Change and Project Management CPM – Collaborative Program Management Constituents of Project Management – CPM By Thomas Manning III
! Is it necessary to implement the best project model in accordance with your project goals and manage the contract through its life cycle by mitigating risks in advance through the essentials of contract indemnities that create a balance of risk while employing optimum dispute resolution to avoid losses that can be covered by the best insurance options1 Avoid unexpected disasters by managing your risks during the contract phase. It is the project/ purchasing manager responsibility to heavily weight contract terms toward his employer because international laws will NEVER meet the needs of how downside risks are allocated and can NOT be counted on!
!
I have worked multiple start-up joint venture interests on five continents and have studied multiple variables in process management to surmise that each property, unit, company and project has its own life cycle. I liken international project management to playing chess except that all the plays have to be arranged in advance. The project manager has more than one opponent, unlike chess, and they all have your complete schema before the first rook is ever moved. You start and have to then employ elements of ‘balance management’ to mitigate this preemptive disadvantage.
!
Some of the following theories have merit but I want to explain the differences, for the sake of argument, as to how they cross-reference each other in all forms of development, production, manufacturing, project management and process for ‘objective attainment’. There is a combination of methodologies and some software programs that manage the algorithmic definitions and variables of process management. The application, of these proven theories, is infrequently well managed by software because:
!
1) 2) 3) 4) 5)
!
Inherent limits to the amount of physical data one can input Programming language deficiencies Limitations of actual programmers Programmers understanding of the business principles Computational outputs are absolutely relegated by user input
This is could be understood by the difficulties of programming a machine to walk upright which is a simple task for us.
!
Six-Sigma2 defines its core concepts as: (3.4 DPMO – defect per million opportunity – (Parento Diag.- 20% of sources causes 80% of problems)).
!
DMAIC – Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve and Control (this, in my opinion is weak as control is a practical fallacy in project management or process deliverables). The 6-sigma definition of control is defined as a state of stability. DMADV – Define, Measure, Analyze, Design, Verify (good for architecture but weak on delivery) I personally prefer, DMEDI – Define, Measure/Manage, Explore, Develop and Implement
! Prince2 management methodology has 45 sub-processes summarized as: !
Starting, Planning, Initiating, Directing, Controlling a Stage, Managing Product Delivery, Managing Stage Boundaries, and Closing a Project (functional)
! MS Project 4.1, 98, 2000, 2002 – antiquated algorithms: !
Microsoft admits that the program does not deliver, even Project2002, and is not totally functional, fancy GUI interface over old process management technology
! Scitor software: !
I am told that it has 5% market and it uses Critical Change Project Management - CCPM as an afterthought but is good overall at traditional project management methodologies
! Prochain Solutions: Best reviews for CCPM !
Critical Chain Project Management protocols software. Prochain has great tech support and an interface add-in for MS project that interacts seamlessly with database, tools, reports and menu functions.
!
CCPM6 – Critical Change Project Management – 10-50% faster and/or cheaper than PERT/CPM Gantt and 95% on-time and on-budget and was developed in 1997 CCPM allows for the weakest link that can be the slowest part of the process. If it is not possible to shore up that weakest link and it fails, you protect it with additional buffers of time or resources so that it will work at its capacity without being stressed. When you put the buffers at the end and maintain a normal pace for the project, people are more likely to make their estimates. This way you can keep reviewing the critical paths to make sure they are being worked continuously. CCPM does not assume that a supervisor estimates the tasks, but that an individual plans their tasks in clock time, assuming there are no interruptions and that the padding will be added on at the end of all the tasks. •
Use the most probable task durations; typically half as long as what is traditionally used.
•
Accumulate the safety time into a few manageable Buffers that project managers and Senior management can watch very closely
•
Minimize or eliminate the multi-tasking which consumes up to 60% of the project time
Reality in Project Schedules
!
The following image explains how a 3 week duration task grows into a 10 week task duration estimate that gets used in traditional project management schedules. With CCPM, the best possible (but fair & realistic) task estimate of 3 weeks gets used in the schedule. People realize it's very tight, but possible, and have a healthy level of anxiety. Project team members work hard & fast to achieve the goals. The overall CCPM schedule keeps 3 weeks for the task, plus 3 weeks of safety time (to be shared by this task, as well as all other tasks). CCPM quickly and easily reports who is using up the safety time, and asks the question, WHY? Social pressure of the project team causes everybody to conserve overall safety time, rather than using more than their "fair share" of the overall safety time. The end result is the project task gets done on-time and on-budget.
