Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Up::1
Shree Lakshmi joined one of our recent meetings to discuss her PhD research and the software being developed for project visualisation.
Shree has asked us to post the link below, to her PhD survey of risk tools used in complex projects. I am sure she will appreciate people completing the survey.
Hi Richard,
Up::1Thanks for suggesting iThink, Davin.
It remind me that there was a time where I used systems dynamics modelling tools (such as iThink, and Powersim) as a consultant – to simulate complex organisational systems. I haven’t done that for quite a few years now.
An example that comes to mind is a training system for Navy apprentices, for high-tech jobs such as sonar technicians in submarines. There are many challenges in training small numbers of highly skilled people where the training takes years of development. If you only have 20 or 30 roles needing those skills, how many need to be trained to allow for people leaving, failing the training etc? What happens to that training pipeline if there is a sudden change because the Navy buys more submarines? Training these people is very expensive – how does that change the decsions that need to be made.Do others have experiences with dynamic modelling of complex human systems? I’ll add “Dynamic Simulation Tools” into our group conversation.Dr Richard BarberUp::2In the meeting today we discussed the dynamics holding the PM profession in ‘traditional thinking’ and practice. Attached is an unpublishedpaper I wrote in 2001 on that exact topic. It includes some diagrams illustrating the challange and looks at it from a number of perspectives. I wonder if I could publish it today, unchanged?
Attachments:
You must be logged in to view attached files.Up::1We had a wide-ranging discussion in our most recent MRC SIG Working Group A meeting (7th July). See the attached notes from the meeting.
The key topics included:
- Integrating project schedule and risk
- Using tools to provoke, enable and support investigation and dialogue
- Characteristics of effective tools
Other topics touched on:
- The role of worldview
- Cynefin and other models – can people use them?
- Differing project priorities
- Are there a few areas that are most challenging for project managers?
- Essential Capabilities Maps (ECM)
Discussion about our Working Group:
- Three questions posed during our previous Working Group A meeting
- How to provide initial feedback to ICCPM Members about our Working Group
- Moving to meeting each three weeks (instead of fortnightly)
Attachments:
You must be logged in to view attached files.Up::1Hi,
We also have been considering asked for insights from ICCPM Fellows. Here is a draft content of a possible email that ICCPM could send to them for us. Please feel free to offers alternative words, edit etc.
Dear ICCPM Fellow,
The ICCPM Managing Risk in Complexity SIG has two working groups. For up to date details you can go to the MRC SIG Forum on the ICCPM website.
Working Group B is tackling the question “How can we “wake up” project leaders and stakeholders who are reluctant to accept or apply complexity methods and models.”
We know that to get people to shift their views and or their behaviours, trust is important. We also know that even when trust is present, individuals still may not (1) accept the need to work differently in complex environments or (2) they may accept the need but still not change their behaviours.
In that context, we would value any thoughts, insights or questions you might have on one or both of the following questions:
- How can we best establish trust, or at least a willingness to engage with project leader or stakeholders who currently see the importance of accepting and managing complexity in projects differently than we do?
- Assuming that we can establish an effective relationship, what other barriers might prevent these project leader or stakeholders from moving, and how can we shift those barriers?
We are looking forward to your responses, which can be sent to:
Thank you,
Davin Shellshear Co-chair ICCPM MRC SIG
Up::1Yes Simon – but the only image we have is the one I included in the notes from the last meeting. I’ll attach it here again. If you want to use it, you might want to crop it to take out people’s images. Shree will have better images, I am sure. I’ll also send Shree’s email address to you.
Attachments:
You must be logged in to view attached files.Up::0As usual, todays meeting was a really insightful conversation. I also liked that we were able to identify some actions to get on with between meetings.
Quite a few times “trust” was mentioned as being crucial. I wonder if we can ask and answer the question “What does it take to enable or build sufficient trust with people who are not yet “woken up” for them (and or their organisation) to come on this journey?” One suggestion from Ian was that we make use of the Fellows of ICCPM. So how about we frame a single open question to be sent to ICCPM fellows about how to build the trust needed? What is their experience?
If others think this is a decent idea, I’m happy to collaborate in developing the question and the process.
Up::1Hi,
The software demonstrated by Shree last week was a “pilot software” version developed at Curtin University. As far as I know it has not been published and is not publicly available. Shree is working with them to further develop the pilot software, so that it can be published as “open source”. I’m not sure about the timeframe for that.
Shree is presenting an ICCPM webinar on this topic on 22 July. Have a look at ICCPM’s upcoming events for the details. When I last asked, Shree was unsure whether at the webinar she will still be using the pilot software to demonstrate, or will be able to show a later version.
Richard
Up::0Shree Lakshmi has provided an email to me that we can use to contact her directly with specific suggestions about the risk visualisation software she demonstrated during our last meeting.
Please contact me and I will provide it to you. I haven’t provided the email here because that would make it visible to a much larger group of people.
In general, all comments and suggestions are best placed on this thread – where Shree will see them automatically anyway provided that she is ‘subscribed’.
Up::1My apologies for taking so long to get these notes out. I’ve been heavily committed since last week. Please have a look at the notes from the Working Group A meeting last Wednesday, and feel free to add comments and to extend the ideas.
Our next meeting will be on Wednesday 7th July at 5:30pm Canberra time. An invite will be provided with the next email sent out by ICCPM.
Attachments:
You must be logged in to view attached files.Up::1Another topic discussed at the last Working Group A meeting was how project managers and other stakeholders can decide which tools/methods they can or should apply.
For discussion, attached is a powerpoint document with some quick thoughts to provoke discussion at the next meeting (Wednesday this week, at 5:30pm Eastern Australian Standard time). In the meantime, feel free to download the document to add your comments, make changes etc.
Attachments:
You must be logged in to view attached files.Up::0I’ve noticed that we sometimes discuss what a complex project is. This implies that some projects are complex and others are not – and also that if a project is ‘complex’ we should treat it differently. I reckon that all human projects include aspects of complexity – and that even the most ‘complex’ mega projects inherently include simple and complicated situations within them.
We should talk about working in and on ‘project systems’ and the need to be alert to the level of complexity faced in any given situation. In that context, tools and methods for working in and on complexity are of value to virtually all project managers and other stakeholders, to varying degrees.
What do you think?
-
AuthorPosts
