Examples of Projects in History

Examples of Projects in History

One way to gain perspective on projects of today is to compare them with
projects of the past. In some ways, projects remain the same as they have
always been, and in some ways, project management has evolved over the
ages. Let us review a few projects from history where enough evidence has
been gained through research and historical records to make some project
management comparisons.
Project: Building the Egyptian Great Pyramid at Giza
One of the first major undertakings that project managers clearly identify
as a project is the construction of the great pyramid at Giza. There is some
historical evidence—we could call it project history—that gives us insight
into its scope and effort.
Project records exist in the writings of Greek philosophers, Egyptian
hieroglyphics, and archeological findings. High-level estimates of time and
effort “in the press” during that period were apparently inaccurate.
Herodotus wrote that the pyramid took 100,000 people 30 years to complete.
Archeological research and records pare those estimates to 20,000
people and 20 years to complete. Hieroglyphics in the tombs reveal some
of the methods (technical approaches and tools) used to construct the pyramid:
Stone blocks were carved from a quarry by hand using stone hammers
and chisels. Then the stones were slid on pallets of wood over wet sand, and
workers used wooden beams as levers to heft them into the desired position.
The team, according to research, was not 100,000 people, as originally
recorded by Herodotus; that would have been approximately 10 percent
of the entire population of Egypt—and more than 3 million effort-years. It
was more likely 20,000 people, 2,000 of whom were continuous in their
service (the core team) and 18,000 of whom were tracked by DNA evidence
in bones on the site to villages all over Egypt. If we were to translate their
structure into a modern context, this would correspond to a core team (the
ancient group of continuous service) with various team members temporarily
assigned as resources from the departments (the ancient villages)
in the sponsor’s organization (the ancient dynasty). The work shift was long
in those days; the team rotation was about 12 weeks. At that point the workers
on loan to the project went home and were replaced by new workers.
The power of the project sponsor was very helpful in getting such a
huge project done. The project sponsor was executive management (the
pharaoh also was viewed as “god”—making it easier to get permission to
leave the family and village job to work on the assignment). The work was hard, there were occupational hazards (bone damage), and the pay was low
(including fresh onions for lunch). People who died on the project were
buried on the project site (hence the DNA evidence to trace their villages).3

Project Management’s Underlying Assumptions

Project Management’s Underlying Assumptions

There are a few fundamental concepts that, once accepted, make many of
the unique practices and processes in project management more logical.
■ Risk. Organizations need to believe the risks inherent in a project to
provide adequate management backing and support, and the team
needs accurate and timely risk information. When doing something
new for the first time, there are many unknowns that have a potential
to affect the project in some way, positive or negative. One goal
is to “flush out” as many of those unknowns as possible—like a
bird dog flushes birds out of the bushes—so that they may be managed,
and the project’s energy can be redirected to managing the
surprises that inevitably arise when the work is unfamiliar.
■ Authority. Because the project has a start and an end and specified
resources, there is a need to balance the competing requirements of
time, cost, and performance. The authority to balance these competing
requirements is delegated to the project manager and the
team.
■ Autonomy. The risks associated with the project must be managed
so that they do not obstruct progress. As risks mature into real
issues or problems, the project manager and team need autonomy
and flexibility to resolve some and ignore others based on their
potential to hurt the project.
■ Project control. To anticipate and predict needed change, the project
manager and team need ways to determine where they are in
relation to the projected time, cost, and performance goals. They
use this status information to make needed adjustments to the plan
and to refine its execution strategy.
■ Sponsorship. The project manager and team need the backing of
management, or a sponsor and champion, to ensure that the project is aligned properly with executive goals, to protect against external
interference, and to provide resource backing

General Rules for Project Management

General Rules for Project Management

In sports, whether one is participating or simply watching the game, one
needs to understand not just the sport itself but also the rules associated
with it. There are different rules and roles in team sports such as football or
soccer, and cricket. Automobile racing has different rules and roles from
horse racing and ski racing. Applying experience and knowledge associated
with one sport while watching a different sport would lead to frustration,
discouragement, and eventually rejection. Similarly, applying rules that
apply to routine business operations in a project context would lead to similar
frustration, discouragement, and rejection. As obvious as this concept
seems, the application of operations management concepts to projects
occurs regularly on a daily basis. In many organizations, both the project
team and the sponsoring management share this negative experience but do
not realize why it is occurring.
What makes a project temporary and unique also makes it unsuited to
the rules and roles of operations management.
Roles in project management are different from those in operations.
In operations, a manager in finance will have a different job from a manager
in human resources or product development, but a project manager
will have a very similar job whether the project is a finance project, a
human resources project, or a product development project. While a line
manager can push a problem “upstairs” to a higher level manager, or evendelay its resolution, the project manager is expected to manage the risks,
problems, and resolutions within the project itself, with the help of the
team, the sponsor or the customer, to keep the project moving forward.
Project manager is a clearly a role; the project manager is the person
responsible for the management and results of the project. Some organizations
with established project management functions (such as a project
management office) will have a job description and position classification
for project manager, and some even deploy project managers to other divisions
when that expertise and role are needed. But the position is not just a
manager role with a different title on it. The performance expectations are
as different from each other as offensive or defensive positions on a sports
team. Project management roles are always “offensive”

