Open and Adaptive Project Systems - Term Paper Example

SUCCESSFUL PROJECTS START WITH AN ACCURATE PROJECT DEFINITION AND ARE DELIVERED THROUGH OPEN AND ADAPTIVE PROJECT SYSTEMS By Institution Location Date Successful Projects Start with an Accurate Project Definition and are Delivered through Open and Adaptive Project Systems Introduction Project managers always operate under the pressure of ensuring that their projects prove to be successful. It is not easy to develop and manage a project while ensuring that it registers the expected outcomes. Experts in project management have highlighted that accurate project definition is a critical step in the determination of the success of the entire project. Moreover, adopting open and adaptive project systems is of critical importance in ensuring that a project can respond to all the changes occurring at different phases, but register the expected outcomes. This is the reason why experts advise against closed systems, which do not present any level of adaptability. This paper will demonstrate that accurate project definition and the adoption of open and adaptive systems are factors that lead to the success of a project. Project Definition Project Definition is a complex process that is defined by Kähkönen (1998, p. 625) as “The process prior to final investment decision-making”. This process has crucial element, which is the recognition of the clients or stakeholders’ necessities and “specification”. Specifically trying to understand the stakeholder’s needs in order to deliver an adequate outcome, with keeping into consideration the three main factors that will measure the performance of this project, which are time, budget, and quality; project manager and his team must be aware of this element and they should understand them clearly (Cano & Lidón 2011, p. 528). This process considered a vital stage since all hazards that might emerge and is associated with the project will be examined (Neal 1995, p. 5). In order to fulfill and cover more aspects of the definition Walker highlighted an important side which most of the definitions lacked it. He mentioned the resources, which includes people who are a key factor to deliver the project. Since the projects cannot be achieved without managing people and by their work, it is essentially vital to include them in the definition (Gibson Jr & Cho 2000, p. 115). Objective of Project Definition and Consequences Kähkönen stated that in order to boost the possibility of achieving an effective project, there are two points; initially, there should be “strategic information” to make sure that the possessor has a clear and adequate knowledge of the chances that will lead to an effective project. Second, the fundamental venture execution plans must be considered as an important part of the definition. From the same point of view, Cano and Lidón addressed it briefly as clarifying and building an accurate understanding of the “size, scope, and complexity”. The main concern when defining the project is to achieve the satisfaction of the client or to whom the project will be delivered for as mentioned by Aibinu and Fageha, within the cost, quality, and time (Aibinu & Fageha 2013, p. 74). Therefore, inadequate definition will lead to stakeholder’s disappointment since the outcome did not meet their needs. To support this point, the result of a survey that has been conducted by Assaf and Al-Hejji shows that the delay of projects is due to owners’ requests that keep changing through the construction, which leads to inefficient project since the time of delivery and budget will change (Assaf and Al-Hejji 2006, p. 350). As the figure (1) shows in concept selection or project definition stage and design stage of the project the cost of changing decisions or terminating it is quite low, but moving along the process the cost increases dramatically and will be difficult for changes to be made (Sutton 2010, p. 60). Successful Projects In order to complement the ideas, the criteria that lead to successful project must be discussed. As shown mostly in every definition the project must be delivered within the specific time, budget, conformance, and quality that has been requested before starting the project. In fact, they are not the only criteria that are used to measure performance of the project (Kerzner 2001, p. 78). There are extra norms that might be at the same level or more significant, those norms that must be considered are the sustainability, safety measures of the site, and whoever is involved in the project, the legacy of the long-run performance, reliability, and achieving corporate interest (Pryke & Smyth 2006, p. 61). Stability during the project life cycle is not guaranteed, there is always a chance for problems to turn up, and therefore project manager and clients should interpret to decide which changes should be made and trade-off might take place in order to stick with the cost or project schedule (Morris 2013, p. 18). At the same time, those decisions must be adequate according to the scope of the change to solve the problem. Nevertheless, if this predicted change would affect any criteria that lead to a successful project, a settlement on that impact will not be permissible in any cases. On the other hand, there must be a combination between the criteria and success factors to deliver a successful project (Lester 2014, p. 72). Effective project definition requires the project manager to understand both the task complexities and relationship complexities associated with the project. This is because managing tasks and relationships are the two most critical responsibilities in project