Project Management as a Core Competency

SECOND EDITION                                                            

By Robert Youker  

Maryland, USA

For many organizations the capacity to effectively and efficiently manage projects from conception to completion should be considered a core competency.  This means the entire project life cycle not just the implementation phase. Thus project management includes selecting the right projects as well as good implementation.  Some people call this Strategic Project Management or just Strategic Management.

First we must distinguish between organizations whose whole business is time based contracts, which means all of their business is projects and regular companies where projects are internal like developing new products.  Project Management is certainly a core competency for a construction company where all of their business is projects.

Professor Sebastian Green, Dean of the University College, Cork, Ireland in an interview in the Spring 2005 IPMA Newsletter, Project Management Practice defined Strategic Project Management as completing “projects which are of critical importance and enable the organization to have a competitive advantage”. There are three attributes to a core competence: it adds value to customers, it is not easily imitated and it opens up new possibilities in the future.

Strategic PM includes the selection of the right projects as well as effective implementation.  Thus we have a continuum of Strategic Objectives and Plan – Portfolio Management – Project Management – Organizations PM Capability.  This takes an organization from Goals to Results. Doing this well can be a core competency.  He says, “Project Management should be promoted to General Managers as the ability to manage across the functions, blending technique procedures with judgment”.

Another strategic management approach to Core Competencies is the Balanced Scorecard system developed by Drs. Robert Kaplan and David Norton in the early 1990s.  The balanced scorecard goes beyond financial measures of performance and includes progress towards long term capabilities and customer relationships.  Organizations today “must create future value through investment in customers, employees, processes, technology and innovation”.


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 ESC Lille in Lille, France in August 2005, revised in 2006.  It is republished here with author’s permission.

About the Author 

flag-usarobert-youker-bioBob Youker

Maryland, USA 

Robert “Bob” Youker is a prolific writer, speaker, and spokesperson for PM practice around the World. A co-founder of both Project Management Institute, and asapm, the American Society for the Advancement of Project Management, he is a long-time contributor to the practice of project management. In addition to the above founding feats, he was a Director of IPMA from 1977 through 1988, taking the seat formerly occupied by Russ Archibald.  In addition to his years of service to PMI, he participated and presented in many IPMA Conferences from 1974 through the early 2000s. He presented keynotes at several of them, and organized panels and workshops in others. He introduced IPMA into a dozen government agencies and businesses all over the World, and in many cases, connected those agencies and businesses with IPMA leaders.

Bob introduced and popularized innovations to the practice of project management, from his work in Xerox in the 1960s, to his leadership in the first manual project management planning and tracking tools (Planalog President, 1968-1974). He published an early book on the Critical Path Method, Analysis Bar Charting, by John Mulvaney. As of today, that book has sold more than 30,000 copies.

In his work for World Bank, Bob developed training that has benefited thousands of project and program managers, and government officials, mostly in developing countries. He performed that training in over a dozen developing countries around the World over a 30 year period, and continues today, to help developing and developed nations. He was the author and developer of the World Bank’s CD-ROM based project management training kit titled “Managing the Implementation of Development Projects”, still available and widely used today.

In the 1970s, to increase Executive visibility for the fledgling practice of project management, Bob engineered the publishing of a Harvard Business Review collection of articles on the subject. He suggested the collection, but was told there were not enough articles for a special collection. He bought copies of the articles, submitted them, and the Harvard Business Review published one of their most popular reprint series, with a number of classic articles on project management.

Bob Youker has contributed massively to the profession or practice of project management, to asapm, IPMA, PMI and society.  He continues to teach several two-week project management courses each year for participants from developing countries at the International Law Institute in Georgetown, Washington, DC, USA.  Bob can be contacted at [email protected].

To see other works by Bob Youker, visit http://pmworldlibrary.net/authors/robert-bob-youker/

On the Subject of Project Management and Professionalism


9 February 2014

Dear Editor,

I read the commentary “Notes on general management, project management and professionalism” by Alan Stretton with considerable interest, for as I think you know, the question of project managing being a profession was the topic of my PhD dissertation- “Is project management a profession? And if not, what is it?”  http://www.build-project-management-competency.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/P.Giammalvo_PHDthesis_2008.pdf and this topic continues to generate raging debates on several LinkedIn forums.

What concerned me about your commentary is the focus on just the semantic definitions coming from the dictionary, while apparently ignoring the equally if not more important socio-economic and legal definitions?

In my dissertation, I explained the problem with the semantic definitions with this anecdote: (page 49)

Tiger Woods is unquestionably a talented golfer. One would be very hard-put to dispute the obvious, which that he is very competent at what he does, perhaps one of the best ever. Therefore he meets the first test of being a professional (n) – skill and competence. In fact, he is sufficiently competent that he makes a very handsome living performing for pay what most of us consider a hobby; hence, applying the second criterion, he meets the ‘earnings test’ to be considered a professional (n). He is not an amateur. Having met both tests (highly competent and earning a living at what most do
for a hobby) entitles him to be termed a professional (adj.) golfer. However, just because Tiger Woods meets the criteria to be called both a professional (n) and a professional (adj) golfer, golf does not qualify as a profession, although Woods might call it his profession (his paid job). 

It is no wonder that many in the community of practice of project management
confuse what is means to belong to a profession. There is the tendency to make the
connection that if they are in fact professional (extremely competent) in the way they
work, then what they do must, by association, be considered a profession. This is
false logic and a semantic trap easily fallen into.

In total, there are some 22 semantic, socio-economic and legal attributes which go into “measuring” or “assessing” any occupation in terms of it being a profession and “project management” scores only ~34% out of a possible score of 100%. (See Exhibit 6.4 on page 304)  More specifically, in terms of “perceived professionalism” project management ranks just about halfway between being an Electrician and being a Medical Doctor in terms of the relative “perceptions”. (See chart on page 303)

Subsequent to the publication of both Zwerman, Thomas et al “Exploring the Past to Map the Future” (2004) which concluded that “project management is not now, nor is it likely in the foreseeable future, to be recognized as a profession” and my research in 2008, which reaffirmed the findings of Zwerman et al using different case studies and developing a quantitative vs qualitative scoring model, there have been at least 3 challenges to GENERAL MANAGEMENT being a profession-

Khurana and Nohria (2008)- http://hbr.org/2008/10/its-time-to-make-management-a-true-profession/ar/1

Barker (2010)- http://hbr.org/2010/07/the-big-idea-no-management-is-not-a-profession/ar/1

Pfeffer (2011)- http://hbr.org/2011/09/management-a-profession-wheres-the-proof/ar/1
Furthermore, I understand PMI spend some 1.6 million USD on their “Value of Project Management” research (Thomas & Mullaly, 2008) and were not able to “prove” anything more than project management is “a tested, proven and valuable delivery system” for asset creation, updating, refinement and eventual disposal.

Given the growing challenges to management in general being a profession and not one, but two independent, published research papers which conclude that project management specifically is not a profession, it is of considerable concern how both PMI and APM, despite credible published research to the contrary, continue to make what amounts to false and misleading claims that project management is a profession. This is clearly a violation of their own codes of ethics/codes of conduct if not the various “consumer protection” or “truth in advertising” laws in both the US and UK.

The US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Bureau of Consumer Affairs, has published a “Advertising Guideline for Small Businesses”.

http://www.business.ftc.gov/documents/bus35-advertising-faqs-guide-small-business .

Under the Federal Trade Commission Act:

·   Advertising must be truthful and non-deceptive;

·   Advertisers must have evidence to back up their claims; and

·   Advertisements cannot be unfair.

I believe the time has come for member/owners of their respective professional organizations to INSIST that the professional organization(s) they belong to and support, adhere to the letter and intent of the FTC requirements. To do anything less makes a mockery of the Codes of Ethics/Codes of Conduct these professional organizations hold their members to. Failure of any organization to not exemplify what they expect from their members is the ultimate hypocrisy.