PROJECT MANAGEMENT CONCEPTS

PROJECT MANAGEMENT
CONCEPTS

OVERVIEW AND GOALS

This chapter provides a general overview of the role projects have played in
the world and how projects in history, as well as projects today, share fundamental
elements. It defines the project life cycle, the product life cycle,
and the process of project design that integrates and aligns the two into one
or more projects.
The triple constraint is introduced as important in defining and managing
projects. How project management evolved helps to explain how it is
applied in different settings today, and why those differences developed.
And while the standard life cycle for projects applies “as is” uniformly
across industries, it requires developing different levels and types of detail
on projects. Tailoring general project management approaches is proposed
based on the types of projects being managed.
WHAT IS A PROJECT?
In Chapter 1 we distinguished projects, which are temporary and unique,
from operations, which are ongoing and repetitive.1 Projects have little, if
any, precedent for what they are creating, the project work is new, and work-

ers are unfamiliar with expectations. On the other hand, operations are
repetitive, routine business activities. They are familiar and documented.
They have benefited by improvements over time, and worker expectations
are written into job descriptions.
Thousands of project management professionals have agreed that a
project has a clear beginning and a clear end, as well as a resulting product
or service that is different in some significant way from those created
before. The unique product or service in a project management setting is
often called a deliverable, a generic term that allows discussion about the
result without getting specific about its characteristics. The project’s deliverable
may be the ultimate product or service, or it may be a clearer definition
needed for the next consecutive project, such as a design or a plan. In
some cases it may be just one part of the final deliverable, consisting of outputs
of multiple projects.2
The reason the distinction is important that projects have “a clear
beginning, a clear end, and a unique product or service” is that the “rules”
for managing projects are different than the “rules” for managing operations.
The roles of the people in relation to the project are different as well.
To better understand the distinction, we can compare it with how the rules
and roles differ in sports.

BENEFITS OF ADOPTING PROJECT MANAGEMENT APPROACHES

BENEFITS OF ADOPTING PROJECT
MANAGEMENT APPROACHES


Recent research and publications help in quantifying the benefits of project
management, including executive surveys of what they consider to be its
benefits.22 However, continuous improvement should be the norm; good
performance “on average” is not sufficient (see Figure 1-6).
The negative impact of not practicing effective methods of project
management includes the escalating costs of high-profile projects. The risk
is that the sponsoring organization does not achieve its desired goals despite
its investment in the project. Some analysts have suggested that a company’s
stock price can drop if a failed project becomes public news.23
Taking a systematic approach to managing projects creates a number
of benefits, regardless of the host organization’s particular emphasis on outcomes.
These benefits are:
■ Quicker completion. Quicker time-to-market delivery of rapid
development can make all the difference in the profitability of a
commercial product. It is said that one-third of the market goes to
the first entrant when a breakthrough product is introduced. In
some sectors, delays enact penalties.
■ More effective execution. When projects are formed to create a
desired product first, the project that delivers results on schedule
simultaneously may deliver large profits to the host company.
Other projects must meet exact requirements.

■ More reliable cost and schedule estimates. Making adequate
resources available when they are needed increases the likelihood
that a project will deliver benefits or services within budget and
resource constraints. Resources can be leveraged.
■ Reduced risk. For highly visible projects, such as shuttle launches
and space exploration, the potential loss of life is an unacceptable
political downside to a project that does not deliver. In not-for-profit
organizations, the losses associated with a failed project may
consume the resource contingencies of the whole organization or
make its reputation unacceptable to its member customers. The
organization’s actual existence—continuation of a whole organization—
can be at risk if losses exceed the organization’s capital
reserve.
■ Reduced cost. Maximizing schedules, linking dependent tasks, and
leveraging resources ultimately reduce waste, including wasted
time and effort on the part of the project team’s highly skilled and
trained staff.
A major benefit of adopting project management is that it raises
awareness of costs, complexities, risks, and benefits early in the process of
development, enabling sponsors to know where they stand in proceeding
with a given commitment and allowing action to reduce negative influences
so that the investment pays dividends and delivers on its promises.
The end result is that society gets benefits with the expenditure of fewer
resources.
What is ultimately needed is an environment where systems and
processes work together with knowledgeable and skilled professionals to
deliver on the promises of project management. While mature integration
has not yet been achieved, this new direction is well on its way.

THE VALUE-ADDED PROPOSITION: DECLARING AND REVALIDATING PROJECT VALUE

THE VALUE-ADDED PROPOSITION:
DECLARING AND REVALIDATING
PROJECT VALUE

Usually the selection of a project for funding and authorization includes a
careful analysis of the value it is to provide its intended audiences.
However, changes occur in the environment, regulations, social interests,
and market opportunities while a project is under way. Sometimes the outcome
of another project, or even reorganization, can make the outcome of
a current project obsolete. It is important not only to communicate the value
of a project at its inception but also to revalidate the effort and expenditure
at key intervals, especially for lengthy projects.
It would be ideal if a project’s value could be established in practical
terms so that the project’s management, sponsor, customers, and users
could agree that it had delivered on its promises. Some of the ways to gain
agreement on objective measures are addressed in Chapters 6 and 12. Those
familiar with the benefits of project management do not need “objective”
reasons; they feel that the reduced ambiguity, managed risk, shortened time
frames, and product existence are benefits enough.
William Ibbs and Justin Reginato, in their research study entitled
Quantifying the Value of Project Management,20 cited a number of dimensions
where organizations reaped tangible benefits. But some sectors discount
project management’s contributions or diminish its overall scope.
Most of these are low on the scale of organizational project management
maturity because the higher the maturity level, the greater are the realized
benefits. Companies with more mature project management practices have
better project performance.21
Spending a little time defining the different benefits of project management
according to the primary values of its own economic sector will
help an organization to clarify how value can be delivered by a project in
its own context. Some sectors will benefit from a focus on resource leverage
or efficiency; others, from a focus on maturity. After such an analysis
is complete, the strategic objectives of the organization and its
management, customers, and user groups need to be considered. Success
criteria built into the plan ensures that all know what the goals of the project
entail.

How Different Organizations Define the Value of Projects

How Different Organizations Define the Value of Projects

The value produced by the practice of project management is not the
same in every sector of the economy (see Figure 1-5). With the risk of oversimplifying,
■ Corporate projects need to make money, and projects are judged by
their contribution to increasing revenue or cutting unnecessary
cost.
■ Not-for-profit organizations are charged with providing benefits to
a broader society, and projects considered successful have broad or
conspicuous contributions.
■ Government projects must provide needed services or benefits to
groups defined by law. Projects that provide those services or benefits
to the stakeholders of public programs and services, and do so
within the regulations, are considered successful.

FIGURE 1-5 Benefits of adopting project management approaches. Different sectors derive significant value from project management by achieving strategic goals.

