Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
7/21/2008
2008/07/14
Business Orientation
Environment
Process Criteria
Outcome Criteria
2008/07/14
7/21/2008
Unit Of Analysis
Project History
Surveys
Organization
Project Managers PM Management Project Managers Project Sponsors Senior Management
Interviews
Case Reports
2008/07/14
66
148
Project Customers
Project Subcontractors
344Employees E l
Project Managers
Project
Surveys
65 Organizations
Project History
447 Interviews
Project Managers PM Management Project Managers Project Sponsors Senior Management
Organization
Interviews
60 Case Reports
Case Reports
2008/07/14
7/21/2008
Quantitative Methods
Principal Components Analysis Regression analysis Cluster analysis
Theory Generation
2008/07/14 PMI Research Conference, Warsaw, Poland 5
PM Implementation
What do organizations do or put in place and call PM?
Organizational Value
What is valuable to organizations and how is it measured?
2008/07/14 PMI Research Conference, Warsaw, Poland 6
7/21/2008
ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT
2008/07/14
N=65
2008/07/14 PMI Research Conference, Warsaw, Poland 8
7/21/2008
N=65
2008/07/14 PMI Research Conference, Warsaw, Poland 9
Customer, 32
7/21/2008
Government Department/Agency 23% Crown Corporation 12% Corporation, Privately Held 29%
Operational 35%
N=52
2008/07/14 PMI Research Conference, Warsaw, Poland 11
Economic Prospects
GDP Growth Rate GDP per Capita Inflation Rate Current Acct Bal
Seniority PM Experience Positive PM Attitude Innovators Conflict Avoiders Not Customer Focussed Construction Product Development Organizational Change Strategic Construction Government Publicly Held Public Partnerships Privately Held Sole Proprietorships Strategic Innovators Operational Efficiency Customer Intimacy
12
7/21/2008
PM IMPLEMENTATION
2008/07/14
13
Full PM Training Lunch & Learn Distance Degree & Diploma Tailored Internal Informal Off-the-Shelf Customized External
67%
Full Toolsets Resource Management Cost Management Clear Roles & Training Trained Experts Traditional Drivers Cultural Drivers Cultural NOT Traditional
36%
7/21/2008
24
20
17
15
10
10
6
5
2 0
0 Level1 1.5 Level2 2.5 Level3 3.5 Level4 4.5 Level5
2008/07/14
N=59
15
24
20
17
15
10
"The PM process has become normal and ordinal, which reduced individual heroism in 10 PM." Project Manager, 23
6
2 0
0 Level1 1.5 Level2 2.5 Level3 3.5 Level4 4.5 Level5
2008/07/14
N=59
16
7/21/2008
ORGANIZATIONAL VALUE
2008/07/14
17
7/21/2008
Fit
What implementations and context are associated with what value?
2008/07/14 PMI Research Conference, Warsaw, Poland 19
62%
Better Process Results Better Project Results
53%
Positive Value Tangible & Intangible Intangible Value Improved HR/Quality of Life Strategic Alignment & Staff Retention Positive Value, New Services, Retention
20
10
7/21/2008
What contexts create what value? What implementations create what value?
DRIVERS OF VALUE
2008/07/14
21
De etermines s
In nfluences
People
Imp plementatio on
Training Delivery
Context
Culture
Projects
People p Motivators
Organizational Attributes
Strategic
2008/07/14
Organization
PMI Research Conference, Warsaw, Poland
Value
11
7/21/2008
2
71
3
35
72
73
Level 2
17 18 51 20 53 30 65 39 43 57 81 22 23 24 25 74 75 76
15 1.5
19 52
28 54 64
29 56 82
32 59 84
34 62 86
42 63 26 27 49 51 83 33 89 47
Level 1
88 31 60 70 67 69
2008/07/14
23
2
71
3
35
2.5
72 73
Level 2
17 18 51 20 53 30 65 39 43
"Project managers have become good at selling additional services." 57 81 22 23 24 25 74 75 76 Senior Manager, 76
1.5 15
19 52
28 54
29 56
32 59
34 62
42 63 26 27 49 51 83 33 89 47
Level 1
"Improved project management should help 64 82 84 86 with share prices because it will increase confidence in the market as we deliver on projects." 88 31 60 70 67 PM Management, 75
PMI Research Conference, Warsaw, Poland
69
2008/07/14
24
12
7/21/2008
2
71
3
35
36
48
87
44
45
55
72
73
Level 2
30 51 53 57 65
17 39
22 75
23 76
24 81
25
18
20
43
74
15 1.5
34 59 47 62 49 64 51 82 54 84 56 86 19 33 26 42 27 52 28 83 29 89 32 63
Level 1
31 88 61 70 67 69
2008/07/14
25
2
71
3
35
36
48
87
44
45
55
72
73
Level 2
30 51
"Collaboration within and between teams has improved; silos within the organization have diminished. 17 22 23 24 25 53 57 65 Senior Manager, 76 18 20 43 74
