Welcome to the January 2014 Edition of the PM World Journal

David Pells,

Managing Editor 

Texas, USA

Welcome to the January 2014 edition of the PM World Journal (PMWJ). This month’s edition again contains a wide range of contents from around the world, with 38 articles, papers, reports and book reviews by 51 different authors in 17 different countries.  An additional 30+ news articles about projects and project management around the world are included. More than 30 countries are again represented by authors or subjects this month.

Invitation to Share Knowledge

We invite you to share your knowledge and experience related to program, project and portfolio management.  We publish a wide variety of articles and papers, case studies and reports, book reviews and news stories.  Share knowledge and gain visibility for you or your organization; publish an article, paper or story in the PMWJ.  See our Call for Papers in the news section of the PMWJ this month; if interested in submitting something for publication, check out the Author Guidelines on www.pmworldjournal.net, then contact me at [email protected].

This month in the Journal

We begin with a Letter to the Editor this month, from Patrick Weaver in Australia in response to the Advisory article in the December PMWJ on the subject of stakeholder management. If you have a reaction to something you read in this publication, share it with the world in an old fashioned letter to the editor – but send it by email please.

15 authors in 6 different countries have contributed Featured Papers this month.  Alan Stretton has provided another paper titled “Notes on organisational stakeholders.”  Alan’s paper this month should be considered an addendum to his 2010 paper on this topic which we have republished this month in the Second Editions category.  Read these two papers together to get the full benefit of Alan’s perspective on this important topic.

We include papers this month by several first time authors.  Maryulis in Jakarta is the author of “Vigorous Integrated Offshore Execution of Integrity Management Program to Significantly Reduce Hydro-Carbon Release and Maintain Base production.” Subhashish Segupta, Dr Debashish Sengupta and Prof Ray Titus in India have authored “Application of Agile Methodologies for Member and Team Role Transformation in Projects.” Ashwan Kharola and Dr SB Singh in India are the authors of “Development of Fuzzy Logic Model for Project Management Success.” Please read these good contributions to the PM literature this month.

Prof Leo Bruno at Fundação Dom Cabral in Minas Gerais, Brazil is back with a paper titled “Longitudinal Assessment of the Impact of Leadership on Organizational Performance.”  Pavel Barseghyan, PhD is back with another important paper titled “Equilibrium and Extreme Principles in Discovering Unknown Relationships from Big Data, Part 2: Non-statistical Mathematical Methods in Project Management.” Bob Prieto at Fluor in the USA has authored another paper aimed at the engineering/construction industry titled “Owner’s Readiness Index.”   And Professors Vladimir Voropajev and Yan Gelrud in Russia are back with another paper in their series on mathematical models for various project stakeholder groups, this month’s paper titled “Mathematical Models of Project Management for a Manager and his Team.”  These authors are frequent contributors of significant works to the PMWJ, so please read their papers.

Prof Eric Wright in Indiannapolis has teamed with DJ McCord to author a paper titled “The Project Manager’s Stakeholder Circuit: A New Paradigm for Stakeholder Management.” Finally, Paul Giammalvo in Indonesia is back with an update of his well-respected assessment of project management certifications, in his paper titled “Project Management Credentials Compared: 2014 Update.” Our Featured Papers are all serious contributions to the P/PM literature, so although they may sometimes be long and/or academic, please consider reading them.  Increase your knowledge!


To read entire paper (click here)

About the Author

flag-usadavid-pellsDAVID PELLS 

Managing Editor, PMWJ

David L. Pells is Managing Editor of the PM World Journal, a global eJournal for program and project management, and Executive Director of the PM World Library. David is an internationally recognized leader in the field of professional project management with more than 35 years of experience on a variety of programs and projects, including engineering, construction, defense, energy, transit, high technology and nuclear security, and project sizes ranging from several thousand to ten billion dollars. He has been an active professional leader in the United States since the 1980s, serving on the board of directors of the Project Management Institute (PMI®) twice.  He was founder and chair of the Global Project Management Forum (1995-2000), an annual meeting of leaders of PM associations from around the world. David was awarded PMI’s Person of the Year award in 1998 and Fellow Award, PMI’s highest honor, in 1999. He is also an Honorary Fellow of the Association for Project Management (APM) in the UK; Project Management Associates (PMA – India); and Russian Project Management Association SOVNET.  From June 2006 until March 2012, he was the managing editor of the globally acclaimed PM World Today eJournal.  He occasionally provides high level P/PM advisory support for major global programs and organizations.  David has published widely, spoken at conferences and events worldwide, and can be contacted at [email protected]. 

For more, visit www.pmworldjournal.net and www.pmworldlibrary.net.

Just-in-Time Just-in-Case Learning to Enhance Project Performance

SECOND EDITION                                                            

 Lawrence V. Suda, CEO

Palatine Group, Inc.

New York, USA

Many organizations are facing difficulties of both capability and capacity – in simple terms, having enough of the right skills and knowledge to be able to get all the work completed to sustain competitive advantage. Even prior to the astonishing developments of the last half decade and the beginning of this decade, the global landscape was changing rapidly and the pressures on individuals and organizations were becoming evident. Developments during this decade only increased the pressures on projects and individuals to have the right skills and knowledge in order to remain competitive, to learn and adapt quickly. These pressures are likely to continue and become even more severe in the foreseeable future.  As entire world economies, governments, and markets reshape on a massive scale never seen before, organizations, projects and people are experiencing levels of unprecedented change. This picture is acknowledged by organizational and project leaders worldwide.

It’s against this setting that the delivery of learning supporting the development of new skills, knowledge and behavioral capabilities, with speed, scale and responsiveness has never been more important. Organizational learning functions are facing increased challenges, as well as great opportunities, to re-shape their interventions to keep pace with these rapid of changes. It follows that harnessing the power of technology to provide and deliver the right training and knowledge at the right time is central to improving talent on a global scale within all parts of all organizations desiring to stay competitive in the next decades.

This paper and presentation will examine how learning can be enabled and enhanced through the strategic and innovative use of a range of learning technologies. The focus is on learning of individuals and teams within an organizational context.

Learning Challenges and Changing Business Demands in a New World 

The world of learning and development professionals today was unthinkable a decade ago. Their jobs are evolving from the administration and leading traditional classroom and straightforward transactional tasks to developing and building strategic capacity and capability within the workforce to meet the goals and objectives of the organization.

The key responsibilities and challenges of learning and development professions in all organizations are strategic. Their real value lies in their strategic contribution toward meeting the current and future organizational goals and objectives. Ulrich and Brockbank’s research found that 43% of the human capital function comes from a more strategic focus (RBL 2006).

When the organization’s business strategy and human capital strategy are aligned, an organization can show up to a 250% increase in business performance compared with organizations taking a more tactical focus (ASTD 2005) As reported by the ASTD and IBM research, senior level executives expect the learning and development function to be working and building workforce capability in support of the future organizational strategy. But, the fact is that the human capital functions are still focused on tactical work to meet the immediate demands of the organization. One survey found that 66% of respondents said that the human capital function was not responding quickly enough to the strategic challenges related to profitable new growth (HRPS 2007). This is in large part due to the fact that most human capital functions are understaffed and are forced to meet immediate workforce needs.


To read entire paper (click here)

Editor’s note:  Second Editions are previously published papers that have continued relevance in today’s project management world, or which were originally published in conference proceedings or in a language other than English.  This paper was originally presented at the PMI Global Congress North America 2013 in New Orleans, Louisiana, USA and included in the congress proceedings; republished here with author’s permission.

About the Author 

flag-usaLawrence-V.-SudaLawrence V. Suda 

Palatine Group / Management Worlds

New York, USA 

Lawrence Suda is the CEO and an Officer at Palatine group/Management Worlds, Inc. with over 30 years project and program management consulting and training experience to numerous government and private sector companies. The Palatine Group/Management Worlds specializes in creating computer-based simulations for project management and leadership training. Larry’s career emphasis is on organization behavior, project management, operations management, strategic management and enterprise-wide project management for leading companies and government agencies throughout the world, including: NASA, US Navy, Departments of Commerce, Treasury, Energy, Health & Human Services , Agriculture, DAU and others and in the private sector to such companies as General Electric, Proctor & Gamble,  ALCOA, URS, Verizon, Boeing, Lockheed/Martin, Hewlett-Packard, Perot Systems, PPG Industries, United States Steel and others. Before founding Palatine Group/Management Worlds, Larry worked in the private and public sectors at the US Environmental Protection Agency and was an Assistant Professor at the University of Maryland. Mr. Suda is a frequent speaker at PMI and IPMA Conferences in the United States and Europe and has led workshops for PMI’s Seminars World in various locations around the World. He is an adjunct professor at Drexel University teaching Global Project Leadership.  He can be contacted at [email protected].

Competency-based dual education: An alliance between industry, education and public sectors to fulfill industry demand and needs of youth in the US – A project success story[1]

SECOND EDITION                                                          

Dr. Thomas Baumanna, Sarah Harfstb, Amy Cellc, John Dunnd

aGeneral Manager, Orbitak International LLC, Troy, Michigan, USA

bConsultant, Orbitak International LLC, Troy, Michigan, USA
cSenior Vice President, Talent Enhancement, Michigan Economic Development Corporation, Lansing, Michigan, USA
dPresident, Brose North America, Inc., Auburn Hills, Michigan, USA


The future of industry, and its ability to globally compete, is contingent on the competencies and motivation of its employees. Therefore, competence-based education and youth development are needed to maintain a talent pipeline of employees who have the skills and competencies necessary for industry to succeed in the global market. Such an undertaking requires a professional combination of political vision, academic abilities and acumen, and strong industry involvement, as well as a unified mindset of social responsibility.

Over the last two decades, there has been an increasing skill gap between industry demand and the qualified existing workforce. In Michigan, the state government, industry and educators initiated and implemented- within 12 months- a statewide competency-based dual education system in order to create a competent, readily employable workforce. Using industry defined competencies, nationally recognized academic credentials, and a unique combination of theory, practical instruction and work assignment, Michigan Advanced Technician Training [MAT2] allows companies to “grow their own” employees, offers graduates viable career options, and ensures the recognition of Michigan as an education innovator and global competitor.

Strong program management with a clearly defined structure [organization, scope, timing, risks, costs…] was crucial in order to ensure the critical balance of different stakeholder interests, the creation of industry-approved competence-based learning content, and the successful completion of program targets. This article will explain the program management approach, complex structure, and ambitious goals of MAT2, as well as identify the key success [program management] features which will allow it to grow.