■ Academia organizes knowledge into curricula and courses of study, and projects that push knowledge into new areas or advance human understanding are recognized as valuable. Project management must be sufficiently challenging intellectually to warrant attention from leading scholarly institutions

Long-Term Value of Project Outcomes

Long-Term Value of Project Outcomes

Major undertakings produce outcomes that are believed to deliver great value to their users. It is difficult to know whether a major project will be short-lived or will endure over time. As necessary as they may be when begun, some projects deliver important results for only a short period of time and then are replaced by new methods or new technology. Others persist.



The Panama Canal connected two great oceans, and the reversal of the Chicago River—an engineering marvel—linked the East Coast shipping trade with the great Mississippi transportation corridor. But railroads swift-ly replaced shipping as a low-cost method of moving people and goods over long distances. The railroad projects across the northern states adopted a standard gauge and could be connected into a vast transportation network. But the southern states adopted a narrower gauge and had to reset their tracks to benefit from this vast network.

There are intangible benefits to project outcomes as well. The Eiffel Tower in Paris and the Space Needle in Seattle—both engineered to draw attention to a big event—put those cities on the map for tourism and marked them with emblems of innovation that have endured. The astro-nomical wonder of Stonehenge in England, huge stone statues in Africa and Asia, South America’s “lost cities” in the Andes, and the cathedrals of Europe inspired the people of the past, and they continue to inspire us today (see Figure 1-4).

Viewing the results of massive projects in history reminds us that our advanced technology, learning, and project methods have shortened the timeframes needed to get project results. Cathedrals sometimes took 200 years to complete; the World Trade Center was built in 20 years. But a still longer view is needed. Sometime in the next five years the United States will have to address the upgrade of its vast network of interstate highways, which were built after World War II. But five years is not an adequate length of time for such a large undertaking. Many of the government planning agencies were found in the late 1980s to have no plan for raising funds to maintain society’s infrastructure.17

Not only our individual enterprises but also our society as a whole needs to have the infrastructure in place to initiate, fund, plan, and execute major projects. Currently, many separate agencies are responsible for dif-ferent parts of these massive projects. Running nationwide projects without a central project authority in government is much like running projects sep-arately within a large organization. A realistic supportive environment is important if we want to ensure project success and keep costs down. Where is this project management initiative to come from?

In Capetown, South Africa, a large segment of freeway stands above town along the waterfront, built by government officials without consider-ation for the funding required to link it with other transportation systems. Local project managers say that the city leaves it there as a reminder to think long range in their planning.18

Professional ethics address the professional project manager’s respon-sibility to society and the future. While it is easy to say that a project is only responsible for the outcome defined for that project over the period of time it is in existence, we know that the outcomes have a life cycle, and quality and value are assessed over the entire life cycle of a product or service until it is eliminated, demolished, or removed from service. Considering how it will endure over time or be maintained is part of management’s responsi-bility, but the project manager has the opportunity to build such considera-tions into the plan.

Cooperation Builds the Future

Fortunately, professional societies in the field of project management have begun working with government agencies in a number of different countries to integrate project management with the school systems and the policies governing public projects. More on these topics will be addressed in later chapters.19 In Chapter 12 we address how mature project environments manage the interdependent elements of projects.

Failed Projects Spur Improvement

Thanks to modern communications technology, failed projects also have staked out a space in human history. We may not consider them projects or even know why they failed, but they sit as examples in our minds as we con-template a new undertaking. We see images of ancient cities in the Middle East covered by desert sands, victims of environmental degradation. The steamship Titanic rests on the ocean floor, an engineering marvel that fell prey to its own self-confidence. Other less visible project failures are in our conscious minds through the news media. The Alaskan oil spill, the release of nuclear pollution onto the Russian plain, attempts to stem the AIDS epi-demic’s relentless march—all are common project examples in our news media and our history books. All share the legacy and challenges of project management. Ambitious projects continue to be conceived, planned, executed, and completed—with varying degrees of “success.” Sometimes teams study these examples to capture learning and improve our project track record in the future. Sometimes we have no answers, just the reminder of risk unmanaged or faulty assumptions.

Projects typically are carried out in a defined context by a specific group of people. They are undertaken to achieve a specific purpose for inno-vators, sponsors, and users. But project delivery of something new is also judged in a broader context of value. Projects are not judged at a single point in time but over the life cycle of the project’s product or outcome. Managing complex project interdependencies as well as the future effects of the proj-ect is part of the professional challenge. It is the profession of project man-agement that is devoted to increasing the value and success of projects and ensuring that what is delivered meets expectations of not just immediate users but of a broader set of stakeholders. This broader definition of project success is another element driving project management toward a profession.

Comparing Project Management with Problem Solving

Comparing Project Management with Problem Solving

The phases of a project are basically the same as an individual’s method of problem solving, but when the project’s outcome is bigger or more chal-lenging, the system breaks down. People in separate functional departments see the problem differently. Agreed-on approaches get interpreted differ-ently by specialists with diverse values and training. Actions influence other actions, sometimes undercutting each other or slowing implementation. Somehow, small problems can evolve into a myriad of complexities, dependencies, and challenges. Priorities become difficult to sort out.

Projects require a process just like in problem solving (see Figure 1-3). The first phase, usually called initiation, is when the idea is worked out and described, its scope and success criteria defined, its sponsors identified, its resources estimated, and its authority formalized. Then the project manager and team decide how it can be achieved practically, plan it out, and allocate the resources and risks by task and phase. Finally, the project manager and team put the plan into action during project execution. Project management professionals counter the complexity just described by formalizing the process. They then orchestrate it with teams, managing task interfaces, reducing risk, and solving the remaining implementation problems within resource and time constraints. Once they have the experience behind them, they assess whether it turned out the way it was expected to, why or why not, and define what can be done better next time. The group applies the learn-ing to sequential projects and makes best-practice examples available to

FIGURE 1-3 Comparing project management with problem solving. Both proj-ect management and problem solving require a process to be effective.

other projects in the organization. The phases of a project closely resemble

the stages of problem solving: initiation/concept development (analyze the

problem), high-level/detailed planning (identify options/select one), execution/

control (implement an option/see if it works), and closure and lessons

learned (refine for next cycle of analysis).