Critical Chain Project Management (CCPM) allows your project plan to match the reality of how people work. Classical project management assumes everyone will exactly follow the formally defined schedule. Reality is adjusted for by the use of excessive supervision, pressure, expediters, excessive co-ordination meetings, re-baselining, pleading, scope reduction, feast & famine activity levels, overtime, etc. People are not robots who tirelessly do everything right, exactly when they are supposed to. Not even robots do that! We all know that: •
People get bored at mundane tasks.
•
They get overwhelmed by too much information given too quickly.
•
People get nervous & frustrated when everything seems to be changing, especially when it occurs rapidly or continuously
•
People have personal priorities ("pet projects" & private agendas)
•
People tend to do what they like doing, before they do what they have to do.
•
Each person does certain tasks very well, and others they shy away from.
•
Most people tend to be optimists, and assume things will go better than they really do.
CCPM doesn't demand people to be "perfect little robots" in order to work together effectively. Instead, it assumes that people are human, with strengths and weaknesses. CCPM supports the people by adding strength where people need help, and allowing people freedom to create and work in areas where they naturally excel. CCPM provides the strong structure that people and organizations need, while permitting the flexibility and individualism that we all want. CCPM is simultaneously strong and flexible. Instead of thousands of tasks and micro-management that traditional project management methods use, CCPM lets us define and effectively manage the most complex project with 300 tasks (or less). CPM – Collaborative Program Management in where a dynamic process model permeates approved changes conditionally throughout a project which are then relegated against future projects (project versus program management).3
!
All of these off-the-shelf driven management tools are based on methodologies that are great for documentation, planning, collaboration, meetings, corporate governance and reporting. Project Management is better employed through flexible administration of management experience with Engineering advisors, not an Adcock software committee applying venerable cross-spectrum adjustments.
!
Technology has been a great example of uncontrolled growth through mutation from its genesis. This is truly cancerous and a resource parasite! “Beware of failed technology – it exists everywhere and is being peddled to your piers!” We all have had to rely on the laurels of software program and technology development. Was the technology BOOM methodically planned through CPM, CCPM, etc,, or did the opportunistic “human element” infect the platform of these programs from their birth? I’d say, “The latter”.
! A Case in Point: Fishmonger.com !
I was enticed to an equity position at a DOT.com called Fishmonger in 1999. Fishmonger was intended to bring the 352 billion dollar fishing industry together in matrimony of ecommerce bliss. I worked with a large team of IBM custom software developers to maximize flexibility in disparate system integration supporting supplier and consumer systems integration for e-service solutions as Director of Business Development. Sounded great then the cancer set in…The founder of the portal, Tom Poole, informed me that we were so well funded that we did not have to turn a profit for 4 or 5 years. The biggest problem had just rained down as we were not going to manage by committee and our top gun was a regal fat-cat.
!
I backlogged the group 6 months with business development in the first 6 weeks and worked on changing the “fat cat” mentality. Our impending competition, GoFish, was funded 5 times over Fishmonger and the race was on. Another reason the portal did not stick is because the IBM consultants were a hodge-podge of inexperienced junior programmers as IBM’s resources were stretched at that time. Also, they were reinventing the wheel as there were already ERP systems that could have served as the base for portal platform.
!
There was technology available that existed as an actual hardware appliance for disparate systems integration called Commerceroute. This hardware appliance was the first Application Service Provider (ASP) available that allowed digital companies to connect business partners and customers. The appliance allowed trading partners to quickly establish electronic relationships regardless of size, geographical location or IT systems. It extended the benefits of integration and connectivity by reducing the cost and time-to-market advantages. All Digital Markets were challenged with critical obstacles - consolidating their multiple trading partners, linking various protocols, and connecting isolated applications. This integration appliance enabled businesses to quickly and seamlessly weave together front-office, back-office, CRM, ERP and supply chain systems both within and beyond their organizations. The Appliance translated XML and HTML documents, flat files, X12 and other EDI protocols, and a range of popular relational databases. This system was too late in the game for our group.
