Part III Complex Project Management - Assignment Example

Part III Complex Project Management Part III Complex Project Management In a complex project, at least some of the goals and solutions may not be clearly identifiable and known at the project’s outset. As a result, project management models may not work and thus, adjustments should be made. In projects whose objectives are clearly defined but lack solutions in later parts, referred to as APM projects, the main issue is that even in situations where the solution is discovered, it may not deliver acceptable business value. This leads to the first step of dealing with complex projects, where the best solution possible should be enhanced in the project models and dynamics (Wysocki, 2014). The second main step of approaching complex projects is deeper and involves those projects whose main goal cannot be clearly defined, mainly referred to as the extreme projects. Such a goal is desired although it may not be possible to attain it. As a result of the increasing dynamic conditions in the contemporary project management, it is important for project management and stakeholders to make good choices of the best fit between problem-solution models and the final achievements of the project goals and objectives. Complexity and Uncertainty Contemporary projects are becoming more uncertain, and with such increasing uncertainty come increased risk and complexity. Such uncertainty is due to changing market conditions that lead to high-change and high-speed responses in order to produce solutions that lead to more competitive advantage. On the other hand, complexity occurs due to a solution that eludes detection and thus, challenging to find, which may impose difficulties to the project manager to develop appropriate responses (Wysocki, 2014). The aspects of uncertainty and complexity are directly and positively correlated and thus, risk increases with increasing uncertainty and complexity. It is in this regard that as projects turn out to be more complex, they are dominated by higher levels of uncertainty. Such increase in project complexity leads to changes in different aspects of the project. Project requirements are a major factor to change due to increasing complexity. As complexity increases in a project, the chance of coming up with the complete definition of its requirements diminishes. At other fundamental levels, the project scope may become complex at later stages, which may raise the need for more requirements. In addition, as the complexity of the project increases, the need for flexibility in the main processes involved also increases. It is through increasing complexity that the need for project stakeholders and processes to be more adaptive and creative develops (DeCarlo, 2010). Along with the increased flexibility, APM projects need higher levels of adaptability. In this case, flexibility refers to the process of project management. If the organization is using a one-size-fits-all approach, it is not flexible. In order to cope in such project conditions, it is important to ensure that the schedule of deliverables and project management process is flexible in order to accommodate new conditions in the project environment. In addition, project risk increases with complexity and uncertainty as the project ranks in the categories TPM, APM, xPM, and MPx. A definitive plan is essential in attaining goals of the project becomes more complex as the project progresses in these levels. Additionally, team cohesiveness is also a great factor that is impacted by changes in project complexity and uncertainty. In TPM projects, successful teams are usually composed of specialists who are assigned specific tasks that match their specialties. However, as the project’s complexity rises to other levels in APM, xPM, and MPx, there is a gradual change from a team of exclusive specialists to that of generalists (Tyntor, 2010). As a result, coordination may be a challenge, which leads to less team cohesion. Changes in team cohesion also lead to increased communication challenges as the project’s complexity increases. Client involvement also changes with the complexity of the project. In instances where the project management is certain of the achievement of the set goals and the subsequent solutions, the project may not be complex and thus, the client may not be largely involved. Limited client involvement is featured in projects that are team and plan- driven (Tyntor, 2010). However, as the project grows complex, clients may be involved in clarifications, as well as approvals. In addition, change may evolve throughout the project as the complexity increases. Simple and plan-driven projects are not effectively designed to respond to change since the occurrence of change disorients the order of project activities. Change may also compromise resource schedules, which are rarely renegotiated in simple projects. However, increasing complexity of projects lead to major changes to the project scope, deliverables, as well as the functionality and thus, change is a dominant factor in such conditions. Due to the overall impact of project complexity and uncertainty, business value is a major factor that is affected (Wysocki, 2014). Simple TPM projects are usually focused on attaining plan-driven aspects of cost, time, and scope. More complex projects have high value in terms of cost, time, and scope. The rising risk in light of increasing complexity leads to higher value for the projects. Agile Project Management (APM) APM models fit projects whose goals have been specific but whose solutions are unknown at the project’s outset. However, such projects are complex and thus, achieve optimal outcomes if they adopt a continuously adapted and dynamic management approach. Different forms of projects associate themselves to agile elements. Such projects usually address business opportunities and problems for which acceptable solutions have not been there or the opportunities have not been fully exploited. Such projects are featured with high uncertainty and complexity, which presents organizations with significant challenges (DeCarlo, 2010). APM PMLC models of project management may be further classified into iterative and adaptive models. Iterative PMLC models are usually appropriate for projects whose most solutions have been discovered and only some minor aspects have not been decided. On the other hand, adaptive PMLC models are usually appropriate for projects whose solutions are barely known (Wysocki, 