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

Jakarta, Indonesia


Welcome to the March 2014 Edition of the PM World Journal

David Pells,

Managing Editor 

Addison, Texas, USA

Welcome to the March 2014 edition of the PM World Journal (PMWJ). This month’s edition again contains a wide range of contents from around the world, with 39 articles, papers, reports and book reviews by 51 different authors in 19 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 3 Letters to the Editor this month, from Andy Cuthbert in the USA, Lynda Bourne in Australia and Paul Giammalvo in Indonesia, all in response to contents in the February PMWJ. Join the debate.  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 as an email please.

18 authors in 8 different countries have contributed Featured Papers this month.  Greg User in Australia has authored “Enhancing Strategic Integrity through Project Management.”  Alex Hope and Robert Moehler in UK are the authors of “Balancing Projects with Society and the Environment: A Project, Programme and Portfolio Approach.”  Keeping with the theme of socially-conscious PM, Monica Gonzalez in Argentina has contributed “Advancing Human Rights in Supply Chains through Community Engagement and Investment.”

Three good papers on more traditional aspects of project management are also included.  Walt Lipke in Oklahoma, USA has authored another paper on earned schedule titled “Examining Project Duration Forecasting Reliability.” Dennis Bolles and Darrel Hubbard have authored “The Elephant in the Executive Suite – Project Management.”  Prof Avraham Shtub (Israel), Michal Iluz (Israel), Yael Dubinsky (Israel), Josef Oehmen (Norway/USA) and Kilian Gersing (USA) have co-authored “Implementation of Lean Engineering Practices in Projects and Programs through Simulation Based Training.”

And 3 good papers on international topics: “The Project Management Culture: International Lessons and Kazakhstan’s Experience” is a featured paper this month by Dr. Alexey Tsekhovoy, Natalia Nekrassova and Lidiya Karmazina in Almaty, Kazakhstan.  “Use of Project Cycle Management in Project Selection Process: Evaluation of European Commission Approach” is by Giussepe Arcidiacono in Italy.  “Middle East: Opportunity for Greek Construction Industry” is by Prof Dimitrios Kamsaris and Stefanos Kougoulos who are either in Greece, UK or the Middle East (depending on time of month and assignment).  Featured Papers are all serious contributions to the P/PM literature, so although they may sometimes be long and/or somewhat academic in nature, please consider reading them.  Increase your knowledge!

6 Series Articles are included this month, by 10 authors in 5 different countries. Darren Dalcher in the UK has provided another introductory article in our Advances in Project Management Series.  Darren’s article is titled “Whatever happened to management by objectives? Learning to look beyond goals”.  The featured authors in the Advances Series this month are Susan David (USA), David Clutterbuck (UK) and David Megginson (UK), co-authors of an article titled “Insights from Beyond Goals.”  Don’t miss these very interesting articles this month.


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 energy, engineering, construction, defense, 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 advisory support for major programs and global organizations.  David has published widely, spoken at conferences and events worldwide, and can be contacted at [email protected].

To see more works by David Pells, visit the PM World Library at http://pmworldlibrary.net/authors/david-l-pells/

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

Project Management Report from Belo Horizonte


By Manuel Carvalho da Silva Neto

International Correspondent

Minas Gerais, Brazil

In 2013, for the second time, the CCR Infrastructure and Logistics Center from Fundação Dom Cabral, an important Brazilian business school, performed a survey named Professional Lack. This round heard 167 companies, which represents 23% from Brazilian GNP. These companies altogether have more than 1 million employees.

Nothing less than 61,1% (just 33,85% in 2010, the first round of this survey) of the companies are having problems with hiring Project Managers, because they are difficult to find. Almost 25% from them consider Project Manager to be an exceedingly scarce professional. That situation made the companies to flex their experience and demands considering Project Managers.

The bad news is that the companies consider the biggest problem the professionals` lack of training.

Hello, Brazilian Project Managers, 87% of these companies offer medical and dental care and 61% Private Pension Funds. 85% are from southeast, but they strongly demand results orientation. You just need to study. Certification is welcomed. But, the important thing is to practice. 


To read entire report, click here

About the Author 

flag-brazilManuel-Carvalho-da-Silva-NetoManuel Carvalho da Silva Neto 

Minas Gerais, Brazil 

Manuel Carvalho da Silva Neto, MSc, Mech. Engineer and PMP is Fundação Dom Cabral Invited Professor and also Consultant. He is a seasoned professional with over 39 years of experience in Project Management, Process Management and Strategy. Manuel has managed or participated in more than a hundred projects across different fields including Steel, Mining, IT, Telecom, Food Processing, Government and Construction to mention a few. He worked also in projects of PMO (Project Management Office) and Methodology of Project Management. He has also strong skills in Leading People and Finance. He served as Minas Gerais State Undersecretary for Planning and Budget, from 2007 to 2008. Manuel can be contacted at [email protected].

Healthcare: Is it a Project Business or System Business?


By Almahdy Eltonsy 

Cairo, Egypt

“It is not a project business; it is a system business…”  This was the statement I had, even from big multinational manufacturers. Is it a true statement? Is it hard to see healthcare as a project business?

How do we define activities as a project?

Is it about complexity, criticality, impact, invested capital…..?

If we recall the typical definition of project and project management: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_management#History). [1]

Project management is the process and activity of planning, organizing, motivating, and controlling resources to achieve specific goals. A project is a temporary endeavor designed to produce a unique product, service or result [1] with a defined beginning and end (usually time-constrained, and often constrained by funding or deliverables). [2]

“You just got a system from a shelf and put it in its location. Do you call this a project?  If so then having a new TV will be a project, healthcare equipment is on a shelf product delivered and run, that is it.”

That was a usual discussion I had; but that could be a valid argument 15 years ago.

The concept of healthcare has changed in the last two decades and that touched all healthcare components.  This can be seen obviously in the last 15 years.

You can easily see the change of Major manufacturers’ slogans from providing equipment to providing solutions for general healthcare.

Many mergers and acquisitions done in the industry have reshaped the market and opened a new era.

The healthcare facility is providing a function; the main scope in healthcare projects is to achieve the function, not just having running equipment.

Stakeholders are a real pivot in healthcare projects; dealing with physicians and medical professionals requires using their own terminologies and concepts.  Knowing clinical work flow is mandatory.


To read entire article (click here)

About the Author

140214-pmwj20-eltonsy-IMAGE1 ELTONSYflag-egyptAlmahdy Eltonsy 

Cairo, Egypt 

Almahdy Eltonsy, IPMA – B is a Senior Project Manager in the HealthCare industry, and the first healthcare PM granted the IPMA-B certification in Egypt. Starting with Siemens in 1993, Almahdy has extensive technical and managerial experiences, gaining the ability to work cross-functionally in a time-intensive environment.  One of the most important milestones in Almahdy’s project management career is Children’s Cancer Hospital in Egypt (57357) ( www.57357.com ), a 30 Million Euro Project. As a GPM for this strategic pivotal project, the scope was not only project management but also the service management, in addition to work with accreditation bodies.

In 2012 Almahdy moved to GE HealthCare to work as a product service manager for Surgery – X Ray – Intervention – Ultrasound – Life Care solutions, using his experience in leading the service team with project management methodology. Almahdy’s motive to change is to take a new challenge and exposure to new cultures and discipline, taking advantage of his technical and managerial skills and using the project management tool box in general management aspects.

In addition to his work in healthcare, Almahdy worked as an IT project developer with one of the largest media and advertising groups in Egypt.  Almahdy was able to realize a new methodology and software for Media planning and advertising campaign planning. Almahdy holds a B.Sc. in Systems and Biomedical Engineering from Cairo University – Faculty of Engineering, and passed many specialized courses in Siemens, GE and Microsoft.  Linkedin: Almahdy Eltonsy.  Email: [email protected]

Project Management A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling, 11th Edition

PM World Book Review 

pmwj20-mar2014-Diehl-IMAGE1 BOOKBook Title:  Project Management A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling, 11th Edition
Author:  Dr. Harold Kerzner, PhD
Publisher:  John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
List Price:  US $94.00          Format:  Hard cover; 1264 pages
Publication Date:  2013                  ISBN: 978-1-118-02227-6
Reviewer:      Diane R. Diehl, MBA, PMP
Review Date:              November, 2013


The latest edition of Project Management A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling, by Dr. Kerzner, is a must for individuals wishing to obtain their PMP credential.  It is the perfect companion to the PMBOK® Guide, reinforcing and clarifying important concepts a project management candidate must understand.  It is also an excellent reference book for existing project managers and those who are invested in the success of a project.