Benefits of Managing Organizational Initiatives Systematically

Benefits of Managing Organizational Initiatives Systematically

Why do organizations need project management? When initiatives with
high risk and change are undertaken, a systematic process for managing
known unknowns frees time, energy, and resources for managing unknown
unknowns. This sort of “risk triage” increases the chances that the project
will deliver successfully on its commitments using the committed
resources. There are a lot of elements to manage. Figure 1-2 shows some of
the benefits to managing them more systematically using project management
disciplines and practices.
■ Visibility into the problem. The analysis that goes into systematic
management reveals a lot of hidden issues, overlaps, and trends that
were not visible before. If management is to resolve organizational
challenges, it must first make them visible. A precept of project
management is to make the invisible visible so that it can be managed.
16 Management consultants consider the biggest challenges in
working with organizations not to be the identified problems but
rather to be the unspoken ones.
■ Leveraging scarce resources. The money, time, and effort to undertake
organizational initiatives are finite. To get the most leverage
out of them, resources should be made available only when they are
needed, and they should be transferred to more pressing needs
when a particular initiative is over. Unless management knows
what exists and its status in terms of completion, scarce resources
can be scattered and not used effectively.
■ Building a skills base. Most of the key functions present in organizations
are also present in projects, but they are abbreviated, condensed,
or applied in unique ways. For individuals in project
management, learning the fundamentals of most organizational
functions, as well as those unique to project management, comprises
the basics. Mastery takes commitment and dedication over a
number of years. As staff members learn project management, they
also learn the fundamentals of organization functions so that they
make more informed decisions in their work for the organization.
■ Planning for easy changes in the future. Managing organizational
initiatives systematically preserves the overall quality of the outcomes
for stakeholders and the organization as a whole.
As an analogy, consider a person building a house with only a general
plan and no architectural drawings. By means of routine decisions, myriad
minor compromises occur without any overall intent to compromise:
The number and placement of electrical outlets can affect the use of appliances
and limit future work capacity; unplanned placement of vents and
piping can affect future comfort and ability to manage temperature; and
placement of load-bearing walls can affect remodeling or later modification.
Use of different standards for different parts of the construction can
prevent later consolidation of separate systems.Seemingly minor compromises can erode the overall quality of life for
the occupants and limit what can be done with the house in the future.
Many such ad hoc houses are in fact demolished and replaced because it is

FIGURE 1-2 Benefits of managing organizational initiatives systematically. When initiatives are planned systematically, the results are more effective and efficient, and the organization benefits from the professional development of the project team.

cheaper to rebuild than to remodel, particularly if new standards must be taken into account.

Similarly, taking a more comprehensive view of an initiative—and systematically planning its development, deployment, and resourcing—can provide benefits to the organization as a whole by leveraging its common potential and protecting quality.

Why Organizations and Teams Undertake Projects

Why Organizations and Teams Undertake Projects

People embrace change when the value to be gained makes the pain worth
risking. Thus a project is formed. The assumption is that if a project is
formed, the value of the results will be achieved, and the pain everyone goes
through will be worth the effort. Implicit in project management is the concept
of commitment to change and the delivery of results. It is not always a
good assumption that the people on the project team favor the change or
even support it. They receive it as “duties as assigned” in their job description.
The project manager takes on the role of leader and shapes the commitment
and motivation of the individual team members. If the assumptions
made about the project and its ability to deliver are not realistic and achievable,
it is the project manager’s responsibility to validate or change those
assumptions before embarking on the project. Part of the value set of a professional
is not to take on work that is beyond one’s means to deliver. Sales
and management sometimes “sell” a concept because of its appeal, without
a full understanding of the challenges involved in achieving those results.
After all, nothing is impossible to those who do not have to do it.
If you happen to be the individual selected to implement change, it
feels a lot better if the change is desirable and people support the effort. But
having support at the beginning of a project does not guarantee acceptance
later, when the discomfort of change sets in. And popular support seldom
delivers the value of change over time. If change were that easy, someone
already would have done it. People usually support the comfort and familiarity
of the “old way” of doing things before the project came along. In
some cases the project changes things that people rely on, alters their familiar
data, or replaces their old product or service with a new one. Engaging
and managing the risk of human attachments to their familiar methods is
one task of the project management professional. It takes conscious, dedicated
effort on the part of the project’s sponsors, project managers, and
project teams to deliver change that meets expectations. Increasing the
chances of a successful outcome is one element that gets the team working
together on project management activities, methods, and practices.
Delivering on the project’s commitment to results that have value in a challenging
modern context is what gets people inside and outside the project
to work together toward success.

THE RELATIONSHIP OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT TO IMPLEMENTING DESIRED CHANGE

THE RELATIONSHIP OF PROJECT
MANAGEMENT TO IMPLEMENTING
DESIRED CHANGE

Traditionally, project management has been how organizations managed
anything new. Organizations always have used projects to manage initiatives
that found “normal operations” inadequate for the task. Normal operations
are designed to accomplish a certain function, but they lack
flexibility. Managing a project to implement any truly new venture is
fraught with ambiguities, risks, unknowns, and uncertainties associated
with new activity.
Change is often a by-product of projects. Creating a project that operates
differently simply adds to the chaos. “Why don’t we just do it the old
way?” people ask. They usually are referring to the tried-and-true methods
of operations that had the benefit of continuous improvement; for example,
the inconsistencies had already been worked out of them by repetition.
When change is needed, in most cases someone already tried getting the
desired change using operations processes, and the “old way” failed to produce
results. Given the discomfort of change, there is usually a compelling
business reason for organizations and their management to undertake it voluntarily.
Usually, the reason is that change is a necessity. In most cases,
someone in a leadership role has determined that the results of the project
(the product or service and even the change) are desirable and that the outcomes
of making that change have value. In other cases, the dangers inherent
in not creating a project and making the change simply are too risky to
tolerate.
Once the outcome of a project has been established as beneficial, and
the organization is willing to undertake a project, the project manager and
team are engaged. Seldom is the project manager brought in at the earliest
concept development stages, although early involvement of the project
manager occurs most frequently in organizations where projects are linked
to the main line of business. The people who are engaged in the project—
as project manager or team member—are not involved voluntarily in creating
change. “My boss told me to,” is a more common reason why someone
becomes involved in a project.