Keywords: program management, stakeholder management, PM in education, partnership, 

  1. Introduction 

Michigan’s 2013 Economic Summit focused on the growing skills gap, and the current disconnect between industry demand and the state’s ability to meet both current and future talent needs. Governor Rick Snyder addressed the scope and impact of Michigan’s current skill gap, acknowledging that “it’s a national issue… not a just a Michigan issue” and there is “no good system to aggregate that demand” [Gallagher, J., 2013].   Skills gap studies across the country indicate that 67% of manufacturers are currently experiencing “a moderate to severe shortage of available, qualified workers” [Manufacturing Institute Report, 2012], and recognizing the aging generation of their current workforce, expect a severe labor crisis when they retire [Streb, Voelpel, and Leibold, 2009]. The manufacturing industry is unable to fill vacant technician positions, due to a labor shortage of skilled workers [those falling between unskilled labor and engineer], and are sometimes forced to place engineers in technician roles- resulting higher labor, recruitment, and turnover costs [Roesset and Yao, 2000].

Although the talent pipeline has several points of disconnect, one that industry leaders have increasingly identified targets the US education system. Citing this disconnect, automotive manufacturer Volkswagen recently stated that they “can only maintain their global standard by utilizing their own training and education measures,” and have created their own internal training programs for employees using approaches similar to the German Dual Education System [VW 2013].  Because the future of industry, and its ability to globally compete, is contingent on the competence and skill of its workforce, educators play a pivotal role in their success and/or failure. Companies rely on educators to supply a higher level of entry-level skill so that they can minimize their training costs. If educators are unable to meet industry’s talent demands, as currently indicated by the national skill gaps, manufacturers like Volkswagen will continue to increase their investment in employee training and view colleges as increasingly irrelevant. This solution, however, fails to address the bulk of the manufacturing industry.

Although larger companies have the knowledge and resources to implement internal training programs, both the federal and Michigan state government have recognized the need for education reform amongst community colleges, so as to meet the talent needs of suppliers and other [smaller] manufacturing sectors. In doing so, the Michigan Economic Development Corporation [MEDC], directed by Governor Snyder, brought together a group of government, industry, and education leaders in June 2012 to discuss the comprehensive education reform needed to address the current skills gap in Michigan. The product of this meeting, what is now called the Michigan Advanced Technician Training [MAT2] Mechatronics Program, is the pilot implementation of a dual education system and is driven by three primary stakeholder groups:


To read entire paper (click here)

Editor’s note:  Second Editions are previously published papers that have continued relevance in today’s project management world, or which were originally published in conference proceedings or in a language other than English. This paper was originally presented at the 27th IPMA World Congress in Dubrovnik, Croatia and included in the Congress Proceedings, October 2013. It is republished here with permission or the authors and congress organizers.

About the Authors 

flag-usapmwj18-jan2014-baumann-PHOTO1 BAUMANNThomas Baumann 

Orbitak International LLC

Troy, Michigan, USA

Thomas Baumann, born in 1960 studied physics. After some years in the power plant industry he got in contact with the matter of project management and joined a management consultancy. Using his experiences in the power plant and offshore industry he implemented project management in international and global acting companies.  Later he joined the large German Automaker Volkswagen AG as principal of the Volkswagen consulting and was responsible for the strategic development of the component plants esp. in Germany. Because of his strong ties to project management field he was asked to establish and manage the center of competence of PM of VW in Wolfsburg, Germany. Later he became the leader of Business Processes and IT-Strategy at Volkswagen of America in Detroit, USA.

Today Th0mas is Director of the Orbitak Consultancy company and CEO of the Orbitak International LLC in Detroit USA. Since more than 20 years he is working/leading consulting projects & programs mainly in global acting enterprises in the automotive & supplier, public, education and banking industry. Mr. Baumann is specialized in the fields of strategic consulting, business processes and project management- especially PM-maturities and new trends in project management. During the last years he was focused on the transfer of results from fields like expertise research, neurobiology and complexity management into practical hints for the field of (project) management about which he published several papers. He also is specialized in setting up and managing complex projects within the educational sector where politics, industry and academic providers have to partner.

Thomas Baumann won with his colleagues Manfred Saynisch and Dr. Louis Klein the 2010 International ICCPM research prize.  Thomas can be contacted at [email protected].

flag-usapmwj18-jan2014-baumann-PHOTO2 HARFSTSarah Harfst

Orbitak International LLC

Troy, Michigan, USA

Sarah Harfst is a consultant for Orbitak International LLC, the US subsidiary of a German-based management consulting company. She graduated from Michigan State University having focused on research and evaluation, and has worked on state-wide systems change initiatives like the National Youth Leadership Initiative. Currently, Sarah consults in the development and project management of the Michigan Advanced Technician Training Program (MAT2) Mechatronics Program and the Multi-State Advanced Manufacturing Consortium Grant.

flag-usapmwj18-jan2014-baumann-PHOTO3 CELLAmy Cell

Michigan Economic Development Corporation

Lansing, Michigan, USA

Amy Cell is Senior Vice President of Talent Enhancement for the Michigan Economic Development Corporation.  Her primary focus is to direct programs to attract, retain and develop talent for the state of Michigan. Prior to joining the MEDC in 2011, Amy was VP, Talent Enhancement & Entrepreneurial Education at Ann Arbor SPARK, where she assisted organizations with their talent needs, provided oversight for a variety of entrepreneurial education programs and managed the SPARK East incubator.  In addition to working as a CPA for Plante & Moran, and launching an Office of Student Life for the Ross School of Business at the University of Michigan, she has spent 10 years in a variety of human resources roles at Ford Motor Company, the Stanford Research Institute, Applied Biosystems and co-founded the consulting partnership, HR Drivers.

Current and past board memberships include the Center for Entrepreneurship at the U-M College of Engineering, Women’s Council for Washtenaw Community College, Huron Musical Association, Women’s Exchange of Washtenaw, Ross School of Business SE Michigan Alumni Club, Kingcare, King PTO and the Junior League of Ann Arbor.  Amy received her BBA and MBA from the University of Michigan.

flag-usapmwj18-jan2014-baumann-PHOTO4 DUNNJohn Dunn

President, Brose North America

John Dunn has been responsible for Brose activities in North America since August 1, 2012.    John Dunn graduated with degrees in engineering from Purdue University and the University of Wisconsin.  After joining Brose North America as Director for General Motors Door System business in 1998, he was appointed General Manager of the Chicago plant in 2002.  From 2007, John was Chief Operating Officer in charge of production sites in the North American region.  For two years during that period, he also held the position of Vice President responsible for global door system sales to General Motors.

[1] Second Editions are previously published papers that have continued relevance in today’s project management world, or which were originally published in conference proceedings or in a language other than English.  Original publication acknowledged; authors retain copyright.  This paper was originally presented at the 27th IPMA World Congress in Dubrovnik, Croatia.  It is republished here with permission of the author and congress organizers.

IPMA Education & Training Board’s Series for the PMWJ : Educating Project Management Practitioners in Ireland


By Ed Naughton

IPMA Education & Training Board Member


Prof Sebastian Green

University College Cork 


The Institute of Project Management, which is the IPMA member association in Ireland, has for the past nine years been conducting an annual survey of project managers across five major geographic centres in Ireland. The Institute is 100% focused on the field of project management and is committed to the development and the professionalization of our chosen field. This survey forms part of a research initiative instigated by the Institute and run in conjunction with University College Cork (UCC), Department of Management and Marketing.   UCC is the third largest University in Ireland.

The survey aims to provide up to date, comprehensive information on the state of the project management profession in Ireland, with a particular focus on the career profile and attainment levels of project managers.  It gives us a picture of the career path of people, who are enhancing their professional profiles by acquiring project management education and internationally recognised accreditation.

The results of the survey are widely available and provide an important reference point not just for project managers but for organisations having significant exposure to project management.  The survey instrument comprises in excess of fifty questions covering five key areas: (i) project managers’ profile and salary, (ii) importance attributed by organisations to certification and maturity, (iii) the extent of PMOs, (iv) the practice of portfolio management, and (v) benefits realization.

The highest no of respondents to the survey are career project managers in their 30s with the second highest group being in their 40s.  Virtually all respondents are well educated with just over a third having a post graduate qualification.  For those having a degree, a strong bias is shown toward a qualification in engineering and construction followed by business management and information technology although the project managers themselves are spread across a wide range of industries such as Pharmaceuticals, Healthcare, Banking Construction, Utilities and E commerce.

Most respondents think that project management should provide a clear career path yet few, less than a third, think that it actually does.   They neither face a clear career path within their organisations nor consider they receive adequate remuneration for their specialism.  This suggests that much still needs to be done to structure and embed explicit career paths and remuneration levels for project managers within Irish companies.


To read entire article (click here)

Editor’s note: This is the 11th in a series of articles provided by the IPMA Education and Training (E&T) Board on the subject of project management education, training, careers and related topics.  More information about the IPMA E&T can be found at http://ipma.ch/education. 

About the Author

flag-irelandpmwj17-dec2013-naughton-AUTHOR IMAGEED NAUGHTON 

Institute of Project Management

Dublin, Ireland 

Ed Naughton, BE, C. Eng., F.I.E.I, FIPMA, IPMA-a, PMP, is the founder and current Director General of the Institute of Project Management of Ireland, the leading authority on the PM profession in Ireland.  On the international front, Ed was responsible for initiating cooperation agreements with both the PMI (Project Management Institute) USA and the IPMA (International Project Management Association). He is Ireland’s representative on the IPMA council of delegates, and a former Vice President-Marketing for the IPMA. He was also the first PMP registered in Ireland.  Ed has researched, published and presented many articles and papers on project management and is the author of the Irish Project Management Competence Baseline. During his thirty year career, Ed has worked as a project manager and/or project management consultant on a large variety of high profile domestic and international assignments. Ed Naughton is a graduate of University College Dublin (BE, civil), a Fellow of the Institute of Engineers of Ireland, a Chartered Engineer (Ireland), a Professional Engineer in Canada, and holds an IPMA Level A certification.  He is former founder and editor of the quarterly international publication “Project Management Practice”. One of Ireland’s most respected experts on the topic of modern project management, Ed is an executive advisor to PM World in Ireland.  Ed Naughton was named a Fellow of IPMA in 2013.  Ed lives in Dublin and can be contacted at [email protected].

flag-irelandpmwj18-jan2014-green-naughton-PHOTO2 GREENSebastian Green, PhD

University College Cork

Cork, Ireland

Prof. Sebastian Green joined University College Cork in 1990 as Bank of Ireland Professor of Management, specializing in Strategic Management. He was Head of the Department of Management and Marketing and was Dean of Commerce from 1998 to 2002 and the first Executive Dean of Commerce from 2003 to 2004. He re-launched the MBA at UCC in 1991 and was its director from 1991 to 1996 and from 2000 until 2004.

