Project management approaches for dynamic environments Essay

This writing sets out to investigate the nature of pick upsconducted in disruptive changing milieus. Examples andtheory atomic number 18 used to illustrate the nature and challenges ofthis category. Suitable management approaches are identied under the fol natural depressioning headings Planning, Experimentation, Lifecycle, Controls, Culture, Communication, and Leadership style.The dynamic protrude category.The paper closes with recommendations for furtherresearch. In this paper, control is interpreted to mean the mechanisms throughwhich resources are managed to achieve objectives 1, and is dierent to the PMBOK technique 2 which is strictly focused on bringing make upivities in mental strain with a plan 3. The term dynamic is taken to mean characterised by constant adjustment 4. In the project management context dynamism is taken to be a mark of a projectthat represents the extent to which a project is inuenced by changes in the environment in which it is conducted.This pap er argues that this is a non-binary dimension thatapplies in varying degrees to all projects, so strictly anygiven project is neither dynamic nor not dynamic. All projects have some degree of dynamism, so the dimensionis not dichotomic. Therefore, the ideas in this paper may be applied in varying degrees to any project as deemed appropriate. For the sake of simplicity though, for the remainder of this paper, a dynamic project is taken to be matchless that isnecessarily subject to higher than normal levels of changedue to the environment in which it is conducted.The business environment is changing at an increasingpace 57. Rothwell and Zegveld 8 went so far as to say we are in the midst of a technology explosion. They arguedthat 90% of our practiced familiarity has been generated inthe last 55 years, and that technical knowledge will continue to increase exponentially. Perrino and Tipping 9 reportedthe pace of technology is accelerating, raising the stakes and risks formanaging in novation, and requiring earliestwarning and shorter response time.Change, in all formsof technology and business processes, can be regarded asincreasingly pervasive and providing challenges even wherehigh technology is not a core business, such as in mining10. Consider how the Australian Submarine project waschallenged by developments in the IT industry betwixtthe 1980s design phase, and sea trials decades later 7.This paper will now investigate dynamic projects from atheoretical point of view. Gray and Larson 11 argued thatPich, Loch and De Meyer 12 describe a pillow slip of projectthat encounters unknown unknowns and how it is best accommodate to what they called a learning strategy which involves scanning, problem solving and exibility. They argue thatthis is distinct from projects conducted in well dumbenvironments which are suited to instructionism, and distinct fromselectionism where the most fruitful initiative is chosen after a pool of trials. Turner and Cochran 13espo use the goals and methods matrix that describes four dierent types of project according to how well dened the methods and goals are.Projects can have poorly(predicate) denedgoals (re) or poorly dened methods (water), or both (air).Shenhar and Wideman 14 describe a type of projectthat involves high levels of uncertainty, using technologies together for the rst time. They call these high tech 14. They also describe a type of project that actually createsnew technologies, called super high tech. Shenhar 15 describes how low technology projects are typically performed in construction, production and utilities, and high technology projects in the computer, aerospace and electronics industries. He oers building and tide over construction as examples of low technology projects.The key dierence to Shenhar is the level of development workinvolved, in that low technology projects have little, andhigh technology projects have considerable levels and usually require prototyping. Shenhar and W ideman 14 argue that some other key dierence is the number of designcycles. In low technology projects they say there is typically altogether one cycle with a freeze before development, and with high technology there are at least two, typicallythree cycles.OperationalworkCio 16 suggests that projects be placed on a spectrum of newness from operable to project. The idea has been adapted in Fig. 1 to illustrate the sliding scaleof unknowns that applies to projects. Unknowns in thissense distinguish to any aspect of the project, including the methods to achieve it, the objective, and the environment it has to operate in.The guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK) 2 describesprogressive elaboration, where planning is developed in greater detail as the project progresses. apply progressive elaboration to ll knowledge gaps, it might be possible to move a project to the unexpended inFig. 1, thereby achieving the objective in a more predictable fashion.However, rapid changes in the environment, including tools and methods, and attempts to innovate,act to push the project to the right, increasing unknowns.The two forces of exploration and change act against eachother constantly throughout the project. The challenge isto conduct exploration at a greater rate than the emergenceof environmental change. It is also important to ensure that the amount of change created by the exploration andimplementation is not harmful overall. An example of Project A in Fig. 1 might be a production line where there only variable is the colour required.The intention here is to review literature to provide abroad overview of approaches that might be used to betterdeal with dynamic environments. Approaches were brokendown as follows