The Occupation of Managing Projects

The Occupation of Managing Projects

The field of project management includes not only project managers but also specialists associated with various functions that may or may not be unique to projects. Those who identify themselves with the occupation of “managing projects” implement projects across many types of settings. They are familiar with the basics in project management and know how projects are run. They may take on different roles within a project setting or the same role on different types of projects. But they always work on projects. Specialists exist in a type of work associated with projects, such as a project scheduler, a project cost engineer, or a project control special-ist. Others will specialize in the use of a particular software tool, knowing all the features and capabilities of that tool, even targeting a particular industry (see Chapter 12). Some specialists perform a sophisticated proj-ect function, such as an estimator on energy-development sites (a specific setting) or a project recruiter (a specific function). Still others specialize in implementing a unique type of project, such as hotel construction, trans-portation networks, large-scale training programs, or new mainframe soft-ware development.

Some of the individuals associated with projects may have entered the field by happenstance, perhaps through a special assignment or a promo-tion from a technical role in a project. What distinguishes those in the proj-

Project Management 15


ect management occupation from those in the technical occupation of that project is that they choose to tie their future and their development to proj-ect management, expanding their knowledge and skills in areas that support the management of a project rather than the technical aspects of creating, marketing, or developing the product or service resulting from the project. There are thousands of people engaged in the occupation of project man-agement, most of them highly skilled, and many of them extremely knowl-edgeable about what it takes to plan, execute, and control a project.

Emphasis on the Profession of
Project Management

A growing number of people recognize the emerging profession of project management. The profession encompasses not only project managers but also other project-related specialists taking a professional approach to the development, planning, execution, control, and improvement of projects. The profession is getting broader because of a number of factors in busi-ness today:

■ The increased rate of change in the business environment and the economy. It used to be okay to say, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” Today, if you don’t fix it before it breaks, the window of opportu-nity may already be closed.

■ External factors. Technological changes, market changes, com-petitive changes—these all influence projects, as well as chang-ing expectations of those who use or receive the products, services, or benefits of the project. Some may change without the project organization’s participation or knowledge. Government regulations are an example of an external change, as are legal decisions in the courts. Understanding project management is necessary to integrate these changes into the organization’s prod-ucts and services.

■ Internal factors. Some organizations have to release new docu-ments, products, or services to stay in business. Whether it is a software company creating “not so necessary” releases or a govern-ment organization refining aviation maps or making policy changes, the changes may be generated internally. Project managers are need-ed to manage these revenue-generators.

Different industries are driven by varying motives to implement projects:

■ Revenue generation

■ Technology
16 The McGraw-Hill 36-Hour Project Management Course

■ Changes in the environment

■ Changes in markets or competition

The project management profession draws from those in the occupa-tion, but it targets individuals who consciously address the more sophisti-cated and complex parts of project management—building knowledge, skills, and ability over time.

WHY MAKE A DISTINCTION BETWEEN PROJECTS AND OPERATIONS?

WHY MAKE A DISTINCTION BETWEEN PROJECTS AND OPERATIONS?

It is important to make a distinction between projects and operations for several reasons, the first of which is that there are major differences in:

■ The decision-making process

– The delegation of authority to make changes
– The rules and methods for managing risk
■ The role expectations and skill sets

– The value sets
– The expectations of executive management for results
– Reporting relationships and reward systems

Project scope or complexity can vary, so size can cause a project to fall within the generally accepted definition of project. A subgroup enter-prise unit may initiate its own products or services using projects, complete them autonomously with a single person in charge, and then turn them over
12 The McGraw-Hill 36-Hour Project Management Course


to another group to operate. Whether this is a project or not depends on its temporary nature and reassignment of the staff member after completing the unique product or service (contrasted with just moving on to another job assignment).

The Decision-Making Process

The decision-making process relies on delegation of authority to the project manager and team to make changes as needed to respond to project demands. A hierarchy of management is simply not flexible enough to deliver project results on time and on budget. The detailed planning carried out before the project is begun provides structure and logic to what is to come, and trust is fundamental to the process. The project manager uses the skills and judgment of the team to carry out the work of the project, but the decision authority must rest with the project manager. Whether the project is large or small, sim-ple or complex, managed by a temporary assignment of staff from other groups (matrix structure) or with full-time team assignments, the delegation of authority is fundamental to the project manager’s ability to perform the job.

Projects with a strong link to the organization’s strategic objectives are most likely to be defined by executive management and managed at a broader level, with higher degrees of involvement and participation from multiple affected departments. Depending on organizational level, the proj-ect manager’s involvement in establishing strategic linkages for the project with the organization’s mission will be more or less evident. Some larger organizations use a process of objective alignment to ensure that projects complement other efforts and advance top management’s objectives.15 Projects at higher levels in the organization probably will state the link with the organization’s mission in their business case and charter documents. Projects at a lower level will need to clarify that link with management to ensure that they are proceeding appropriately in a way that supports the organization’s mission.

It is unlikely that a project linked directly with the organization’s cur-rent strategic initiatives would be implemented by a single person; a team would be assigned to implement it. The project manager has delegated authority to make decisions, refine or change the project plan, and reallo-cate resources. The team conducts the work of the project. The team reports to the project manager on the project job assignment. In non-“projectized” organizations, team members might have a line manager relationship for reporting as well. Line managers have little authority to change the project in any substantial way; their suggestions are managed by the project man-ager—along with other stakeholders. (Line managers, however, do control promotions and salary of “temporary” project team members.)

A subgroup project generally has more input from local management, less coordination with other departments, and generates less risk for the

Project Management 13


organization should it fail to deliver. It might be coordinated by an individ-ual working with a limited number of other people for a few weeks or months until completion of the deliverable. In many large organizations, only larger projects of a specific minimum duration or budget are formally designated as projects and required to use the organization’s standard proj-ect management process.