It is my opinion that Dr. Kerzner, the Senior Executive Director for Project Management of the International Institute for Learning (http://www.iil.com/), is the quintessential author of books related to Project Management.


Used in both undergraduate and graduate courses in business, information systems, and engineering, Project Management A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling is structured as follows:

  • The first five chapters focus on the basic core of knowledge needed for project management.
  • Chapters 6 through 8 continue to focus on the behavioral aspects of the organizational support functions and strengthens the belief that effective project managers know more than just technology or Microsoft Project: they also embrace the soft skill set of managing people as a critical success factor.
  • Chapters 9 and 10 describe factors for predicting success and management support.
  • Chapters 11 through 20 present a detailed examination of planning, scheduling, controlling, cost control, estimating, contracting/procurement, and quality.   

In addition, more than 25 cases studies and more than 125 multiple-choice questions are included.

What’s New in this Edition

In addition to updating existing text to align with PMBOK® Guide changes there  are  over 40 new sections, including: 


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). Authors and publishers provide 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 keep the books and can receive PDUs for PMP recertification when their book reviews are published.  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

pmwj20-mar2014-Diehl-IMAGE2 DIEHLflag-usaDiane Diehl, PMP

Dallas, TX, USA 

Diane Diehl has been practicing project and process management for over 12 years and lives in Dallas, Texas.  Diane has consulted for such organizations as Bank of America, PepsiCo, VMware, Fannie Mae, and Verizon Business Professional Services.  Ms. Diehl holds an MBA from York College of Pennsylvania.  Due to her specialization in process improvement, ITSM risk control, and compliance, she has begun pursuing her CISA Certification, which will provide additional value to her clients.

Establishing a Program Decision Framework: Introduction to a new series on program management


Series on Program Management

By Russ Martinelli and Jim Waddell

Program Management Academy 

Oregon, USA

As Ricki Godfrey enters his office he stares at the poster pinned to the wall in front of his desk.  The poster shows a bulls-eye with the words “Bang Head Here” in the middle.  For a moment, he considers it.  “This is the third time I have been in front of our governance committee trying to get approval to move to the next stage of my program” states Godfrey in frustration.  “Every time I go in for approval I get a new set of questions to find answers to, more action items to follow up on, and direction to come back again in a month.”

What Godfrey describes is not an uncommon scenario.  In fact, in many organizations, gaining approval to move forward at critical decision ‘gates’ surfaces as a primary challenge for program managers and a major contributor to time-to-benefits delays.

So what is happening here? There are many reasons why program ‘gate’ decisions are difficult to obtain, of course.  Sometimes the decision criteria is unclear or unknown, or the decision methodology (consensus, consultative, authoritative) is not understood, and sometimes sufficient information to make an informed decision is lacking.  In Godfrey’s case however, the problem is more systematic.  His organization lacks a robust decision framework that focuses work effort on the achievement of the critical business decision-points that are a part of every program.

Lifecycle Process versus Decision Framework

Here’s the issue at hand. Like many others, Godfrey’s organization has gone to great length, investment, and effort in creating a lifecycle process that meticulously documents the various stages their programs progress through.  This is good, but what we consistently see is the bulk of the effort and process definition lies in defining the various work flows and outcomes during each stage of the process, and very little forethought and effort dedicated to the business decisions which need to be made at the culmination of each stage.

What if the way we think of our lifecycle models is reversed? Instead of viewing them as processes consisting of stages of work with decision ‘gates’ intended to allow work effort to transition from one stage to the next, we view them as a series of business decisions with iterative work cycles designed to prepare for and successfully transverse each business decision as it is encountered. Let’s look at an example.

Business Decision Framework

During the course of a program, a program manager will have to contend with unexpected changes in the market and organizational environment, a large number of uncertainties and assumptions that have to be tested and vetted, and multiple influential stakeholders with opposing views. For these reasons, a robust business decision framework provides the flexibility necessary to enable an adaptive management process that allows for changes in the program as new information comes in, and at the same time, provides anchors to align stakeholders and the program team on the critical business decisions necessary to successfully manage a program.

Figure 1 illustrates an example of a program-level decision framework that is based upon the critical business decisions associated with a program.


To read entire article (click here)

The PMWJ series of articles on program management is authored by Russell Martinelli and James Waddell, principle advisors at the Program Management Academy in Oregon, USA.   More about the authors and the Program Management Academy can be found at http://www.programmanagement-academy.com/.

About the Authors

pmwj19-feb2014-martinelli-AUTHOR1 MARTINELLIflag-usaRuss Martinelli 

Oregon, USA 

Russ Martinelli is a senior program manager at Intel Corporation, one of the world’s largest semiconductor companies.  Russ has many years of experience leading global product development teams in both the aerospace and computing industries.  Russ is also a founder of the Program Management Academy (www.programmanagement-academy.com), and co-author of Leading Global Project Teams and the first comprehensive book on program management titled Program Management for Improved Business Results. Russ can be contacted at [email protected].

flag-usapmwj19-feb2014-martinelli-AUTHOR2 WADDELLJim Waddell 

Oregon, USA

Jim Waddell, former PMO director in the high-tech industry, is a founder of the Program Management Academy (www.programmanagement-academy.com) where he consultants in program management and mergers & acquisitions. He has held a variety of management positions in the high tech and energy industries, has been a speaker at numerous conferences, and is a co-author of two books:  Leading Global Project Teams and Program Management for Improved Business Results.  Jim can be contacted at [email protected].

IPMA Education & Training Board Series: Case Study: Project Management Education in India


Dr. Ashutosh Karnatak 


In this article, the author looks at the state of project management education in India through the prism of his employer GAIL (India) Ltd ,  a Central Public Sector Undertaking (PSU) under the Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas which currently has circa 4,000 employees.

The organization’s vision is – “To be the Leading Company in Natural Gas and Beyond, with Global Focus, Committed to Customer Care, Value Creation for all Stakeholders and Environmental Responsibility” and its mission is“To accelerate and optimise the effective and economic use of Natural Gas and its fractions to the benefit of national economy” are helping it propel to the next level of natural gas business in India and abroad.

The author is the head of Projects Department in the organization, and is currently an IPMA Level-A Certification candidate.

Why Project Education is required?

One of the major causes of lackadaisical performance in projects execution in India is the lack of knowledge, skills, tools and techniques related to project management. Many people think that projects don’t need any expertise which is very much contrary to the truth. Project vocabulary, syntax and understanding are something which we cannot fully utilize if we don’t treat it as a separate subject studied like any other field of education.

One or more of the project’s triple constraints of time, cost and quality are often compromised due to less mature systems and processes in place. Of all the phases, project execution is the most affected which plays the pivotal phase in the project being branded as a success or a failure.   The competency development through formal project management education at all the levels of project portfolio – junior level (Scheduler, MIS), middle level (Project Coordinator/ Chief Manager) and senior level (Project Manager/ General Manager) – is the need of the hour for improved project management. Many organizations including GAIL have taken proactive steps to train its manpower in project management.

To further underline the training deficit in India, the difference between certified project professionals available in India and China is highlighted by the figure on the next page.


To read entire article (click here)

Editor’s note: This series of articles is 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

pmwj20-mar2014-karnatak-AUTHOR IMAGEflag-indiaDr Ashutosh Karnatak


Dr. Ashutosh Karnatak, M. Tech. (Energy Studies), B. Tech. (Electrical), MBA (Finance), Ph. D. is a member of the IPMA Educationand Training Board and is presently pursuing a Post-Doctorate in Business Administration on ‘Organizational Maturity in Project Management’.  He has diverse experience of more than 30 years in various domains of Oil & Gas Industry and has managed projects of a total budget exceeding €5bn. He has authored books on project management and self-development and is a firm believer in positive thinking.

