The Evolution of Project Management Practice

From Programmes and Contracts to Benefits and Change

Darren Dalcher

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2017
• Print ISBN: 9781138080140
• eBook ISBN: 9781351625616
• Topic: Negocios y empresa
• Subtopic: Negocios en general

Project practice has undergone significant changes requiring new ways of thinking about and managing projects. The single focus on the staged delivery of artefacts is gradually being replaced by a wider interest in stakeholders, value, benefits, and complexity. As a result there is a growing interest in the development of practitioner capabilities, grounded in the recognition that dealing with permeable boundaries and unstructured situations transcends normative processes. Modern practitioners increasingly utilise deliberative and reflective approaches, often challenging received wisdom and traditional interpretations.

This volume provides a sampling of some of the best writing in the project domain, enabling readers to access a wider group of authors, ideas, and perspectives. Key topics covered include agility and programme management, planning, people, business cases, contracts, teams, sponsorship, collaboration, strategy, patterns, context, change, and benefits.

The main aims of the collection are to reflect on the state of practice within the discipline; to propose new extensions and additions to good practice; to offer new insights and perspectives; to distil new knowledge; and, to provide a way of sampling a range of the most promising ideas, perspectives and styles of writing from some of the leading thinkers and practitioners in the discipline.

1
Programme Management

The temporal boundaries of projects and programmes

Darren Dalcher

Is it time to revisit our definitions of projects and programmes?

Definitions and assumptions play a key part in delimiting both knowledge and practice. Language is closely entwined with human life: Words and constructions and the way a language is used can shape what is seen and understood, defining what is acceptable and even possible.

‘When I use a word’, Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean-neither more nor less’.

(Carroll, 1871; p. 57)

The Humpty Dumpty theory of semantics holds sway in most societies and many organisations and cultures. Words, symbols, and concepts are endowed with additional meaning or associations, often derived from highly contextual, regional or vernacular sources, which can make a word mean precisely what the user wants it to mean.

Debates around the real nature of linguistics often focus around the ability to learn and adapt as opposed to inborn notions. Yet, given that meanings within linguistic communities change over time, there appears to be a need to re-visit linguistic associations and consider their impacts on language, understanding, and more widely on the implications for the wider practice.

American philosopher and logician, Willard Van Orman Quine invoked the metaphor of the ‘myth of the museum’, where exhibits are meanings, and the words are labels (1960). His main objection is to the assumption that semantics is determinate in the mind. Instead, Quine advocates for a naturalistic view of language, which implies discovery of the use of native words that comes from observation of behaviour. By this logic, only an empirically based account can address the indeterminacy and contextuality of words and their use, and uncover Humpty Dumpty’s intended interpretation.

Cognitive psychologist Steve Pinker concedes that semantics is about the relation of words to thoughts (2007). But he is quick to point out that it is also about: the relation of words to other human concerns; the relation of words to reality; the relation of words to a community; the relation of words to emotions; and, the relation of words to social relations. Semantics thus defines how thoughts are anchored to things and situations in the world, what shared understanding may be possible, how a word comes to evoke (and even define) an idea, how these ideas are transferred, and ultimately hint at what is allowed and what is considered possible. Above all, semantics can open a window into Humpty Dumpty’s wider world and its impact on ours …

Starting with projects

The traditional definition of a project implies a temporal arrangement concerned with actualising a planned and defined objective. Indeed, project management is regarded as an execution discipline concerned with realising plans. In the UK, especially in government circles, there is currently a growing emphasis on strengthening the profession of project delivery, implying that project management, as practised, is an implementation-focused approach.

Projects are designed to deliver some asset; a result, capability, product or service. In other words, projects are undertaken in order to reach an end point and generate artefacts and outputs that have been planned and requested.

Programme management on the other hand, requires an open-ended approach. The sixth edition of APM Body of Knowledge defines programme management as ‘the coordinated management of projects and change management activities [required] to achieve beneficial change’ (p. 14). The definition cleverly sidesteps the continuous debate about the relationship between project and programme management, offering a more continuous interpretation inclusive of change and, potentially, benefits.

