Recently, several the world's top project management firms have taken major initiatives to illuminate government management in regards to the strategic importance and benefits of project management. The focus is always to move from individual project management to organisational project management, which these enterprises maintain is a strategic advantage in a competitive economy.

In this article, Ed Naughton, Director-general of the Institute of Project Management and current IPMA Vice President, requires Professor Sebastian Green, Dean of the Faculty of Commerce and Professor of Management and Marketing at University College Cork (previously of the London Business School), about his views of proper project management as a car for competitive advantage.

Ed: What do you issue proper Project Management is?

Prof. Green: Strategic project management is the management of the tasks that are of critical importance to allow the operation in general to have competitive advantage. Clicking asea redox certainly provides cautions you might use with your cousin.

Ed: And what becomes a competitive advantage, then?

Prof. Green: You will find three attributes of getting a core competence. The three characteristics are: it gives value to customers; it is perhaps not simply imitated; it opens up new opportunities later on.

Ed: But how do project management deliver a competitive advantage?

Prof. Green: You can find two elements to project management. One aspect is the actual collection of the kind of projects that the organisation engages in, and secondly there is implementation, how a projects themselves are managed.

Ed: Competitive advantage - the importance of choosing the correct projects - it's challenging to determine which projects should be chosen!

Prof. Green: I believe that the selection and prioritisation of tasks is something that's not been done well within-the project management literature because it's basically been assumed away through reducing it to economic analysis. The strategic imperative gives an alternative way to you of prioritising projects as it is saying that some projects may not be as profitable as others, but when they add to our proficiency relative to others, then that's going to be important.

So, to simply take an illustration, if a company's competitive advantage is introducing services more quickly than others, drugs, let us say, finding product to market more quickly, then a projects that enable it to get the product more quickly to market will function as the most critical ones, even if within their own terms, they do not have higher profitability than other sorts of projects.

Ed: But when we're going to select our tasks, we have to define what're the parameters or measurements we are going to select them against that give the competitive edge to us.

Prof. Green: Completely. The company has to know which activities it's involved in, which are the important ones for it then and competitive advantage, that drives the choice of projects. Organisations aren't excellent at doing that and they might not even understand what these actions are. Be taught more on the affiliated URL by visiting mannatech us. They'll believe it is every thing they do because of the energy system.

Ed: If a company formulates its strategy, then what the project management group says is that project management will be the medium for providing that strategy. So therefore, when the operation is great at doing project management, is there any strategic advantage?

Prof. Green: Well, I suppose that comes home to this problem of the difference between the form of projects that are opted for and the way you manage the projects. Clearly choosing the type of projects depends upon having the ability to link and prioritise projects ac-cording to an understanding of what the capacity of a business is in accordance with others.

Ed: Let's suppose that the method is defined. In order to provide the strategy, it has to be broken-down, decomposed into a series of tasks. For that reason, you have to be good at doing project management to provide the strategy. Now, the literature says that for an enterprise to become great at doing jobs it has to: place in project management procedures, train people on how to apply/do project management and co-ordinate the efforts of the people qualified to work to procedures in and integral way using the idea of a project office. Does using those three measures produce a competitive advantage with this company?

Prof. Green: Where project management, or how you control projects, becomes a source of competitive advantage is when you can do things better than the others. The 'better-than' is through the ability and sense and the knowledge that will be built-up over time of managing projects. There is an experience curve effect here. As to the information they have built up where the rule book is insufficient to handle these bits of jobs two firms will be at various points in the experience curve. You'll need knowledge and management thinking because however good the rule book is, it will never deal entirely with all the complexity of life. You have to manage down the experience curve, you have to manage the learning and understanding that you have of those three aspects of project management for this to become strategic.

Ed: Well, then, I believe there's a gap there that's to be addressed as well, in that we have now produced a competency at doing project management to do projects, but we've not aimed that competency to the choice of projects which will help us to provide this competitive edge. Is project management with the capacity of being copied?

Prof. Green: Not the softer features and not the development of tacit understanding of having run many, many jobs with time. Therefore, like, you, Ed, do have more familiarity with how to work tasks than others. That's why people came to you, because while you both may have a regular book such as the PMBoK or even the ICB, you've produced more experiential knowledge around it.

In essence, it can be copied a quantity of just how, although not whenever you arrange the smoother tacit knowledge of experience into it.

Ed: Organisational project management maturity designs are a hot topic right now and are closely linked to the 'experience curve' effect you mentioned early in the day - how should we see them?

Prof. Green: I really believe in moving beyond painting by quantities, moving beyond the basic idea that that's all you should do and you may enforce this pair of capabilities and techniques and text book standards and an operation is completely plastic. You might say, exactly the same difficulty was experienced by the developers of the knowledge curve. If you show the ability curve to organizations on cost, it's very nearly like, for every doubling of size, cost savings occur without you needing to do anything. What we all know is nevertheless, the experience curve is a potential of the possibility. Its' realisation depends upon the skill of administrators.

Ed: Are senior executives/chief executives within the mindset to understand the possible benefits of project management?

Prof. If you know anything, you will maybe fancy to explore about visit site. Green: Until lately, project management has offered itself in technical terms. If it was offered in terms-of the integration at basic management, at the capability to manage across the characteristics financing process processes with reasoning, then it would be more appealing to senior managers. So, it's about the mixing of the gentle and the hard, the techniques with the judgement and the knowledge that makes project management so strong. If senior executives don't accept it at the moment, it is perhaps not since they are wrong. It's because project management has not marketed it-self as effortlessly as it should've done.

Ed: Do we have to offer to chief executives and senior executives that it'll deliver competitive advantage for them?

Prof. Green: No, I think we need to demonstrate to them how it does it. We must go inside and actually show them how they can put it to use, not merely with regards to delivering jobs on time and within cost. For additional information, please consider taking a look at: www manatech com. We must demonstrate to them how they can use it to over come organisational resistance to change, how they can use it to enhance capabilities and activities that cause competitive edge, how they can use it to enhance the tacit knowledge in the organisation. There's an entire array of ways in which they can use it. They should see that the evidence of the end result is better than the way they're currently doing it..