Prior to coming to UCC he was Senior Lecturer in Strategy at Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand and before that Research Fellow in Strategy at the London Business School. He has also been an Economic Advisor at the Price Commission, London and a Research Fellow in the National Consumer Council.

Sebastian’s current work focuses on Corporate Culture, Organisational Relations and Change in subsidiaries of multi-national corporations (MNCs) and in family businesses.  He is also interested in the area of Strategic Project Management.  Sebastian is on the editorial board of the Journal of Social Transformation and Change, and on the Knowing Field Journal. Sebastian is the author of international journal articles and books on strategy issues, corporate culture and organisation constellations.

He holds a Tavistock MA in Consultation and the Organisation, and a PhD from Sussex University in Social Anthropology, UK.  Sebastian can be contacted at [email protected].

Risk Doctor Briefing: Including Sustainability in the Risk Framework


Dr David Hillson FIRM, HonFAPM, PMI Fellow

The Risk Doctor 


Sustainability has become increasingly important to organisations across the world in recent years, as both a business objective and a necessary constraint. But what does it mean? And how should it be included in the risk process?

The word sustainability has changed its meaning significantly over time in the business world. At first it only referred to impact on the environment. Then in 1995 John Elkington from British consultancy SustainAbility introduced the idea of the “triple bottom line” of “Profit/People/Planet”, suggesting that an organisation needs to be sustainable financially, socially and environmentally.

More recently, work on sustainability in 2007 by the Forum for the Future expanded this further, identifying five areas that contribute to the production of value by an organisation, and which need to be managed sustainably. They call these The Five Capitals of Sustainability.* They are:

  1. Natural Capital. This represents the environmental and ecological resources that are needed to produce goods or deliver services. They include energy, water, fuels, raw materials and other natural resources, as well as the ecosystems from which these are taken. 
  1. Human Capital. This is not just about individuals as resources, but it also covers their energy, health and wellbeing, knowledge and skills, motivations and emotions. 
  1. Social Capital. This describes the way that people interact in the various teams within organisations. It is also about how people relate through other networks, partnerships and less formal groupings. 
  1. Manufactured Capital. This covers material goods and infrastructure used by an organisation to generate its products and services, but which are not part of the delivered output. It includes buildings, machines, tools, communications networks, IT systems etc. 
  1. Financial Capital. These are assets that exist in currency form, including cash, shares, bonds and loans. 

Each of these Five Capitals forms part of the value chain which an organisation uses to generate its goods and services. The challenge is to use these different types of capital in a way that is wise, efficient, effective and sustainable. 


To read entire article (click here)

About the Author

flag-ukdavid-hillsonDr. David Hillson 

The Risk Doctor 

Dr David Hillson CMgr FRSA FIRM FCMI HonFAPM PMI-Fellow is The Risk Doctor (www.risk-doctor.com).  As an international risk consultant, David is recognised as a leading thinker and expert practitioner in risk management. He consults, writes and speaks widely on the topic and he has made several innovative contributions to the field. David’s motto is “Understand profoundly so you can explain simply”, ensuring that his work represents both sound thinking and practical application.

David Hillson has over 25 years’ experience in risk consulting and he has worked in more than 40 countries, providing support to clients in every major industry sector, including construction, mining, telecommunications, pharmaceutical, financial services, transport, fast-moving consumer goods, energy, IT, defence and government. David’s input includes strategic direction to organisations facing major risk challenges, as well as tactical advice on achieving value and competitive advantage from effectively managing risk.

David’s contributions to the risk discipline over many years have been recognised by a range of awards, including “Risk Personality of the Year” in 2010-11. He received both the PMI Fellow award and the PMI Distinguished Contribution Award from the Project Management Institute (PMI®) for his work in developing risk management. He is also an Honorary Fellow of the UK Association for Project Management (APM), where he has actively led risk developments for nearly 20 years.  David Hillson is an active Fellow of the Institute of Risk Management (IRM), and he was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts (RSA) to contribute to its Risk Commission. He is also a Chartered Fellow of the Chartered Management Institute (CMI) and a Member of the Institute of Directors (IOD).

Dr Hillson can be contacted at [email protected].

Implementing Project Management as Part of a Corporate Cost Reduction Program

SECOND EDITION                                                            

Hubert Vaughan

Professor (retired)

Tsinghua University

Beijing, China


The Chief Executive is now the champion for driving the project management practices within the organization. Implementation of project management is more than delivering projects on time and under budget, it is the major tool for achieving sustainable cost savings in the Corporation.

Keywords: Reform, Cost Reduction, project management, Profit improvement, Project Office, System Development


Most organizations implement Project Management with a simple objective, to deliver quality deliverables on time, under budget, with limited resources.

Despite statistics indicating the rate of failures in project engagement year after year, organizations continue to put faith in project management because its knowledge base is comprehensive to ensure project engagements can achieve their objectives if applied properly. Furthermore, those successful engagements we often hear about are projects of significant nature from organizations we recognized as industry leaders.

Project Management was officially introduced to China just before the turn of the century. Government offices and enterprises initially greeted it with great enthusiasm. Project Management was the magic tool they were looking for that can enhance management effectiveness and improve operation efficiency. Government soon mandated all engineering contracts must have a certified project manager from the bidder to quality for bid submission, and executives expected project managers to deliver contracts on time and under-budget.

The facts of a Project Manager’s Life 

Ten years have passed and there are stories of successes and failures in the use of project management across all industries in China. Most Project Managers are accomplished professionals, selected by management and given the responsibility of leading and managing project engagements. Appointments were mostly based on the individual’s acumens in their field of business or technology achievement in relation to the project nature itself. The mandate is simple, i.e., get the job done right. Unfortunately it is easier said than done.

A majority of Project Managers, as far as most organizations in China go, are no more than Team Leaders who carry the prime responsibility of an engineer with other team members having added responsibility to manage the project according to the Project Management knowledge introduced by PMI from USA or IPMA from Europe. The gaps between project management knowledge and project management practices are large enough for these accomplished professionals to lose focus of their newly assigned responsibility.

Gradually, their primary concern is to meet senior management expectation by filling out the regular reports from data submitted from other team members without validating or evaluating the contents, while senior management considered project management a viable tool that can provide them the needed statistics through regular status reports so that they know how well the organization is doing financially.  They leave the project managers on their own to find ways of improving their project management skills and competency. How projects were managed was not that important as long as revenues continue to flow in and profit margins appear in financial reports.


To read entire paper (click here)

Second Editions are previously published papers that have continued relevance in today’s project management world, or which were originally published in conference proceedings or in a language other than English.  Original publication acknowledged; authors retain copyright.  This paper was originally published in PM World Today in September 2010, republished with author’s permission. 

About the Author

flag-chinapmwj17-dec2013-vaughan-AUTHOR IMAGEProf Hubert Vaughan (Retired) 

Tsinghua University

Beijing, China

Hubert Vaughan commenced his career in the field of computer technology in early 1972. For thirty years, Hubert practiced and served a number of International technology and financial Organizations including IBM, DEC, Unisys, Tandem, Bell Canada, Andersen Consulting, Lucent Technologies, National Mutual, ANZ Banking Group and Bank of Montreal; holding senior management positions in Technology related services. His career covered the five major continents around the world as Department Manager, Director, Assistant Vice President, and Vice President that spanned across software development, professional services, product development, technology consulting, project/program management, strategic planning as well as business development.

The last ten years, Hubert joined the Academic Institutions in China as Professor at the Institute of International Engineering Project Management (IIEPM) of Tsinghua University. Hubert also lectured at the Graduate School of China Academy of Science, the Beijing University of Aeronautic and Astronautic teaching Innovation Management, Management of Technology, Program Management, Project management, and Software Engineering.

Apart from his teaching engagements, Hubert is a Research Fellow at the China Academy of Management Science, a member of the International Society of Professional Innovation Management (ISPIM), a former member of PMI’s Certification Governance Council (CGC); a co-founder of First International Innovation Management Alliance (FiiMA), and an Editorial Advisor of professional e-journal PM World Journal. Hubert is a Program Consultant to a number of multi-billion dollars projects run by State-Owned technology organizations and financial institutions in China.

Hubert is a regular presenter at international conferences and seminars in North America, Europe, Middle-East and Asia-Pacific. He had published more than fifty papers related to Software Engineering, Project Management, Program Management, and Innovation Management subjects both in China and in various international professional journals.  Retired from his academic engagement in July 2013, Hubert continues his research work in Innovation Engineering and presents at international events about his research findings throughout his career. He can be contacted at [email protected]

Project Management Report from Zagreb


Development of Project Management in Croatia

Successfully executed projects could serve as wind in its sails 

By Gordana Blažević

International Correspondent 

Zagreb, Croatia

Last year was a very successful year for the Croatian Association for Project Management, not only for its Young Crew, but also for the overall development of project management in Croatia. The most important events related to project management in Croatia that have marked the year 2013 are certainly the 27th IPMA World Congress and the Global Young Crew Workshop, that were held from 30 September to 3 October in the beautiful city of Dubrovnik. The Croats were given the opportunity to gain insight into the best practices in project management and thus upgrade their skills and competencies that will bring not only personal and professional benefits but also ensure national competitiveness in the future.

IPMA Excellence Award in Croatia 

High efficiency projects and excellent project management have become the imperative of today’s  successful business and knowledge from the field is a conditio sine qua non for modern business leaders, and in that context Croatia is no exception. With the intention of raising not only the level of skills in project management, but also the awareness of its importance the Croatian Association for Project Management has granted the IPMA Excellence Award. The award identifies examples of excellent project management and acknowledges innovative projects. It supports professional project management in achieving high performance in projects and motivates project teams to identify and optimize the use of their strengths. The assessment process is based on the IPMA Project Excellence Model. As of this year, the Croatian Association for Project Management has established a national award for project management excellence.

The TriGranit d.o.o. company was declared as this year’s gold winner for the construction of the Arena Zagreb shopping center, and we have interviewed TriGranit’s project manager Mr. Leo Penović, who received this special award.

  1. 1.    What does this award mean to you from a professional, but also from a personal point of view?

