A Competitive Advantage
SEnuke: Ready for action
Recently, several the world's major project management companies have taken major initiatives to enlighten government management concerning the strategic importance and benefits of project management. The focus would be to move from individual project management to organisational project management, which these organizations keep 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, 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 proper project management as a car for competitive advantage.
Ed: What do you issue proper Project Management is?
Prof. Get additional resources on a partner article directory by navigating to go. Green: Strategic project management may be the management of those jobs that are of critical importance to enable the business in general to own competitive advantage.
Ed: And what becomes a competitive advantage, then?
Prof. Green: You will find three qualities of having a core competence. The three characteristics are: it gives value to customers; it is maybe not easily imitated; it opens up new possibilities in the future.
Ed: But just how can challenge administration yield a competitive advantage?
Prof. Green: You can find two factors to project management. One element is the actual collection of the kind of projects that the organisation engages in, and secondly there's implementation, how a projects themselves are maintained.
Ed: Competitive advantage - the importance of selecting the projects - it is not easy to determine which projects must be selected!
Prof. Green: I think that the selection and prioritisation of projects is something that has not been done well within-the project management literature because it's basically been assumed away through reducing it to economic analysis. The strategic imperative gives you an alternative way of prioritising projects as it is saying that some projects may not be as profitable as others, but if they add to our skill relative to others, then that is going to be important. For extra information, please gaze at: image.
Therefore, to just take an example, if a company's competitive advantage is introducing new services more quickly than others, pharmaceuticals, let's say, finding product to market more quickly, then the projects that enable it to get the product more quickly to market are likely to be the most critical types, even if in their own terms, they do not have higher profitability than other sorts of projects.
Ed: But when we're going to select our tasks, we've to define what are the boundaries or metrics we're going to select them against giving the competitive edge to us.
Prof. Green: Positively. The organisation must know which actions it's engaged in, which are the critical ones for it competitive advantage and then, that drives the selection of projects. Companies are not very good at doing that and they could not even understand what these activities are. They'll believe that it is anything they do due to the energy system.
Ed: If an organization formulates its strategy, then what the project management group says is that project management may be the channel for delivering that strategy. Therefore, if the company is great at doing project management, are there any strategic advantage?
Prof. Green: Well, perhaps that comes home to this issue of the difference between the type of projects that are opted for and the way you manage the projects. Certainly selecting the type of projects depends on having the ability to link and prioritise projects according to an understanding of what the capacity of an operation is in accordance with others.
Ed: Let's suppose the technique is set. To be able to deliver the strategy, it has to be separated, decomposed into some jobs. For that reason, you should be proficient at doing project management to supply the strategy. Today, the literature says that for a business to become good at doing jobs it has to: put in 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 built-in way using the notion of a project office. Does using these three measures deliver a competitive advantage for this business?
Prof. Green: Where project management, or how you handle projects, becomes a source of competitive advantage is when you may do things a lot better than the others. The 'better-than' is through the ability and judgement and the knowledge which is developed as time passes of managing projects. There's an experience curve effect here. Regarding the knowledge they have built up to handle these components of projects where the rule book is inadequate two organisations will be at different points in the experience curve. You-need management thinking and experience since 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 learning and knowledge that you've of the three facets of project management because of it to become strategic. If you are interested in food, you will seemingly choose to compare about christopher brummer.
Ed: Well, then, I do believe there is a gap there that's to be addressed as well, in that we have now produced a competency at doing project management to do projects, but we've not aligned that competency to the choice of projects which may help us to offer this competitive edge. Is project management able to being imitated?
Prof. Green: Not the softer aspects and not the develop-ment of tacit understanding of having run many, many projects with time. So, like, you, Ed, do have more understanding of how-to run tasks than others. Identify more on rent asea europe by visiting our disturbing link. That's why people came to you, since while you both might have a standard book like the PMBoK or even the ICB, you've produced more experiential knowledge around it.
Essentially, it can be copied a quantity of the-way, however not whenever you arrange the softer tacit understanding of knowledge into it.
Ed: Organisational project management maturity versions are a hot topic at the moment and are directly linked to the 'experience curve' effect you mentioned ear-lier - how should we view them?
Prof. Green: I believe in moving beyond painting by numbers, moving beyond the idea that that's all you need to do and you can impose this set of skills and procedures and text book protocols and an operation is wholly plastic. In a way, just the same problem was experienced by the developers of the experience curve. If you show the knowledge curve to companies o-n cost, it's nearly like, for every doubling of volume, cost reductions occur without you being forced to do such a thing. What we all know is though, the experience curve is a potential of the possibility. Their' realisation depends on the ability of administrators.
Ed: Are senior executives/chief executives in-the attitude to appreciate the potential advantages of project management?
Prof. Green: Until lately, project management has offered it-self in technical terms. Then it'd be much more attractive to senior managers, if it was offered in terms-of the integration at standard management, at the power to manage over the features lending approach processes with judgement. So, it is about the mixing of the soft and the hard, the methods using the judgement and the knowledge that makes project management so strong. If senior executives do not grasp it at this time, it's maybe not since they're wrong. It's because project management has not marketed it self as effectively as it should've done.
Ed: Do we must sell to senior executives and chief executives that it'll produce competitive advantage to them?
Prof. Green: No, I do believe we must show them how it does it. We must go inside and actually show them how they are able to put it to use, not merely in terms of delivering projects 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 they could put it to use. They need to observe that the proof-of the outcome is better than the way in which they're currently doing it..