In the past, we wrote a series of posts and recorded videos on project scheduling, including rolling wave planning. Further, in our main book on CAMMP, Project Management beyond Waterfall and Agile, we also addressed planning in general. In the book, we stressed the need to think, act, and manage at the project level and at the stage level. Today, we have received a request, from a professional who is taking one of the SUKAD PM Quest online courses. The learner’s question triggered this post.Continue reading
This post started out as a video but we are expanding on that. We are including the video in this post. We also include the transcripts but modified to make it appropriate for written text and will include additional notes on points or clarifications that were not mentioned in the video. The key question that we are addressing today is: Is political correctness skewing the purpose of the monitoring and controlling processes? Continue reading
At times, our clients ask us how do we compare the SUKAD CAMMP Model with other methods or guides. The quick answer is in this image. Continue reading
Once again, what is the project life cycle?
Why this question?
Because it is our belief that the most common misunderstanding in project management today, especially among those who follow PMI and learned project management through the PMBOK Guide. Notice, we used the term misunderstanding because Continue reading
It is quite common nowadays the use of social media to network, share knowledge, and learn. Project management is one of those domains that we also use social media for.
It is also common to find many groups on social media sites dedicated to project management, especially those sites advocating the PMP certifications and posting questions daily or hourly.
What are some of the issues, challenges, problems, and opportunities that we see with such groups? Continue reading
We realize that we discuss this topic often, and others do as well on various online platforms and social media sites. Yet, we continue to see PMPs, PMI Registered Education Providers (REP), “PMP Instructors” confuse this concept and think that the process groups are project phases.
Even when they say they are not the same, once we go into applying the concept, they fall into the trap of “Planning Phase” and “Execution Phase”. Continue reading
The following post is part of a chapter in our upcoming book on The Customizable and Adaptable Methodology for Managing Projects™ (CAMMP™). This section presents a possible scenario on taking a project from idea to closure following the CAMMP Project Life Cycle, which integrates the process groups of PMI / ISO.
Establishing an OPM System for Foreign Ministry
Let us assume the organization is the ministry of foreign affairs for a given government. The project is about building a sustainable Organizational Project Management System. This OPM System will be implemented in the home country across the various divisions and globally for any projects led by the various embassies, such as ‘aid’ projects.
As the new minister take charge after a government reshuffle, she recognized that the ministry has numerous projects all over the world, but the reports on these projects were entirely different.
The reports did not have consistency in term of format and content. Further, it was not clear where do these projects stand or how they were performing. After, further investigation, she found out that the ministry did not have a standardized process for managing projects and programs. Since the minister came from a project management background, she asked one of the ministry’s senior staff to draft the Project Brief for building a comprehensive and sustainable Organizational Project Management System, as was described earlier. She approved the Project Brief and appointed a project sponsor to lead the effort.
The sponsor implemented the ‘select project manager’ process (Chapter 29), which led to hiring an expert project manager that is certified in the CAMMP™ Model. The sponsor authorized the project manager to lead the project but starting with the feasibility study. The sponsor also set the success criteria for the stage.
Since the project manager has the authorization (a feasibility stage charter), the next step was to mobilize a project management team to help him develop the Stage Management Plan. At this stage a couple of people could have been enough, a senior planner and a deputy project manager with experience in the ministry type of work. To develop the Stage Management Plan, the project manager followed the maangement planning processes in Chapter 29 (Table 5), which includes all of the processes necessary to manage the stage work.
Once the Stage Management Plan is complete, the project manager mobilized a team of lead experts from the various divisions within the ministry; these would include senior professionals from strategic planning, planning and budgeting, facilities, international affairs, information technology, human resource, sustainability, health and safety, among others. This team with senior professionals developed the Stage Detailed Plan – for the feasibility study, only. The Stage Detailed Plan includes all of the detailed planning processes of Chapter 29 (Table 6), such as the comprehensive scope, cost and schedule estimates for the feasibility stage, the resource requirements, defined the applicable quality standards, identified and analyzed the stage risks and developed response strategies.
Next, it is time for the project team to conduct the feasibility study, which would consider the various factors addressed in Chapter 18. The team also shall follow the processes from Table 7, Chapter 29.