management. In addition, project definition requires the project manager to have a clear focus of the path that will define the entire project (Winch 2010, p. 67). The niche of the project is the most critical aspect that must be kept in mind. Failures to have the niche in mind means that the project may end anywhere else, hence not meet the defined standards. Moreover, the project manager must contemplate on the potential uncertainties related to the project (Sherrer 2010, n.p). It is one thing to understand all the different tasks and relationships that define a project, as well as how they are interrelated while it is a different thing to consider any uncertainty that may emerge. The nature of uncertainty expected in a certain project determines how the manager plans and controls different tools. Different uncertainties affect the project in a varied manner. Therefore, it is critical for the project manager to assess the level of uncertainty (Nahod 2012, p. 444). Some of the common types of uncertainties include variation, foreseen risk, unforeseen risks, and chaos. All these types of uncertainty usually influence the duration, the total cost, and the overall performance of the project (Petit & Hobbs 2010, p. 50). Therefore, proper project definition should bring them into concepts (Collyer & Warren 2009, p. 358). It is critical for a project manager to consider both project complexity and uncertainty and highlight how they are related. As highlighted above, project complexity denotes the challenges involved in the proper coordination of the different tasks as well as the allocation of an appropriate resource for each task. Other complexities may arise when the project manager is trying to define the critical path of undertaking the project in the monitoring phase of the entire project. Notably, the project manager must ensure that all the deviations from the critical path defined are effectively corrected with respect to the budget, timing, and performance of the entire project. On the other end, a project manager should consider relational complexity. This includes the identification of any existing conflicts of interest as well as the misguided priorities exhibited by some individuals involved in the project (Human & Steyn 2013, p. 1). Notably, project managers must have several aspects in mind if they are to succeed in project definition. Successful Project Managers Adopt a Systems Approach A systems approach requires the project manager to consider the project or organization as a whole and not its separate entities. This is because a project is a system comprising of different components which are closely interrelated, and which must function to achieve a certain goal. Therefore, project managers who intend to succeed in their projects must maintain an overall view of the entire project and consider the potential effects of all the decisions they make on the project. A systems approach ensures that a project manager creates Cinergy between all the components of the entire project (Aritua, Smith, & Bower 2009, p, 75). It is critical for a project manager to understand how the different components of a project are interrelated and how they function together. Notably, there are different types of systems that project managers may opt for in an effort to ensure that they deliver the expected results within the defined period. Worth noting is the fact that all types of systems have a defined structure depending on their components. In addition, they exhibit a unique behavior depending on the types of inputs they require, the functionality of their processing, as well as the outputs (Gillard & Joharisen 2004, p. 23). Moreover, systems have a form of interconnectivity, which denotes the existing relationships between the different components. Adopting a systems approach helps a project manager to consider an integrated view of the entire system instead of perceiving each component independently. Notably, viewing the system as a whole creates a platform for the project manager to consider how the system interacts with its environment (Anderson & Merna 2003, p. 385). Notably, it is critical to understand system dynamics, which denote the flow of information and the feedback from each department of the component. All systems have both an internal and external environment, which affect their functionality (McLeod 2002, p. 67). Open Systems The open system is one of the approaches under systems approach, which defines a model used by project managers to view the entire project, its components including tasks and relationships and how the environment affects them (Collyer & Warren 2009, p. 360). Open systems consider the inputs, which involve resources, the processing of the project as well as the outputs and how the environment affects the entire project (Walker 2007, p. 78). Therefore, open systems give considerations to the environment and are able to adapt to changing environmental conditions (Moore 2002, p. 56). Experts have highlighted that open systems have an evident potential of changing in accordance with the environment, shaping the environment they operate in, or eventually creating a favorable environment that enables them to meet the predefined goal (Sutton 2010, p. 50). The open system also considers the interaction between different components of the entire system, and how they affect each other (Petit & Hobbs 2010, p. 50). Therefore, project managers who choose to adopt the open system should be prepared for a measure of differentiation and adaptability, which is of critical importance in these systems (Aibinu & Fageha 2013, p. 79). Notably, open systems require