Traditional Way and Agile Way of Management - Essay Example

Traditional Way and Agile Way of Management Introduction Company projects are temporary and plus they are endeavours (Chatfield & Johnson, 2012). . Project managers might know the start date of a project but it is not necessary that they would also know the end date of it. That is why handling a project requires efficient management. Management has been present for centuries. Even cave dwellers were accustomed to some type of management. From hunting food, to making fire and then expanding in numbers all required some form of management skills. Today management has been divided into many types and forms according to their needs and usage. Managing projects efficiently makes the difference between a winner and a loser. New studies and tactics are being formed each day in the field of project management. However, conventional (traditional) form of management is still prevalent and has its uses. On the other hand, more flexible and client oriented management tactics are also mushrooming. Here is an introduction of both of types. Traditional Management This form of management requires certain ways and procedures to be fulfilled, preferably in order. Despite the fact that traditional style of management is more rigid than the agile, the fundamental steps involved in Traditional Management are just rough estimations of management techniques intricate. For instance; some projects won’t even be completed and will get terminated in the middle of management process. Some projects will not follow the order of basic processes while some projects might go through basic steps multiple times before completion. Agile Management It is an interactive form of management where engineering and Information Technology requirements of a project are determined. This type of management is used for small scale projects or for some elements of large scale projects. However, its most common use is in projects that are too complex for the customers to comprehend. Therefore, the agile management techniques test prototypes of the product for customer’s use. Lean techniques and six-sigma are also linked with agile management processes (Wikipedia, 2012). Traditional Project Management Approaches The basic steps involved in traditional management are; Initiation Planning and design Construction Controlling and Monitoring Completion Three main methods used under traditional management approaches are critical chain method, events chains method and the extreme project management (Wikipedia, 2012). Critical Chain Method This method revolves around the Theory of Constraints, where various tasks in the project are prioritize and categorized according to their importance. Usually, the tasks included in the ‘critical chain’ are given preference over all other tasks (PM Hut, 2008). Moreover, the fundamentals of this method are uncertainty (handling it) and getting the job done with the most limited amount of resources available (scarcity of intellectual property and raw materials). Many critical chain method projects undergo ‘resource levelling’. It means that longest events with constrained resources are tied to the apex of critical chain. However, for projects that include sub-contracting other projects, resource levelling might not be a good idea (Wikipedia, 2012). Agile Project Management Approaches Agile project management is sometimes called extreme project management. The aspects of the ‘Iterative life cycle’ are also found in agile project management, for instance, deliverables in multiple stages throughout the life cycle of the project is an iterative life cycle tool, which is also present in agile project management. This type of project management uses the features found in agile software programming. In other words, agile project management can be considered a practical (in physical terminology) version of the software (Manifesto, 2001). Iterative or agile method involves incremental development. The system and the process is gradually built and has an advantage over other methods. For instance, if there is a need to modify the management process or the direction of the system needs to go through sudden abrupt changes; agile management system has a better chance to cater for the change then other methods. One relatively rigid method is ‘waterfall method’. In comparison with the agile project management, the waterfall method uses clearly (or with less flexibility) defined deliverables for the life cycle of the project. The higher management of a company performs a complete audit of the system before it is incorporated into the project management. Agile project management method cuts the processing time considerably. Projects that took months to complete in the past are being accomplished within weeks or days. This project managing method modifies the conventional iteration processes waterfall and makes them more flexible and advanced. Despite the fact that agile management is rarely used to manage a mega project, it is no less crucial than the conventional of traditional project management methods and tools. A mega project can be divided into several parts and then these small parts can then be governed and managed by agile management. Moreover there usually are certain aspects of any project that are better governed by another management methodology. These days, the competition is tougher than ever and everything comes down to efficiency. How efficiently is the project manager handling the time? Where does the project stand in terms of cost efficiency? That is why a collage of management methods and tactics are incorporated in one project. Comparison of traditional and agile project management approaches The core difference between agile and traditional project management rests in their estimating techniques. Traditional project management is more task-based whereas the agile technique uses feature based approach towards task estimation (Freedman, 2010). For the traditional project management, ‘task break down’ structure is used where the PM designs and plans parts of a project. ‘Divide and rule’ would sum up this process. One crucial aspect of traditional project managing is counting number of hours per job or sub-task. This might sound a little too rigid and formal, it is formal. Plus this process goes into more generalization of the technique. For instance no two projects are similar (exception is the rule) and they each require unique cost and skill features. Now estimating both such tasks through hours per task would be a little unfair. Equality isn’t a universal rule, equitability probably is (Freedman, 2010). This is where the agile management has an edge. Feature based approach is more customized and caters for easy tweaking in the project management engine. “Finding