!
It was presented to Washington Mutual (WAMU) that was contending with dozens of acquisitions and at that time WAMU was 10’s of millions of dollars into custom
programming for systems integration. The CIO and project managers were too afraid to abandon their efforts to be replaced with a simple six figure solution. Either way a group can be infected from the top-down or in the WAMU case the middle –up. Commerceroute is now available through Intel online services and is a remarkable tool that has unlimited application.
!
I departed after Fishmonger merged with Worldcatch Inc. and when my shares were vested.
! Part II: ! Constituents of Project Management (my own personal version of CPM) !
!
1) Contract integrity and balance through preemptive definition of resource dependencies and terminal elements. 2) Dissuasion of Multi-tasking 3) Equilibrium through balance management 4) Sensitivity toward the human element (intolerance of obstinacy) 5) Maximize project performance
(CDESM – thankfully means nothing (there needs to be a moratorium on pesky acrimonious acronyms!))
!
Deployment of process command and management: Real-time react-ability…….
!
I prefer prince2 methodology – I have never used the software but like the premise of its defining structure: Starting, Planning, Initiating, Directing, Controlling a Stage, Managing Product Delivery, Managing Stage Boundaries, and Closing a Project
!
Response deployment of synchronized reactivity throughout a project scope avoids unpredictable cross-project risks – real-time react-ability. This is totally reliant on the experience behind the thinking that is applied to a situation and the manager’s comprehension of the variables of the environment in which it takes place – real-time rational react-ability and responsibility.
! Case in point: Commercial Fishing Examples !
I fired an Operations Manager for purchasing 10,000 lbs. of weight chain. The req. was under his authorized limit of $25,000 but the vendor was in Norway and it was priority air freighted to USA. He was reacting to the need and did not comprehend the variables and costs associated with his purchase – he only cared that it was a need and it was under his limit.
!
The subsequent Operations Manager purchased 2 used pumps for $25,000 each and I knew that these were purchased for $5,000, painted and delivered from a scrap yard and an unscrupulous vendor. It cost $17,000 to rebuild them and he was fired as well for corruption (although, it was under his transactional limit).
!
The following Operations Manager was told these examples of what not-to-do and had all of his procurement needs satisfied by the actual purchasing department. A post-work settlement of sub-contractor work was reviewed showing he had signed off on $128,000 worth of welding job work orders for 4 separate factories – it concluded that some of several employees from that sub-contracting group had been working intermittently over 30 hours total ‘in one day’ at multiple locations at the same time. I short paid, sanctioned the vendor and fired this other Operations Manager.
!
I abolished that position and assigned the responsibilities to the engineering department professionals giving to them 2 of the ops assistants. I later reassigned and trained the remaining ops assistants for purchasing and operations support.
!
This proves that guidelines and limits do little to prevent. They are just guidelines, not that operations managers should come from purchasing or that engineers are more responsible.
!
Idiot Factor – I.F. – IF I only had a brain – The Oiler did it! (Maritime engineering assistant):
!
We finished a shipyard in Korea in 1997 of one of 11 Super-Trawlers under my management. Super-Trawlers are 365ft., 9,600HP, 150+crew, 600 MT production capacity/day, very large catcher/processor fishing boats. The main engine overhaul was finished, turbocharger rebuilt, shaft generator rewind complete and installed, nets mended, vessel supplies backloaded, crew ready, refueled as the last boat readied to leave after nominal sea-trial and DNV certification. The 16 cylinder high-compression, low-rev Wärtsilä engine turned over and ran well for several minutes before all hell broke loose. A very large SS fastening bolt, within the engine block, scarred and scored multiple cylinder liners in this freshly rebuilt engine as it made its way through to where it vaporized the impending turbo unit operating at full load and 16,000 RPM. The Oiler had been working with the Chief Engineer when he dropped a fastening bolt behind one of the fuel injectors before it was dogged into place. He was afraid he would get into trouble if he was the cause of a delay by admitting his mistake, not understanding the consequences. The Project Manager and Chief Engineer were terminated for lacking sensitivity toward the human element thus causing the accident.
