Phil Rutherford wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just to avoid confusion, there are no tools that can manage
> projects - the project manager manages the project, the tool only
> helps him/her do it economically, effectively and efficiently.
Thank you, Phil, for saying this out loud. At the risk of repeating
your comments, I'll add that the "Mark I" human brain can benefit from
effective [and efficient:) ] tools.
At the product/process development level, we need nifty CAD and dynamic
simulation software for products with a large downstream impact (read $
usually).
At the project execution level, we need project mgt software, such as
the now unavailable Claris MacProject, MS Project, and others.
A subset of these is a careful application of these tools.
Specifically, Monte Carlo analysis of a project tells you the range of
outcomes, depending on what might happen, but not how to improve the
project. A DoE (Design of Experiments) analysis will tell you how to
optimize the completion dates, cost, and/or ruggedness of the project.
Cf. M. P. Santell, J. R. Jung, Jr., and J. C. Warner, �Optimization in
Project Coordination Scheduling Through Application of Taguchi Methods�,
Project Management Journal, XXIII(3), pg. 5-16, Sept. 1992.
At the corporate level, we need those Mark I brains again to work on
decisions for which there are not yet simulation models. John Sterman,
at MIT, has built a model for a specific company, and shown how it did
track, and would have tracked under alternatives, over a rocky period.
This is in a paper on the web, "Unanticipated Side Effects of Successful
Quality Programs: Exploring a Paradox of Organizational Improvement"
(see web.mit.edu/jsterman/www, I think) In general, we simply can't
afford the time and effort required to build such models to use as
guidance. Instead, we ask those brains to guess. I.e., make decisions
with insufficient data.
The core principles to use at the corporate and corporate strategy
levels are (a) measurement and (b) feedback. The managers & leaders
must collect large amounts of information/data, interpret it, and decide
implications so they can move closer to their prime objectives. If they
move before the changes are obvious to others, it is called proactive.
If they wait until it is obvious, it is called reacting. Those Mark I
(and Mark II!) brains get a workout. If the feedback process is broad
and effective, we call it a Baldrige company (or in Wisconsin, a
Wisconsin Forward Awardee).
Now you, and many others, already know this. The trick is in the
specifics - getting sound measurements, understanding causes & effects,
moving in the face of risk, and avoiding the analysis paralysis that
absolute reliance upon software can promote. Let us use the software
where it is critical & useful (such as my paper demonstrated), support
studies that add to understanding cause & effect (like Sterman's),
collect all the information we can handle, and "grab the nettle" of the
hard decisions.
Jay
> I would suggest that if you are looking for some means to help
> you make decisions about overall projects, their viability and
> worth as compared to other projects, then you can't go much
> better than the Mark I human brain. Assisting this brain could be
> such tools as Monte Carlo simulations (or similar) that help you
> run a number of scenarios out over as many iterations as you
> want. Doing this allows you to look at trends and potential
> outcomes. The only problem is that these are based on existing
> data and not the unknowns (like Murphy's Law) that can play a
> large part in whether or not a good project goes bad or a bad
> project comes good.
that depends on how you select alternatives for analysis.
> The second item you need for this is your organisational and
> strategic plans, goals and policies.
I.e., a corporate, or organization, mission statement that is real.
> These will tell you which
> projects have priority over others (something that might change
> from day to day but, with the Mark I human eyeball you'll see
> this). If you are trying to maintain a priority list of projects
> or some means for spotting problems or issues you will need
> remember that such lists or issues are subject to external and
> internal forces that might throw up data essential to your
> decision making that no computer program can ever do - so here is
> where you need to keep a Mark I human finger on the pulse of each
> project (or, more importantly, aimed at each project manager to
> ensure that he/she is maintaining control over his/her projects).
i.e., collect information, analyze it, decide implications. Takes
brains, as Phil said.
> Finally, nothing can prepare you or your organisation for changes
> to priorities, customer concerns, and project problems than clear
> and open communications - and here is where your Mark I human
> voice and Mark I human ears comes into it. Managing programs of
> projects (ie, at the macro level) is all about juggling resources
> and maintaining the momentum of all projects in line with the
> overall strategic or business direction. But you can't do this
> alone - you need everyone monitoring and controlling their part
> of each project, and you need project managers doing their job.
> You will know that this is happening through the maintenance of
> reporting and reviewing systems and procedures.
>
> No computer program yet invented can ever take the place of human
> intervention so my suggestion is to not try so hard to find a
> program that can manage your projects and find a person. In the
> long run I think you'll find it much cheaper.
>
> Phil Rutherford
> Academic Director
> Project Management Studies
> University of New England
>
> >
> > To:
MG-ED-DV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU
> > cc: (bcc: mlmanheim)
> > Subject: [MG-ED-DV] Help need. Please advise on tool to manage
> projects.
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > What tools exist in the marketplace to manage projects? More
> specifically I
> > wonder
> > if there exists a tool to facilitate the allocation of resources
> among a
> > set of
> > projects on
> > the macro-level for collaborating teams to use?
> >
> > Tools that focus on the micro-level (detailed) project management
> that can
> > manage
> > the macro-level of multiple projects are desirable. The focus of
> this
> > inqury is
> > on macro-level
> > project management. By macro-level management, I refer to the
> process of
> > deciding
> > that the project is worth pursuing, this include among other
> activities: to
> > categorize, sort,
> > decide and track projects worth investing in. The management of
> activities
> > particular
> > and required to have a successful project I refer to as micro-level
> and
> > consider
> > tools
> > like Microsoft project.
> >
> > Thank you for the attention given to this.
> >
> > Saludos
> >
> > Esteban
--
Jay Warner
Principal Scientist
Warner Consulting, Inc.
4444 North Green Bay Road
Racine, WI 53404-1216
USA
Ph: (262) 634-9100
FAX: (262) 681-1133
email:
quality@a2q.com
web:
http://www.a2q.com
The A2Q Method (tm). What do you want to improve today?