Throughout this study, the project management team monitored and controlled the stage work to ensure that the team did not lose focus and were not doing more than required or less than it is needed. The controlling processes were defined via Table 8, Chapter 29.
Once the feasibility study is complete, it is time for a stage gate and the sponsor approval.
After consulting with the minister, the project was approved, and the sponsor issued the Project Authorization Document. The minister approval was the first approval point; refer to the next chapter. With this approval, it was time to close the stage with the aid of Table 9 processes.
It would be valuable to reflect for a moment.
Except for the feasibility study itself, all of the work, such as the Stage Management Plan and Stage Detailed Plan were peculiar to the stage; estimates for the stage; risk for the stage; procurement for the stage; quality for the stage. This approach represents thinking (and working) at the stage level.
Let’s shift focus to thinking on the project level; the feasibility study was about the project. Part of this study were cost and schedule estimates, these were for the project, Class 1 Estimate, as will be discussed in Chapter 37. The study also includes the sustainability considerations, risk, and other factors. All of these actions focus on the project. All of the feasibility considerations will lead to the final recommendation for management decision.
Development Phase – Requirements Stage
The project authorization document approved this stage, and unless something is out of the norm, that authorization is enough to start the stage work.
The next step would be for the project manager to develop the Stage Management Plan. It might be necessary to add staff to the project management team but not necessarily. Same as before, this plan is unique to the stage – only. It includes all of the relevant processes.
From SMP the team will continue work to develop the Stage Detailed Plan. Same story, the SDP is focused on the requirements stage, and it is based on all of the relevant processes.
With the SDP completed, the project manager will mobilize the necessary team members that will conduct (implement) the stage’s main scope, which is to develop the project requirements document per the implementing processes.
Obviously, control is throughout the stage and stage closure once all is acceptable.
Once again, the process groups and their applicable processes would be specific to the stage whereas the requirements document focus is on the project. At the stage gate, management would be concerned with the project requirements document and that it complies with the project authorization; this is a control function on the project level.
The Rest of the stages
Per the previous text, the project manager will continue to lead the project to completion and delivering success. Note the following:
- Along the project life, the project manager could have been changed and maybe more than once. Although this is not preferred, it might be necessary.
- The project management team will consist of a couple of members early on but later it could grow, reaching a peak during definition and implementation stages. This team includes planners and schedulers, cost specialists, procurement personnel, among others.
- The technical team is multiple teams. The leads may be the same throughout the project, but the staff conducting the feasibility study are likely different than those developing the definition package or implementing the work.
- An operational readiness team should be working early to maintain the communication in the organization about the change and champion the initiative. This team will also be identifying the various steps for the handover and operating the product of the project. This team could become the project management office for the ministry in the long run.
- Initial operations can be utilized for this project with the implementation of the new system in one division in the home country before roll out in other divisions and globally.
- Repeating, the process groups and their applicable processes would apply at every stage.
This will be a very short post and maybe more on the light side
Technically, in the new sixth edition of the PMBOK Guide, per the exposure draft, there are only four process groups not five.
Well – let us agree first on the definition of a group. Would you agree that a group of something (gadgets) means there is more than one gadget? At least two gadgets are necessary to form a group?
Do you agree?
If you agree – then back to PMBOK Guide.
The closing process groups consist currently of two processes (per the 5th edition). There is a close procurement process and close project or phase process. For some reason, the 6th edition combined these two processes. This subtle change results in having only ONE closing process. In that case – there closing process group consists of one process —– which means it is no longer a group.
Consequently, if the 6th edition kept this situation, then we will have four process groups and one closing process.
I hate to be an academic sometime – but unless for old-time sake we keep using the term “closing process group” then PMI needs to inform Webster or Oxford dictionary to change the definition of a “group” to means: a group is a collection of 2 or more ‘gadgets’ except for PMI it could be one. 🙂 🙂
Over the years, the PMBOK Guide has the ANSI stamp on the cover, giving the impression that the whole guide is an ANSI Standard. However, inside the guide, one can find a mention that the ANSI Standard was part of Chapter 3 in the 3rd and 4th edition of the guide and an Annex in the 5th edition. Yet, people missed this point.
I struggled with writing or starting this blog since I honestly did not know what to say. Is “I told you so” appropriate? Is it good that some of the PMI volunteers are finally waking up, appropriate? Continue reading