2014). Agile project management acts as the guiding principle in majority of APM models that are mainly based on software development, as well as prototyping. There are two major issues that surround a majority of APM projects regardless of the specific model used. Such issues include the implementation of APM models, where such models have constantly evolving solutions to the project goals and objectives. Clients and other forms of organizations may not appreciate the models due to this dynamic nature. As a result, the implementation of the APM models in the dynamic business conditions in today’s organizations may not lead to the achievement of the long-term goal of enhancing organizational performance (Richman, 2002). Such a dilemma for the use of APM models may be solved through ensuring fully supported production forms of partial solutions and ensuring that they are released to the end users on regular, but short-term periods. Such a strategy acts as a fit for the implementation of change in the dynamic organizational practices. In addition, intermediate non-production versions may be released to different focus groups in regular periods in order to ensure the continued development of the project models that are already in the market. Such a strategy solves the problem that comes with waiting for the end users’ feedback in order to improve earlier models. Another issue affecting the application of APM models is co-location of APM project teams. Proponents of APM models propose that it is important for complex projects to use small and co-located teams of specialists and professionals that can achieve the project goals without supervision. Such an aspect may not be achieved due to the increasing globalization of business strategies and thus, the wide geographical differences between team members. Lean Agile Project Management The lean APM proposes that any step in a procedure that does not add value to the project should be eliminated. Lean processes are described by a range of principles including the effectiveness in eliminating waste, amplifying learning, making decisions as late as possible, delivering as fast as possible, empowering the project team, as well as building integrity (Richman, 2002). Iterative Project Management Life Cycle The iterative PMLC model has a number of process groups that are repeated in a sequential manner with a feedback loop after iteration (Wysocki, 2014). At the consent of the owner, the last iteration may lead to the achievement of a partial solution in the project. Since most of the solutions are clearly known, the project kicks off when details to the missing solutions are found. The scoping phase model is the key step to the life cycle. The process involves meeting the client and making the RBS. This phase is followed by the planning phase that develops a high-level plan without many details since many details are not known at this early stage. As a result, the complete plan is done that will enable the building of all the known solutions. However, a partial plan is made for all the unknown details. Following the development of the plan is the launching phase of the iterative PMLC model that involves ensuring that all the project deliverables and team dynamics are in place. Such a phase kicks off the project and ensures that the monitoring and controlling phase takes over. Following the achievement of the desired solutions, the iterative PMLC model ends with the closing phase that involves the evaluation of the whole procedure. Adaptive Project Management Life Cycle Adaptive models are mainly appropriate for projects that have high levels of complexity and uncertainty than the iterative models. Adaptive models thus, fill the gap between iterative and extreme models. The models are more important than iterative in situations where barely little is known about the project solutions. The adaptive model consists of phases that are repeated in cycles, where each cycle’s end is featured by a feedback loop. Each successful cycle is fed by preceding cycles (Richman, 2002). It is at the end of a cycle that a partial solution may be released at the discretion of the client. The scoping phase is featured by high-level activity since little is known about the solution. Missing features are learned through repeated cycles. The planning phase is done at every start of a cycle and determines the functionality and features of the cycle. The launching cycle is similar to that of the iterative model and involves building on team dynamics, decision-making, as well as problem-solving approaches. Extreme Project Management (XPM) XPM is the most creatively managed and least structured of the different models in the project management landscape. They have the highest level of uncertainty and complexity and are thus, highly risky and are faced with high chances of failure. The XPM life cycle is complex as compared to that of other models. The phases of all the process repeat all process groups in a sequential manner (Wysocki, 2014). Such process groups refer to all the cycles that have occurred in earlier phases of the project. As such, if a decision is made to proceed to the next phase, such a phase starts with the scoping of earlier phases or the changed direction of the project. XPM PMLC models are made up of a sequence of repeated phases where each one of them is based on little understanding of the solution and goal. Each one of the phases learns from other preceding phases and redirects the succeeding phases with the aim of converging to a common solution and goal. A partial solution may be released at the end of each phase at the option of the client. Extreme projects may be performed backwards in the form of Emertxe project management. An Emertxe project is a form of an extreme project, but performed backwards. Instead of finding a solution, the project stakeholders are finding a goal. Their life cycle is similar to that of extreme projects (Wysocki, 2014). Bibliography DeCarlo, D. (2010). eXtreme Project Management: Using Leadership, Principles, and Tools to Deliver Value in the Face of Volatility. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Richman, L. (2002). Successful Project Management. New York: American Management Association. Tyntor, C. (2010). Project Management Tools and Techniques for Success. Boca Raton: Taylor & Francis Group. Wysocki, R. (2014). Effective Project Management: Traditional, Agile, Extreme. Indianapolis: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Read More