39 75 76 81
"It It gives them a sense of accomplishment accomplishment, it 1.5 1 5 34 47connected 49 51 54 56 19 26 give them a sense of being to the 59 an 62 opportunity 64 82 84 86 enterprise, it gives them to33 42 contribute and understand how [their work] relates to the larger operation and to the Level 1 success 31 88 of the organization." 61 70 Senior Manager, 20
2008/07/14
27 52
28 83
29 89
32
63
67
69
26
13
7/21/2008
2
71 71
3
35 35
90 87
21
36 72
48 73
87
44
45
55
72
73
Level 2
17 18 51 20
30 30 53 29 56 82 32 59 84 65 34 62 86 42 63 34 59 26 39 43
51
53 57
57 81
65 22 54 84 56 86 83 19 33
17 39 23 26 42
22 75 24 27 52 33
23 76 25 28 83 89
24 81 75 29 89
25
18 74 32
20 76
43
74
15 1.5
19 52
28 54 64
47 62 27
49 64 49
51 82 51
63 47
Level 1
31 88
88 31
61 61
70 70
67 67
69 69
Intangible Tangible
27
2008/07/14
2
35
Level 3 2.5
45
48
Level 2 1.5 15
75
36 55 73 87 90in "Without projects we21would not be72moving any direction, so this work is absolutely critical for this organization. Project Manager, 1917 18 20 22 23 24 30 43 57 39 53 65 74 81
44
25
76
26 47 52 83
28 56 84
32 59 86
34 64
49 82
19 51
27 52
29 62
33 63
42
89
Level 1
2008/07/14
88
31
70
61
67
69
28
14
7/21/2008
2
China
71
35
China
China
Australia
72
73
44
Level 2 15 1.5
Canada
China
China
China
Canada Denmark
75
United Kingdom
24
74
22
China Serbia
23
76
25
Russia
47
33
89
Level 1
2008/07/14 PMI Research Conference, Warsaw, Poland
UAE UAE
67
69
29
2
China
71
35
China
China
Australia
72
73
44
Level 2 15 1.5
Canada
China
China
China
Canada Denmark
75
United Kingdom
24
74
22
China Serbia
23
76
25
Russia
47
33
89
Level 1
2008/07/14 PMI Research Conference, Warsaw, Poland
UAE UAE
67
69
30
15
7/21/2008
2
China
35
Australia
44
Level 2 1.5 15
75
United Kingdom
Most recent (2007): Review of strategic 24 74 22 23 projects and introduction of lessons China learned
Serbia
China
China
China
Canada Denmark
76
25
Russia
47
Level 1
2008/07/14
"It was only since the 33 adoption of project 89 management methods that the company started to really reform its system and establish new management UAE UAE procedures and processes and to run as an economic 67 69 enterprise. Senior Manager, 35
31
2
China
Industry: High-Tech Engineering Initial Implementation (<1988): Basic project management practices
Canada China
71
35
China
Australia
72
73
44
Level 2 15 1.5
75
Most recent (2006): Review ofChina practices derive best practices and 24 consolidate/simplify
United Kingdom
China
China
Canada Denmark
74
22
China Serbia
23
76
25
Russia
47
33
89
Level 1
2008/07/14 PMI Research Conference, Warsaw, Poland
UAE UAE
67
69
32
16
7/21/2008
1 Industry: Telecommuications
2
China
35
Australia
Level 2 1.5 15
Canada Denmark
75
United Kingdom
24
74
22
China Serbia
23
76
25
Level 1
2008/07/14
"All divisions must work like a team to respond 47 to customer needs. Project 33 management 89 contributes to team building and coordination. It greatly improved work efficiency UAE UAE and customer satisfaction. 67 24 69 Project Manager,
Russia
33
Initial Implementation (2000): -1 0 Award-winning Centre of Excellence by 2005 Most recent (2006): ( ) Control-focussed PMO and centralized Program Managers
2
China
United States
71
35
China
China
Australia
72
73
44
Level 2 1.5 15
Canada
75
"The value of project management is tangible. China China Denmark China Canada It's the structure behind the projects. We do 24 74 22 23 76 25 better than industry benchmarks." China Project Manager, 75
United Kingdom Serbia Russia
47 hard value: "Project management provides saving wasted dollars and effort and mitigating the risk of wasting dollars. Level Senior Manager, 75 1
33
89
UAE UAE
67
69
2008/07/14
"The value of project management is control. Project PMI Research Conference, Warsaw, Poland Manager, 75 34
17
7/21/2008
Value Drivers
Creation Of Value
Collective perception of Fit Continuous investment, focus and commitment Perceiving value in project management
Destruction Of Value
Changes in personnel responsible for driving/leading implementation Lack of attention, focus, maintenance, will Over-implementation or over-bureaucratization Inconsistent alignment of needs
Particularly between management and project managers
Uncertainty Of f Value