a flight by source and destination city” would be a great example of agile management. Agile management techniques refrain from attaching iron clad tags with task estimation. For instance, agile method estimates the job by its features. Or in other words, it gives due attention and emphasis on task according to its demand (Freedman, 2010). It categorizes tasks into small, medium and large categories and that is how priorities and resource allocation works. On the other hand, the traditional management makes estimations in absolute number of hours. This habit views all tasks with same priority level and eliminates the possibility of maximizing efficiency (or profit) but paying more attention or allocating more resources to a particular task. Here is an example of what really happens in a traditional project managing. The PM makes estimation on task basis and then reality strikes. The actual time comes out different from the planned one. This is not a rare occasion, it almost always happens and the project managers usually keep a time margin for such discrepancies. Reality versus the assumed or idealized time frame coincides and finally collapses under the pressure. This outcome is destined to occur and effects negatively on the project. The project manager then has to explain such shortcomings to the clients. And this territory is a whole Pandora box because an unsatisfied client can probably pull out of a contract (provided the contract holds such a provision). Not only do the project managers have to do the explaining, they also have to make necessary adjustments to the existing plan. Sometimes, the adjustments require more than just tweaking. Additional costs may be borne by the client/company. Traditional approach is easy to make but difficult to follow. The whole plan is usually made right before starting the project and often covers the whole project in its entirety. The rest of the project is completed with moulding and fixing the plan to reality. The picture is simple; the project managers usually spend the whole project life sitting somewhere inside their offices fixing Gantt charts and restructuring graphs and figures instead of helping out the team members through leadership. They (project managers) can do more productive work while assisting their team members on the job. For instance, if there is an obstacle or even a tiny glitch in the work process, the project managers through their experience can solve or resolve it better than anyone however the team members have to resolve such problems on their own. This might not seem a big problem but when it comes to competing against fierce competitors, these small cranking of nuts and bolts can serve the company for a long time. Benefits of Agile Management On the other hand, agile management is at a certain advantage. In such management processes every aspect of iteration is an opportunity for tweaking the processes (planning, design etc.) according to new requirements, or simply adjusting to reality. This way the team can start the work today instead of waiting to craft that so called ‘perfect plan’ where one size fits all. Under agile management, the project managers can play their real part of a team leader and managing the project, rather than sitting in their office playing the role of a project bureaucrat (Freedman, 2010). One reason that is often misunderstood for choosing agile management (feature level) over traditional management is the fact that clients don’t usually understand the granular details of the task. They don’t know the technical aspects and therefore not interested in what is exactly going on with the work process. A direct effect of this cliché is they are only looking for results. In the end, it all matters what the project can and can’t deliver. Projects with long time horizons can be a real test for project managers. In order to show outstanding results to clients, they need to be consistent in adjusting the management processes. The major problem with task level management is it tries to grasp everything, within or beyond reach. This technique wastes a lot of precious time that can be used somewhere else. And besides it is almost useless to try and estimate and predict those farfetched aspects of a project which may or may not be realised. Therefore it is better to stick with what is in the grasp of the project manager, namely, through feature level management. Multiple time horizon projects can’t work effectively and efficiently with task level decomposition. Conclusions Weighing the main advantages and disadvantages of the two types of management approaches against each other including a definite conclusion, which methods are best for which kind of business and a justification of these choices Self-regulatory and self-correcting plans are made through agile management. Every act of iteration in the management process is a possible review and correctional opportunity. Managers learn from the previous iteration and make the correction or adjustment in the coming plan. Agile project managers take in to account the human emotions and create incremental strategy for the project management. Reality based estimations are only made possible in agile management. They are missing from traditional management practices. This is why the agile management philosophy lets the project managers to make corrections to their strategy and planning at every possible stage. Bibliography Admin. (2001). Manifesto for Agile Software Development. Available: http://agilemanifesto.org/iso/en/. Last accessed 15th April 2012. Carl Chatfield and Timothy Johnson. (2012). A short course in project management. Available: http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/project-help/a-short-course-in-project-management-HA010235482.aspx. Last accessed 15th April 2012. Guidelines for Managing Projects. (2007). Department for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform. Available from: www.berr.gov.uk. Last accessed 15th April 2012 PM Hut. (2008). Which Life Cycle Is Best for Your Project? Available: http://www.pmhut.com/which-life-cycle-is-best-for-your-project. Last accessed 15th April 2012. Rick Freedman. (2010). Comparing traditional and agile project management estimation techniques. Available: http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/tech-manager/comparing-traditional-and-agile-project-management-estimation-techniques/4357. Last accessed 15th April 2012. Wikipedia Contributors. (2012). Project Management. Available: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_management#The_traditional_approach. Last accessed 15th April 2012. Wikipedia Contributors. (2012). Agile Management. Available: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agile_Project_Management. Last accessed 15th April 2012. Read More