Receiving an award for the best-run Croatian project at the global IPMA Congress and in the company the world’s best project managers, represents the recognition of the project management profession as well as recognition of the work carried out by my project management team. I am particularly glad that Croatia is starting to recognize the profession of project management, along with recognizing the competence and excellence criteria in the field.


To read entire report, click here

About the Author

flag-zagreb-croatiaGordana BlaževićGordana Blažević, Croatia

Zagreb, Croatia

Gordana Blažević is a member of IPMA Young Crew and president of Young Crew Croatia. She was born in 1985., graduated Faculty of Civil Engineering from the University of Zagreb in September 2010. After graduation, she was working till September 2012 for company OPTIMA Project Ltd, a registered company for performing construction services, expert supervision, consulting and project management. After that, the Faculty of Civil Engineering at the University of Zagreb in the Construction Management Department employed her as a young research associate.

As a president of Young Crew Croatia Gordana is part of various projects on national and international level. She is also member of IPMA Marketing Working group.

Questions and feedback are highly welcome via [email protected]

IPMA Recruits Assessors for the IPMA International Project Excellence Award 2014


By Ewa Bednarczyk and Kasia Pachuta 

Krakow, Poland

“Go the ‘extra mile’ in project management with your involvement with the IPMA Project Excellence Award”

–  John-Paris Pantouvakis, PhD

Every year a group of around 100 assessors get a unique chance to gain the experience in the assessment of the best-managed projects in the world. Projects coming from all industries and continents take the challenge and apply for the IPMA International Project Excellence Award. This is the annual award organized by the International Project Management Association since 2002 and it is based on the IPMA Project Excellence Model.

The assessors are the heart of the assessment process. Each project is assessed by four or five assessors Prof. Ding Ronggui (China) and Prof. Rajat Baisya (India) both experienced assessors, Team Lead Assessors and Trainers underline that being the assessor is excellence chance to work with project professionals and share ideas and lessons with them. Ph. D. John-Paris Pantouvakis (Greece) said that benefits start already from interacting with a team of peers at the assessors training.

The first part of the assessment is based on the application report, then the assessors meet with the project team and stakeholders at the site visit.

“At the site visit the assessors have an opportunity to discuss with excellent project managers from different industries how to manage projects successfully, to review real case documents and management tools, and to get lots of best practices, which are valuable to make great improvement to our projects” says Prof. Ding Ronngui.

Mr. Venkatesh (India) adds that site visit provides an exciting opportunity to know and understand people (both assessors and applicant) from different countries, regions, cultures, traditions etc.: “A real life experience!” 


To read entire report, click here

About the Authors 

flag-polandEwa-BednarczykEwa Bednarczyk 

Krakow, Poland

Ewa Bednarczyk has administered the International Project Management Association (IPMA) International Project Excellence Award Office since 2007. In years 2010-2012 she served as SPMP (IPMA-Poland) Vice President responsible for the Polish Project Excellence Award. Ewa graduated from the Cracow University of Economics and Avans Hogeschool in Breda. She is an IPMA Level-D and Prince2Foundation certificates holder. Ewa is also an occasional International Correspondent for PM World in Kraków, Poland.  She can be contacted at: [email protected].

flag-polandpmwj18-jan2014-bednarczyk-PHOTO2 PACHUTAKasia Pachuta

IPMA Award Office Manager

Cracow, Poland

Kasia Pachuta has a very international educational background. She studied in Poland, France, USA and South Korea, graduating from Cracow University of Economics. Kasia can be contacted at [email protected]

On the Subject of Omar Muhammad and Abid Mustafa’s article on Managing Stakeholders: Going beyond conventional wisdom.


16 December 2013 

Dear Editor,

The authors of this paper seem to lack access to any effective literature review mechanism.  The problems described are certainly real and occur regularly in organisations with an immature stakeholder engagement culture, but the solutions and many of the highlights in the article have been in the published literature for several years.

Probably the most succinct summary of the problems outlined in the article together with practical solutions can be found in Stakeholder Relationship Management: A Maturity Model for Organisational Implementation (2nd Edition), published by Gower Publishing Ltd, Aldershot (http://www.gowerpub.com/isbn/9780566088643).

One of the key lessons from this book and the many papers published by its author, Dr. Bourne, is that effective stakeholder engagement is never likely to succeed if it is implemented ad hoc at the individual project level.  Effective stakeholder relationship management requires the right organisational culture and the right support systems within the business.

Achieving maturity in stakeholder management takes time and commitment; the five stages of stakeholder relationship management maturity are defined in the SRMM model which is available as a free download from http://www.stakeholdermapping.com/srmm-maturity-model/

So in summary, whilst the problems described in the article are real, the solutions have been available for the better part of a decade; what’s missing is the willingness of executive management in most organisations to commit the resources necessary to achieve a degree of control in the critical area of stakeholder engagement.  As the authors state, if you lose the support of your key stakeholders, your project will fail.

Patrick Weaver, PMP, FAICD,

Melbourne, Australia

Mathematical Models of Management for a Manager and His Project Management Team

FEATURED PAPER                                                           

By Vladimir I. Voropayev, PhD,


Yan D. Gelrud, PhD,



This paper dwells on the complex of the interconnected mathematical models intended for project management activities with the participation of one of the main interested parties – a manager and his project management team. The use of such models aims at increasing efficiency of their activity, and ensures that relevant competences and the desired objectives achievement under various conditions of modalities for the project implementation are put into effect.

KEY WORDS: stakeholder, mathematical models of project management, competence of project management.


This work continues a cycle of articles devoted to creation of a complex of interconnected mathematical models, intended for management of design activity with participation of different interested parties. In [1] there was an attempt to structure the features of the main interested parties (stakeholders) and with these in mind to construct a complex of the interconnected mathematical models of project management. Isolated examples of such models are constructed for investor, customer, project team, main contractors, suppliers and regulators.

Ibid. we noted that various interested parties in the project are notable for different expectations, roles, measures of responsibility and management activities. These distinctions significantly influence project terms of reference, the methods used, tools and techniques of management problem solving, focused on their specific requirements. In [2-5] more detailed models for the investor, the customer, the supplier and regulators are constructed.

In the present article the offered mathematical models of management for the major interested party – the head and his team of management, are intended to calculate  all the technical and economic parameters of the project, to form a set of options of its realization for the subsequent choosing the most effective from them. The use of these models is aimed at the effectiveness increase of the project team’s activity, provides the realization of its corresponding competences and the achievement of goals at project implementation.

The complex multi-purpose project which description is made by means of network modeling is thus considered, and at that the traditional determined as well as probabilistic, alternative and stochastic models can be used. The description of similar network models and the methods of calculation of the main indicators of the project (early and late terms of the beginning and completion of tasks, probabilities of performance of the main stages and all project as a whole and so forth) can be found in [6,7] and several other publications provided in these articles. It is supposed that the realization of the project can be enabled by N options.

For each option the project team calculates their temporary, resource and financial performance, ecological and social characteristics. Actual examples of similar projects will be given in the following articles of the cycle.


To read entire paper (click here)

About the Authors 

flag-russiaVLADIMIR-VOROPAJEVDr Vladimir Voropajev 

Author, Professor, International PM Expert

Founder, Former President, Chair – SOVNET

Former Vice President – IPMA

Full Member, Russian Academy of Natural Sciences

Moscow, Russia

Professor Vladimir Voropajev, PhD. is Founder and former President and Chairman of the Board of the Russian Association of Project Management, SOVNET. Dr. Voropajev is professor of Project Management at the State University of Management, Moscow, Russia.  He is also Head of the Program and Project Management Faculty for the Russian State Academy’s Program for Professional Retraining and Professional Skill Development for Executives and Specialists in Investment Fields.

He is a full member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences on Information Science and Cybernetics, and of the International Academy of Investments and Economy in Construction. From 1991 to 2001, he was Vice-president and a member of the Executive Board of the International Project Management Association (IPMA), the global federation of national PM associations based in Zurich, Switzerland. He is the First Assessor for several IPMA certification bodies. In 2005 he was awarded IPMA Honorary Fellowship Award. He is also an honorary Fellow of the Indian Project Management Association and a past member of the Global Project Management Forum Steering Committee.

During his 40 years of engineering, scientific, teaching and consulting activities, he has published over 250 scientific research works including 7 monographs and 5 textbooks about the organization and planning of construction, information systems, and project management.  Vladimir serves on the editorial boards of several international project management journals, is a frequent participant in PM conferences worldwide, and provides ongoing counsel and support to PM professional leaders in Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, Yugoslavia and several other countries.  Professor Voropajev can be reached at [email protected]

flag-russiaYakov-GelrudYan D. Gelrud

Professor, South Ural State University

Chelyabinsk, Russia

Mr. Yan Gelrud was born in 1947 in Birobidjan (Khabarovsk Territory). In 1965 he finished a school of mathematics and physics at Novosibirsk. In 1970 he graduated from the mathematical faculty of university at Novosibirsk on “Mathematics” speciality. From 1970 to 1991 Yakov was working in the Research Institute of automated control systems as a head of mathematical division. He took part in creation and adoption of more than 100 automated control systems in different branches of industry.

From 1991 to 1997 Mr. Gelrud was doing business, being director general of “URAL-ASCО-SERVICE”.  Since the 1st of September 1997 till now he works as a professor of the “Enterprise and management” department in South Ural State University. He teaches a multitude of disciplines, such as “Mathematics”, “Theory of probability and mathematical statistics”, “Econometrics”, “Economic and mathematical methods”, “Mathematical methods of decision-making”, “Bases of decision-making methodology”, “Economical evaluation of investments”, “Mathematical methods and models of project management”, “Studies of managerial systems.”

Yan Gelrud has more than 100 publications and speeches on seminars and conferences of different level. His monograph “Project management in conditions of risk and uncertainty” was published recently.  He can be contacted at [email protected]

Application of Agile Methodologies for Member and Team Role Transformation in Projects


By Subhashish Sengupta, PMP, ITC Infotech

Dr. Debashish Sengupta, Alliance University


Prof. Ray Titus, Alliance University

Bangalore, India


This paper explores how the Agile methodology impacts all the process groups of Project Management, in a way that the role of the Project Manager and role of the team transforms as compared to a non-Agile environment. Fundamentally, the role of project manager alters from a controlling and directing approach to a facilitation approach in an Agile environment. The role of the team alters more from a mindset point-of-view, from an individual accountability to more of a mutual accountability perspective. In short, the Agile methodology focuses more on the team and not on the individuals, as in a non-Agile set-up.

