The following is taken out of the summary of an old PhD thesis from 1984(!) by Abdel-Hamid:
The results come from the modeling of a generic project including interactions with the “outside” e.g. management – based on interviews and a case-study:
- Different schedules create a different project. i.e. you cannot decide, if one method is more accurate.
- The optimal QA expenditure level is 16% of development days
- Brooks’ Law is not universal: adding more persons makes a project more costly, but not necessarily to complete later
Summary of a fruitful LinkedIn discussion
Ref: How Does It Help?
Jay: From a systems thinking perspective, the entire project can be viewed as an integrated “system,” where each of the aspects/elements identified in the framework is a component of the overall system.
Jay: Linking the simulation activities/effort to the actual project management activities can potentially overburden the PM process with tasks and activities that are not in keeping with the need to manage the project.
T.A.: As project managers begin to think about the goals of the project, they should also think about how the finished product meets customer needs, how it satisfies corporate goals, how it compares to competitive products, and it might be managed so that it motivates co-workers.
Mirko: Good project managers (PM) will intuitively “model” the project as a system while thinking about the plan/risks etc. With System Thinking the PM scope is extended to the “outside” and the “how”.
Jonathan: Projects often coexist with other projects. They may even compete with them for resources. Would it not be beneficial to understand the dynamic that determines how those resources are applied?
Duane: “Setting up” a project is not a PM task. That is more the realm of a business analyst or product manager, with the guidance of an architect. A project manager is typically not even assigned until the project has already been “set up” and approved.
Jay: According to PMI’s structured approach to conducting a project, there are five stages: Initiation, Planning, Execution, Monitoring and Controlling, and Closing. It’s actually in the first stage when a project begins to take shape against the requirements/needs of the business. And it’s at that very beginning point where a Project Manager needs to be present and fully participative… even before a project team is selected. In the context of best practices, the PM would play a key role (working together with a project sponsor and key subject matter experts) in helping to build the case-for-action (aka project justification or business case).
Mirko: In a “traditional” (PMI) setup the PM will lead all roles and takes over the customer/line communication. In alternative setups, e.g. Scrum, these responsibilities may be split between product owner and scrum master.
Duane: I’m a proponent of the focus of ST at the enterprise level (and pre-project level) rather than the project level.
- The Dynamics Of Customer Relationship Management (bayintegratedmarketing.wordpress.com)
- General Dynamics Attains CMMI Level 4 Certification for Programs at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (sys-con.com)
- The Role of the Project Manager (agilityloop.com)
In any program management book replace the words:
Project -> Story
Project manager -> Scrum Master
Steering committee -> Product Owner
Project duration -> Sprint
Portfolio -> Backlog
Project kickoff –> Planning
EVA -> CFD
I’ve started to think about how to reduce the email overload – the goal is a drastic reduction.
My first email resourch shows the following hints:
- Tell the people how to work with you: by Simon Makie
- Some general rules for yourself:
- Use other tools (Blog, Wiki, …)
- Target the organization:
- Write better: by Dave Johnson
- Use Boomerang:
- A broader summary:
If you have Scrum on a larger scale in place, you will end up with several cross functional (multi-skilled) teams:
Eg. you will have developers, business analysts, and QA resources in one Scrum team. After a while you’ll need to think about know-how sharing and skill enhancements. I propose to implement communities of practice (CoP, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_of_practice) for each skill.
A representative for each skill (horizontal community) is sent to the Scrum of Scrum.
Referring to my blog “Being Agile at Organizational scale” I’d like to classify the various organizational paradigms.
I propose a two-dimensional matrix with the following axes:
- Management focused (top-down) vs. Team focused (bottom-up)
- Dependent (waterfall like) vs. Emergent (agile like)
In this matrix, a command-and-control culture was at the dependent-management edge. Self-managed teams were at the team-emergent edge.
I’ve started to put the agile organizational pattern into this matrix:
- Autocratic (classical stereotype)
Management focused, top-down, waterfall-like thinking
- Radical Management
Get rid of top-down communication, enabling self-organizing teams.
Do the right thinks, get the best of classical vs. emergent elements. Management as enablers.
Based on collective wisdom, dynamical management
- Management 3.0
Requires management to understand emergence in complex systems
From Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion_of_innovations
Diffusion of Innovations is a theory that seeks to explain how, why, and at what rate new ideas and technology spread through cultures. Everett Rogers, a professor of rural sociology, popularized the theory in his 1962 book Diffusion of Innovations.
Diffusion of an innovation occurs through a five–step process:
1. Knowledge: In this stage the individual is first exposed to an innovation but lacks information about the innovation. During this stage of the process the individual has not been inspired to find more information about the innovation.
2. Persuasion: In this stage the individual is interested in the innovation and actively seeks information/detail about the innovation.
3. Decision: In this stage the individual takes the concept of the change and weighs the advantages/disadvantages of using the innovation and decides whether to adopt or reject the innovation. Due to the individualistic nature of this stage Rogers notes that it is the most difficult stage to acquire empirical evidence
4. Implementation: In this stage the individual employs the innovation to a varying degree depending on the situation. During this stage the individual determines the usefulness of the innovation and may search for further information about it.
5. Confirmation: Although the name of this stage may be misleading, in this stage the individual finalises his/her decision to continue using the innovation and may end up using it to its fullest potential.
The rate of adoption is defined as the relative speed with which members of a social system adopt an innovation.