Advances in Project Management: Insights from Beyond Goals


By Susan David

Harvard University, USA

David Clutterbuck

Clutterbuck Partnership, UK

David Megginson

Sheffield Hallam University, UK


As practitioners and scholars of coaching and mentoring, we noticed that goal-setting is pervasive in developmental relationships.  Practices like SMART goals (specific, measurable, attainable, realistic, time-bound) go largely unquestioned.  We thought that, while goals have a place in coaching, we really should look at these issues more critically.  In particular, we saw more novice coaches using goal-setting models in rigid ways, as if they were depending on these processes to get them through a coaching engagement.  We questioned the usefulness of this because it seemed that strict adherence to goal-setting could make a coaching relationship somewhat mechanical and transactional, and people could get corralled into goals that weren’t really appropriate for them.

We were also very interested in an academic article called “Goals Gone Wild” that had been published in 2009 by a group of scholars, including Lisa Ordonez from the University of Arizona and Max Bazerman from Harvard Business School.  The article was not specifically about coaching but it was about goal-setting in organizations, so we found it highly relevant.  The basic premise was that goals were being overprescribed in management settings, and this could lead to bad outcomes, like unnecessary risk-taking and unethical behaviour.

Based on all of this, we thought it was time to pull together leading thinkers from coaching and mentoring, and get their take on goals. The result is Beyond Goals, a book that advances goal-setting theory.  For example, Sir John Whitmore is an originator of the GROW model, a goal-setting model that’s often used in coaching.  He contributes a chapter called “GROW grows up”, in which he describes the role of goals in his more recent work on transpersonal coaching.  Gordon Spence and Ed Deci apply self-determination theory to coaching, which hasn’t been done up until now, and they examine how this affects goal-setting.  Kathy Kram describes the evolution of her thinking in the field of mentoring.  Anthony Grant provides his latest theory and research on goals.  With such a wonderful group of scholars, the book turned out to be full of cutting-edge ideas. In this article we describe some of the insights we gained from our work on Beyond Goals.

The limits of goals 

We all know the word “goal” means an aim or desired destination, but if you trace its etymology, the word also means a boundary or limit.  When do goals help, and when do they interfere with desired outcomes? Researchers have demonstrated that if a task is well-defined and the person has the skill set to achieve it, a specific, challenging goal can be helpful.  Studies have been performed with logging crews and typists, and people doing other types of routine work.  But if the task requires learning or novelty, challenging goals can be problematic.  They rush people to action, rather than encouraging appropriate exploration.   Therefore, it’s important to identify when a goal might hinder learning or creativity.


To read entire article (click here)

About the Authors

flag-usapmwj20-mar2014-david-AUTHOR1 DAVIDDr Susan David

Massachusetts, USA

Dr Susan A. David is a leading expert on leadership development, people strategy, employee engagement, and emotional intelligence. She is a founder and co-director of the Institute of Coaching at McLean Hospital of Harvard Medical School and an Instructor in Psychology at Harvard University. As the co-chair of the Institute of Coaching’s Research Forum, she convenes an annual gathering of global leaders in coaching, with the objective of advancing the research and application of coaching. She was an invited member of the Harvard/World Economic Forum Breakthrough Ideas meeting, and is a frequent contributor to the best practice articles of the online Harvard Business Review. She is principal editor of the comprehensive and definitive Oxford Handbook of Happiness (2013). Dr David is the founding partner of Evidence Based Psychology, a leadership development and management consultancy created to provide strategic advice and help senior executives to foster positive and sustainable outcomes for themselves and their organizations. Her clients are leading organizations across the globe.

flag-ukpmwj20-mar2014-david-AUTHOR2 CLUTTERBUCKProf David Clutterbuck

Sheffield, UK

Professor David Clutterbuck is Visiting Professor in the Coaching and Mentoring faculties of both Oxford Brookes and Sheffield Hallam Universities in the UK and he is Special Ambassador for the European Mentoring and Coaching Council (EMCC). Professor Clutterbuck has been responsible for the implementation, monitoring, and evaluation of highly successful mentoring and coaching programmes in numerous organizations around the world, including Standard Chartered Bank, Goldman Sachs, Lloyds-TSB, World Bank and Nokia, and has worked with the Audit Commission in the UK. He has been listed as one of the top 25 most influential thinkers in the field of Human Resources by HR magazine, and was placed by The Independent on Sunday as second in the list of top business coaches in the UK. Clutterbuck has authored, co-authored, or edited 55 books to date. Prof Clutterbuck completed the first longitudinal, cross-sectional, intra-dyadic study of developmental mentoring, in which goal orientation was a principal element of analysis.

flag-ukpmwj20-mar2014-david-AUTHOR3 MEGGINSONProf David Megginson

Sheffield, UK

David Megginson is Emeritus Professor of Human Resource Development at Sheffield Hallam University, UK, where he founded the Coaching and Mentoring Research Group. He has been Chair of the European Mentoring and Coaching Council (EMCC), which he founded with David Clutterbuck in 1992. David Megginson is a well-established author who was one of the first to query the role of goals in coaching and mentoring. He contributes to teaching the MSc in Coaching and Mentoring at Sheffield Business School, and supervises doctoral dissertations in coaching and mentoring. He founded the EMCC’s research conference which has provided opportunities for researchers from a range of countries, research traditions and levels of experience to come together in a collegial way to share their work, their learning and their dreams.

Editor’s note: The Advances in Project Management series includes articles by authors of books published by Gower in the UK.  The articles are coordinated by series editor Prof Darren Dalcher, who is also the editor of the Gower Advances in Project Management series of books on new and emerging concepts.  Prof Dalcher also provides an introduction to the current month’s article, which you can see elsewhere in this month’s edition.”  

Information about the Gower series can be found at http://www.gowerpublishing.com/advancesinprojectmanagement.

Advances in Project Management: Whatever happened to management by objectives? Learning to look beyond goals


By Prof Darren Dalcher

Director, National Centre for Project Management

University of Hertfordshire


Introduction to the March 2014 Advances in PM Series Article 

With the aid of social, mobile and other technologies we are increasingly surrounded by data, facts and values searching for a meaning. It appears that as a society we have never been so data rich.

Yet with so many potential measurements we struggle to stay afloat and pay attention to the urgent and critical ones. Indeed, it seems that managers have never had as many potential targets, indicators, objectives, goals and measures to track, study, analyse and interrogate.

The idea of management by objectives (MBO) was first formulated by management guru Peter Drucker in his 1954 book, the Practice of Management.

A manager’s job should be based on a task to be performed in order to obtain the company’s objectives … the manager should be directed and controlled by the objectives of performance rather than by his boss.

The book highlights a set of priorities for the managers of the future; chief amongst them is the need for managers to manage by objectives. Management by objectives is a participative and collaborative process of defining objectives between management and employees so that everyone understands what needs to be done in order for the organization to achieve its principal goals. The intention is that subordinates play a key part in setting their own goals rather than that receiving a list of objectives from above.

The idea of MBO was particularly popular in the 1960s and 1970s. The process also became known as management by results (MBR) emphasising the focus on translating high-level business goals into individual objectives that enables the organisation to deliver the outcomes strategic outcomes. The key implication of MBO is that objectives need to be understood, defined and measured to determine their ultimate achievement.

The result of non-systemic application of MBO can often lead to a rapid escalation in the number of measures tracked through an organisation. Responsibility for single measures and their achievement can also lead to lack of interest in some aspects, undeserving attention to a subset of parameters, and sub-optimisation without concern for the overall impacts.

US Quality guru, W Edwards Deming, suggested that the setting of production targets encouraged resources to be diverted to meet these targets through whatever means necessary, potentially resulting in poor quality. He therefore advocated the elimination of work standards as well as numerical quotas including management by objective and management by numbers.


To read entire article (click here)

Editor’s note: The PMWJ Advances in Project Management series includes articles by authors of program and project management books published by Gower in the UK.  Each month an introduction to the current article is provided by series editor Prof Darren Dalcher, who is also the editor of the Gower Advances in Project Management series of books on new and emerging concepts in PM.  Prof Dalcher’s article is an introduction to the invited paper this month in the PMWJ.  Information about the Gower series can be found at http://www.gowerpublishing.com/advancesinprojectmanagement. 

