Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byMaximilian Peters Modified over 9 years ago
1
Traditional Project Management
2
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
3
Its Place in the Great Scheme How To Get It Clearly Defined Not Clearly Defined What Is Needed? Clearly Defined TraditionalAdaptive Not Clearly Defined N/AExtreme from Wysocki 2003
4
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015 LOWHIGH Uncertainty HIGH Complexity LOW Adaptive Extreme Iterative Traditional (Linear, Incremental) Project Complexity vs. Project Environment & Appropriate Project Methodology (Wysocki, 2006) Software Development Project Approaches
5
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015 Not All Traditional Projects Are Alike Much depends on the nature of the project Risk: High, Medium, Low Business value: High, Medium, Low Duration: Short ( 6 months) Complexity: High, Medium, Low Technology: Unknown/New, some familiarity, Well known Proportion of organization affected (All, several depts, one dept.) Cost: $$$$$, $$$$, $$$, $$, $
6
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015 Different Project, Different Strokes Projects are diverse – so one approach will not be appropriate for all projects Too many approaches are unmanageable, and may not be really different Categorize projects – use elements of project management that fit the category’s parameters
7
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015 Project Categories High business value, high complexity, unfamiliar technology, high risk, long duration Medium business value, medium complexity, somewhat familiar technology, moderate risk, moderate duration Low business value, low complexity, familiar technology, low risk, moderate duration Low business value, very low complexity, familiar technology, very low risk, short duration
8
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015 Examples Network install Provide specified real-time business performance data to Top Executives Build a system to employ and profit from RFID tags in the supply chain
9
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015 Work one as a class… Network install… What do we need to consider… - Clearly Defined What / How - Complexity vs. Uncertainty - Criteria Method
10
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015 Class Exercise #1 Pick the appropriate Methodology for a project that provides specified real-time business performance data to Top Executives
11
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015 Class Exercise #2 Pick the appropriate Methodology for a project that is to build a new system to employ and profit from RFID tags in the supply chain
12
Traditional PM & Waterfall Model Scope Plan Launch Idea Requirements gathering (analysis) COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
13
Traditional PM & Waterfall Model Monitor and Control Systems design Detailed design Code and Test Systems Test Deploy Close COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
14
Issues The project manager has to manage several aspects of the project Quality Management: Process feedback Procurement Management: Acquire resources through RFP, RFQ Risk Management: Procedures in place for riskiest parts of the project
15
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015 Jack Neift Trucking Company Go through the On-Line interactive case Read through the case Review Complexity vs. Uncertainty Classify the project!
16
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015 Where does Jack Neift Trucking’s Project fit? How To Get It Clearly Defined Not Clearly Defined What Is Needed? Clearly Defined TraditionalAdaptive Not Clearly Defined N/AExtreme from Wysocki 2003
17
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015 LOWHIGH Uncertainty HIGH Complexity LOW Adaptive Extreme Iterative Traditional (Linear, Incremental) Jack Neift Trucking’s Project Complexity vs. Uncertainty? Software Development Project Approaches
18
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015 Where does Jack Neift Project fit? Evaluate in teams each of these criteria for Jack Neift’s CASE problem: Risk: High, Medium, Low Business value: High, Medium, Low Duration: Short ( 6 months) Complexity: High, Medium, Low Technology: Unknown/New, some familiarity, Well known Proportion of organization affected (All, several depts, one dept.) Cost: $$$$$, $$$$, $$$, $$, $
19
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015 Next time Iterative and Adaptive methods
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.