!
This incident was willfully broadcast throughout our industry as a common example of the need for training that informs the collective that we all fail if not mindful of these project radicals that are easily thwarted through understanding and training of these elements of respect and responsibility.
!
“Variance is a constant free-floating project radical that undermines the best laid plans so, beware not weary”
!
This is why I prefer my own version of CPM point #4 (Constituents of Project Management) - Sensitivity toward the human element (intolerance of obstinacy). Although we incurred tremendous delay, I had purchased “loss of hire” insurance four months earlier which paid out @ $135,000/day for 23 days based on seasonal performance from the previous 2 years. Luckily this was a bad season start, late spawning, so we profited from the mistake (it was not incompetence it was obstinacy!). Contract integrity and balance through preemptive definition of resource dependencies and terminal elements is point #1 of my CPM interpretation. Insurance is a ‘terminal element!’
!
I have hundreds of positive achievements stories that lead our management team to save 20 million in the first 18 months with that group while reducing downtime 80% and increasing profitability 30% in three years but they are less relative to this exchange of ideas.
! Contract Integrity: !
CPM #1 - Contract integrity and balance through preemptive definition of resource dependencies and terminal elements
!
Resource dependencies are as crucial to project and process management as hemoglobin to blood cells. They include complicit definition of all elements of material management, machinery, technology, manpower, logistics, operations, money, security, environment, ecology, culture, hazards control4 and application with maximized project performance intent.
!
Even highly educated and accredited Project Managers are only ‘experienced works inprogress’
!
An unsuccessful process of project management is a death of that process unless the experience is effectively applied to future projects that eventually develop into a program of real-world application integration.
! Equilibrium through Balance Management – CPM #3 !
Balance Management is a process of leveling all aspects of resource dependency and terminal elements. Also, it is the collusion of physical, cultural and emotional essentials associated with the ‘human element’ and its physical relationship to progress and performance5 This can only be accomplished by providing a leadership role of integrated balance management sensitive to these profound differences in process and project management for individuals, let alone – cultures and levels of responsibility we all have toward maximizing project performance.
! Dissuasion of Multi-tasking – CPM #2 !
Bad multitasking is the dropping of work on one task before it is finished in order to start another, only to stop and begin yet another task or go back to a previous task. All too often, people aren’t able to complete a task without getting pulled off onto something else, so “task time” grows each time a change is necessary. CCPM wants you to see that the majority of task completion time is not used for the actual work, but is waiting or queue time. Tasks ready to be worked on cannot be worked on because there is no available resource. If the estimates are too long, during execution the actual time will grow even longer! No wonder projects consistently finish late and over budget. CPM; Constituents of Project Management – has consistently tipped the balance for my large industrial and mining projects to beat on-time and on-budget objectives. Contract integrity and balance through preemptive definition of resource dependencies and terminal element AND Dissuasion of Multi-tasking WITH Equilibrium through Balance Management AND Sensitivity toward the human element (intolerance of obstinacy) IN ORDER TO Maximize project performance; has worked for me while being open minded and available to seek better ways to achieve our common goals collectively!
!
1 Circumstance of international project management leads project managers to entrée into risk assessment that should
always be delivered to lawyers (not attained by lawyers) and therein opts for best insurance models for the project. Force majeure, loss of hire, etceteras are normal but, there is always possibility for subrogation actions against negligent parties in spite of one’s status as insured. Attain a best option without spending too much time on contingent variables. Project competence and diligence prevails over any insurance policy. 2 In use by Honeywell, BofA, Raytheon, GE, Motorola developed it but are these companies have an inherent disadvantage
in size by being awash in redundancies. 3Corporate Performance Management, Certified Purchasing Manager, Caja Popular Mexicana, College Prep. Mathematics, Christian Prayer Ministries are all real acronymic renditions of CPM but will not help much when you are supplying a mine project in central Russia 4Control is a terminal element in relation to hazards only and is the only CONTROL element in project management. All
hazards and safety concerns must be controlled as a primary priority 5There are strong cultural differences between people of the same ethnic group. Whether this is socioeconomic, religious,
educational is less relevant than the process of integrated balance management for project integrity 6Diagram and some CCPM information taken from pqa.net
! ! ! !