About the Author 

flag-ukdarren-dalcherDarren Dalcher, PhD 

Series Editor 

Director, National Centre for Project Management

University of Hertfordshire, UK

Darren Dalcher, Ph.D. HonFAPM, FRSA, FBCS, CITP, FCMI is Professor of Project Management at the University of Hertfordshire, and founder and Director of the National Centre for Project Management (NCPM) in the UK.  He has been named by the Association for Project Management (APM) as one of the top 10 “movers and shapers” in project management in 2008 and was voted Project Magazine’s “Academic of the Year” for his contribution in “integrating and weaving academic work with practice”. Following industrial and consultancy experience in managing IT projects, Professor Dalcher gained his PhD in Software Engineering from King’s College, University of London.  Professor Dalcher has written over 150 papers and book chapters on project management and software engineering. He is Editor-in-Chief of Software Process Improvement and Practice, an international journal focusing on capability, maturity, growth and improvement. He is the editor of the book series, Advances in Project Management, published by Gower Publishing of a new companion series Fundamentals of Project Management.  Heavily involved in a variety of research projects and subjects, Professor Dalcher has built a reputation as leader and innovator in the areas of practice-based education and reflection in project management. He works with many major industrial and commercial organisations and government bodies in the UK and beyond.  He is an Honorary Fellow of the APM, a Chartered Fellow of the British Computer Society, a Fellow of the Chartered Management Institute, and the Royal Society of Arts, and a Member of the Project Management Institute (PMI), the Academy of Management, the Institute for Electrical and Electronics Engineers, and the Association for Computing Machinery. He is a Chartered IT Practitioner. He is a Member of the PMI Advisory Board responsible for the prestigious David I. Cleland project management award and of the APM Professional Development Board.  Prof Dalcher is an academic editorial advisor for the PM World Journal.  He can be contacted at [email protected].

To see other works by Prof Darren Dalcher, visit his author showcase in the PM World Library at http://pmworldlibrary.net/authors/darren-dalcher/.

Maturity in Project Management Series: Foundations of the Prado-PM Maturity Model


By Russell D. Archibald

San Miguel de Allende, Mexico

Darci Prado

Minas Gerais, Brazil

The Prado-PM Maturity Model (Prado-PMMM) was launched in December 2002 and reflects forty years of experience on the subject by Darci Prado within IBM and two large, Brazilian international consulting firms: INDG and FALCONI. The initial goal was to create a simple and easy to use model that provides reliable results. Since 2002 it has been used by hundreds of Brazilian organizations and others in Italy, Spain, Portugal and the USA, and the results obtained are consistent with expectations, and with what have been obtained with a thorough, much more lengthy diagnosis. This model has also been used since 2005 in a maturity survey conducted in Brazil by Darci Prado and Russell Archibald [1]. This same survey was conducted in Italy in 2010.

1 – Focus of the Model: Departmental

The Prado-PMMM model should be applied to individual departments of an organization, such as engineering, information technology, product development, etc. So it is a departmental model and not a “organizational type model” in which the focus is on the organization as a whole.

In departments that the model is applied there usually exists a portfolio of projects whose content is renewed periodically (typically annually), and where we usually have a PMO (Project Management Office). The projects in this portfolio are usually linked to the mission of the department, such as in the following examples:

  • The department of engineering, construction and installation of a mining company with the charge of planning and implementing the expansion or improvements in the field equipment and facilities of the company;
  • The computer department of a bank, tasked to develop, acquire and install computer applications across the enterprise;
  • The Research & Development department of a steel industry, tasked with creating new uses for the company’s products;
  • The New Product Development department of a beverage company, in charge of developing new products for the company;
  • A department of a large real estate construction company in charge of residential and commercial building construction in a particular city;
  • A projectized department of a food factory, in charge of designing and building a new plant (green-field). 

Thus, the Prado-PMMM model should be applied separately to each department of the same organization. Then we can typically find a situation in which an organization has departments with different levels of maturity. Eventually, it may happen that an organization is at level 2 in the computer department, at level 3 in engineering and at level 4 in the development of new products department. Repeating:

It remains to add that the model was designed to be universal, ie, it must work well for any type of organization and any category of projects.

2 – Basic Characteristics of the Model: Results Orientation

The model was created to honor the practice, or rather the practical experience and results achievement. It is currently in version 2, and since its inception the model has gone through successive cycles of continuous improvement. Throughout its evolution the author always tried to align its content with the thoughts of leading world authorities in management. Two of them were of fundamental importance:


To read entire article (click here)

Editor’s note: The Project Management Maturity series of articles by Russell Archibald & Prof Darci Prado is based on their extensive research on this topic in Brazil, the United States and other countries.  Russ is one of the pioneers in the project management field and the originator of the Archibald Project Categorization Model.  Darci is the developer of the Prado Project Management Maturity Model which has been successfully implemented by many organizations in Brazil.  More about this model and related research can be found at http://www.maturityresearch.com/. 

About the Authors

flag-usa-mexicorussell d archibaldRussell D. Archibald

San Miguel de Allende, Mexico 

Russell D. Archibald: PhD (Hon) ESC-Lille (Fr), MSc (U of Texas) & BS (U of Missouri) Mechanical Engineering, PMP, Fellow PMI and Honorary Fellow APM/IPMA (member of the Board of IPMA/INTERNET 1974-83), held engineering and executive positions in aerospace, petroleum, telecommunications, and automotive industries in the USA, France, Mexico and Venezuela (1948-1982). Russ also had 9 years of active duty as a pilot officer with the U.S. Army Air Corps (1943-46) and as a Senior Pilot and Project Engineer with the U. S. Air Force (1951-58.) Since 1982 he has consulted to companies, agencies and development banks in 16 countries on 4 continents, and has taught project management principles and practices to thousands of managers and specialists around the world. He is co-author (with Shane Archibald) of Leading and Managing Innovation: What Every Executive Team Must Know About Project, Program, and Portfolio Management (2013); author of Managing High-Technology Programs and Projects (3rd Edition 2003), also published in Russian, Italian, and Chinese; other books (in English, Italian, Japanese, and Hungarian); and many papers on project management. Web-site: http://russarchibald.com  E-mail: [email protected]   

To see other works by Russ Archibald, visit his author showcase in the PM World Library at http://pmworldlibrary.net/authors/russell-d-archibald/

flag-brazilpmwj18-jan2014-archibald-PHOTO PRADODarci Prado, PhD 

Minas Gerais, Brazil

Darci Prado is a consultant and partner of INDG in Brazil. He is an engineer, with graduate studies in Economical Engineering at UCMG and PhD in Project Management from UNICAMP, Brazil. He has worked for IBM for 25 years and with UFMG Engineering School for 32 years. He holds the IPMA Level B Certification. He was one of the founders of Minas Gerais State and Parana State PMI chapters, and he was member of Board Directors of Minas Gerais State PMI chapter during 1998-2002 and member of the Consulting Board during 2003-2009. He was also the president of IPMA Minas Gerais State chapter during 2006-2008. He is conducting a Project Management maturity research in Brazil, Italy, Spain and Portugal together with Russell Archibald. He is author of nine books on project management and is also author of a methodology, a software application, and a maturity model for project management.  Darci can be contacted at [email protected].

To see other works by Darcy Prado, visit his author showcase in the PM World Library at http://pmworldlibrary.net/authors/darci-prado-phd/

Projects vs. Operations: The Model and Framework for Product-Based Project Management

SECOND EDITION                                                            

By Alexey Chumakov (IPMA/A) 

Moscow, Russia


Mature organizations get stuck to current operations, draining their competitive advantages. In unstable times, right projects are the key to success. But CEOs tend to focus on ‘generating current cash flow’, avoiding investment and missing the opportunities. The simple yet powerful framework was discovered and implemented, allowing the real organizations to balance and mix their project-based development with current operations, with affordable learning curve and initial resources.

