tradition of project management. Sound off! Please leave a comment for me and the other readers.
One last thought...becoming better users of obsolete tools and approaches won't make for more successful projects. We get to see the failings of the current approach each day as five people die on construction projects. While IT projects have no loss of life, project participants report that over ¾ of the projects fail. We must re-examine our world view. The Underlying Theory of Project Management is Obsolete. [See my notes]
[Reforming Project Management]
Number 12 is my favorite....the management, not the manager as an individual, makes all the difference. Why do projects fail? Lots of reasons, but primarily I think that real-life is still very difficult to plan.
9:10:30 PM 
|
