Agile Project Management: Creative Innovative Products - Report Example

?Project Management Methods: A Comparative Study Introduction: The concept of project management is defined as the discipline of planning, organising, securing and managing resources in order to accomplish specific goals and objectives in any field or domain. In other words, it systematically organises a project and its components. A project is a one-time effort that is aimed at producing specific results in a specific duration. That is to say, a project has a defined beginning and an end. Further, a project is time-constrained. Therefore, it requires a systematic approach and methodology to identify and execute certain activities and strategies in order to meet a specific set of goals and objectives. A project follows a certain set of phases including the following: definition (what are its objectives), planning (what are its tasks and activities), execution (what are the resources and budget), control (what are its updates and progress details), and closure (what is its final outcome). There are several methods and techniques used in a project to meet these goals. This paper briefly addresses two of the main approaches of project management – traditional and agile management methods. While discussing the respective characteristics of the methods, the discussion also includes a detailed yet precise comparison between traditional and agile approaches. Traditional project management approach: To begin with, it is important to note the different characteristic features of a project from a general management perspective. Andersen, Grude and Haug (2009) clearly indicate the basic features according to whom a project: Is a unique task Is designed to attain a specific result Requires a variety of resources Is limited in time When it comes to traditional project management approach, it uses conventional methods and techniques in the management process. In the context of a general definition of traditional project management, it is acknowledged as a set of methodologies, techniques and tools which can be applied to an activity or task in order to accomplish an end product, outcome or a service. Used for decades in different domains and management environments, traditional project management approach is applicable for most of them due to its less complicated and more organised way of working. Unlike the modern methods, traditional method does not require to be customised in a specific way. It simply uses its own orthodox yet simplified tools and techniques for management and problem-solving areas. The most remarkable advantage of a traditional project management is that its tools and techniques have been used and proven for such a long time. Therefore, the level of predictability of the outcome of such an approach is almost to the point of reasonably acceptable accuracy. A traditional approach to project management involves the identification of certain stages and execution of activities or tasks accordingly. The following stages are applied in a traditional approach in a sequential fashion: Initiation Planning and design Execution and construction Monitoring and controlling systems completion The initiating stage involves the process of determining the nature and scope of the project. This stage is significant for the successful execution of the project. At this initial stage, it is important for the project team to have a clear understanding of the business environment. The planning and design stage witnesses project planning details along with a number of activities including selection of the planning team, identification of necessary tasks and deliverables, development of schedule, budget and risk planning, and so on. Once the plan is executed, monitoring the project variables and ongoing activities is continuous. Traditional approach involves careful and systematic planning and execution in every stage of the project management. In case of any deficiencies identified at any stage, recommendations can be immediately made to solve the problems. Ideally, a traditional approach follows a structured planning and monitoring process just like the way it is shown in the above figure. However, such structural methodology depends on the type of project. Variation in these project stages is characteristically prominent in different industries. Agile project management approach: When a project requires advanced and customised planning, modern methodologies like agile project management are usually followed. Agile project management can be defined as an iterative method that moves faster, is more flexible and aggressively customer responsive (Highsmith, 2006). Further, “Agile Project Management (APM) brings together a set of principles and practices that enables project managers to catch up with the realities of modern product development.” (p. 20) With a more practical approach, agile method focuses on real-time problem solving rather than traditional paperwork. It is highly flexible and interactive in nature. Agile project management highlights certain important aspects – opportunity, principles, framework and practices. The approach follows the principles of experimentation, exploration and adaptation. It aims at creating innovative products and services. Highsmith provides an appropriate comment on the objectives of agile project management: “At its core, APM focuses on customers, products and people – delivering value to customers, building adaptable products, and engaging talented people in collaborative work.” (p. 21) Agile techniques are also known as extreme project management. Such techniques and tools are ideally used in extremely complex and uncertain management projects. Especially, agile methodologies are useful for people who do not have accurate understanding of how to handle the complexities and uncertain business situations and problems. Agile approach is best applied in software development projects. The elasticity of agile project management leaves sufficient room for adaptation of new opportunities as well as adjustment to reality. Compared to other iterative methods, the delivery time in agile project management is in weeks rather than in months. Freedman (2010) explains this promptness of agile techniques: “The daily meeting, an integral element of agile practice, allows teams to plan in a very granular manner for the results that they plan to deliver that day, and due to its immediacy, estimates for this work are much more likely to be accurate.” As the project moves toward its final stage, the work becomes more ambiguous, unknown, and prone to change. Therefore, estimation process in agile techniques is based on what is practically visible and attainable. In short, unrealistic predictions do not have any room in agile project management. Further, agile planning can be done at feature level rather than task level in order to assist stakeholders and sponsors through the uncertainty and ambiguity of business situations. This has other advantages as well. “Agile methodologies such as eXtreme Programming (XP), SCRUM and Feature-Driven Development strive to reduce the cost of change throughout the software development process. For example, XP uses rapid iterative planning and development cycles in order to force trade-offs and deliver the highest value features as early as possible. In addition, the constant, systemic testing that is part of XP ensures high quality via early defect detection and resolution.” (Agile Project Management, 2003) However, there are disadvantages too. Due to be in distinctive contrast with traditional methodologies in fundamental assumptions, newer agile methodologies tend to “appear informal to the point of being chaotic, egalitarian to the point of actively fostering insubordination, and directionless in their approach to problem solving.” (Agile