read moreRecently, a number of the world's top project management organizations took major initiatives to enlighten executive management about the strategic value and benefits of project management. The focus is to move from specific project management to organisational project management, which these companies keep is a strategic advantage in a competitive economy.

In this essay, Ed Naughton, Director-general of the Institute of Project Management and recent IPMA Vice-president, requires Professor Sebastian Green, Dean of the Faculty of Commerce and Professor of Management and Marketing at University College Cork (formerly of the London Business School), about his views of proper project management as a car for competitive advantage.

Ed: What do you point proper Project Management is?

Prof. Green: Strategic project management is the management of those projects that are of crucial importance to help the business as a whole to get competitive advantage.

Ed: And what becomes a competitive advantage, then?

Prof. Green: You will find three attributes of having a core competence. The three qualities are: it adds value to customers; it's not easily imitated; it opens up new possibilities later on.

Ed: But how do task management generate a competitive advantage?

Prof. Green: You will find two aspects to project management. One factor is the actual selection of the type of projects that the organisation engages in, and subsequently there's implementation, the way the projects themselves are managed.

Ed: Competitive advantage - the significance of choosing the projects - it is challenging to define which projects ought to be selected!

Prof. Green: I do believe that the choice and prioritisation of projects is something that has not been done well within the project management literature because it's essentially been assumed away through reducing it to financial analysis. The strategic imperative gives an alternative way to you of prioritising projects as it is saying that some projects may not be as profitable as others, but when they add to our experience relative to others, then that's going to be important.

Therefore, to just take an illustration, if a company's competitive advantage is introducing services more quickly than others, pharmaceuticals, let us say, finding product to market more quickly, then a projects that enable it to get the product more quickly to market are going to function as the most significant types, even if in their own terms, they do not have higher profitability than various projects.

Ed: But if we're going to select our projects, we have to define what are the guidelines or metrics we're going to select them against that provide us the competitive edge.

Prof. Green: Definitely. The organisation must know which activities it's involved in, which are the critical ones for it then and competitive advantage, that drives the selection of projects. Organizations aren't very good at doing that and they might not even know what those activities are. They'll believe it is anything they do due to the energy system.

Ed: If its strategy is formulated by a company, then what the project management community says is that project management may be the channel for providing that strategy. So therefore, if the enterprise is good at doing project management, does it have any strategic advantage?

Prof. Green: Well, I guess that comes back to this matter of the difference between the sort of projects that are selected and the way you manage the projects. Demonstrably choosing the kind of projects depends on being able to link and prioritise projects according to an understanding of what the ability of an operation is relative to others.

Ed: Let us suppose the strategy is placed. In order to produce the strategy, it has to be separated, decomposed into a series of tasks. Consequently, you should be good at doing project management to provide the strategy. Now, the literature says that for an operation to be great at doing projects it has to: put in project management procedures, train people on how best to apply/do project management and co-ordinate the efforts of the people qualified to work to procedures in and integral way using the notion of a project office. Does taking those three measures offer a competitive advantage because of this operation?

Prof. To learn more, we understand you glance at: rate us online. Green: Where project management, or how you handle projects, becomes a source of competitive advantage is when you can do things better than the others. The 'better than' is through the ability and sense and the data that will be built up as time passes of managing projects. There is an event curve effect here. Regarding the information they've accumulated where the rule book is inadequate to control those items of tasks two companies will be at various points in the experience curve. You'll need experience and management sense since however good the rule book is, it will never deal fully with the complexity of life. You have to manage down the experience curve, you have to manage the knowledge and learning that you have of those three facets of project management for this to become ideal.

Ed: Well, then, I think there's a niche there that has to be resolved as well, in that we have now developed a competency at doing project management to do projects, but we have not aligned that competency to the selection of projects which can help us to give this competitive advantage. To discover additional info, please consider checking out: research chrisbrummer.com. Is project management capable of being copied?

Prof. Green: Not the softer elements and not the development of tacit knowledge of having run many, many jobs with time. Therefore, like, you, Ed, have significantly more knowledge of just how to run projects than others. That is why people came to you, since while you both may have a standard book including the PMBoK or even the ICB, you've developed more experiential knowledge around it.

In essence, it may be copied a quantity of the way, but not if you arrange the softer tacit knowledge of experience into it.

Ed: Organisational project management maturity models are a hot topic at this time and are closely linked to the 'experience curve' effect you mentioned earlier - how should we view them?

Prof. Green: in my opinion in moving beyond painting by figures, moving beyond the simplistic idea that that's all you need to do and you can enforce this set of skills and processes and text book practices and a business is completely plastic. In ways, exactly the same problem was experienced by the developers of the experience curve. If you show organizations the experience curve o-n cost, it is nearly as though, for each doubling of size, cost savings occur without you having to do anything. What we know is though, that the experience curve is a potential of the possibility. Its' realisation depends on the skill of professionals. Identify more on an affiliated link by clicking https://minilateralism.com.

Ed: Are senior executives/chief executives within the mind-set to understand the possible advantages of project management?

Prof. Green: Until recently, project management has offered it-self in technical terms. If it was promoted in terms of the integration at general management, at the power to manage across the functions financing technique procedures with reasoning, then it would be more appealing to senior executives. So, it's about the experience which makes project management so powerful, the practices with the sense and the mixing of the gentle and the hard. If senior managers don't grasp it at the moment, it is perhaps not since they are wrong. It's because project management hasn't sold it self as effectively as it should've done.

Ed: Do we have to sell to chief executives and senior executives that it'll deliver competitive advantage for them?

Prof. Green: No, I think we need to demonstrate to them how it does it. We need to get in there and actually show them how they could use it, not only with regards to providing tasks on time and within cost. We must show them how they can use it to over come resistance to change, how they can use it to enhance capabilities and activities that cause competitive advantage, how they can use it to enhance the tacit knowledge in the company. There is a whole range of ways in which they could use it. They have to note that the evidence of the results is better than the way in which they're currently doing it.. Learn further on this related wiki - Navigate to this website: partner sites.