Benefits obscure the picture

The increasing interest in benefit realisation necessitates a wider focus beyond project delivery. Benefit realisation management was first encountered in IT project portfolio discourse. Alternative methods and approaches were devised to ensure that IT projects deliver defined, and agreed, benefits according to a plan. Over the last 20 years, the benefits discourse has penetrated additional areas, featuring in programme management and most recently in project management dialogue engendering some confusion and lack of clarity.

The APM Body of Knowledge asserts that ‘a project is a unique, transient endeavour, undertaken to achieve planned objectives, which could be defined in terms of outputs, outcomes, or benefits’ (p. 12).

It further elaborates that ‘a project is usually deemed to be a success if it achieves the objectives’ (ibid.).

This is confusing as outcomes occur beyond delivery and handover. More critically, benefits accrue over an extended time period as the new or improved asset or system goes into use.

If the success of a project is to be determined by the achievement of the planned objectives, which may encompass outcomes and benefits, it cannot be ascertained until the passage of a significant amount of time beyond project handover, when the benefits from use can be realised and the resulting value is accrued.

The conflation of different timeframes and timescales associated with projects and benefits is far from helpful. Making sense of an increasingly confused picture may require the creation of a distinction between project delivery and post-project benefits realisation and value that imply that the project outputs are actually in use following project completion.

Learning to think strategically

Viewing projects through a delivery lens decreases the wider impacts and potential influences of projects, not least by omitting the shared understanding, the focus on human concerns, and the relation to emotions and social relations. Delivery reduces project management to a lower common denominator focused on systematic implementation of pre-defined results. Crucially, it ignores the potential influence of project managers and leaders in shaping, advocating, negotiating, motivating, and enhancing potential solutions. It is also worth pointing out that an execution-centric perspective excludes an interest in the long-term horizon, thereby discounting the need to consider benefits, and longer-term change impacts.

Moreover, the adoption of the delivery lens creates a strategic vacuum between organisational strategy and the execution of projects.

If projects are to become focused delivery mechanisms there would be a need for something else to adopt a more strategic approach. Meanwhile, if the interest in benefits realisation requires a more strategic and longer-term approach, there is a need for a further discipline to address the wider concerns and the linkage to strategic aspects that extend beyond ‘mere’ delivery.

The chapter by Dr Michel Thiry entitled ‘New Developments in Programme Management’, bridges this gap by considering the new and expanding role of programme management. Programme management is increasingly called upon to address an uncertainty- and complexity-laden context. It is also focused not on the delivery of products and artefacts, but instead on the longer-term realisation and sustainability of benefits.

The chapter represents a reflection on the new developments and changes within the discipline of programme management, primarily over the last five years and draws upon the revised and updated second edition of Program Management (Thiry, 2015). It offers fresh thinking about the connection between programme management and agile management and the alignment of the programme management standards; but, more importantly, it provides new ways of thinking about the essential differences between projects and programmes and revisiting our definitions of what might be expected of each.

Michel’s work offers a direct and well-thought-out link between strategy and project execution, proposing programme management as a vehicle for organisational change. It encourages managers and executives to consider the integration of programme management in the business, the crucial role that it can play in delivering benefits and driving change and improvement. The discussion is further extended to consider the integration with portfolio management and delivery of change.

Dr Thiry has made significant contributions to programme management thinking. His approach integrates, synthesises, and strengthens the body of knowledge and empirical understanding of programmes and their wider role within organisations. It also provides detailed insights into the processes and activities of decision management, stakeholder engagement, governance, change management, and benefits management. His approach reflects updated thinking around programmes and their wider integration to business addressing life cycles, change, programme management maturity measures, organisational issues, and the development of programme management into a key organisational capability.

Rethinking our definitions

A key value of the work is in rethinking our definitions, contexts, and relationships. The chapter offers a useful mechanism for advancing the discourse on projects and programmes. While it does not offer a direct definition of either, it provides a useful set of measures based on five factors. In doing so, it clarifies the context through a multi-dimensional exploration of the different aspects of the undertaking. It is particularly encouraging to see the kind of thinking and maturity that result from the reflection on the development, improvements, and changes within the discipline.

Similar efforts are required to derive an improved understanding of the context of projects, project management, and project delivery. The words as currently used are laden with meaning and expectations. To escape from the static museum and advance the disciplinary discourse, we need to derive a more contextual understanding of the empirical uses of each and their implications. The relation of words to reality remains key.