Keywords: Project, Project Management, Agile Methodology, Waterfall Methodology 


A project is a ‘temporary endeavour’ undertaken to create a unique product or service. ‘Temporary’ denotes that all projects are time-bound and hence have a start and finish date; and, ‘Unique’ denotes that the product or service developed as a result of the project is distinguishable from other products or services. Project is different from an operation. Although project and operations share some similarities like both consist of activities, both are limited by resources and both need to be planned, executed and controlled, however while operations are continuing and repetitive, projects are temporary and unique (Choudhuri). Projects also have a third characteristic besides being ‘temporary’ and ‘unique’, the third characteristic of a project is progressive elaboration. ‘Project management is a group of interrelated processes, implemented in a progressively elaborative manner, in which to produce the deliverable’ (USBR). “A project is a one-shot, time-limited, goal-directed, major undertaking, requiring the commitment of varied skills and resources” (BEE).

A project has the following attributes (Baume & P.Martin, 2002):

  • has a clear purpose that can be achieved in a limited time;
  • has a clear end when the outcome has been achieved;
  • is resourced to achieve specific outcomes;
  • has someone acting as sponsor who expects the outcomes to be delivered on time; and
  • is a one-off activity that would not normally be repeated.

Literatures on Project strategies have viewed projects from three different tracks (Artto, Kujala, Dietrich, & Martinsuo, 2008):

  1. In the first track, projects are seen more as subordinate of the parent organization and the project strategy is a derivation from the larger business strategies of the firm. 
  2. In the second track projects are viewed as independent organization in themselves that are loosely connected to the parent organization. In this case projects have their own strategies that may not be dependent on the organizational context.
  3. In the third track, projects are viewed as organization that adapt to ongoing changes as strategic entities of their own. 

The first track is the most dominant one where projects are viewed as subordinate of the parent organization. 

Project Management

Project Management is the process of achieving project objectives (schedule, budget and performance) through a set of activities that start and end at certain points in time and produce quantifiable and qualifiable deliverables (Kay, 2013).

Project management has been practiced for thousands of years, dating back to the Egyptian epoch. Although management of projects has been going on for thousands of years, the practice has been widely recognized as a discipline in its own right for only about ten years. It was in the mid-1950s that the organizations commenced formal project management tools (Lewis, 2002).

Project Management as a discipline developed from different fields of application including construction, engineering, telecommunications, and defence. The 1950s marked the beginning of the modern project management era. According to Azzopardi (2009) four periods are identifiable in terms of evolution of Project Management (Modesto & Tichapondwa, 2009): 


To read entire paper (click here)



About the Authors

flag-indiapmwj18-jan2014-senguptas-titus-PHOTO1 SUBASHISHShubhashish Sengupta, PMP

ITC Infotech Ltd.

Bangalore, India

Subhashish Sengupta is a certified Project Management Professional (PMP)®. He has over 15 years of work experience in the IT industry and his key strengths are in Project Development & Management, Delivery management, Project Analysis & Design. He currently works as Senior project Manager at ITC Infotech Ltd.  and is based at Bangalore (India). He has played a leading role in coming-up with recommendations on implementing Agile in the Indian IT scenario. He has received several awards in his career and recently he was awarded the ‘Star performer of the Year’ award by his current employer. Besides his present role, Subhashish also has interests in practice-oriented research, especially in the area of Project Management. Email: [email protected]  Linkedin Profile URL: http://in.linkedin.com/in/subhashishpmp/

flag-indiapmwj18-jan2014-senguptas-titus-PHOTO2 DEBASHISHDr. Debashish Sengupta

Alliance University

Bangalore, India

Dr. Debashish Sengupta currently works with Alliance School of Business, Alliance University, Bangalore (India) as a senior faculty member. He is the author of a Crossword bestseller book – Employee Engagement (2011). He has also authored three other books. He has been a book reviewer for the prestigious Emerald Group Publishing, London (U.K.). He is an avid researcher and has more than 70 research publications to his credit till date. He occasionally writes columns, articles and case studies for reputed business dailies and for leading business magazines. He writes a professional blog on employee engagement – http://www.peopleengagement.blogspot.in

Dr. Sengupta is among the selected 26 authors invited from all over the world to be invited by Institute for Employee Wellbeing, Bellevue University, Nebraska, U.S. for writing invitational posts on Employee Happiness. Dr. Sengupta is a much sought speaker at various business forums and a resource person in several MDPs, corporate training programs. He has also been involved in some not-for-profit business consulting in the area of strategic HR and employee engagement. Email: [email protected]

flag-indiapmwj18-jan2014-senguptas-titus-PHOTO3 TITUSProf Ray Titus

Alliance University

Bangalore, India

Ray Titus is the Professor and Marketing & Strategy at the Alliance University, School of Business located at Bangalore, India. He also serves as the Area Chairperson at the Department of Marketing. Ray’s entry into academia followed a decade long stint in the Industry where he served in Operations, Marketing, and Project roles. As an Industry Professional he’s overseen strategic growth infinitives that included product and category expansions and the launch of an independent strategic business unit.

As an academic in the classroom Prof. Ray teaches courses on Marketing Strategy, Consumer Behaviour, and Social Media Marketing. Ray is also a visiting Professor at the SP Jain Center of Management, Dubai and Singapore, and the Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand. Prof Titus’ research interests lie in the area of consumption behaviour, marketing value propositions, and new & social media landscape. As a Marketing Trainer and Consultant, Ray has closely worked with leading Indian and Multinational firms. He also actively engages with the industry through Management Development Programs.

Prof. Ray publishes his professional blog ‘Buyer Behaviour’ which is listed among the ‘Top 100 academic Blogs every professional investor must read’ by Currency Trading and ‘15 Must Read Indian Blogs about Investing & Business’ by INForum India. Ray is also a business columnist whose expert opinion features in leading business newspapers and magazines.  e.mail: [email protected] Blog: http://www.buyerbehaviour.org Twitter handle: https://twitter.com/buyerbehaviour

The Project Management Stakeholder Circuit: A New Paradigm for Stakeholder Management


By D. J. McCord and Eric Wright 

Indiana, USA

The recent fifth edition of the PMBOK (2013) now includes an entirely new process group called ‘project stakeholder management’ (PSM).  A key activity identified by PMI is developing “appropriate management strategies for effectively engaging stakeholders in project decisions and execution” (PMBOK, 2013, p. 391).  Currently, in most organizations, this is accomplished by having project stakeholders attend all or most project meetings.

While this ubiquitous practice may seem to be the most effective way to engage project stakeholders, there are two problems with this approach.  First, project meetings are typically not the best venues for project stakeholders to provide the needed guidance, direction, and leadership.  Second, project stakeholders are usually not the best participants for project meetings, either in terms of content or process.  While the more obvious consequence of these problems is the significant waste of time and money that results from taking stakeholders away from critical management tasks to attend these meetings, that is not at all the most important impact.  A far more significant impact comes from the opportunity costs associated with the failure of projects, resulting from having the wrong people (i.e. project stakeholders) involved in the tactical planning and implementation of those projects.  These opportunity costs can prove crippling to an organization at best, and lethal at worst.

Therefore, this article suggests a converse approach to stakeholder management, one designed to save time and money, and more importantly, to get projects completed on time, on budget, on scope, and with high quality deliverables.  The central theme of this approach is to keep project stakeholders out of most project meetings, except for those in which the stakeholders play a key role.  Some examples of the kinds of meetings that benefit from stakeholder presence would be project ‘kick-off’ meetings and project ‘wrap-up’ meetings in which team-members are recognized for their contributions.  However, the process we recommend does, indeed, provide stakeholders with continuous input and interaction, based on their identified organizational and individual needs and expectations.  Further, it actively engages stakeholders in project decision-making, as well as the activities identified as PSM processes 13.2, 13.3, and 13.4 in the fifth edition of the PMBOK (2013).

One might say that the key to managing anyone (stakeholders included) is to identify and meet the needs of that individual.  Additionally, in the business context, we must simultaneously meet the needs of the organization.  If the needs of the stakeholders and the organization can be met without the stakeholders being physically present in most of the project meetings, the savings in terms of time and money are obvious.  This article will ’lead off‘ with a description of the needs of the stakeholder vis-à-vis those of the organization at large.  It will then present a backdrop for these needs derived from the field of behavioral theory.  Finally, it will provide a model for addressing these needs while minimizing the direct, physical participation in project meetings by the stakeholders themselves.

The needs of stakeholders for a project can be categorized into three areas:  Functional, Organizational, and Psychological.  Let us first consider the ‘Functional’ area.  The ultimate functional need of the stakeholder in terms of potential outcomes of a project meeting is to have the actual project documents (or “artifacts”) themselves.  Another functional need of the stakeholder is the opportunity to provide guidance to the project’s team members and key players.

The two key stakeholder needs in the ‘Organizational’ area can be described as oversight (suggesting knowledge and awareness of activities) and control (suggesting an influence over activities, leading to productive results).  These are essentially what the organization as an entity needs the stakeholders to have.  


To read entire paper (click here)

About the Authors

flag-usapmwj18-jan2014-mccord-wright-PHOTO1 MCCORDD. J. McCord, MSM

Indianapolis, USA

DJ McCord, MSM, holds a Bachelor’s degree in Engineering from the United States Military Academy, and a Master’s degree in Business Management from the Lake Forest Graduate School of Management, with a concentration in Personnel and Project Management.  His first career was as an infantry officer in the US Army, where he served in various training management roles, and managed a number of projects, including a unit realignment project involving a multi-million-dollar budget and roughly one thousand personnel.  In his next career, he owned and operated a personal growth training center in San Antonio, Texas.  More recently, he has held a variety of training, teaching and training development positions, as well as various project management roles.  He has taught at Indiana University – Purdue University at Indianapolis, Indiana Tech, and DeVry University (where he continues to teach).  The range of subjects on which he has instructed includes management, business, information management, and psychology.  He is the co-author, along with a former head of the Military Academy’s Behavioral Science Department, of a research paper that was published in the proceedings of the Seventh Symposium on Psychology in the Department of Defense.  His work, products, and services can be found at The PM Doctors, and he can be contacted at:

[email protected] or at [email protected].

flag-usaeric-wrightEric Wright, PhD, PMP

Indianapolis, USA

Eric Wright, PhD, PMP, is a project management professor, practitioner, speaker, trainer, and founding consultant/CEO of The PM Doctors.  He holds a Ph.D. in Business Administration, with a Concentration in Financial Management, from Northcentral University, an MBA from the University of Phoenix, and a Bachelor of Science in Liberal Studies, with a Concentration in Psychology, from Excelsior College.  Additionally, he is pursuing a Master’s in Project Management from the PMI GAC-accredited Keller Graduate School of Management.  His doctoral dissertation focused on the leadership behaviors of project managers associated through LinkedIn, and examined variables that influence a project manager’s choice of leadership behavior.  Eric is also a Project Management Professional (PMP), and Process Improvement Expert (Lean 6 Green Belt).  He has twenty-three years of experience as a project manager and facilitator, accountant, resource manager, teacher/trainer, and leader at many levels of responsibility in various organizations.  He has taught and trained in the fields of healthcare, public financial and accounting services, project management, the military, and education.  His work, products, and services can be found at The PM Doctors, and he can be contacted at [email protected] or at www.linkedin.com/pub/eric-wright-phd-pmp/29/579/569/.