Political changes and conflicts Control issues/imposition of control frameworks Project management implementation as a fad PM as something that people have to do
PMI Research Conference, Warsaw, Poland 35
2008/07/14
CONCLUSIONS
2008/07/14
36
18
7/21/2008
Conclusions
19
7/21/2008
Conclusions
Half Our Case Study Organizations Demonstrate Tangible Value Organizations That Could Calculate ROI
Should have data Are those that deliver projects for customers
Conclusions
Realization Of Intangible Value Is Correlated With The M Maturity i Of O Organizational i i lI Implementation l i This Reinforces The Lack Of Interest Of Many Organizations In Direct Measures Of ROI
2008/07/14 PMI Research Conference, Warsaw, Poland 40
20
7/21/2008
Conclusions
Increased Maturity Delivers Greater Value Intangible Value Appears To Increase In Proportion To Maturity
Greater levels of intangible value are reported in organizations with higher level of maturity
Conclusions
Implementation AND Value Are Largely Influenced By Culture These Include Differences In:
National culture
Illustrated by different approaches to this study
Organizational culture
Process vs. results driven cultures
21
7/21/2008
Conclusions
Even Organizations That Demonstrate Significant Value Today Are Not Assured Of Continued Value Moving g Forward Many Organizations Appear To Be At An Inflection Point
Continued delivery of value is open to question
Some Organizations Demonstrating Significant Value And Actively Investing In Their PM Implementation Are In Fact Destroying Value
2008/07/14 PMI Research Conference, Warsaw, Poland 43
Conclusions
Where Value Is Being Sustained And Continuing To Grow, There Is On-going Focus And Improvement Underway Organizations That Stop Focussing On Value, Or Believe That They Are Done:
Stop demonstrating value The act of not enhancing value appears to destroy value
22
7/21/2008
Conclusions
The Value Of Project Management Implementations Are Fundamentally Determined By Fit:
How well what is implemented p meets the needs of the organization
Measurement Of Fit Requires Determining What Contexts And Implementations Deliver What Value
This is what this study has delivered
2008/07/14 PMI Research Conference, Warsaw, Poland 45
23
7/21/2008
2008/07/14
47
Proposal Team
Dr. Frank Anbari Dr. Ben Arbaugh Dr. Tim Brady Dr. Walid Belassi Dr. Christophe Bredillet Dr. Peter Checkland Dr Svetlana Cicmil Dr. Terry Cooke-Davies Dr. Lynn y Crawford Dr. Fathi Elloumi Dr. Young Hoon Kwak Dr. Harvey Maylor Dr. Thomas Mengel Mr. Mark Mullaly Dr. Janice Thomas Dr. Terry Williams Dr. Mark Winter
2008/07/14
48
24
7/21/2008
Workshop 1 Broadway, UK
Dr. Frank Anbari Dr. Erling Andersen Dr. Walid Belassi Dr Tim Brady Dr. Dr. Christopher Bredillet Dr. Peter Checkland Dr. Svetlana Cicmil Dr. Lynn Crawford Dr. Terry Cooke-Davies Dr. Fathi Elloumi Dr. Patrick Fong Dr. Zhai Li Dr. Harvey Maylor Dr. Thomas Mengel Mr. Mark Mullaly Dr. Shi Qian Dr. Maria Romanova Dr. Jonas Soderlund Dr. Janice Thomas Dr. Rodney Turner Dr. Terry Williams Dr. Mark Winter Dr. Zhai Li Dr. Khim Teck Yeo Dr. Harry Stefanou Dr. Edwin Andrews Ms. Janice Janzen
49
2008/07/14
2008/07/14
25
7/21/2008
Mr. Mark Mullaly Dr. Shi Qian Ms. Eva Riis Dr Maria Romanova Dr. Dr. Jonas Soderlund Dr. Janice Thomas Ms. Anne Live Vaagaasar Dr. Vaidotas Viliunas Ms. Jia Ning Wang Dr. Terry Williams Dr. Khim Teck Yeo Dr. Sasa Zivanovic Dr. Edwin Andrews Ms. Marguerite LeBlanc
51
2008/07/14
2008/07/14
26
7/21/2008
Denmark
Pernille Eskerod
Norway
Erling Andersen
United States
Thomas Lechler
Lithuania
Vaidotas Viliunas
Brazil
Marcos Santos Abreu
Sweden
Jonas Soderlund
United Kingdom
Tim Brady Svetlana Cicmil Terry Cooke-Davies H Harvey M l Maylor Janice Thomas
Russia
Maria Romanova
China
Ping Chen Shi Qian Xue Yan Zhai Li
Germany
Thomas Mengel
Serbia
Svetlana Cicmil
Australia
Lynn Crawford
2008/07/14
53
Analysis Team
Qualitative Team Dr. Svetlana Cicmil D Pi Dr. Ping Ch Chen Dr. Pernille Eskerod Dr. Zhai Li Dr. Thomas Mengel Mr. Mark Mullaly Dr. Janice Thomas Quantitative Team Dr. Terry Williams M Lisa Ms. Li Danquah D h Dr. Merlyn Foo Dr. Thomas Lechler Dr. J.W. (Mac) McDonald Mr. Mark Mullaly Dr. Janice Thomas
2008/07/14
54
27
7/21/2008
PMI AND THE CASE STUDY ORGANIZATIONS THAT MADE THIS RESEARCH POSSIBLE
2008/07/14 PMI Research Conference, Warsaw, Poland 55
2008/07/14
56
28