As thoughts are anchored to particular meanings and interpretations, it is important to uncover some of the underlying assumptions and interpretations that they entail. Improving our shared understanding will depend on the ability to identify how ideas are evoked, transferred, shared, and executed, and where the limits may lie.

American novelist Jonathan Safran Foer noted that ‘definitions have never done anything but to constrain’. Further advances may well depend on our ability to make clear the definitions that underpin particular views, resulting in the repetition of certain patterns and approaches. As masters of dealing with constraints, it is incumbent upon us to uncover the ones defining our achievements. Learning to deal with Humpty Dumpty may well entail understanding what he means through a naturalistic interpretation of his actions and behaviours.

Many of the different flavours and expectations come from the baggage that words and phrases such as ‘projects’ and ‘project management’ evoke. Addressing strategic needs and affecting improvement would ultimately depend on the ability to clarify the contexts and implications of different terms and nuanced interpretations.

Semantics, as the study of meaning has a lot to offer the unfolding dialogue. American theologian, Tryon Edwards (1809–1894) asserted that ‘most controversies would soon be ended, if those engaged in them would first accurately define their terms, and then adhere to their definitions’.

Meanings are incomplete without some elements of context. American Anthropologist Clifford Geertz observed that ‘meaning is socially, historically and rhetorically constructed’. Until we begin to understand the geographies and the situational boundaries of the terms invoked in our conversations around projects we may continue to talk at cross-purposes. Our definitions and dialogue will become richer when we learn to share some of the context and use it to underpin current understanding, explore the emerging boundaries and limits, and continue to drive future development and improvement by re-visiting and challenging both understanding and boundaries.

References

APM (2012). APM Body of Knowledge, 6th edition. Princes Risborough: Association of Project Management.

Carroll, L. (1871). Through the Looking Glass, and What Alice Found There. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Pinker, S. (2007). The Stuff of Thought: Language as a Window into Human Nature. New York: Allen Lane.

Quine, W. V. O. (1960). Word and Object. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Thiry, M. (2015). Program Management. Farnham: Gower.

New developments in programme management

Michel Thiry

Since the first edition of my book Program Management was published in 2010, programme management has evolved both as a distinct discipline and as an organisational capability. As a discipline it has reached a point where, today, the main programme management standards and writers agree that it is meant to deal with complex and turbulent situations and to deliver benefits, not products. It is also becoming more of an organisational capability and practice focuses more and more on its integration within the business, from strategy formulation to sustainability of benefits.

All these developments could be encapsulated in the maturing of the programme culture. In this chapter, I will examine five aspects of this cultural evolution:

1. 1 The rise of agility and its effect on programme management.
2. 2 The alignment of the main programme management standards.
3. 3 The integration of programme management in the organisation.
4. 4 The distinction between projects and programmes.
5. 5 The management of change as a key aspect of programme management.

Agility and programme management

Complex and turbulent situations require a cyclic and flexible approach that today is labelled ‘Agile’. The concepts on which agile is based have existed for a long time, but the popularity of agile management has helped managers understand and accept the culture shifts necessary to manage programmes. I will aim to explain how agile methods and programme management share the same cultural paradigms.

Programme management has evolved from the complexity created by a number of interrelated projects and the number of stakeholders involved; from the need to span from strategy to operations and from the ambiguity involved in constantly emergent decision-making. Agile methods were developed to deal with projects that could not be dealt with using traditional project management methodology. Projects that are complex, involving many unknowns in terms of design, and the effect that results have on expected benefits cannot be managed using traditional project management methods.

In 2001 a group of thinkers of what was then called ‘lightweight methods’ issued the ‘Agile Manifesto’ to tackle complex, fast-moving IT programming projects. This Manifesto states four basic ideas:

• Responding to change over following a plan.
• Working software (measurable results) over comprehensive documentation.
• Individuals and interactions over processes and tools.
• Customer collaboration over contract negotiation.

These principles are shared by programme management.

• Agile ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• List of figures
• List of tables
• About the editor
• Notes on contributors
• Introduction: the evolution of project practice
• 1 Programme management
• 2 Planning
• 3 People
• 4 Business case
• 5 Contracts
• 6 Teams
• 7 Sponsorship
• 8 Collaboration
• 9 Strategy
• 10 Context
• 11 Change
• 12 Benefits
• Conclusion
• Index