Project Management, 2003) Comparison of traditional and agile project management approaches: It is important to note again that project management is indeed a serious task with a systematic and organised set of activities, planning, deadline, time, money, problem situations, changes, monitoring and controlling, order, and people. The two important approaches of project management already being discussed above can be further discussed on a systematically comparative level based on different dimensions. Starting with a general approach, traditional methodologies tend to follow certain fundamental assumptions (Agile Project Management, 2003): Rigid procedures are needed to regulate change Hierarchical organisational structures are means of establishing order Increased control is encouraged for increased order Employees are interchangeable ‘parts’ in the organisational ‘machine’ Problem solving can be handled through reductionist task breakdown and allocation Complex upfront planning is useful in predicting projects and risks However, agile methodologies are more or less in sharp contrast with most of these fundamental assumptions of traditional methodologies. For instance, agile techniques are open and elastic, and ready to adapt to change in contrast to the rigid structure of traditional approaches. In terms of problem solving, newer agile methodologies are directionless in their approach at least in the context of these assumptions. It is also observed among many industries that due to the conspicuous misalignment between the fundamental norms of traditional management and those of new agile development methodologies, new agile methodologies are being adopted at a comparatively slow level. When it comes to the issue of money, traditional and agile methodologies are subject to almost similar consequences. In case of traditional management techniques, the risk of cost is relatively less as everything in the project is managed through proper planning and execution of organised budget and risk plan. However, such techniques are not practically prepared for sudden changes and complexities in business environments and operations. In that context, agile development methodologies are more efficient in dealing with the risk of cost. As agile methodologies are characteristically iterative, their cost reduction strategies are apparently accustomed to sudden changes in the development management process. In terms of time management, traditional management approaches are comparatively less adept than the new agile methodologies. Traditional project management is usually task-based and estimates the number of hours each task is going to take. However, this estimate does not change throughout the project. Often, the actual time changes into a different one than the estimated time. Besides, the hierarchical structure in traditional approaches formulates gap in communication between upper and lower level management which results in missed deadlines. In case of agile methodologies, they are feature-based and therefore estimates time focusing on the relative size of features. Besides, delivery time in agile development methodologies is estimated in weeks. The estimation of time is likely to be more accurate due to the iterative nature of such methods. In the context of business environments and situations, both traditional and agile project management approaches follow systematic and organised strategy planning and execution. Traditional methodologies are more orthodox in nature and often incapable of dealing with sudden business changes and complex situations. The rigid structure of traditional approaches often prevents them from a clear understanding of unpredictable problem situations. On the contrary, agile methodologies are iterative and try to find out every new opportunity to reconsider the plan and adjust to reality. The elasticity and flexibility of agile techniques usually result in exploration, experimentation and adaptation of newer business environments. Besides, traditional approaches are usually not fit for modern projects such as software development. Traditional approach typically features intricate scheduling techniques and heavy formalism. Due to its task-based structure, traditional approach typically finds project managers focusing more on task lists to confirm to the reality of progress rather than working with the team. Disconnect between upper and lower level management is also common in traditional approach. Agile methodologies are relatively flexible and focus on products and people, not paperwork (common in traditional approach). When it comes to the creation and implementation of new technologies and techniques, agile methods are best used in small-scale and complex projects whereas traditional methods are limited to the more conventional ones. Conclusion: With the advancement of technology, various project management methods have been adopted, changed, modified and implemented based on different industry types and business environments. While traditional project management methods have been proved useful for many industries so far, newer lot of technology and software development programmes requires even newer and more advanced methodologies and techniques with better accuracy and outcome. Traditional approaches are adopted for many management projects as they do not require any customisation. But newer projects in software development definitely demand more adequate and customised tools and techniques. However, the alignment between the fundamental assumptions of traditional and agile project management methodologies should not be too extensive and complicated. Instead of solely supporting and following one of these two methodologies, it is wiser and professionally sound to incorporate the assumptions of these two methodologies and work on the development and implementation of a new and more effective project management methodology. Future is going to be witnessing more and more of such advanced methodologies and techniques. Bibliography: 1. Andersen, E., Grude, K. V. and Haug, T., 2009, Goal Directed Project Management: Effective Techniques and Strategies. 4th edition. London: Kogan Page. 2. Biafore, B. and Stover, T., 2012, Your Project Management Coach: Best Practices for Managing Projects in the Real World. Indianapolis: Wiley & Sons. 3. CCPACE, 2003, Agile Project Management. Retrieved from http://www.ccpace.com/resources/documents/agileprojectmanagement.pdf. 4. Charvat, J., 2003, Project Management Methodologies: Selecting, Implementing, and Supporting Methodologies and Processes for Projects. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. 5. Chin, G., 2004, Agile Project Management: How to Succeed in the Face of Changing Project Requirements. New York: American Management Association. 6. Cobb, C. G., 2011, Making Sense of the Agile Project Management: Balancing, Control and Agility. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. 7. Freedman, R., 2010, Comparing Traditional and Agile Project Management Estimation Techniques. Retrieved from http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/tech-manager/comparing-traditional-and-agile-project-management-estimation-techniques/4357. 8. Highsmith, J., 2006, Agile Project Management: Creative Innovative Products. New Delhi: Pearson. 9. Goodpasture, J. C., 2004, Quantitative Methods in Project Management. Florida: Ross Publishing. 10. Orlando, D., 2009, Traditional Project Management vs. Agile Development with Software as a Service Project. Retrieved from http://danorlando.com/?p=406. 11. Tutorials Point, 2012, Traditional Project Management. Retrieved from http://www.tutorialspoint.com/management_concepts/traditional_project_management.htm. 12. Wysocki, R. K., 2011, Effective Project Management: Traditional, Agile, Extreme. 6th edition. New Jersey: Wiley & Sons. Read More