Role Expectations and Skill Sets

Whereas a few people can accomplish small projects, larger projects— especially those critical to an organization—tend to be cross-functional. Participation by individuals from several disciplines provides the multiple viewpoints needed to ensure value across groups. An important high-level project will be more likely to involve people representing various groups across multiple organizational functions; it may even be interdisciplinary in nature. The varied input of a cross-functional team tends to mitigate the risk of any one group not supporting the result. Interdisciplinary participation also helps to ensure quality because each team member will view other team members’ work from a different perspective, spotting inconsistencies and omissions early in the process. Regardless of whether the effort is large or small, the authority to manage risk is part of the project manager’s role.

Basic project management knowledge and understanding are required for the individual project manager to complete smaller projects on time and on budget. However, professional-level skill, knowledge, and experience are necessary to execute larger, more complex or strategic projects. The project manager leads, orchestrates, and integrates the work and functions of the project team in implementing the plan. The challenges of managing teams with different values and backgrounds require excellent skills in establishing effective human relations as well as excellent communication skills and team management skills. Honesty and integrity are also critical in managing teams that cross cultural lines.

The project manager of a small project may carry the dual role of managing the project team and performing technical work on the project. The project manager of a large, strategic, complex project will be perform-ing the technical work of project management, but the team will be doing the technical work necessary to deliver the product or service. Often a larg-er project will have a team or technical leader as well and possibly an assis-tant project manager or deputy. Small projects are a natural place for beginning project managers to gain experience. The senior project manag-er will be unlikely to take on small projects because the challenges and the pay are not in line with the senior project manager’s level of experience. An exception, of course, would be a small, critical, strategic project for top management, although if it is very small, it too could be considered simply “duties as assigned.”
14 The McGraw-Hill 36-Hour Project Management Course


People who work in project management will have varying levels of skill and knowledge, but they all will be focused on the delivery of project results. Their background and experience will reflect the functional spe-cialties within their industry group, as well as the size of projects they work on. The diversity of projects is so broad that some people working in the field may not even recognize a kinship or commonality with others in the same field. They may use different vocabularies, exhibit diverse behaviors, and perform very different types of work to different standards of quality and with differing customs and behaviors.

The project management maturity of the organization hosting the project also will cause the organization to place value on different types of skills and experience. A more mature project environment will choose pro-fessional discipline over the ability to manage crises. A less mature organ-ization or a small project may value someone who can do it all, including both technical and management roles, in developing the product and run-ning the project.

It stands to reason, then, that hiring a project manager from a differ-ent setting or different type or size of project may create dissonance when roles, authority, and alignment with organizational strategy are involved.

Research and Development

Research and Development

Some projects develop entirely new products or services; this is often called research and development. Examples of terms for these types of activities are:

■ Design

■ Synthesis

■ Prototypes

■ New development

■ Product creation

Because the new product or service is “different in some distinguish-ing way from all similar products or services,” these efforts qualify as proj-ects. Another term, called research and demonstration in government circles, applies development from one context in a completely different context that varies widely in environmental, legal, or social elements. While the product may not be significantly different, the context in which it is applied makes it different; it therefore qualifies as a project (e.g., nuclear power plants transferred from the United States to developing countries such as South Korea or Brazil).

Revisions and Enhancements

Other groups undertake major revisions to existing products and services, and these may or may not be projects, according to the generally accepted definition. Sometimes these are referred to as:

■ New releases

■ Updates

■ Enhancements

■ Redesign

A familiar process or software tool released on a completely different technological platform may seem the same but may require a major design effort to create.14 If the work is temporary, the group disbands after complet-ing it, and the work is turned over to someone else to operate. This is probably a project. In cases of evolving technology, the uncertainties and complexities of an enhancement or redesign may qualify the work as a project.

Refinements

In contrast, some organizations produce versions of a similar product or service repeatedly. This is more commonly referred to as production. Other terms for this type of activity are:

Project Management 11

■ Capacity increases

■ Remodeling or modernization

■ Renewal

■ Release maintenance

■ Refurbishment

To be classified legitimately as a project, each distinct effort must meet the criteria of “every project has a definite beginning and a definite end” and of product or service uniqueness, meaning that “the product or service is different in some distinguishing way from all similar products or services.” For example:

■ A developer of residential housing may be executing a “produc-tion” by building multiple houses of the same design and configu-rations of houses are repeated over and over. This is not a project because it is a repetitive fabrication, except for the first develop-ment and if a repeat is on significantly different terrain.

■ A custom developer creating homes of different sizes, styles, and materials for separate customers is managing a series of projects. In a “projectized” organization, the developer is using a new design and new contractors each time.

■ A person designing and building her own home, alone or using professional contractors, is definitely implementing a temporary endeavor creating a unique product.

The Field of Work Focused on Projects

The Field of Work Focused on Projects

Often the term project management is used to define the entire field of work that is focused on the delivery of project results. Others use it to describe traditional management practices or technical management prac-tices, simply transferring those practices from organizational operations to

FIGURE 1-1 Role of project management in organizations. The authority, role, resources, and title given to project management vary by type of organizational structure. (PMBOK Guide 2004)


projects. The field of project management encompasses the planning and execution of all sorts of projects, whether they are construction planning and execution, events planning and execution, design planning and execu-tion, development of new products, creation or design of complex tools, mitigation of negative effects such as radiation cleanup, or the exploration and production of new resources. Large and small projects alike are includ-ed in the field, as are simple projects, sophisticated projects, and complex projects. Complex projects are easy to identify as legitimate projects, but there is a gray area where it is more difficult to determine whether we are addressing a project or simply a refinement of “operations.” Why would we want to know? The rules are different, and the roles are different.

New Groups Embrace Project Management

New Groups Embrace Project Management

Organizations and industries tend to embrace project management when they either stand to gain significantly by doing so or to lose by not doing so. Many historical projects left a visible legacy behind them, but those in prior centuries left little in the way of a project record. In the twentieth cen-tury, the Navy and NASA projects mentioned earlier could not have been achieved without project management. The construction industry and other government contractors that won major contracts began to embrace the same project management practices as their sponsoring government agency did. Other industries, such as the pharmaceutical industry, made significant gains in quality and mitigated complexity by using project management. The examples could go on and on.