The idea is representing an organization as 5 (usual count) specially selected product portfolios, and allocating all the tasks to them. The tasks are categorized as ‘reproduction, promotion, development’ classes, and gradually grouped to products and projects to reproduce, improve, or promote specific product versions. Permanent and temporary responsibility is assigned. The process similar to P2M ‘Vision—Product—Service’ cycle is established. Customer expectations are set as the reason and the target for any tasks. This allows for lowering overhead for project management, fully integrating the developmental project management to a decision-making process, and decisions based on total cost of ownership allocation per any product.

Subsets of Project Management, Product Management, Demand/Value management, Interaction Design, and Strategic Management were adopted and linked together to form a unified process of decision-making and value delivery through both waterfall and iterative projects. Selected guidance from IPMA ICB, PMAJ P2M, ISO 9241, and Lean was implemented.

The framework is being successfully implemented in several pilot organizations to lead ‘project-based development through versioned product portfolios’, under the name of ‘D3’ or ‘Demand-Driven Design for Organizations’.

Keywords: Project Management Framework; Product Management; Value Delivery; Decision-Making Process; D3 Framework

1. Introduction and the purpose

Usually, start-ups strive for being successful in bringing new products or services to market. They have the strongest motivation, including personal ambitions, limited funding, and the need to meet investors’ expectations. And they have almost no limitations like existing procedures, skills of operational personnel, etc. Quick and efficient decisions are made much easier at this stage. And the organization itself is obviously a project.

Successful organizations are generally less open to new initiatives (either by themselves, or under pressure of shareholders). They are more process-oriented, more rigid, and if not handled properly, eventually they could start to ‘stick to their success’, avoiding active changes.

Start-ups ‘have less resources’, successes ‘have less speed and flexibility’.

In competitive changing environment, the latter could finally lead to a loss of a market share.

How could we integrate development projects into a decision-making process to mix the startup-like speed of changes and mature operations, and benefit from both? To provide a balanced decision-making process for CEO? In my effort, I found no existing solution in the project management area, simple enough to implement. There were always some links missing between strategic goals, customers, development projects, the budget structure, and the decision-making process.


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 Author

flag-russiapmwj20-mar2014-chumakov-AUTHOR IMAGEAlexey Chumakov

Moscow, Russia

Alexey Chumakov, Founder and CEO of Tolk Group, Russian Federation, is a manager, business trainer, and facilitator focused on strategic development and project / program management.  During last 10 years, Alexey is leading various programs for organizational changes, IT development, and team development for several Russian and international organizations, either joining their management team, or providing professional services through Tolk Group. Alexey is the author of Russian ‘Demand-Driven Design for Organizations’ framework, bridging strategic, project, and operational management together, with help of HR, IT, and product management techniques. He is IPMA certified project director and consultant (Level A CPD, PPMC).  Alexey can be reached at +7.903.200.11.80 or [email protected] (or via LinkedIn and Facebook). His personal blog (currently, in Russian) is http://alex.chumakov.ru.

Lean vs Agile Project Management, alternative or complementary approach


By Luca Cavone

Milan, Italy


Methodologies are not good for “all seasons” and do not apply equally with the same results in all contexts and / or industries. Lean and Agile approaches were created to overcome some of the limitations of the traditional Project Management techniques.

Despite the common principles at the base, do Agile and Lean represent alternative or complementary approaches? Which of the methods is most effective and where? Again, what the reasons why? The background, industry, process, business innovation level, object delivered ( i.e.  “Product” or “Service”), etc.. What else?

This paper illustrates an operational framework for scenario mapping. The analysis and the proposed approach are based on real cases, with the aims to present commonalities and differences between Lean and Agile techniques.

Keywords: Lean, Agile, Project Management, Innovation


When dealing with a project, we always have to consider its objective(s). In fact, literature as well as the international experiences developed across the past decades and any among the standards available today do refer to concepts such as strategy, scope, stakeholders, time, cost, quality, risk, etc…

Even though a project target gets set depending on the related business type, context and other features, we can state that in the overall picture the ultimate goal of a project is its success. Success (or failure) is affected and determined by all or a part/a mix of the said elements.

To attain a successful result we can then consider what the factors are which play a major influence (the key contributing factors). Of course there is no way to have a standard approach valid at all times; the right balance needs to be found case by case.

In time, a significant number of project management methodologies and tools were born. Even though viewed as commodities today, such techniques are in fact a great help for properly managing projects. However, in no case their application can be constrained into a copy-and-paste approach, by taking something that has worked elsewhere and simply get it replicated. Suitable methods should be selected and customized where needed, prior to applying in proper context.

It is then important to identify per each project the correct drivers, pointing the right direction. It is quite frequent that traditional methods are not suitable and can fail. Other methods are needed and new approached may be born in the meantime.

In the same perspective it is worth quoting the Lean and Agile Project Management, which were created and introduced to overcome some of the limitations of traditional Project Management techniques. Collecting common sense and feedbacks by company people and business professionals, there’s not always a clear understanding between the two, and historically this created some confusion. The point on which this article focuses is to understand the relationship among these methodologies, clarify if they represent a similar, different or complimentary approach and as a consequence how to deal with their applicability.


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 Author

flag-italyluca-cavoneLuca Cavone 

Milan, Italy

Luca Cavone is a Consultant at JMAC Europe, the Consulting firm of the Japan Management Association. He is mainly focused to support companies in Innovation Management and Product Development Projects typical of R&D and Marketing areas, with an interdisciplinary background of the business processes. In JMAC Luca follows also the study and development of project management methodologies based on the application of Lean Thinking approach. Before joining JMAC he worked several years in the Aerospace industry.   Since 2009 Luca has been actively involved with the International Project Management Association (IPMA); at that time he was between the founders of the Young Crew Italy and was appointed as first chairman. In 2011 he left the position to join the Young Crew Management Board, where he’s currently Head of Membership and Responsible for the Young Project Manager of the Year award. Since 2010 Luca is also a member of the Executive Board of IPMA Italy.  Luca is also an international correspondent for PM World in Italy; he can be contacted at [email protected].

To see other works by Luca Cavone, visit his author showcase in the PM World Library at http://pmworldlibrary.net/authors/luca-cavone/.

Projects and Project Management in Germany


Reinhard Wagner

International Correspondent

Munich, Germany

Last month the IPMA Expert Seminar 2014 with fifty participants from about sixteen countries happened in Zurich, Switzerland. I was happy to chair that Expert Seminar, because it was dedicated to the “Future Trends in Project, Programme and Portfolio Management”, which is something that is important to me and obviously also to the participants.

In my opening speech I shared my observations about developments in the field of projects, programmes and portfolios (PP&P). Organisations are more and more using projects as a means to develop new products, implement change or realize strategies. Therefore, more roles than the professionals we in the PM community typically consider are involved. Top management, senior executives, line functions, educators, coaches, trainers, consultants, to mention only a few are interested in the topic of PP&P, to learn which role they could or should fill. Standards must address that needs, professional associations have focused too long on project practitioners and also the literature needs to address these new people as target audiences. This is the rationale behind IPMA publishing the IPMA Organisational Competence Baseline (IPMA OCB) to address the needs of those people. The new version of IPMA Competence Baseline (ICB) will also address more clearly the roles of project, programme and portfolio managers. In parallel IPMA intends to publish another ICB for PM Trainers, Coaches and Consultants, as support functions. Later the ICB could cover a wider spectrum of roles, such as PMO Heads or Support Functions.

Another key trend which I addressed in Zurich is the network we are typically working in. A project manager is involved in forming a network, facilitating that network and at the end of a project or programme dissolving that network again. A project network could be formed out of a divers set of people, groups of people or even organisations. In Automotive Industry for example, more than 500 companies are involved developing a car and bringing it into mass production. Typically, those companies are spread all over the globe. To form such a network is a huge undertaking, firstly regarding the legal framework, secondly regarding the alignment of strategies, processes, structures and cultures, and thirdly also in respect to the way of leading all stakeholders towards the common goal of a project or programme. 