an inflow of information and feedback production. These kinds of systems are always open to new sources of information emerging from the environment and utilize such information to ensure that the entire system responds effectively (Lester 2014, p. 56). Successful Projects, Adopt an Open Systems Approach The reality of many projects as highlighted above is that they are defined by a high level of complexity and uncertainty. Therefore, adopting a closed system approach may not deliver the expected outcome. This explains why successful project managers usually define the project specifics and adopt an open systems approach (Gibson Jr & Cho 2000, p. 120). This means that they constantly consider environmental factors and exhibit adaptability with the system exhibiting change in accordance with the feedback from environmental factors (Oscillations between Open and Closed Systems : Project Management in Research and Development 2000, p. 34). Project managers adopting this view ensure that all the decisions they make are assessed appropriately and their potential effects on the entire system considered (Neal 1995, p. 7). Managers adopting the open systems approach keep the niche of the project tin mind and ensure that there is proper adaptability in an effort to define the path toward achieving the overall goal. They manage the complexities and uncertainties ensuring that the system responds appropriately according to all the feedback collected (Pondy & Boje 2005, p. 129). Diagram showing the open system structure Available at http://books.publishing.monash.edu/apps/bookworm/view/The+Project+as+a+Social+System%3A+Asia-Pacific+Perspectives+on+Project+Management/171/OEBPS/c12.htm Closed Systems On the other hand, closed systems are predefined with the critical path determined in the course of planning with minimal variations expected in the entire course of the project. Closed systems are not subject to environmental influence and remain independent, of all the environmental changes (Al-Hejji & Assaf 2006, p. 355). This rigidity prevents any form of adaptability to either internal or external environment. Closed systems operate under the assumption that minimal complexities will occur (Cano & Lidón 2011, p. 530). This is the reason why they do not leave an open space for any form of adaptability. They do not give regard to information flow and its feedback (Kähkönen 1999, p. 67). Successful Projects Integrate both Soft and Hard Systems In an effort to ensure that a project achieves the defined goals, project managers should integrate both soft and hard systems. Soft systems exhibit an unstructured form, but have purposeful behavior, which is critical sin defining objectives (Siriram 2012, p. 95). Soft systems are able to utilize feedbacks and adopt goals and behavior in accordance with the perceived feedback. Problems associated with soft systems are subject to a diverse range of interpretation because they may be messy. On the other hand, hard systems are dependent on quantitative models with well defined problems (Ackoff 1971, p. 669). They are well structured and they require specific formulas to address them. Integrating both soft and hard systems is likely to ensure that many of the objectives of a project are met. This is because soft systems serve to ensure that the dimension of human activity is addressed effectively (De Florio et al 2013, p. 765). On the other hand, hard systems prove to be highly appropriate in handling technical issues related to different tasks (Telem, Laufer, & Shapira 2006, p. 1170). Adopting a Front-end project Management can make Projects more Successful Front-end management denotes the strategy that involves planning of the entire project from the time of the idea conception to the completion of the project. It involves the determination of the scope, objectives, as well as the justifications of the project. Project managers also define a general outline of the entire project design and highlight estimates of the expected costs (Robbins & Coulter 2012, p. 520). Moreover, front-end management enables the project manager to determine the potential benefits of the project. Usually, front-end management is of critical importance as it helps in the planning of the project enabling the project manager to have a clear view of the entire project (Morris 2013, p. 17. Conclusion Evidently, projects can only be successful if the project managers are well aware of their responsibility in project definition. This means that they must define the scope of the project, its specific goal, tasks involved, and all the complexities that may emerge. Adopting a systems approach is of critical importance to project managers as it helps them view the project as a whole. In this way, they can make decisions that affect the project positively. Adopting an open system ensures the kind of adaptability that can propel a project to success. In addition, there is an evident need for project managers to integrate both soft and hard systems in an effort to promote the achievements of all the objectives. In some projects, end-to-end project management is very effective in ensuring that projects are successful. Bibliography Ackoff, RL 1971, Towards a system of systems concepts, Management Science, 17, 11, pp. 661-671, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 9 November 2014. Aibinu, A. & Fageha, M 2013, Managing Project Scope Definition to Improve Stakeholders’ Participation and Enhance Project Outcome, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 74. Al-Hejji, S. & Assaf, S 2006, Causes of delay in large construction projects, International Journal of Project