by clicking the arrows at the side of the page, or by using the toolbar.
by clicking anywhere on the page.
by dragging the page around when zoomed in.
by clicking anywhere on the page when zoomed in.
web sites or send emails by clicking on hyperlinks.
Email this page to a friend
Search this issue
Index - jump to page or section
Archive - view past issues
Project Manager : June July 2011
Project Manager 32 • HISTORY management tools and techniques previously developed, particularly those relating to pro ject planning , scheduling and control. Morris states that Cost/Scheduling Control System Criteria (C/SCSC) took over from PERT and PERT/Cost as the primar y project control tool in both the DoD and NASA. DoD also placed increased emphasis on the ‘front end’ of projects, which led to the establishment of a new milestone in the acquisition process – Milestone 0. This included approval of the ‘mission element need statement’ and authorisation to proceed to concept exploration. Construction management In 1970 the influential US General Services Administration (GSA) published a report endorsing the construction management approach (which had already become increasingly used). Morris gives the example of the World Trade Centre in New York , where the construction manager used classic project management tasks of preparation of budgets and detailed schedules, coordination of design work and use of value engineering to get better design value for money, assistance with procurement, progress supervision and change control. Environmental factors In the USA, public concerns about the environment helped prompt passage of the National Environmental Act in 1970. The Trans Alaskan Pipeline System (TAPS) was seriously impacted by this Act. Morris noted that the US Supersonic Transport program (US SST), which had been announced in 1963, was abandoned in 1971, partly through failure to read the environmental threat and political consequences. It was becoming increasingly important for so many projects to look beyond the project itself and to take account of any and all external factors that might impinge on the project. Failed or sub-standard projects As already noted, the TAPS and US SST were prominent in this category. Later in the decade, nuclear power plant projects in the USA were running into trouble, with vast over-r uns and cancellations. Morris attributes this to a combination of difficulties in bringing such a complex technology from R&D to commercialisation, lack of sensitivity to risks involved, a series of mistakes and technical problems, public opposition and increasingly poor financial viability of these projects. References Cleland, David I & William R King 1968. Systems Analysis and Project Management Hovey, Bruce 2010. History of the Project Managers Forum leading to the formation of the Australian Institute of Project Management Kerzner, Harold 1979. Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling and Controlling Morris, Peter W G 1994. The Management of Projects Stretton, Alan 2010. ‘ Systems’ and project management’; PM World Today Snyder, James R 1987. ‘ Modern Project Management: How Did We Get Here - Where Do We Go?’; Project Management Journal When the National Environmental Act was passed in 1970, the Trans Alaskan Pipeline System project was seriously impacted Industry organisations prosper The two project management associations formed in the 1960s, Europe’s International Project Management Association (IPMA) and North America’s Project Management Institute (PMI) prospered in the 1970s. In PMI, there were increasing discussions about professional recognition, as Snyder notes: “In the 1970s, the writings on project management took two significant new directions. We might call this period one of ‘applications’ and ‘professional recognition’. New names joined the list as a wide variety of applications surfaced. “These people were writing the ‘how to’ of the project management business. Experience was beginning to replace ideas. Results were starting to reinforce concepts.” In 1976, the Project Managers Forum (PMF) was formed in Australia. Initial activities centred on NSW, but interest in project management was so extensive that PMF soon became a national body, with Chapters in Qld, NSW, ACT, Vic and SA. There was a strong building/construction orientation initially, but this was slowly diluted in time. Preoccupation with network planning techniques gave way to the broader perspective that planning and control constitute only a part of the total project management task. «EXPERIENCE WAS BEGINNING TO REPLACE IDEAS. RESULTS WERE STARTING TO REINFORCE CONCEPTS»
April May 2011
Project Manager Aug Sep 2011