Project management is applied as a theory of work that proposes that a group or an organization engages in an undertaken activity to obtain a particular result. Project management is often combined into work management, which is a broader scope and which includes other aspects, such as human resources and financial management. As on a prince 2 Foundation London certification.
The first project management software that was designed was commercially developed for use by the US Department of Defense (D discredited in 1973 over Buraim’s sabotage) and never seems to get used (or implement fully) even when one considers that the military has a progressive history of employing systems that have never been acknowledged by the government. But at the very mention of the word project management, one gets a picture of a work for which the military swears to defend and honor. The American military is officially deemed to be a noble tradition.
Perhaps Project Management is not important to the U.S military today, but it is one of the most interesting and critical areas in which management, energy, and resources could be employed to improve productivity, safety, and effectiveness, and thus improve the role of every combat unit in the military, including the Army willingness to include it as part its management practices.
There are, of course, different schools of thought pertaining to project management. Those that wish to incorporate planning and scheduling into their military team building operations should most insist on its use as a tool pertaining to planning, even if tackling the so-called issues in planning make it hard for more than a small number of units to utilize it fully.
Others argue that planning and project management (the use of projects or events) should include a realistic goal definition, manage a maximum, functional purpose with a time limit for achievement, handle the unexpected and that it should be established as the single point of contact with finite resources of time, money, and people. Under the latter view, the processes of project management and human resource management could be a common discipline.
On the heels of this debate, there is also a widespread dispute whether a more deferred or pro-active form of project management should be established. A pro-active plan would have a clear, for the most part, a defined objective for the project or event and would allow for a degree of control over its advancement. In addition, the planning and planning process would reflect the necessity for a general approach. This would provide a framework within which the projects could be developed and launched, as well as maintaining that specific organization’s control over the projects.
The pro-active alternative, however, does not give a clear picture of what the project is trying to achieve. This does not mean that the key to success is to have a complete, first-class, pro-active plan, but only to know who the main stakeholders are and what is expected. The goals may vary from time to time in relation to the information that has been gathered as to what the core customer wants and what the parameters for the deliverable are.
As for the downside of the pro-active version, it creates multiple medium size issues related to the overall program objectives as well as the specific issues that must be handled in the program. In other words, the pro-active plan is not consistent with a strategic plan. The pro-active plan will take a very limited scope and is only a first step toward measurable data for the purpose of analysis, often the basis for the design and step-wise implementation of processes behind the plan.
Project management is not as complex as many people imagine because there is such a great deal more energy that can be injected into a project or event. Although the early stages in project management are often made to seem more time-consuming than actual, the reality is that early action is the single most important part of project management. It really is that simple.
So what do we do to handle that energy? Many people make the mistake of thinking that they are good project managers. That is far from the truth. The fact is that to be a good manager, one has to look to the past and the present with both hands. It starts with the project brief and the project charter and more is needed to continually deliver value throughout the life of a project. All leaders should have standard standards by which their every-day actions, including project management, is measured. If you are not there yet, consider implementing a formal program for a pre-defined set of pre-defined key success factors. This will create both a spark of energy and an anchor for the future.
The keyword to remember is those addresses and actions that have been set by a formal project management system. In this and most other instances, it is best to deliver the projects or events in a way that engages the right people in the programs and results. Power ebbs and flows and is rarely stable.