Strategic Project Management A Competitive Advantage

SEnuke: Ready for action

Recently, a number of the world's top project management firms have taken important initiatives to show executive management about the strategic importance and benefits of project management. The focus is always to move from specific project management to organisational project management, which these companies preserve is a strategic advantage in a competitive economy.

In this essay, Ed Naughton, Director-general of the Institute of Project Management and present 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 strategic project management as a vehicle for competitive advantage.

Ed: What do you thing strategic Project Management is?

Prof. Green: Strategic project management is the management of those tasks that are of critical importance to allow the company as a whole to own competitive advantage.

Ed: And what defines a competitive advantage, then?

Prof. Green: You will find three qualities of having a core competence. The three features are: it adds value to customers; it's maybe not simply imitated; it opens up new possibilities later on.

Ed: But just how can challenge administration generate a competitive advantage?

Prof. Green: There are two aspects to project management. One aspect is the actual collection of the type of projects that the enterprise engages in, and subsequently there's implementation, the way the projects themselves are maintained.

Ed: Competitive advantage - the significance of choosing the projects - it is difficult to determine which projects must be chosen!

Prof. Green: I do believe that the choice and prioritisation of tasks is something that's not been done well within the project management literature because it is generally been thought away through reducing it to economic analysis. The strategic imperative gives you a different way of prioritising projects since it is saying that some projects might not be as profitable 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, drugs, let us say, finding product to market more quickly, then a projects that allow it to acquire the product more quickly to market are likely to function as the most important types, even if within their own terms, they do not have higher productivity than various projects.

Ed: But if we're going to select our tasks, we've to determine what are the variables or measurements we're going to select them against that provide us the competitive advantage.

Prof. Green: Completely. The enterprise must know which activities it is involved in, which are the critical ones for it then and competitive advantage, that drives the choice of projects. Firms are not very good at doing that and they may not even know what these actions are. They will believe it is anything they do because of the energy system.

Ed: If a company formulates its strategy, then what the project management group says is that project management is the channel for delivering that strategy. So therefore, if the enterprise is good at doing project management, does it have any strategic advantage?

Prof. Green: Well, I suppose that returns to this issue of the difference between the form of projects that are selected and the way you manage the projects. Demonstrably selecting the kind of projects depends on being able to link and prioritise projects according to a knowledge of what the capability of an enterprise is relative to others. Be taught further on our favorite related web site - Click this hyperlink: purchase

Ed: Let's suppose that the strategy is about. So that you can provide the strategy, it has to be broken-down, decomposed into some projects. Discover new resources on buy by visiting our pushing website. For that reason, you must be good at doing project management to deliver the strategy. Now, the literature says that for an enterprise to become great at doing projects it's 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 integral way using the concept of a project office. Does taking those three methods produce a competitive advantage with this company?

Prof. Be taught further about open site in new window by browsing our novel portfolio. Green: Where project management, or how you control projects, becomes a source of competitive advantage is when you can do things better than others. The 'better-than' is through the experience and reasoning and the knowledge that will be built-up as time passes of managing projects. There is an experience curve effect here. Regarding knowledge they've accumulated where the rule book is inadequate to control these bits of tasks two companies will soon be at various points in the experience curve. You'll need management sense and knowledge because however good the rule book is, it will never deal entirely using the complexity of life. You have to manage down the ability curve, you've to manage the knowledge and learning that you've of those three aspects of project management for this to become proper.

Ed: Well, then, I believe there is a gap there that's to be resolved as well, in that we've now developed a competency at doing project management to do projects, but we've not aimed that competency to the selection of projects which will help us to provide this competitive advantage. Is project management with the capacity of being copied?

Prof. Green: Not the softer features and not the devel-opment of tacit understanding of having run many, many jobs over time. So, as an example, you, Ed, do have more knowledge of how-to work projects than others. That is why people found you, since while you both might have a regular book including the PMBoK or even the ICB, you've created more experiential knowledge around it.

Basically, it could be imitated a quantity of the way, however not once you align the smoother tacit understanding of knowledge into it.

Ed: Organisational project management maturity designs are a hot topic at this time and are directly linked to the 'experience curve' effect you mentioned ear-lier - how should we view them?

Prof. Green: I really believe in moving beyond painting by numbers, moving beyond the idea that that's all you need to do and you may encourage this group of techniques and skills and text book practices and a business is wholly plastic. In ways, just the same difficulty was experienced by the designers of the ability curve. If you show the experience curve to companies o-n cost, it is almost as though, for each doubling of volume, cost savings occur without you having to do such a thing. What we all know is however, the experience curve is a potential of the possibility. Its' realisation is dependent upon the skill of managers.

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. If it was offered in terms-of the integration at standard management, at the ability to manage across the characteristics financing process procedures with reasoning, then it'd be much more appealing to senior managers. Aseas is a wonderful online library for additional resources about how to consider it. So, it is about the ability that makes project management so strong, the methods with the reasoning and the blending of the smooth and the hard. If senior executives do not embrace it at this time, it's maybe not because they are wrong. It's because project management has not marketed it-self as effectively as it should've done.

Ed: Do we need to sell to chief executives and senior executives that it'll deliver competitive advantage for them?

Prof. Green: No, I do believe we have to demonstrate to them how it does it. We have to go in there and really show them how they could use it, not merely with regards to offering tasks on time and within cost. We need to show them how they can use it to over come resistance to change, how they can use it to enhance capabilities and activities that lead to competitive edge, how they can use it to enhance the tacit knowledge in the enterprise. There is a complete array of ways they are able to use it. They must note that the proof of the outcome is better than the way they're currently doing it..