This post is an audio presentation of what is the CAMMP™ Model. Further, the focus is on why organizations should consider and adopt a project management method, like the CAMMP™ Model. Continue reading
The following is another image, from another chapter in our recent book, #Project Management beyond #Waterfall and #Agile (https://goo.gl/hFYoHQ). It is about the SUKAD Seven Elements of Project Management Maturity, which is the model we use to help organizations build their OPMS, Organizational Project Management System. Continue reading
In numerous discussions online, even in guides like the PMBOK Guide, there is so much focus on the project rather than the organization and on the project manager rather than organizational project management.
What I mean is Continue reading
How does CAMMP™ compare to global resources, frameworks, or methods? How does CAMMP™ compare to the PMBOK® Guide, ISO 21500, or PRINCE2? Continue reading
Years ago, I started leading project management workshops inside the companies I worked for. I remember my first course, back in the mid-1990’s was on the steps of project control and I delivered to our engineers and construction professionals (our employees and the employees of the general contractor).
Then Continue reading
How does CAMMP™, The Customizable and Adaptable Methodology for Managing Projects™, compares to global guides like ISO 21500 and PMBOK Guide?
The following table summarizes the differences Continue reading
Well, it has been roughly two weeks since the new PMBOK Guide, Sixth Edition is out and the online community is flooded with posts on this topic. Some posts go through extensive details even comparing page count on a chapter by chapter basis.
As someone who has been using the PMBOK Guide, since the first consolidated edition in 1996, and who have learned project management pre-PMBOK Guide, we have a few posts on the subject as well.
Today’s post, the 5th in the series, is about tailoring. What does tailoring refer to in the new guide? Read on: Continue reading
This post is extracted from a chapter in our upcoming book on Project Management with the title, Project Management beyond Waterfall and Agile. Continue reading
This blog post is extracted from Chapter 6 of our upcoming book, Project Management beyond Waterfall and Agile.
To summarize the relevant information from the earlier chapters, the current practice is:
The hypothesis of this book is that, despite the high value each professional association offers, there are still gaps in project management practice. Practitioners still struggle to apply what they learn in the real world, on real projects, and on different types and classes of projects.
In the world of projects and project management, certain fixed concepts apply regardless of industry or domain. Many variables are highly unique to the context of a given project.
Yes, organizations can use the IPMA’s ICB® and develop their methods using the competence elements.
Yes, organizations can use the process groups and subject groups from PMI/ISO to develop an internal methodological approach.
Some are doing so, but not enough!
In large organizations with abundant resources, their staff could explore the world of project management and choose what is best for their organizations from the available “menu” of options. Even in such organizations, one can find that they stick to one menu item, or one resource, for one reason or another.
While large organizations may limit their choices, small and medium organizations may not even have the luxury of selection. Consequently, they constrain their project management system—assuming they have one—and depend on the common sense of their accidental project managers. These organizations manage projects, or, more accurately, “execute” projects through accidental project managers, then wonder why the failure rate is so high. It is also possible
that these organizations think that they are delivering the project successfully; this might be so, but are they using clear criteria for measuring project success?
These practice gaps exist because organizations tend to box themselves into limited options. The gaps present us with opportunities to provide workable solutions. The fundamental principle of the offered solution revolves around integrating the best of what exists and offering it in a practical approach that can work for small or mega projects, regardless of domain, type, or class of project. Th is is a modest attempt to save organizations much research and development work.
What do you think?