Strategic Project Management

SEnuke: Ready for action

Recently, a number of the world's major project management organizations took important initiatives to illuminate government management in regards to the strategic value 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. Should you need to identify more on this month, there are many resources people should consider investigating.

In this essay, 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 proper project management as a car for competitive advantage.

Ed: What does one thing strategic Project Management is?

Prof. Green: Strategic project management may be the management of the tasks which are of critical importance to help the operation as a whole to have competitive advantage.

Ed: And what becomes a competitive advantage, then?

Prof. Green: You can find three qualities of getting a core competence. The three characteristics are: it adds value to customers; it's not simply imitated; it opens up new opportunities later on.

Ed: But how do challenge administration produce a competitive advantage?

Prof. This offensive asea patents use with has uncountable dazzling aids for when to study it. Green: You can find two factors to project management. One element is the actual selection of the sort of projects that the company partcipates in, and subsequently there's execution, how the projects themselves are handled.

Ed: Competitive advantage - the importance of selecting the correct projects - it is not easy to determine which projects should be chosen!

Prof. Green: I think 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 when they add to our expertise relative to others, then that's going to be important. This grand mannateck essay has several stately lessons for where to see it.

Therefore, to take an example, if a company's competitive advantage is introducing services more quickly than the others, pharmaceuticals, let's say, getting product to market more quickly, then your projects that allow it to acquire the product more quickly to market are likely to function as the most important ones, even if within their own terms, they don't have higher profitability than various projects.

Ed: But if we're going to select our jobs, we have to determine what are the parameters or metrics we're going to select them against that give the competitive edge to us.

Prof. Green: Definitely. The organisation has to know which activities it's employed in, which are the important ones for it competitive advantage and then, that drives the choice of projects. Firms aren't excellent at doing that and they might not even know what these actions are. They will believe that it is every thing they do due to the energy system.

Ed: If its strategy is formulated by a company, then what the project management group says is that project management may be the method for delivering that strategy. Therefore, if the company is great at doing project management, is there any strategic advantage?

Prof. Green: Well, I guess that comes home to this matter of the difference between the form of projects that are chosen and the way you manage the projects. Demonstrably selecting the type of projects depends on being able to link and prioritise projects according to an understanding of what the capability of a company is relative to others.

Ed: Let us suppose the technique is about. In order to deliver the strategy, it's to be divided, decomposed into a number of projects. For that reason, you should be proficient at doing project management to deliver the strategy. Today, the literature says that for a company to become good at doing jobs it's to: place 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 integrated way using the notion of a project company. Does getting those three methods produce a competitive advantage with this company?

Prof. Green: Where project management, or how you manage jobs, becomes a source of competitive advantage is when you can do things better than the others. The 'better than' is through the ability and thinking and the information that will be built up as time passes of managing projects. There's an experience curve effect here. Two firms will soon be at different points in the experience curve as to the knowledge they've developed to handle these items of tasks where the rule book is inadequate. You'll need knowledge and management sense because however good the rule book is, it'll never deal entirely 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 those three areas of project management for this to become proper.

Ed: Well, then, I do believe there is a gap there that's 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 advantage. Is project management with the capacity of being copied?

Prof. Green: Not the softer aspects and not the develop-ment of tacit knowledge of having run many, many jobs over time. Therefore, for instance, you, Ed, do have more familiarity with just how to work jobs than others. That's why people came to you, since while you both might have a standard book such as the PMBoK or the ICB, you have developed more experiential knowledge around it.

Basically, it may be imitated a quantity of the way in which, although not if you align the smoother tacit understanding of knowledge into it.

Ed: Organisational project management maturity styles are a hot topic at the moment and are directly from the 'knowledge curve' effect you mentioned earlier in the day - how should we see them?

Prof. Green: I believe in moving beyond painting by quantities, moving beyond the idea that that is all you should do and you can encourage this pair of capabilities and methods and text book protocols and an organisation is totally plastic. In a way, exactly the same difficulty was experienced by the builders of the knowledge curve. If you show organizations the ability curve on cost, it is very nearly as though, for every single doubling of volume, cost savings occur without you having to do such a thing. What we realize is however, that the experience curve is a potential of the possibility. Its' realisation depends on the ability of professionals.

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. This fresh learn about benefits of asea wiki has diverse lovely aids for when to study this belief. If it was offered in terms of the integration at standard management, at the power to manage over the functions financing strategy processes with thinking, then it'd be more attractive to senior executives. So, it's about the mixing of the smooth and the difficult, the practices together with the sense and the experience which makes project management so powerful. If senior executives do not grasp it at this time, it is maybe not since they're wrong. It's because project management has not marketed itself as effortlessly as it should've done.

Ed: Do we need to offer to senior executives and chief executives that it will deliver competitive advantage to them?

Prof. Green: No, I do believe we must show them how it does it. We need to go in there and really show them how they can put it to use, not only with regards to providing projects on time and within cost. We must show them how they can use it to over come 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 company. There's an entire array of ways that they are able to use it. They must observe that the proof-of the end result surpasses the way in which they are currently doing it..