A Competitive Advantage
SEnuke: Ready for action
Recently, numerous the world's leading project management companies took important initiatives to illuminate government management in regards to the strategic importance and advantages of project management. The emphasis is to move from specific project management to organisational project management, which these enterprises preserve is a strategic advantage in a competitive economy.
In this article, Ed Naughton, Director General of the Institute of Project Management and current IPMA Vice-president, asks 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 proper project management as an automobile for competitive advantage.
Ed: What do you point proper Project Management is?
Prof. Green: Strategic project management is the management of these projects which are of critical importance to help the company as a whole to get competitive advantage.
Ed: And what defines a competitive advantage, then?
Prof. Green: There are three attributes of experiencing a core competence. The three features 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 task management deliver a competitive advantage?
Prof. Green: There are two aspects to project management. One element is the actual collection of the type of projects that the company partcipates in, and secondly there's execution, how the projects themselves are managed. If you think you know anything, you will certainly wish to check up about https://chrisbrummer.org.
Ed: Competitive advantage - the importance of choosing the correct projects - it's challenging to define which projects ought to be chosen!
Prof. Green: I do believe that the choice and prioritisation of projects is something that has not been done well within-the project management literature because it is generally been assumed away through reducing it to financial analysis. The strategic imperative gives another way to you of prioritising projects as it is saying that some projects might not be as successful as others, but if they add to our expertise relative to others, then that is going to be important.
Therefore, to simply take an example, if a company's competitive advantage is introducing services more quickly than the others, pharmaceuticals, let us say, getting product to market more quickly, then your projects that enable it to get the product more quickly to market will be the most important types, even if in their own terms, they do not have higher productivity than various projects.
Ed: But if we're going to select our projects, we've to define what are the guidelines or measurements we're going to select them against that give us the competitive edge.
Prof. Green: Positively. The business needs to know which actions it is involved in, which are the important ones for it competitive advantage and then, that drives the choice of projects. Enterprises are not great at doing that and they might not even know what those actions are. They will think it is anything 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 is the channel for providing that strategy. Then, if the operation is great at doing project management, are there any strategic advantage?
Prof. Green: Well, perhaps that returns to this problem of the difference between the form of projects that are selected and the way you manage the projects. Certainly selecting the kind of projects depends upon having the ability to link and prioritise projects ac-cording to a knowledge of what the capability of a business is in accordance with others.
Ed: Let's assume that the approach is set. So that you can deliver the strategy, it's to be broken down, decomposed into some jobs. Consequently, you should be proficient at doing project management to provide the strategy. Today, the literature says that for an enterprise to become proficient at doing tasks it has to: place in project management procedures, train people on how best 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 company. For one more perspective, please consider having a gander at: mannateck. Does getting these three ways provide a competitive advantage because of this operation?
Prof. Green: Where project management, or how you control jobs, becomes a source of competitive advantage is when you can do things a lot better than others. The 'better-than' is through the experience and thinking and the knowledge which will be developed as time passes of managing projects. There is an experience curve effect here. Two enterprises will be at different points in the experience curve regarding the information they've accumulated to handle these components of tasks where the rule book is inadequate. You-need knowledge and management judgement because however good the rule book is, it will never deal fully with the complexity of life. You've to manage down the experience curve, you have to manage the learning and knowledge that you have of these three aspects of project management because of it to become ideal.
Ed: Well, then, I believe there's a niche there that has 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 with the capacity of being copied?
Prof. Green: Not the softer aspects and not the devel-opment of tacit understanding of having run many, many projects over-time. So, for instance, you, Ed, do have more familiarity with how to run projects than other people. That's why people found you, since while you both might have a regular book like the PMBoK or even the ICB, you've created more experiential knowledge around it.
Basically, it can be copied a quantity of just how, however not once you align the smoother tacit understanding of knowledge into it.
Ed: Organisational project management maturity versions are a hot topic right now and are closely for this 'experience curve' effect you mentioned earlier in the day - how should we see them?
Prof. Green: I believe in moving beyond painting by numbers, moving beyond the idea that that's all you should do and you may encourage this group of methods and capabilities and text book methods and a company is completely plastic. In a way, exactly the same difficulty was experienced by the builders of the knowledge curve. We found out about asea.net by browsing the Denver Post. If you show the knowledge curve to organizations o-n cost, it is nearly like, for each and every doubling of size, cost savings occur without you needing to do any such thing. What we all know is however, the experience curve is a potential of the chance. Its' realisation depends upon the skill of administrators.
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 it self in technical terms. If it was promoted in terms of the integration at basic management, at the capability to manage across the characteristics lending method processes with reasoning, then it would become more appealing to senior executives. So, it is about the mixing of the difficult and the gentle, the techniques using the sense and the experience that produces project management so strong. If senior managers do not grasp it at the moment, it's not since they are wrong. It's because project management has not sold itself as efficiently as it should've done.
Ed: Do we need to offer to senior executives and chief executives that it will deliver competitive advantage for them?
Prof. Green: No, I think we must demonstrate to them how it does it. For supplementary information, consider peeping at: commercial christopher brummer. We have to get inside and really show them how they can use it, not only in terms of offering projects on time and within cost. We must demonstrate to them how they can use it to over come organisational resistance to change, how they can use it to enhance capabilities and activities that cause competitive edge, how they can use it to enhance the tacit knowledge in the operation. There is a complete range of ways in which they are able to use it. They need to see that the proof-of the outcome is better than just how they are currently doing it..