Vigorous Integrated Offshore Execution of Integrity Management Program to Significantly Reduce Hydro-Carbon Release and Maintain Base production.


By Maryulis, MM, MBA 

Jakarta, Indonesia


Pertamina Hulu Energi Offshore North West Java (PHE ONWJ) establishes its integrity management (IM) program for the assets in Offshore North-West Java in the eagerness of reducing risk continuously with the ultimate goals for a safe place to work, reduce hydro-carbon release and maintain base production. There are now several thousand recommendations in the IM Program scope list, which have created more complex issues. Total IM scope in 2012 is over 3000 scopes which are distributed to Engineering Integrity, Operations, and Project departments.

This paper focuses on how to manage the complexities of the IM Program into a manageable program scope and planning by using rigorous risk management processes. The author presents the issues that commonly exist in the aging facilities in oil & gas industry.

For achieving effective IM Program, it requires integrated offshore execution plan which is based on a reliable and consistent approach of high level quantified risk assessment, recommendation, prioritization scope, and execution strategy.


Pertamina Hulu Energi Offshore North West Java (PHE ONWJ) field has been operation since 1970, where ARCO, BP and now Pertamina as the operator, This asset consists of more than 200 offshore structures, with 11 manned flow-stations, 3 ORF and more than 350 subsea pipelines totaling about 1,600 km that are spread across a geographic area of 350 km x 150 km. The age of facilities is a big challenge for PHEONWJ to manage safe operations, reliable operations and maintained base production.

Since 2009, the IM strategies and plans for PHEONWJ have massive pressure system inspection called PSI campaign to get IM status for each flow-station, assessment was conducted in 2010. While continuing to offshore IM Program recommendation execution, a Program Team was formed in January 2012 to define scope prioritization, distribute IM scope to construction team, manage the new recommendation, and to accelerate the completion of the IM recommendation. There are now several thousand recommendations in the IM Program scope list, which have created more complex issues. 


To read entire paper (click here)



About the Author


Jakarta, Indonesia

Maryulis has more than 30 years’ experience in Project/Program Management, Majority in the Major EPCI contract, and oil & Gas company.  He has experience in the Infrastructure project, Process Plant, Fertilizer Plant, Steel Plant, Mining, LNG Plant and Oil & Gas (Green Filed & Brownfield project). Various company: Krakatau Engineering, Kaiser Engineers, Petrosea Tbk, UNOCAL Indonesia, Chevron Indonesia, British Petroleum (BP Tangguh) LNG Indonesia,  BP-ONWJ and Pertamina Hulu Energy (PHEONWJ). Academy background: MM & MBA (Majority in Business Engineering) and, PhD can. Majority in Sustainable Development Management.  Contact: e-mail: [email protected]

Development of Fuzzy Logic model for Project Management Success (PMS)


Ashwani Kharola and Dr. SB Singh 

Institute of Technology Management (ITM)

Defence R&D Organisation

Ministry of Defence, Government of India

Uttarakhand, India


The most critical and challenging task of Project Manager in an organization is the successful management of projects. However, failure in managing projects is encountered regularly, which causes waste of company resources. The aim of this research is to simultaneously optimise the time, the cost, the quality, the scope and the PMS of a project and hence providing an aid to project manager in taking effective decisions.

In this paper a Fuzzy logic Matlab model for PMS is developed. A stage wise fuzzy reasoning approach is used as it reduces the fuzzy if-then rules making the system less complex. A set of examples are given at the end to show the applicability and validity of the proposed methodology. 

Keywords: PMS, PM, Matlab, Simulink, Fuzzy Inference System (FIS) 

1.0 Introduction

Project Management (PM) has evolved as a new management technique/methodology in the last fifty odd years. The use of PM helps organization to face with new challenges. Unfortunately PM has been considered as too complicated which results in frequent misunderstanding and poor practices in organizations [1]. Large scale of Engineering and Management projects has dominated PM up to a vast extent. Effective management of projects is crucial for the development and survival of any economy because development is about growth and growth is about series of successful managed projects [2].

According to A Guide to the PM Body of Knowledge [3],” PM is the application of knowledge, skills, tools and techniques to project activities in order to meet or exceed stakeholder needs and expectations from a project. Meeting or exceeding stakeholder needs and expectations invariably involves balancing competing demands among: 1. Scope, time, cost and quality, 2. Stakeholders with differing needs and expectations, 3. Identified requirement (needs)and unidentified requirements (expectations)”[3]. PM includes the process to ensure that the project will satisfy the needs for which it was taken [4]. It involves a team of people which in a controlled manner defines a desired objective or goal.

A project, no matter the size or magnitude, must be completed under certain constraints [5]. The “Triple constraints of PM” or “The PM triangle” are as follows: Scope-project size, goals and deliverables, Time- time frame available to complete the project, Cost-amount budget for the project. The PMS is impacted by balancing Scope, Time and Cost. High quality projects delivers the required product, service with scope, on time and within budget, leading to Project Success. In project management environment time-cost-quality trade off problem is a multi-objective optimisation problem, which mainly focuses on selecting nodes with their corresponding time, cost and quality for a task to minimize project completion time and cost, while project quality is maximised leading to Project Success.

In this paper we have considered following constraints i.e. cost, time, scope and quality which determines PMS. This paper has been divided into five parts. Part I gives the general introduction of PM. Part II defines fuzzy reasoning approach in PM. Part III comprises of Modelling and simulation. Part IV gives Results. Part V and Part VI Conclusion and References respectively. 


To read entire paper (click here)



About the Authors

flag-indiapmwj18-jan2014-kharola-singh-PHOTO1 KHAROLAAshwani Kharola

Ministry of Defence

Government of India

Mr Ashwani Kharola, Government of India, Ministry of Defence, ITM (DRDO), Mussoorie, India, is presently serving as Research Scholar (JRF) in ITM. He is Mechanical Engineer and has completed M. tech (honours) in CAD/CAM & Robotics and B.tech (honours) in Mechanical Engineering. He can be contacted at [email protected].

flag-indiapmwj18-jan2014-kharola-singh-PHOTO2 SINGHDr SB Singh

Ministry of Defence

Government of India

Dr SB Singh, Scientist ‘G’, Government of India, Ministry of Defence, ITM (DRDO), Mussoorie, India, is presently serving as Director of ITM (DRDO).  He is a Metallurgical Engineer and has obtained Phd in Metallurgical Engineering from IIT Kharagpur. He has published 34 technical papers in National and International Journals. He has been serving DRDO for more than last 31 years. Dr Singh can be contacted at [email protected].

Project Management Credentials Compared: 2014 Update


Dr. Paul Giammalvo, CDT, CCE, MScPM, MRICS, GPM-M

Jakarta, Indonesia


Since December of 2010, out of frustration trying to make sense of all the credentials proliferating in the field of project and program management, I have been conducting on-going research trying to benchmark the various project and program management credentials against the US Professional Engineer (PE) license as well as Malcolm Gladwell’s “10,000 hour” rule.

To set the stage for this update, a “Benchmark” is defined to be “A “best in class” achievement which becomes the reference point or recognized standard of excellence against which similar processes are measured[1]” with the objective being “to improve the current practices[2].”  This research is being published not to embarrass any professional organization or their credentials, but to encourage all professional organizations to use this benchmarking research as the basis to “raise the bar” to help professionalize the practice of project management.

Thus, the US Professional Engineer (PE) license was chosen as one of the benchmarks because:[3]

  • Civil Engineering has been recognized as a “learned profession” for over 160 years (since 1852)
  • Civil Engineering has earned the respect of the consuming public by CONSISTENTLY designing roads, bridges, buildings and other structures which have lasted well beyond their design life while saving lives in the process;
  • Civil Engineering exemplifies the processes associated with project management as those processes are embedded within the profession of Civil Engineering.
  • The PE license requires a well-balanced mix of BOTH education and supervised, peer reviewed experience. 

There are two ways to qualify to earn a PE license –

  • Graduate from an ABET accredited university and log 10,000 hours of SUPERVISED experience.
  • Graduate from a non-ABET accredited university and log 14,000 hours of SUPERVISED experience. 

Malcolm Gladwell’s “10,000 Hour” rule came from his 2008 book “Outliers – The Story of Success” where he posited that to become “successful” at anything, required a minimum of 10,000 hours of progressively challenging experience.  And while his research has been challenged, the primary reason for choosing this as a benchmark is by providing a true zero point and having the same unit of measure, it enabled the creation of a ratio scale analysis. So while the “10,000 hour” rule has been used as a benchmark, this research makes a reasonable argument that the number should be closer to 15,000 hours not 10,000, at least for project management.

To recap the history, the initial 2010 study consisted of those credentials from PMI, IPMA, AIPM, AACE, INCOSE and AXELOS. (Reference PM World Journal Volume 2, Issue 1 January 2013, Second Edition http://goo.gl/trQHCJ).

In the February 2013 issue of PM World Journal, http://goo.gl/EIkyA, I published an UPDATE which expanded the research to include the Green Project Management (GPM) organizations credentials; the ASEM (American Society for Engineering Management) certifications and the FAI (US Federal Acquisition Institute) credentials. That update also added PMI’s agile credential and AACE’s Decision and Risk Management credential. In the 2013 update, I also refined the scoring model to address several anomalies in the rankings. (See the previous editions for details on these refinements)

Based on requests from various followers of this topic in the PM World Journal, this 2014 update has been further EXPANDED to include the following credentials:

International Institute of Business Analysts (IIBA) http://www.iiba.org/About-IIBA.aspx

Certification of Competency in Business Analysis (CCBA)

Certified Business Analysis Profession (CBAP)

AXCELOS/IT Service Management (ITSM/ITIL) http://www.itil-officialsite.com/

ITIL Foundation

ITIL Expert

ITIL Master

Green Project Management Organization http://www.greenprojectmanagement.org/

Green Project Manager Master Level w/BA/BS

Green Project Manager Master Level w/MS/MBA

Green Project Manager Master Level w/PhD

Worth noting is the Green Project Management organization is the first to OFFICIALLY recognize advanced degrees (Masters and PhD) as an INTEGRAL part of their certification process. This is consistent with the decision that starting in 2020, the US Professional Engineer (PE) license is also going to start requiring a Master’s degree or better. For those professional organizations who follow this research, and have been using it as the basis to create or expand on their credentials, the fact that advanced degrees are starting to be given formal recognition as a part of the credentialing process is an encouraging sign that the bar is being raised in terms of “professionalizing” the practice of project and program management. 

