Over the past few years, project managers and project management has grown tremendous growth. Project management has evolved over the past several years from an activity in an organization to a discipline in its own right. Many professional bodies exist today to represent project management as a discipline, some of which include, PMI and PM Bok.
According to A Guide to the Project Management Body of knowledge (PMBOK Guide), Third Edition, “Project Management is the application of knowledge, skill, tools, and techniques to a broad range of activities in order to meet the requirements of a particular project. Project management is comprised of five basic Project Management Process groups and nine knowledge areas that are typical of almost all projects. The five process groups are Initiating, Planning, Executing, Monitoring and Controlling and Closing process. The nine Knowledge areas center on management expertise in Project Integration Management, Project Scope Management, Project Time Management, Project Cost Management, Project Quality Management, Project Human Resource Management, Project Communications Management, Project Risk Management, and Project Procurement Management.
Each of the nine knowledge areas contains the processes that need to be accomplished within its discipline in order to achieve an effective project management program. Each of these processes also falls into one of the five basic process groups, creating a matrix structure such that every process can be related to one knowledge area and one process group. The PMBOK Guide is meant to offer a general guide to manage most projects most of the time. There are currently two extensions to the PMBOK Guide: The Construction Extension to the PMBOK Guide applies to construction projects, while the Government Extension to the PMBOK Guide applies to government projects. 1. Summarizes how the project manager or team exhibited exceptional and ethical project management practices.
The project Management Institute, which provides standards and certification for professional project manager, offers simple ethics code of conduct guidance. Its standards suggest that project managers practice ethical behavior first through accepting responsibility for their decisions and consequences. It expects projects manager to respect others, listen objectively to input and feedback and be honest I communications. Project managers must practice fairness and transparency in decision making including potential conflicts of interest.
Managers’ report on the status of projects to senior management and other stakeholders which identifying risks, acknowledging failure to meet deadlines and accepting responsibility for personal and team actions. Project managers must describe status accurately and resist the temptation to tell people only what want to hear. Project managers must realistically propose the projects level effort, even when receiving supervisory pressure to underestimate costs in order to win contracts.
Ethical relationships with project staff require respect for individual abilities and cultural differences. Projects managers must use employee search and hiring process that emphasize job-related skills and provide clear job descriptions, including measurement criteria, while obeying laws against discrimination. Project managers should guard against allowing personal relationships to influence decisions on promotion, layoffs and performance evaluations.
A project manager should establish a method for employees to report ethical concerns with anonymity and should follow up through. 2. Discusses the role of the project manager or team, the organizational setting, the recipient’s approach to project integration management, and obstacles that had the potential of adversely impacting the triple constraints. The major role of the project manager or team is to lead all processes and participants of a given project. In satisfying this role, the project manager or team has the difficult task of predicting project schedules and budgets, including possible setbacks that may adversely impact them. Where setbacks are encountered, the project manager or team should strive to compensate for these, to bring the project within agreed requirements. For example, recent recipients of the Project of the Year Award in 2009 and 2010 demonstrated their ability to achieve project goals despite significant setbacks. In 2009, the Newmont TS Power Plant Project faced challenges from a difficult economic landscape in 2004 and an environment with unparalleled demand for technical resources and construction labor, while operating in a remote location.
The project management team adopted a risk management approach and focused on high performance teamwork. The former approach, with risk management and mitigation, is among core strategies advocated by the Project Management Institute. The latter attribute, regarding the level of teamwork, was enhanced by adopting many team building sessions, and by valuing a clear vision for the goals expected by all stakeholders in the project. Goals were assessed on many aspects, including schedule, quality, safety, and sustainability. The Project of the Year Award recipients described their project management strategy as “Continuous Performance Improvement”, in which the skills of the project management team improve from project to project, using feedback to identify areas of enhancement. In 2010, the project management team for the National Ignition Facility (NIF) in Livermore, CA, demonstrated its ability to manage a massive and complex nuclear energy project.
As measures demonstrating the size of the project, the budget exceeded $3.5 billion, and the work involved 7,000 employees. Several setbacks occurred during the project, with the possibility of adversely affected the schedule and budget: as examples, heavy rains from El Nino flooded the worksite, and discovery of paleontological remains halted works for several days. Project managers at NIF used these setbacks to identify that they had misidentified the project scope and miscalculated the project complexities. They responded by adopting several corrective measures: they defined a new baseline cost and schedule, adopted new cost and risk management practices, replaced their senior leadership team, and forged relationships with industrial firms. Chief among their response was collaboration with Moscow State University, to develop a new process to form KDP crystals in 2 months instead of 2 years, bringing the project back on schedule and within budget. In effect, the project managers identified their own project management weaknesses and the technical and scientific weaknesses of their organization, and looked to outside intervention for the benefit of satisfying the project goals.
A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide),
Third Edition 2008, retrieved from http://www.tumblr.com/tagged/a-guide-to-the-project-management-body-of-knowledge–third-edition–pmbok-guides
National Ignition Facility Project (2010), Livermore, California, USA submitted by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, retrieved from http://www.pmi.org/en/Knowledge-Center/Publications-PM-Network/Project-of-the-Year-2010.aspx
Newmont TS Power Plant Project (2009) Submitted by Fluor Enterprises, Inc. and Newmont Nevada Energy Investment, Ltd. retrieved from http://www.pmi.org/About-Us/Our-Professional-Awards/Movie-2009-PMI-Awards-POY-Newmont-Power-Plant-Project-Winner.aspx