To read entire report, click here

About the Author 

flag-germanypmwj17-dec2013-wagner-IMAGE2 AUTHORReinhard Wagner

International Correspondent – Germany

Based near Munich

Reinhard Wagner is an International Correspondent for PM World Journal in Germany. He is also CEO of Projektivisten GmbH, a service provider specialized in the field of project management. He studied Electrical Engineering and Business Administration in Germany and the USA and looks back to more than 27 years of project related work and leadership experience. His career started in the German Air Force, where he served as Air Surveillance Officer in NATO Air Defense performing projects like the establishment of a Systems Operations Center. 1995 he entered the Automotive Industry and managed several major design projects and programmes, developed specific methodology for Automotive Engineering activities and published the first book on Project Management in Automotive Industry. In 2002 he founded a Special Interest Group for Automotive Project Management within GPM German Project Management Association and leads these activities since then. In 2006 he entered the Executive Board of GPM being responsible for all R&E activities as well as the International affairs. Today he is Chairman of the Executive Board. As Chairman of the respective DIN committee for the development of PM standards he is responsible for several standardization projects in Germany. From 2007 until 2012 he acted as working group Convenor in ISO for the development of ISO 21500 Guidance on Project Management. Within GPM and IPMA, he developed tools for the assessment and certification of organisations (e.g. GPM3 and IPMA Delta) and acts as Lead Assessor for PM-ZERT and IPMA in this field. Reinhard Wagner teaches project management at different Universities in Germany. He has published more than 150 books and articles, speaks to national and international audiences and is elected as IPMA Vice President for R&D / Awards. Reinhard is living close to Munich, Bavaria and can be contacted via [email protected]. 

To see other works by Reinhard Wagner, visit his author showcase in the PM World Library at http://pmworldlibrary.net/authors/reinhard-wagner/

Project Management Update from Chile


Jaime Videla

International Correspondent

Santiago, Chile

PMIEF is already in Chile

The PMI Educational Foundation has reached Chile. This is a non-profit organization whose main objective is the dissemination of project management in the field of education and social welfare with a focus on three areas:

In the educational area, helping students, both primary, secondary and university graduates as teachers, to achieve their dreams through scholarships, research grants, project management courses, among other things.

For Nonprofit organizations, to learn how to use available resources more efficient and effective in order to increase their capacity to lead.

Post Disaster, disasters and crises are by nature, accompanied by uncertainty. The reconstruction priority list is longer than a person can tackle alone and unsupported. To fix this, the PMI Educational Foundation has developed Project Management Methodology for Post Disaster Reconstruction, aimed at those in the field of disaster recovery, providing the kind of leadership and clarity of thought necessary to help in the reconstruction effort.

For more information on the role of Liaison PMIEF visit: PMIEF Liaison and FAQs.

And www.pmi.cl

Investment in the Chilean mining industry

Investment in the Chilean mining industry stands at US$112.5 billion. Mining companies have announced 49 projects involving upwards of US$90 million each. Most are in progress or undergoing review, with investment decisions slated for no later than 2017 and start-up by 2021. The project portfolio is as follows: 


To read entire report, click here

About the Author 


Santiago, Chile

Jaime Videla, PMP, is the Managing Director for Videla Montero Consultores a project management consultant firm based in Santiago, Chile. He is also senior partner of AccuFast! Cubicaciones, a company provides material takeoff estimating services and engineering projects in Chile. Mr. Videla has 20+ years of project management experience leading utilities, mining and industrial projects (totaling US$222 millions) for large multinational companies like Siemens and ABB, or as a consultant for BHP and Anglo American. Jaime is a certified Project Management Professional (PMP®) since 2007, has formal studies in Civil Engineering from Universidad de Chile. He has professional experience working/training in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Mexico and Germany. Since 2006 has been an active member of the Project Management Institute (PMI®), assuming the role of director and vice president of communications and publicity of the PMI Santiago Chile Chapter in 2010. His areas of activity today include PMO development; contracting, claim, risk and project management services; project management training and coaching. Author of the e-book “Los 7 pasos para salvar un proyecto (The 7 steps to project recovery)”, he also writes about project management themes on PMOChile blog. In addition, he works as volunteer at Fundación Trascender, an innovative institution that manages a network of volunteer professionals through social projects. Jaime Videla is fluent in English, Portuguese and Spanish, lives in Santiago and can be contacted at [email protected].

To see other works by Jaime Videla, visit his author showcase in the PM World Library at http://pmworldlibrary.net/authors/jaime-videla-pmp/ 

Project Management in Spain – monthly report


By Alfonso Bucero

International Correspondent & Editorial Advisor

Madrid, Spain

Academic PMI GAC Forum in Barcelona on March

The professional insertion is a key discussion area in the business communities, academic and governamental. Furthermore PMI GAC is currently reviewing and finalizing their accreditation standards, particularly regarding Project Management Training results.

This Forum, that will happen on march 23rd 2014 in Barcelona, is the ideal place where interested professional meet to discuss basic competences that a Project manager needs to be successful. Dr. George Danielle, Associated Dean for Training and Education of Manchester University, United Kindom, will deliver the main speech to frame the discussion for the rest of the day.

The day will count on academic presentations, the European industry and government leaders; in addition it will count on a representative from the “European Tunning Project” presenting on the way in which the academic community is dealing with that relevan subject. The evening sesion will count on an interactive workshop where the attendees will be able to discuss and share their ideas and experiences related to the professional insertion and the training results.

It starts the optimism in the Construction Industry projects

We had the opportunity to interview the President of AEDIP (Asociación de Dirección Integrada de Proyectos), Mr. Jordi Seguró, from the Construction industry. He answered the following questions:

What is the trend in Construction Project Management for 2014?


To read entire report, click here for (English) or (Spanish) 

About the Author 

flag-spainalfonso-buceroAlfonso Bucero 

Contributing Editor

International Correspondent – Spain

Alfonso Bucero, MSc, PMP, PMI-RMP, PMI Fellow, is an International Correspondent and Contributing Editor for the PM World Journal in Madrid, Spain. Mr. Bucero is also founder and Managing Partner of BUCERO PM Consulting.  Alfonso was the founder, sponsor and president of the PMI Barcelona Chapter until April 2005, and belongs to PMI’s LIAG (Leadership Institute Advisory Group).  He was the past President of the PMI Madrid Spain Chapter, and now nominated as a PMI EMEA Region 8 Component Mentor. Alfonso has a Computer Science Engineering degree from Universidad Politécnica in Madrid and is studying for his Ph.D. in Project Management. He has 29 years of practical experience and is actively engaged in advancing the PM profession in Spain and throughout Europe. He received the PMI Distinguished Contribution Award on October 9th, 2010 and the PMI Fellow Award on October 22nd 2011.  Mr. Bucero can be contacted at [email protected].

To see other works by Alfonso Bucero, visit his author showcase in the PM World Library at http://pmworldlibrary.net/authors/alfonso-bucero/

Project Management Update from Argentina


By Cecilia Boggi, PMP

International Correspondent

Buenos Aires, Argentina

PMI Chapters in Argentina are working thoroughly in developing Project Management awareness and professionalism in the region. Additionally, since 2010 the two Argentinian Chapters are following PMI Educational Foundation programs promoting project management for educational good for elementary and high school students, as well as the community at large.

PMI Educational Foundation, PMIEF (http://www.pmi.org/pmief/), is the philanthropic arm of the Project Management Institute, PMI ((http://www.pmi.org/).

Within the framework of the PMI Educational Foundation Chapter, PMI Buenos Aires Argentina Chapter developed some activities in the past years.

A team of volunteers of PMIBA delivered lectures and workshops of “Introduction to Project Management” for high school students who were participants in the “Company” program organized by Junior Achievement Argentina Foundation, JAA, (http://www.junior.org.ar/). Junior Achievement is an international educational foundation whose mission is to generate youth entrepreneurship to enable them to achieve their goals within a framework of responsibility and freedom.

Also under the PMIEF program, the PMIBA team of volunteers composed by Adriana Morando, Gerardo Blitzer, Gustavo Flouret and Julio Rossini has worked with Asociación ORT Argentina (http://www.ort.edu.ar/) in adapting the curriculum of the high school by incorporating Project Management practices aligned to PMBOK® as well as training the teachers.