All told, there are now a total of 40 different certifications being benchmarked against both the PE license and against Gladwell’s “10,000 hour” rule: 


To read entire paper (click here)

Editor’s note: footnotes and references are included in full paper. 

About the Author         


Dr. Paul D. Giammalvo, CDT, CCE, MScPM, MRICS, GPM-M 

Jakarta, Indonesia

Dr. Paul D. Giammalvo, CDT, CCE (#1240), MScPM, MRICS, GPM-M is Senior Technical Advisor (Project Management) to PT Mitratata Citragraha. (PTMC), Jakarta, Indonesia. www.build-project-management-competency.com.

For 20+ years, he has been providing Project Management training and consulting throughout South and Eastern Asia, the Middle East and Europe.  He is also active in the Global Project Management Community, serving as an Advocate for and on behalf of the global practitioner. He does so by playing an active professional role in the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering International, (AACE); Construction Specifications Institute (CSI) and the Construction Management Association of America, (CMAA). He currently sits on the Board of Directors of the American Society for the Advancement of Project Management (asapm) http://www.asapm.org/ and is on the Certification Board of the Green Project Management Institute. http://www.greenprojectmanagement.org/ He is active as a regional leader in the International Guild of Project Controls. http://www.planningplanet.com/guild

He has spent 18 of the last 35 years working on large, highly technical international projects, including such prestigious projects as the Alyeska Pipeline and the Distant Early Warning Site (DEW Line) upgrades in Alaska.  Most recently, he worked as a Senior Project Cost and Scheduling Consultant for Caltex Minas Field in Sumatra and Project Manager for the Taman Rasuna Apartment Complex for Bakrie Brothers in Jakarta.  His current client list includes AT&T, Ericsson, Nokia, Lucent, General Motors, Siemens, Chevron, Conoco-Philips, BP, Dames and Moore, SNC Lavalin, Freeport McMoran, Petronas, Pertamina, UN Projects Office, World Bank Institute and many other multi-national companies and NGO organizations.

Dr. Giammalvo holds an undergraduate degree in Construction Management, his Master of Science in Project Management through the George Washington University and was awarded his PhD in Project and Program Management through the Institute Superieur De Gestion Industrielle (ISGI) and Ecole Superieure De Commerce De Lille (ESC-Lille- now SKEMA School of Management) under the supervision of Dr. Christophe Bredillet, CCE, IPMA A Level.  Paul can be contacted at [email protected].

Longitudinal Assessment of the Impact of Leadership on Organizational Performance


Léo F. C. Bruno, PhD 

Fundação Dom Cabral



The study sought to evaluate, seven years later on (2005 – 2012), the personal values profile, the predominant leadership styles, the leadership effectiveness, the relationship between personal values balance and leadership effectiveness, and the relationship between personal values balance and organizational performance of a group of Brazilian executives. In order to evaluate the personal values profile a closed instrument of the rank order type has been developed and applied. To identify the predominant leadership styles, as well as the leadership effectiveness of the involved executives, it has been used an instrument available in the market. To verify the relationship between personal values balance and leadership effectiveness, it has been used the linear regression method computing the linear correlation coefficient between the before mentioned variables, involving 400 executives. The study has shown that the executives have an unbalance in their personal values profile, with predominance of economic and theoretical values. Additionally the study has uncovered lack of flexibility regarding the leadership styles, presenting styles of selling and sharing ideas as dominants. The study also showed that the leadership effectiveness of the involved executives was at a moderate level. The research also pointed out a high positive relationship between executives` personal values balance and leadership effectiveness. Additionally to that, the study suggested a positive relation between executives’ personal values balance scores and organizational performance. Finally, the research found that executives’ values had not shifted, neither their leadership profile.

Key words: personal values, leadership style, leadership effectiveness, personal values balance, organizational performance.



Many personal aspects will interact to determine the actions of a person in a leadership role. Perceptions, attitudes, motivations, personality, skills, knowledge, experience, confidence, and commitment are a few of the variables which are important for understanding the behavior of people. They are no less important for understanding the behavior of people at work, whether they are leaders or not. However, this study will highlight what may well be the crucial and underlying determinant of leaders’ behavior – values.

According to Spranger (1928), an early and influential writer, values are defined as the constellation of likes, dislikes, viewpoints, shoulds, inner inclinations, rational and irrational judgments, prejudices, and association patterns that determine a person’s view of the world. The importance of a value system is that once internalized it becomes, consciously or subconsciously, a standard or criterion for guiding one’s action. Thus the study of leader’s value is extremely important to the study of leadership.

A number of studies have been done to uncover the values leaders and managers actually have. The most influential theory is based upon the thinking of Spranger (1928) who defined several types of value orientation as shown in Table 1, and has been developed by Guth and Tagiuri (1965). They studied the expressed values of 653 American executives, using a closed instrument, of rank order type, detecting that the executives in the sample in terms of group averages presented a predominance of economic, political and practical values. Additional support to these findings is available in the studies of England (1967) involving a survey of 1,072 American managers.


To read entire paper (click here)



About the Author

flag-brazilpmwj15-oct2013-bruno-AUTHOR IMAGE 120x176Léo Fernando Castelhano Bruno

Associate Professor and Researcher

Fundação Dom Cabral

Minas Gerais, Brazil 

Léo Fernando Castelhano Bruno is an Associate Professor and Researcher at Fundação Dom Cabral in the fields of People, Organizational Behavior and Innovation, since 2004. He is a member of the FDC Leadership Development Center and of the FDC Innovation Center. He is also an Assistant Professor in the field of Science and Technology at VolkswagenAutoUnion, Wolfsburg/Germany; Professor in the Master’s courses at UNICAMP – Campinas State University, and UFAM – Amazonas Federal University, in the disciplines Strategic Planning, Organizational Change Management, Leadership, Organizational Culture, Research in Organizations, and Organizational Behavior; Technical Coordinator of the Fundação Dom Cabral PAEX – Partners for Excellence program; and President of the Council at CLSB – Center for Leadership Studies do Brasil, São Paulo/Brazil.

Prof Bruno is a member of the Executive Committee at the UNESCO Global Leadership Forum; member of the Executive Committee at CASA – Chinese-American Scholars Association, New York/USA; and international lecturer in the fields of Leadership, Organizational Change, Organizational Culture and Science & Technology (Innovation). He has worked as an executive for several companies such as: Ford, Embraer, Philips, Whirlpool/Brastemp, Samsung, Gradiente, Genius Institute of Technology and Flextronics. Some of his lectures abroad include: “Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations” at the 10th Global Leadership Forum/UNESCO in Novosibirsk/Russia, 2008, and “Impact of Leadership on Organizations” at the E-Leader Conference in Krakow/Poland, 2008.  He is the author of several books and numerous articles and book chapters.

He has a Doctorate in Applied Behavioral Sciences, specialization in Organizational Behavior, California American University (1982); Master in Administration, California American University (1978); Masters Degree in Mechanical Engineering, Escola Politécnica da Universidade de São Paulo (1977); Specialist in Quality Management, University of California at Los Angeles – UCLA (1979); and Bachelor’s Degree in Mechanical Engineering, Escola de Engenharia Mauá do Instituto Mauá de Tecnologia, (1970).  Prof Bruno can be contacted at [email protected] .

Equilibrium and Extreme Principles in Discovering Unknown Relationships from Big Data Part 2: Non-statistical Mathematical Methods in Project Management


By Pavel Barseghyan, PhD 

Yerevan, Armenia and Plano, Texas, USA


The pure statistical methods of Big Data mining are too data dependent, which makes them error prone to a large extent. The semi-statistical methods of Advanced Data Analytics are to some extent better, because they use data grouping/structuring before applying the statistical methods. For this reason the Advanced Data Analytics can be considered as partially data dependent and less error prone.

In order to avoid the disadvantages of pure statistical and semi-statistical methods, non-statistical methods should be used instead.

The goal of non-statistical methodologies in Big Data analysis is to derive functional relationships between the parameters of the system under study in a pure analytical way, and then apply them for data analysis and interpretation.

Non-statistical ways of quantitative description such as state equations or variational principles are common in theoretical physics and other sciences.

The second part of this paper is devoted to demonstrating how the new analytical way of Big Data Analysis can be used in the project management area. In particular it shows how this new non-statistical, analytical methodology can be used to discover unknown relationships between project parameters.

Key words: Big Data Analytics, Non-statistical methods, State equation, Variational principles, Equilibrium of projects, Functional relationships between project parameters.


The causal relationships that lie behind the data and facts are typically the logical basis for the processing and interpretation of statistical data collected in specific areas of human activity. These causal relationships have a central role for the expert management of processes that are based on intuition and experience of humans.

If the data is processed by purely statistical methods, without structuring the data, the results are usually highly dependent on the specific data. Sometimes the results can even be almost meaningless because that direct dependency on data.

The likelihood that the patterns and relationships extracted from unstructured data by using pure statistical methods will be qualitatively adequate is negligible. In that case, if these results are qualitatively inadequate and hence they do not correctly reflect the trends contained in the data, than it is meaningless to even talk about their quantitative adequacy.

Qualitative or behavioral adequacy of patterns, extracted from the data can be improved by structuring the data, or splitting data points into groups based on sound principles or local hypotheses.

Increasing the degree of generality and logical validity of these principles and hypotheses improves the probability of retrieving qualitatively and behaviorally adequate relationships from data.

The gradual improvement of understanding and interpretation of causal relationships contained in the data, and the transition from the level of using intuition, experience and statistical perception of information to the level of systematization of knowledge in the form of mathematical models and quantitative theories, makes it possible to give a completely new, non-statistical interpretation of data.


