Bob Hughes University of Brighton

1

New developments in IS/IT project management -towards a 3rd edition

Bob Hughes

School of Information Management, University of Brighton

Bob Hughes University of Brighton

2

Project management - flavour of the month?

Down-sizing

Delayering

Loss of organisationalintelligence

Loss of ability toimplement change

CHANGINGWORLD

Bob Hughes University of Brighton

3

Traditional careerprogression

programmer

systemsanalyst

project manager

In many bureaucratic organisations, all projects were IT projects

Bob Hughes University of Brighton

4

A different view of PM

Out-sourcing

Supplier side(technical management)

Customer side(contract management)

Bob Hughes University of Brighton

5

Some consequences

Growth in interest in PM Professional bodies

– Association for Project Management (UK)– Project Management Institute (US)– developing bodies of knowledge (BOK)

Bob Hughes University of Brighton

6

More consequences

Qualifications– PMI, APM, ISEB, BCS Diploma, NVQ/SVQ,

Institute of Management New kids on the block

– DSDM (Dynamic Systems Development Method) project manager examination

– ISEB Programme and Project Support Office qualification

Bob Hughes University of Brighton

7

More consequences

‘Standards’– PRINCE 2 - CCTA, APM etc.,– BS 6079 - British Standards Institution– ISO 10006– ISO 12207

Backdoor approach to getting some structure back - Programme Management and Project Support Office

Bob Hughes University of Brighton

8

Programme management

Programme brief

‘Vision statement’

‘Blueprint’ projects

Project portfolio

Benefits managementsuccess = good development + good operation

Bob Hughes University of Brighton

9

PRINCE2 versus BS6079

PRINCE procedures neologisms products project delivers

products

BS6079 techniques (e.g.

NPV, EVA) traditional

terminology activities ‘project’ includes

operation

Bob Hughes University of Brighton

10

Earned value analysisPhase

Module DesignEst

DesignActual

CodeEst

CodeActual

TestEst

TestAct.

A 10 15 20 20 10 n/a

B 10 10 15 17 12 n/a

C 20 late 31 late 18 n/a

EV

Est. tots2040

3566 40

%EV = 55/146* 100 i.e 37.7%

Bob Hughes University of Brighton

11

New paradigms: DSDMthe nine characteristics active user involvement development team empowerment frequent product delivery business fitness is key iterative/incremental development

Bob Hughes University of Brighton

12

DSDM characteristics - contd. All changes reversible requirement set at high level only testing integrated throughout life-cycle collaboration between stakeholders

Bob Hughes University of Brighton

13

project management implications of DSDM

control on products and requirements time-boxing: fixed time-scales - contrast

with critical chain need to manage and motivate user

involvement MORE management needed not less

Bob Hughes University of Brighton

14

Grady Booch

Projects can be driven primarily by– calendar– requirements– documentation– quality– architecture

Bob Hughes University of Brighton

15

DSDM and the Booch taxonomy RAD/DSDM seems to be essentially

– calendar driven i.e. ‘characterized by an obsessive focus on schedule’

Risks with calendar driven approach– chaotic development methods– lack of ‘business sustainability’ (e.g.

scaleability, extensibility etc.)– long-term stress and demotivation

Bob Hughes University of Brighton

16

DSDM and Booch contd.

RAD/DSDM also seems to be requirements driven - ‘rigid focus on the system’s outwardly observable behaviour’

Risks– lack of motivation to deal with sustainabilty– architecture: large number of independent

functional components

Bob Hughes University of Brighton

17

Requirements vs architecture drivenSystem functions

Common infrastructureCommon infrastructure

System functions

Bob Hughes University of Brighton

18

Booch’s five habits of good OO projects

ruthless focus on providing essential minimum requirements

focus on results effective use of OO modelling strong architectural vision well-managed iterative/incremental

development life cycle

Bob Hughes University of Brighton

19

Effect of alternative paradigms

RAD/DSDM - iterations - how do we control them?Still need management milestones

Hide it withinprocess

Or make each iterationa project

Bob Hughes University of Brighton

20

Note also

Effect on metrics - different units of software

Reuse - being decoupled from OO

Bob Hughes University of Brighton

21

The dispersed project - Situational factors e.g. common/different organizations central/dispersed authority criticality motivation common culture ease of communication language shared resources incl. data

Bob Hughes University of Brighton

22

Freedom/constraint cycleFREEDOM

CONSTRAINT

orientation

trust building

goal setting

commitment

implementation

highperformance

renewal

Same tim

e/place

Same tim

e

Diff

eren

t tim

e/pl

ace

Same

time

/pla

ce

Bob Hughes University of Brighton

23

Future developments? Synergies with CSCW? Limits to project management?

experiments projects routines

analogies case-basedreasoning

parametricmodels