During this past decade, most large organizations were integrating com-puter technology into their strategic business systems. This evolving technol-ogy was generating hundreds of projects. The shift to an organizational context in project management therefore coincided with an influx of professionals from information systems, information technology, and information manage-ment functions into project management. They joined the professional associ-ations in record numbers. Previously, professional practitioners were from the construction industry, streamlined as it was by project management methods and tools from government. The motto of the Project Management Institute’s marketing thrust during the early nineties was “Associate with Winners.”

In contrast, information systems and information technology projects were getting media coverage citing 200 percent budget overruns and sched-ule delays.7

As these groups shifted their attention from software engineering to project management, they brought the attention of management with them as well. All were aware of the wasted resources and opportunity costs of not managing projects well. The idea resonated with senior management that

Project Management 7


projects simply were not “nonstandard operations” but rather a core busi-ness process for implementing strategic initiatives. Senior management was ready to begin managing projects more systematically. Project management became the topic for executive forums, and some executive groups reviewed all projects biannually to determine the best use of the organiza-tion’s strategic resources (see Chapter 12).

The response of the marketplace to recognition of the project manag-er and the project management function caused interest to skyrocket. Membership in the professional association grew quickly, swelling from just under 10,000 members in 1992 to 100,000 by 2002 and 150,000 by 2005.8 Project management was the subject of articles in business newspa-pers and corporate journals. Research began to show that organizations with mature project management environments derive more value from project management than those beginning to implement it.9

The government had funded a means by which software engineering professionals could judge the maturity of their software development envi-ronments,10 but no parallel instrument existed for assessing the maturity of project management environments. By 1999, professionals from all over the world were collaborating to create an “Organization Project Management Maturity Model” (OPM3™), released in 2003 (PMI).11 Various maturity models were developed in leading business schools (e.g., Stanford University and the University of California at Berkeley), as well as by vendors, and these models were applied to products serving the maturing project management marketplace (see Chapter 12). Like people weaving different corners of the same tapestry,12 the detail and richness of the profession are emerging from the combined cooperative efforts of many professional bodies and are being advanced by their common application of standards and training in the agreed-on and “generally accepted” project management process. While there is still a good deal of work to be done before these separate fronts merge into one picture, the movement is steady and positive toward that end.

Recognition of “professionalism” in project management remains uneven across industries. In 1986, at the same time the corporate sector was beginning to implement project management fundamentals, the government sector already was moving forward to implement earned-value measurement and performance management. Information systems (IS) and information technology (IT) were expanding into strategic business initiatives, but they were too new to have both product development methodology and project management methodology in place (see Chapter 12). It will be a while before these different parts of the marketplace all speak the same language.

Definition of the Project Management Profession

Definition of the Project Management Profession

In the late 1960s, several project management professionals from the con-struction and pharmaceutical industries believed that project management had moved beyond being simply a job or an occupation.2 They undertook the task of defining professional project management and created a profes-sional association to put the elements of professional support in place. They called it the Project Management Institute (PMI). They expected as many
4 The McGraw-Hill 36-Hour Project Management Course


as a thousand members someday, and at first they ran initial operations out of one of the member’s dining room in Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania. These visionary leaders considered project management to be an international profession; early members were from not only the United States but also from Canada, South Africa, Europe, and Australia. By the mid-1970s, PMI chapters had been formed in five countries, and discussions of profession-al standards were under way at the association’s 1976 annual meeting in Montreal, Canada. By 1983, the discussions included ethics, standards, and accreditation. College programs were developed (see Chapters 12 and 13), a formal examination was created, and by 1984, professionals began to be designated as project management professionals (PMPs).

Definition of Project Management Standards

The creation of a professional association allowed hundreds of professionals from the field of project management to collaborate in developing an accept-able definition of what project management means. The original founders of the Project Management Institute, together with colleagues from business, govern-ment, and academia, assembled the professional writings on project manage-ment into a document called the “Project Management Body of Knowledge.” It started by focusing on the project itself, but by 1986, a framework was added to incorporate the relationship between the project and its external environment and between project management and general management.

Almost 10 years later, the standards committee published a new ver-sion of the document describing the processes used to manage projects, aligning it with the common knowledge and practices across industries, adding knowledge areas, and reducing the original document’s construction emphasis. More than 10,000 people in almost 40 countries received the document for review, and the “standard” truly began to proliferate around the world. There was common agreement that project management involves balancing competing demands among:

■ Scope, time, cost, risk, and quality

■ Stakeholders with differing needs, identified requirements, and expectations

A project was defined as distinct from operations in that operations are ongoing and repetitive, whereas projects are temporary and unique. Further, it clarified terms: “Temporary means that every project has a definite begin-ning and a definite end. Unique means that the product or service is differ-ent in some distinguishing way from all similar products or services.”3

An Evolving Professional Standard

The purpose of PMI’s Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide®) was to identify and describe that subset of

Project Management 5


the project management body of knowledge that is generally accepted, or “applicable to most projects most of the time.” Because so many profes-sionals contributed to the definitions and processes, and given its prolifer-ation around the world, the Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge was becoming a de facto professional standard. While everyone seemed to agree, however, that the environment in which a project operates is important, they could not agree on what it should consist of. Different levels of organizational project management maturity across industries pre-vented building a consensus on the organizational context for project man-agement. For this reason, parts of the original “Project Management Body of Knowledge” (1986) that related to organizational responsibilities were left out of the published standard. It was 10 years before those concepts were accepted broadly enough that the scope could be extended to include programs and portfolios as organizational contexts for housing and strate-gically managing multiple projects within a single organization.

Projects are now linked explicitly to achieving strategic objectives, and organizational planning is considered part of the human resources management function. Processes and process groups are also now more fully defined.4 Some work was done in various countries around the world on professional compe-tencies and credentialing, but these cannot yet be defined as a “standard” because the business context differs so much from one country to the next.5 As the profession advances, these areas also may merge into one common defini-tion, providing significant benefits to organizations that operate globally.