To read entire paper (click here)

About the Author 

flag-Armenia-USApavel-barseghyanPavel Barseghyan, PhD     

Yerevan, Armenia

Plano, Texas, USA

Dr. Pavel Barseghyan is a consultant in the field of quantitative project management, project data mining and organizational science. Has over 40 years’ experience in academia, the electronics industry, the EDA industry and Project Management Research and tools development. During the period of 1999-2010 he was the Vice President of Research for Numetrics Management Systems. Prior to joining Numetrics, Dr. Barseghyan worked as an R&D manager at Infinite Technology Corp. in Texas. He was also a founder and the president of an EDA start-up company, DAN Technologies, Ltd. that focused on high-level chip design planning and RTL structural floor planning technologies. Before joining ITC, Dr. Barseghyan was head of the Electronic Design and CAD department at the State Engineering University of Armenia, focusing on development of the Theory of Massively Interconnected Systems and its applications to electronic design. During the period of 1975-1990, he was also a member of the University Educational Policy Commission for Electronic Design and CAD Direction in the Higher Education Ministry of the former USSR. Earlier in his career he was a senior researcher in Yerevan Research and Development Institute of Mathematical Machines (Armenia). He is an author of nine monographs and textbooks and more than 100 scientific articles in the area of quantitative project management, mathematical theory of human work, electronic design and EDA methodologies, and tools development. More than 10 Ph.D. degrees have been awarded under his supervision. Dr. Barseghyan holds an MS in Electrical Engineering (1967) and Ph.D. (1972) and Doctor of Technical Sciences (1990) in Computer Engineering from Yerevan Polytechnic Institute (Armenia).  Pavel’s publications can be found here: http://www.scribd.com/pbarseghyan and here: http://pavelbarseghyan.wordpress.com/.  Pavel can be contacted at [email protected]

The Software Project Manager’s Bridge to Agility

PM World Book Review

pmwj18-jan2014-ure-IMAGE1 - BOOKBook Title:     The Software Project Manager’s Bridge to Agility
Author:  Michele Sliger and Stacia Broderick
Publisher:  Addison-Wesley © 2008 Pearson Education, Inc. (Agile Software Development Series, Alistair Cockburn and Jim Highsmith, Series Editors)
List Price:       US$49.99      Format:  soft cover, 353 pages
Publication Date:   May 2008         ISBN: 978-0-321-50275-9Re
viewer:      James Ure, PhD, PMP
Review Date:              October 2013

If you are a project manager versed in traditional project management practices and are looking to make the transition into the agile world, then this is a must have title. Get it now and keep it close by your desk! This book is a wonderful resource that covers a wide range of topics filled with practical nuts and bolts examples, and helpful guidance. It is also included in the Reference Materials list for the PMI-ACP Exam.

The authors are both committed agilists who are also both PMP certified. They started their careers as project managers leading traditional plan-driven software projects, and now have deep experience and an understanding of how project management functions within both realms. Most importantly, they thoroughly understand how the role of a project manager is different in an agile context. Broderick gives us good insight into her own journey in the introduction; “For me to cross the agility bridge, I had to understand what it meant to put others before me…I had to learn how to facilitate and listen for problems underneath the surface…I had to learn that the people doing the work know the work the best and will figure out the best way to get from point A to Z. All they really needed me for was to clear the path.”

The book has three sections – Part 1: An Agile Overview; Part 2: The Bridge: Relating PMBOK ® Guide Practices to Agile Practices; and Part 3: Crossing the Bridge to Agile. Part 2 is the most substantial and is organized by topics everyone familiar with the PMP exam will recognize: Integration Management, Scope Management, Time Management, Cost Management, Quality Management, Human Resources Management, Communications Management, Risk Management, and Procurement Management. Each chapter discusses how these topics are handled with agile practices and includes reference charts showing summary comparisons of Traditional to Agile processes. These side-by-side comparisons are helpful and reveal the book at its best.

A good example is the Time Management chapter. Here the core concept of planning is covered. The authors start with a solid rationale for agile planning being designed for change, and its focus on delivering business value. They cover concepts on Release planning and Iteration planning, emphasizing that detailed task level plans are only generated within an iteration when the actual development work will be done.


To read entire Book Review (click here)

Editor’s note:  This book review was prepared for the PMI Portland, Oregon, US chapter.  It is reproduced here with approval of the book reviewer (author of book review). 

About the Reviewer

flag-usapmwj17-dec2013-ure-IMAGE2 REVIEWERJames Ure, PhD, PMP

Oregon, USA

James Ure is a project leader with his own consulting practice. His background includes 12 years of experience in IT leadership roles for government, not-for-profit, and various private sector organizations. His research and professional interests include agile maturity models and integrating agile practices into organizations. He holds a BA degree from Haverford College and has an MA and PhD from the University of Pennsylvania. James may be contacted at: [email protected].

Design Leadership, Securing the Strategic Value of Design


pmwj18-jan2014-subramanian-IMAGE1 - BOOKBook Title: Design Leadership, Securing the Strategic Value of Design
Author:  Raymond Turner
Publisher:  Gower Publishing Limited
List Price:   US$ 94.95
Format:  Hard cover; 255 pages
Publication Date:   2013     ISBN: 978-1-4094-6323-8
Reviewer: Lakshmi Subramanian
Review Date:              Nov 2013

Introduction to the Book

Design Leadership” presents arguments about the value of design and how it can be leveraged for the benefit of the organization. Design directly impacts oft-used measures such as Gross margin, Net margin, Return on Investments, Operating costs and can be used as a Brand Asset as well. Organizations see design as a cost rather than an investment, as a thing instead of a process, or as a tactical rather than a strategic resource. However, design is a business tool that makes strategy visible, and design leadership is a commercial and social imperative. Design spend is the single biggest expenditure that the Board knows the least about.

Good design is good business. However, most organizations don’t pay heed to design and its role in the big picture. This book presents arguments for putting design in the DNA of business and demonstrates how design leadership can positively impact the strategic objectives.

Overview of Book’s Structure

The book is divided into 4 parts with 18 chapters in total – 1. Preparing the ground, 2. The how and what of delivery, 3. Looking back to look forward, and 4. Case examples.

In Preparing the ground, the author touches upon the challenges that design faces currently – sceptics who think design is a thing and not a process and as a cost and not an investment and how to convert them by the authority of argument, rather than by the argument of authority. The author presents arguments on why design is relevant and can increase brand value, reduce costs and time to market. Demonstrations on how design can drive these key indicators that measure business is quite resourceful, should you need to make an argument on the relevance of design.

In The how and what of delivery, the author explains the differences between design management and design leadership, where the former addresses “the how” to get design implemented and the latter provides direction to manage. A diagram showing basic links between strategic intent and design response is a must-see and is oft repeated in different contexts. Using an opportunity to leverage design is discussed in detail under ‘Milestones of Design Management’ and ‘Process of Design Leadership’. The behavioral styles of Line managers, Functional Managers and Design clients are also discussed. 


To read entire Book Review (click here)

Editor’s note:  This book review was the result of cooperation between the publisher, PM World and the Dallas Chapter of the Project Management Institute (PMI Dallas Chapter – www.pmidallas.org). Publishers provide the books to PM World; books are delivered to the PMI Dallas Chapter, where they are offered free to PMI members to review; book reviews are published in the PM World Journal and PM World Library.  PMI members can receive PDUs for PMP recertification by reviewing the books.  PMI Dallas Chapter members are generally mid-career professionals, the audience for most project management books.  If you are an author or publisher of a project management-related book, and would like the book reviewed through this program, please contact [email protected]. 

About the Reviewer

flag-usa-indialakshmi-subramanianLakshmi Subramanian

Lakshmi Subramanian, PMP, has 10 years of varied and valuable experience serving the IT and IT Enabled Services industry. She has a Bachelors in Commerce, Masters in Computer Applications and Diploma in Business Management and is a proud member of the Dallas PMI Chapter. Lakshmi is currently working for a Telecom Major in the Dallas-Fort Worth area in Texas, USA. Lakshmi can be contacted at [email protected].

Software Requirements, Third Edition

PM World Book Review 

pmwj18-jan2014-Soncodi-IMAGE1 - BOOKBook Title:  Software Requirements, Third Edition
Author:  Karl E Wiegers, Joy Beatty
Publisher:  Microsoft Press
List Price:   44.99$
Format:  soft cover; 672 pages
Publication Date:   August 2013   ISBN: 978-0735679665
Reviewer:      Marta Soncodi
Review Date:              November 2013

Introduction to the Book

Good software requirements are the foundation of every successful software project. They are hard to achieve given the timing and interplay of several factors: agreement on what needs to be solved and how, meeting business objectives, and ability to keep project plans intact.

Software Requirements, Third Edition, is an updated and comprehensive coverage of perspectives on requirements by stakeholders, methodologies and practice for requirements development and management, and analysis of requirements for specific project classes.

It is a thorough and practical reference as it offers a comprehensive set of best practices, tools, templates, real-life examples and case studies for requirements. These aspects apply to any industry and project methodology, as well as to any project class and size.

Overview of Book’s Structure

The book is organized in five parts and detailed over 32 chapters. Each chapter starts with a relevant story which sets the context for the scope and issues covered. Additionally, a specific case study is analyzed throughout the book to drive home discussion points and learning.

Part I, “Software Requirements: What, Why and Who” provides key terms and general background information. The major classes of software requirements are introduced: business, user, functional and system requirements; business rules and quality attributes (non-functional requirements). The important distinction between product and project requirements is noted. Special consideration is given to customer identity and expectations, identifying who the decision makers are, as well as distinguishing between the business analyst and product manager roles. Finally, a comprehensive framework for developing requirements is introduced (elicitation, analysis, specification, validation, management). 


To read entire Book Review (click here)

Editor’s note:  This book review was the result of cooperation between the publisher, PM World and the Dallas Chapter of the Project Management Institute (PMI Dallas Chapter – www.pmidallas.org). Publishers provide the books to PM World; books are delivered to the PMI Dallas Chapter, where they are offered free to PMI members to review; book reviews are published in the PM World Journal and PM World Library.  PMI members can receive PDUs for PMP recertification by reviewing the books.  PMI Dallas Chapter members are generally mid-career professionals, the audience for most project management books.  If you are an author or publisher of a project management-related book, and would like the book reviewed through this program, please contact [email protected]. 

About the Reviewer

flag-usapmwj18-jan2014-Soncodi-IMAGE1 - REVIEWERMarta Soncodi, MBA, PMP

Marta Soncodi is Co-Founder of Latticera, LLC, a web services company. She is a Software Development Manager and Project Manager with over twenty years of experience in the telecom industry. Her recent interests include UX Design, Software Requirements, and Prototyping. Marta can be contacted at [email protected].