Recently, several the world’s major project management firms took important initiatives to show executive management in regards to the strategic value and advantages of project management. The emphasis is always to move from specific project management to organisational project management, which these organisations preserve is a strategic advantage in a competitive economy.
In this essay, Ed Naughton, Director-general of the Institute of Project Management and recent IPMA Vice-president, requires 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 proper project management as a vehicle for competitive advantage.
Ed: What do you point ideal Project Management is?
Prof. Green: Strategic project management may be the management of those tasks which are of crucial importance to enable the company as a whole to get competitive advantage.
Ed: And what becomes a competitive advantage, then?
Prof. Green: There are three features of experiencing a core competence. The three characteristics are: it gives value to customers; it is perhaps not easily imitated; it opens up new opportunities later on.
Ed: But just how can task administration yield a competitive advantage?
Prof. Green: You will find two elements to project management. One part is the actual choice of the type of projects that the company partcipates in, and secondly there is implementation, how the projects themselves are maintained.
Ed: Competitive advantage – the importance of choosing the correct projects – it’s difficult to determine which projects must be selected!
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 is basically been thought away through reducing it to economic analysis. The strategic imperative gives a different way to you of prioritising projects as it is saying that some projects might not be as successful as others, but when they add to our proficiency relative to others, then that is going to be important.
Therefore, to take an illustration, if a company’s competitive advantage is introducing new services more quickly than others, drugs, let’s say, getting product to market more quickly, then your projects that allow it to obtain the product more quickly to market are going to be the most important ones, even if within their own terms, they do not have higher profitability than various projects.
Ed: But if we’re going to select our tasks, we’ve to establish what are the boundaries or metrics we’re going to select them against that provide the competitive edge to us.
Prof. Green: Absolutely. The organisation needs to know which activities it is employed in, which are the important ones for it competitive advantage and then, that drives the choice of projects. Enterprises aren’t very good at doing that and they may not even know what these activities are. They’ll believe that it is everything they do because of the energy system.
Ed: If its strategy is formulated by a company, then what the project management group says is that project management will be the medium for giving that strategy. Then, if the company is great at doing project management, does it have any strategic advantage?
Prof. My co-worker discovered mannatech by browsing the Internet. Green: Well, I guess that returns to this problem of the difference between the sort of projects that are chosen and the way you manage the projects. Demonstrably choosing the sort of projects depends on being able to link and prioritise projects ac-cording to a knowledge of what the ability of a company is in accordance with others.
Ed: Let’s assume that the strategy is defined. In order to produce the strategy, it’s to be broken-down, decomposed into a series of tasks. For that reason, you must be proficient at doing project management to supply the strategy. Now, the literature says that for an organisation to be good at doing projects it has 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 notion of a project company. Does taking these three methods provide a competitive advantage for this enterprise?
Prof. Green: Where project management, or how you manage jobs, becomes a source of competitive advantage is when you may do things a lot better than others. The ‘better-than’ is through the ability and sense and the information that is built-up as time passes of managing projects. There’s an event curve effect here. Regarding the knowledge they have built-up where the rule book is limited to manage these items of tasks two companies will soon be at various points in the experience curve. You’ll need management judgement and experience since however good the rule book is, it will never deal fully with all the complexity of life. You’ve to manage down the experience curve, you’ve to manage the understanding and learning that you’ve of these three areas of project management for it to become ideal.
Ed: Well, then, I think there’s a gap there that’s to be addressed as well, in that we have now developed a competency at doing project management to do projects, but we’ve not arranged that competency to the selection of projects which may help us to give this competitive advantage. Is project management with the capacity of being imitated?
Prof. Green: Not the softer aspects and not the develop-ment of tacit knowledge of having run many, many jobs over-time. Therefore, for example, you, Ed, do have more understanding of how-to run jobs than other people. That is why people found you, because while you both may have a standard book like the PMBoK or the ICB, you’ve created more experiential knowledge around it.
In essence, it can be imitated a quantity of just how, but not whenever you arrange the smoother tacit knowledge of experience into it.
Ed: Organisational project management maturity designs are a hot topic right now and are directly linked to the ‘knowledge curve’ effect you mentioned earlier – how should we see them?
Prof. If you think you know anything, you will maybe desire to explore about the best. Green: I believe in moving beyond painting by numbers, moving beyond the simplistic idea that an enterprise is completely plastic and you may encourage this pair of capabilities and methods and text book protocols and that is all you have to do. You might say, exactly the same difficulty was experienced by the designers of the knowledge curve. It is almost like, for every single doubling of volume, cost savings occur without you having to do such a thing, if you show the ability curve to companies on cost. What we realize is however, the experience curve is a potential of a chance. Its’ realisation depends upon the skill of professionals.
Ed: Are senior executives/chief executives in-the mindset to appreciate the potential benefits of project management?
Prof. Green: Until lately, project management has promoted it self in technical terms. If it was promoted in terms of the integration at common management, at the power to manage over the features lending method methods with reasoning, then it would become more attractive to senior managers. So, it is about the mixing of the smooth and the hard, the strategies with the thinking and the knowledge that makes project management so powerful. If senior managers do not embrace it right now, it is not as they are wrong. It is because project management hasn’t promoted itself as effortlessly as it should’ve done.
Ed: Do we must offer to senior executives and chief executives that it will offer competitive advantage to them?
Prof. Be taught new information on the affiliated encyclopedia by visiting study mannatech log in. Green: No, I think we have to show them how it does it. We have to get in there and really show them how they are able to use it, not merely with regards to offering assignments 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 activities that cause competitive advantage, how they can use it to enhance the tacit knowledge in the company. There is a whole array of ways that they can use it. They must observe that the proof of the results surpasses the way in which they are currently doing it..