To read entire report, including many great photos, (click here)

About the Author

flag-argentinaCecilia BoggiCECILIA BOGGI 

International Correspondent

Buenos Aires, Argentina

Cecilia Boggi, PMP is founder and Executive Director of activePMO, giving consulting services and training in Project Management and Leadership skills in Argentina and Latin America.

After graduating with a degree in Computer Science Engineering from Universidad de Buenos Aires, Argentina, she has managed software development projects and PMO implementation projects for more than 20 years both in the government and private sector. Cecilia also has graduated from an Executive Program in Business Management at Universidad del CEMA. She holds the Project Management Professional (PMP®) credential since 2003, is certified as SDI Facilitator from Personal Strengths© and is alumni of the PMI Leadership Institute Master Class 2012.  Ms. Boggi is Past President of the PMI Buenos Aires Argentina Chapter, and is a founding member of the PMI Nuevo Cuyo Chapter and PMI Santa Cruz Bolivia Chapter. She has been designated by PMI in the role of Mentor of Region 13, Latin America South, for the years 2014-2016.  Cecilia has participated in the development of PMBOK® Guide 5th Edition, leading the Chapter 9, Human Resource Management, content team and she is professor of Project Management in some Universities and Institutes in Argentina, Chile, Peru and Bolivia.

She can be contacted at [email protected]  and www.activepmo.com.ar

To view other works by Cecilia Boggi, visit her author showcase in the PM World Library at http://pmworldlibrary.net/authors/cecilia-boggi/.

Report on the IPMA Project Excellence Award Assessors Training


By Ewa Bednarczyk and Kasia Pachuta

IPMA Excellence Awards Office

Krakow, Poland

“Seeing our most experienced assessors and sharing their most interesting Project Excellence stories. I guess that’s what makes it worth participating in these workshops every year.” Grzegorz Szałajko from Poland, experienced Team Lead Assessor, trainer of Advanced group.

A few days ago there was the biggest training for the IPMA International Project Excellence Assessors ever organized. Over 50 people, from 18 countries and 5 continents, traveled to Warsaw during 21-23 February 2014 to learn the PE Model, assessment process and exchange their experience.

The training is conducted every year to train potential new Assessors and re-train experienced ones to run the Assessment process during the IPMA International Project Excellence Award. This year, for the first time there was a separate path for advanced Assessors who have potential to become TLAs. “The advanced level was really what I needed” said Hossein Ossooli from Iran. 

“I am glad that I attended this training as I have learnt a lot even though I have been an assessor for a long time. The practical sessions made these sessions helpful to understand better what is being expected from a TLA. One of the best trainings I have attended. Thank you.”  Robert Wagesreiter from Austria

What participants of the training liked the most was the atmosphere of enthusiasm about Project Management, strengthening the family links between future assessors as well as meeting people who share the same passion for the PE Model. 


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]. 

To see other works by Ewa Bednarczyk, visit her author showcase in the PM World Library at http://pmworldlibrary.net/authors/ewa-bednarczyk/

flag-polandpmwj18-jan2014-bednarczyk-PHOTO2 PACHUTAKasia Pachuta

IPMA Award Office Manager

Kracow, 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] 

To see other works by Kasia Pachuta, visit her author showcase in the PM World Library at http://pmworldlibrary.net/authors/kasia-pachuta/

On the Subject of A Fuzzy Risk Assessment Model (FRAM) for Risk Management (RM), featured paper in the February PMWJ by Ashwani Kharola


3 February 2014 

Dear Sir,

I applaud any attempt to quantify risk in a risk management process; however there are some observations on this article that I’d like to make.

It should be remembered that risk and chance have different inherent meanings and are not interchangeable.  In the third paragraph the author writes, “Risk can be defined as, “the chance that an undesirable event will occur and the consequences of all its possible outcomes””.  For any uncertainty we could equate risk and chance to threat and opportunity respectively, for example, if I walk to the store to buy a ticket there is a chance I might win the lottery, but there is a risk I might slip on the icy sidewalk to get there.

When discussing ‘fuzzy control rules’ (Section 3.3, page 5), the author states that “The fuzzy rules are defined and based on personal experience of expert and varies from one expert to other.”  Fundamentally fuzzy logic still relies on subjective assessments of risk and, rather than assigning a weighting to the risk itself, simply introduces another tool that assists in prioritizing the uncertainties that have been identified.

The article focuses on probability and severity and therefore only considers risk mitigation, ignoring risk acceptance, transfer and avoidance.  In any comprehensive risk assessment one should be aware that uncertainties lie in each of the latter three strategies; how they could be explored using the fuzzy logic methodology would be an interesting sequel.


Andy Cuthbert.

Houston, Texas, USA

On the Subject of the February Letter to the Editor on Stakeholder Management


8 February 2014 

Dear Editor,

Drew Davidson’s reactionary response to the original article by Omar Muhammad and Abid Mustafa’s on, “Managing stakeholders: Going beyond conventional wisdom” in the December 2014 PM World Journal and Patrick Weaver’s letter in the January 2014 issue, published in your February Edition cannot go without comment.

Stakeholder management is a much wider topic than the narrow ‘leading of change’ discussed by Kotter and Connor in their publications. Even John Kotter in his latest work ‘Accelerating change’ recognises the need for a coalition of support among stakeholders to assist the central management push to implement an organisational change.

Whilst decision makers are undoubtedly important stakeholders (generally referred to as ‘key stakeholders’) Mr. Davidson’s proposition that they are the only stakeholders that matter, and they will automatically support ‘their project’ ignores reality; and maintains a minority position long abandoned by researchers into stakeholders and organisations, including John Kotter.

Just one contemporary example, some of the most important ‘stakeholders’ in the Japanese whaling program in the Antarctic Ocean are the Seashepherd activists. They have a massive impact on the way the Japanese manage their intended operations.

And from history; one of my early projects was to implement a new system into a major telecommunication businesses’ call centres to resolve a major weakness in the organisations processes that had caused a series of PR and legal disasters over the preceding few years. The need for the system was universally recognised and supported by the executive decision makers. The technologists loved it because the development would use a new computer operating system that complied with the new IT policy. And when implemented the system would provide a much improved customer interface in the area of concern.

However, the call centre staff were largely opposed to the system and their opposition was ignored because staff always oppose change and they don’t have any authority or power!

A few days before the application went ‘live’, the CEO visited one of the call centres and had the “facts” explained to him by an irate operator; she explained the new system meant 2 computers on each desk and would result in major reductions in call throughput by the call centre staff.

He listened to this ‘lone voice in the wilderness’ and cancelled the roll out – several hundred thousand dollars of re-work later the system was installed on the standard operating system used by all of the other call centre programs. Better stakeholder management would have avoided a massive delay and cost overrun in this ‘mission critical’ application development.

The lessons are simple:

  • Failing to properly scan and manage the whole stakeholder community is a guaranteed way to drive projects into failure. Support from powerful executives is only one element, in this matrix.
  • All stakeholders are important, but some are more important than others [1]. Part of any effective methodology is the prioritisation of your efforts to manage the most important stakeholders ‘at this point in time’. 

Mr. Davidson’s final comment that he has succeeded in implementing his limited view of stakeholder management on a number of projects may be true, but how many of the organisations continue to use his methodology when he moves on?  Stakeholder management maturity seems to follow the same growth path as any other capability (eg, project management maturity) with ad hoc use by individual advocates being at Level 1, and optimised processes supported by continuous improvement at levels 4 and 5.

To help organisations grow their stakeholder management maturity, I have developed a freely available stakeholder management maturity model at: http://www.stakeholdermapping.com/srmm-maturity-model/. I encourage your readers to use this model to support their journey towards 21st century inclusive stakeholder engagement; and to recognise that the old fashioned ‘command and control’ style of management passed its ‘use-by-date’ sometime in the last century.


Lynda Bourne

Stakeholder Management Pty Ltd

Melbourne, Australia

[email protected]


[1] With apologies to George Orwell and ‘Animal Farm’