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 : Project Manager Oct Nov 2011
30 Project Manager • HIsTorY Shenhar’s paper reflected the results of four years of ongoing field study, the purpose of which was to identify the differences among real-world projects; to investigate the contingencies that exist in the process of project management; and to develop a context-free, conceptual framework for the distinction among projects. Managing multiple projects Multi-projects (sometimes called programs or portfolios of projects) have been with us for a long time. However, they appear to have been managed simply as an aggregation of individual projects, rather than as an integrated whole in the nineties. Early examples included development of models concerned with the information-system needs of programs and new multi- project planning methods. Fangel identified a renewed focus in this area “from focusing on the management of each individual project, towards handling each project as an element in a network of projects and other activities in the corporation". More project strategic alliances Project-related strategic alliances could be seen as dating back to 1930, when a joint venture of six construction companies formed to build Boulder (later Hoover) Dam. Such joint ventures became common for construction of very large dams and other types of major construction projects, particularly in the USA. They were also used on major construction projects for the Snowy Mountains Authority in Australia. Strategic alliances of a somewhat different type became more popular. As Cleland & Ireland stated: “Companies today, facing unprecedented global competition, are finding it advantageous to cooperate with partners around the world to share resources, risks and rewards. These partnerships take the form of strategic alliances and are references 1. arCHIbald, r d & S lICHTeNberg (1992). ‘experiences using Next generation management practices: The future Has already begun!’. proceedings of the 11th INTerNeT World Congress 2. ClelaNd, david I (1990). ‘Simultaneous Verses Sequential processes in product manufacturing from Concept to Customer’. proceedings of the project management Institute Seminar/Symposium 3. ClelaNd david I & lewis r IrelaNd (2002). project management: Strategic design and implementation 4. ClelaNd david I & William r KINg. project management Handbook 5. faNgel, morten (1993). ‘T he broadening of project management’. International journal of project management 6. gabrIel, eric (1990). ‘T he future of project management - The New model’. proceedings of the 10th INTerNeT World Congress on project management 7. mOrrIS, peter W g (1994). The management of projects 8. SCHeINberg, mark V (1992). ‘planning of portfolio projects’. project management journal 9. SHeNHar, aaron j (1996). ‘project management Theory: The road to better practice’. proceedings of the 27th annual project management Institute Seminars & Symposium 10. SHeNHar, aaron j (1995). ‘a project is not a project is not a project: a contingent project management framework’. proceedings of the 26th annual project management Institute Seminars & Symposium 11. TurNer, j rodney (1993). The Handbook of project-based management 12. TurNer, j r & a SpeISer (1992). ‘programme management and its Information Systems requirements’. International journal of project management «coMPAnIes Are fIndIng It AdvAntAgeous to cooPerAte wIth PArtners Around the world» the creation of the internet and World Wide Web had a far-reaching impact on the project management community, particularly in communications and education. used for many purposes, such as sharing the design of products and processes, sharing manufacturing and marketing facilities, and sharing in the financial risks and rewards.” Professionalisation of project management Formal approval of the Australian Institute of Project Management (AIPM) Articles of Association occurred in 1992. AIPM developed its National Competency Standards for Project Management in 1996 and actively pursued the development of certification/ registration programs. In the UK, the Association for Project Management launched the first two editions of its body of knowledge (APMBoK) in 1992 and 1994, which formed the basis for its own certification program. Following the publication of these APMBoKs, several European countries, including Austria, France, Germany, the Netherlands and Switzerland, developed their own bodies of knowledge of project management. Europe’s International Project Management Association (IPMA) developed an IPMA Competence Baseline (ICB) in the late 1990s to provide a reference baseline for their member associations to develop their own National Competency Baselines (NCBs), and to ‘harmonise’ the existing European bodies of knowledge. The ICB formed a basis for assessment and certification at four nominated IPMA levels. In the US, PMI published a rewritten guide to the PMBOK in 1995. This formed part of the basis for qualifying for Project Management Professional (PMP) accreditation. At a more general level, advanced project management degree courses were becoming widely available in many countries. •••
Project Manager Aug Sep 2011
Project Manager Dec Jan 2012