A New Core Competency for Organizations

Awareness grew that project management, far from being an adjunct activ-ity associated with nonstandard production, actually was the means by which organizations implemented their strategic objectives. The consensus also grew that project management has become part of the core competen-cy of organizations. The definition captured in the 2000 Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge reflects this growing awareness:

Project management is the application of knowledge, skills, tools, and tech-niques to project activities to meet project requirements. Project management is accomplished through the use of the processes such as: initiating, plan-ning, executing, controlling, and closing. The project team manages the work of the projects, and the work typically involves:

■ Competing demands for: scope, time, cost, risk, and quality.

■ Stakeholders with differing needs and expectations.

■ Identified requirements.6

This change reflected a shift from seeing project management as a pro-fession to seeing project management as an organizational function with
6 The McGraw-Hill 36-Hour Project Management Course


defined processes addressing both the needs and the expectations of people with a stake in the project’s outcome, as well as the functional requirements of the product or service to be produced. It also set as a standard the under-standing that the organization has explicit responsibility for the success of its projects. An organization’s management is responsible not only for estab-lishing an environment that allows and enables project success but also for approving and authorizing the requirements that the project is to meet.

The shift to an organizational context meant that the project manager was no longer an independent practitioner within the organization, making projects successful despite contrary forces. He now had a defined job title, function, and place on the organizational chart. Formalizing the occupation into jobs and career tracks creates a space in which the professional can operate legitimately

PROJECT MANAGEMENT

                               

                       PROJECT MANAGEMENT

OVERVIEW AND GOALS

This chapter provides a general overview of the broad field of project man-agement and its role in the working world. It describes how an age-old process became formalized in the late twentieth century, shows how pro-fessional project management evolved to where it is today, and distinguish-es thousands of people in the occupation of project management from the new project management professional. It explains why organizations under-take projects, clarifies terms, and provides examples of different types of projects. Its goal is to distinguish project management from other functions.

WHAT IS PROJECT MANAGEMENT?

Many sectors of the economy are identifying project management as a new key business process. As project management gains recognition as a distinct way of managing change, there are differences in how it is applied and understood across industries, corporations, governments, and academia. Project management is a term used freely in today’s work world, whether the work is in a profit-oriented company, a not-for-profit organization, or a government agency. People do not always mean the same thing when they use it, however. Some organizations use the term project management to describe the task of managing work. Others use it to define the field of work that is focused on the delivery of project results. Still others refer to

1

Copyright © 2005 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Click here for terms of use.

2 The McGraw-Hill 36-Hour Project Management Course

the profession of project management, encompassing not only project man-agers but also other project-related specialists. Others use it to describe tra-ditional management practices or technical management practices, simply transferring those practices from organizational operations to projects. Because this field is emerging into the mainstream, many definitions abound. During the course of describing project management practices and concepts, this book will help to distinguish what is unique to this field from what it has in common with general management and the management ele-ments of technical disciplines. It also will identify many of the misleading assumptions about project management that camouflage the value of this new field of professionalism.

Project Management Evolves

Projects have been managed since prehistory. Strategies for project man-agement can be found in records of the Chinese War Lords (Sun Tzsu), Machiavelli, and other more obscure writers (see Chapter 2). As projects became more complex and more difficult to execute in a context where profit, timelines, and resource consumption competed with defined objec-tives, twentieth-century managers began to codify the practices needed to plan, execute, and control projects. The government led the way in devel-oping the techniques and practices of project management, primarily in the military, which faced a series of major tasks that simply were not achiev-able by traditional organizations operating in traditional ways.

It is popular to ask, “Why can’t they run government the way I run my busi-ness?” In the case of project management, however, business and other organizations learned from government, not the other way around. A lion’s share of the credit for the development of the techniques and practices of project management belongs to the military, which faced a series of major tasks that simply were not achievable by traditional organizations operating in traditional ways. The United States Navy’s Polaris program, NASA’s Apollo space program, and more recently, the space shuttle and the strategic defense initiative (“star wars”) programs are instances of the application of these specially developed management approaches to extraordinarily com-plex projects. Following such examples, nonmilitary government sectors, pri-vate industry, public service agencies, and volunteer organizations have all used project management to increase their effectiveness.1

Thus, for modern-day project management, it was the U.S. Navy’s Polaris submarine program and later NASA’s Apollo space program that launched the systematic application of knowledge, tools, methods, and techniques to the planning, execution, and delivery of projects. While these techniques have proliferated broadly among other government programs

Project Management 3  

since the sixties and seventies and through research and demonstration pro-grams to other branches of government and to their contractor organiza-tions, the construction industry was a key beneficiary of these improvements. Large, complex projects, such as the construction of Hoover Dam and the carving of the faces of American presidents into stone at Mount Rushmore in South Dakota, applied these improvements. Since then, project management methods have been implemented in information management and movement, pharmaceuticals, information systems, the entertainment and service sectors, and a variety of global projects. Project management’s value continues to grow.

For a clearer idea of what the term project management means, com-pare it with the term medicine in a health context. Each term can have many meanings. The all-inclusive view of project management—just as in medi-cine—will address the practice of, as well as the role, the field, the occupa-tion, and the profession. It also will expand on the variations of meaning depending on which view is taken. Project management in a professional context means applying knowledge, skills, processes, methods, tools, and techniques to get desired results.

Just as the practice of medicine has many applications, so does the practice of project management. Like the word medicine, the term project management can take on a broad definition or a narrow one. A doctor prac-tices medicine (broad). A patient takes a dose of medicine (narrow). Athletic discipline is said to be good medicine—an ambiguous definition that combines both. The same term takes on a different meaning depending on the context in which it is used. Yet one associates common values and goals with medicine. Medicine supports health; it does not compromise it. Medicine implies a commitment of individuals to the goal of preserving or restoring health. This book will define a context for project management and put its various roles and uses in perspective for both individuals and organizations. Although one term or definition may not fit all uses, there are common elements inherent in all project management. These common elements bind together the individuals and the practices within project man-agement. Together they create a common understanding of what project management is and help us to come to grips with just why project manage-ment is getting such visibility today and why we need to know about it