Management, 24(4), pp.349–357. Anderson, D, & Merna, T 2003, Project Management Strategy—project management represented as a process based set of management domains and the consequences for project management strategy, International Journal of Project Management, 21, Selected papers from the Fifth Biennial Conference of the International Research Network for Organizing by Projects. Held in Renesse, Seeland, The Netherlands, 28-31 May 2002., pp. 387-393, ScienceDirect, EBSCOhost, viewed 9 November 2014. Aritua, B, Smith, N, & Bower, D 2009, Construction client multi-projects – A complex adaptive systems perspective, International Journal of Project Management, 27, pp. 72-79, ScienceDirect, EBSCOhost, viewed 9 November 2014. Cano, J. & Lidón, I 2011, Guided reflection on project definition, International Journal of Project Management, 29(IvánLidón). Collyer, S, & Warren, C 2009, Project management approaches for dynamic environments, International Journal of Project Management, 27, 4, pp. 355-364, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 9 November 2014. Collyer, S, & Warren, C 2009, Project management approaches for dynamic environments, International Journal of Project Management, 27, 4, pp. 355-364, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 10 November 2014. De Florio, V, Bakhouya, M, Coronato, A, & Di Marzo, G 2013, Models and Concepts for Socio-Technical Complex Systems: Towards Fractal Social Organizations, Systems Research & Behavioral Science, 30, 6, pp. 750-772, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 9 November 2014. Gibson Jr, E. & Cho, CS 2000, Development of a Project Definition Rating Index (PDRI) for General Building Projects, Construction Congress VI. Gillard, S, & Joharisen, J 2004, Project management communication: a systems approach, Journal of Information Science, 30, 1, p. 23, Publisher Provided Full Text Searching File, EBSCOhost, viewed 9 November 2014. Human, W, & Steyn, H 2013, Establishing project management guidelines for successfully managing resettlement projects, South African Journal of Business Management, 44, 3, p. 1, MasterFILE Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 9 November 2014. Kähkönen, K 1999, Multi-character model of the construction project definition process, Automation in Construction, 8(6). Kerzner, H 2001, Project Management : A Systems Approach To Planning, Scheduling, And Controlling, New York : John Wiley. Lester, A 2014, Project Management, Planning and Control: Managing Engineering, Construction and Manufacturing Projects to PMI, APM and BSI Standards 6th ed., United Kingdom: Amsterdam ; Elsevier/Butterworth-Heinemann. McLeod, R 2002, Systems development, HathiTrust, EBSCOhost, viewed 9 November 2014. Meeting Retail Project Needs -- End-to-End 2014, Point-Of-Purchase, 10, 2, p. 44, Publisher Provided Full Text Searching File, EBSCOhost, viewed 9 November 2014. Moore, D 2002, Project Management : Designing Effective Organisational Structures In Construction, Oxford, [Eng.] : Blackwell Science. Morris, P 2013, Reconstructing Project Management Reprised: A Knowledge Perspective, Project Management Journal, 44, 5, pp. 6-23, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 9 November 2014. Nahod, M 2012, Scope Control Through Managing Changes in Construction Projects, Organization, Technology & Management In Construction, 4, 1, pp. 438-447, Energy & Power Source, EBSCOhost, viewed 9 November 2014. Neal, R 1995. Project definition: The soft-systems approach, International Journal of Project Management, 13(1). Oscillations between Open and Closed Systems : Project Management in Research and Development 2000, OAIster, EBSCOhost, viewed 9 November 2014. Petit, Y, & Hobbs, B 2010, Project portfolios in dynamic environments: Sources of uncertainty and sensing mechanisms, Project Management Journal, 41, 4, pp. 46-58, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 9 November 2014. Pondy, L, & Boje, D 2005, Beyond open system models of organization, Emergence: Complexity & Organization, 7, 3/4, pp. 119-137, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 9 November 2014. Pryke, S, & Smyth, H 2006, The Management Of Complex Projects : A Relationship Approach, Oxford ; Malden, MA : Blackwell Pub. Robbins, S, & Coulter, M 2012, Management, Upper Saddle River, N.J. : Pearson Prentice Hall. Sherrer, A 2010, A project managers guide to systems thinking: Part I. Available at http://www.projectsmart.co.uk/project-managers-guide-to-systems-thinking-part-1.php, viewed 10 November 2014. Siriram, R 2012, A Soft and Hard Systems Approach to Business Process Management, Systems Research & Behavioral Science, 29, 1, pp. 87-100, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 9 November 2014. Sutton, I 2010,Process Risk and Reliability Management: Operational Integrity Management, United States: William Andrew Publishing, United States. Telem, D, Laufer, A, &Shapira, A 2006, Only Dynamics Can Absorb Dynamics, Journal of Construction Engineering & Management, 132, 11, pp. 1167-1177, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 9 November 2014. Trent, RJ 2008, End-To-End Lean Management : A Guide To Complete Supply Chain Improvement, Ft. Lauderdale, FL: J. Ross Pub, eBook Collection (EBSCOhost), EBSCOhost, viewed 9 November 2014. Walker, A2007, Project Management in Construction, 5th ed., United Kingdom: Wiley-Blackwell (an imprint of John Wiley &; Sons Ltd). Winch, G 2010, Managing Construction Projects : An Information Processing Approach / Graham M. Winch, n.p.: Malden, MA : Blackwell Science, 2002., OhioLINK Library Catalog – LR, EBSCOhost, viewed 9 November 2014. Read More