[Stephen Grey]

in reply to: Working Group B: What principles are important in dealing with complexity? #11826

Up

1

::

There is a lot here. Here are a few immediate reactions.

1. The first two headings seem like managing up, trying to fill the gaps in senior management with a little bit of attention to changing their behaviour.
2. On tools – I am not sure tools are the answer, necessary but not sufficient and I am sure there won’t be one tool or even one set of support tool attributes that will fit all requirements. I am more inclined to put faith in people.
3. A lesson from many fields is that we frequently fail to capitalise on the value of the knowledge, insights and creativity of the people executing a project or working in an organisation. They are closest to the work front and can observe small leading indicators of emerging problems but no one asks them or listens if they speak up. I believe that we need to look outside the people explicitly responsible for risk management and their senior management.

We need to take our own medicine I think

What we asking for is a shift in world view from linear mechanistic and analytical to suspending judgement where we can, tolerating ambiguity and uncertainty. A common response to such suggestions is to say “that won’t work” because we have so little experience of it in action. Analogies, perhaps military, might offer one way to spread understanding.

[Stephen Grey]

in reply to: Complexity papers and resources #11792

Up

0

::

I think I have solved it

 

The website doesn’t like my VPN

It doesn’t say so but seems to limit what is visible, even though I am logged in

 

Trying again

[Stephen Grey]

in reply to: Complexity papers and resources #11790

Up

0

::

Thanks

 

I am still stuck

 

This screenshot shows where the link takes me but I don’t see “Complex Project Management Tools”

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[Stephen Grey]

in reply to: Complexity papers and resources #11783

Up

1

::

@Stephen-Suminguit

I can’t see anything about that tool in the https://iccpm.com/resources/useful-tools/ page

Is that where it should be?

Steve Grey

[Stephen Grey]

in reply to: Working Group B: What principles are important in dealing with complexity? #11761

Up

1

::

Not sure about where to post stuff so I put some papers into a topic on the forum at https://iccpm.com/forums/topic/complexity-papers-and-resources/#post-11751

I hope they will be useful to some members and would welcome reactions and comments

Also not sure if that is “the forum” or “a forum” in this context

[Stephen Grey]

in reply to: Complexity papers and resources #11751

Up

1

::

I mentioned the idea of metaphorical teddy bears being used to overcome anxiety about the use of novel techniques

This is a link to the ABC broadcast that described it

https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/this-working-life/harnessing-ambiguity/8010228

[Stephen Grey]

in reply to: Complexity papers and resources #11750

Up

1

::

In the face of anxiety among clients about schedule risk modelling failing to forecast the long right hand tail they expect to see on schedule probability distributions, based on the experience of having some projects blow out by a large amount, I looked into various mechanisms that might help us understand how a project can descend into chaos. The paper linked from this page demonstrates that, while there might be several forces at work, a simple interaction between schedule slippage and the fire fighting behaviour it often stimulates can explain the phenomenon.

https://broadleaf.com.au/extreme-project-schedule-over-run/

This is not a complete encapsulation of the loss of control that projects can face. That is a multifaceted phenomenon. However, it shows how the interaction between uncertainty and human behaviour, a tendency towards fire fighting rather than pulling back to regroup and reset, can explain a high probability of schedule over run.

[Stephen Grey]

in reply to: Complexity papers and resources #11748

Up

1

::

This is a link to a recording of a talk I gave to the Monash University Master of Project Management course

The production quality is not brilliant but I think that the content is useful despite the background noise. One of the key points is that I have found it is more straightforward to define complexity in terms of what it is not that to try to define it directly, as explained in the talk.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/qr9aa9u9wwjpm60/Monash%20Uni%20Masters%20course%20lecture%202021.mp4?dl=0

The slides are in the attached file but, without the animation and narration that you can see in the video, a lot of important points are lost

 

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[Stephen Grey]

in reply to: Complexity papers and resources #11746

Up

1

::

This INSEAD paper outlines how major infrastructure projects diverge from their initial stated targets due to the involvement of people and organisations that bring human behaviour to bear. I believe that the same forces are at work wherever the participants join in progressively, including organisational change and IT projects where stakeholder involvement grows as work progresses. Large ‘concrete’ projects are subject to the effect of interactions with complex human systems that surround them.

ABSTRACT

This study links evolution in organizational structure to ambiguity in the definition of performance in the context of organizations formed to develop long-lived infrastructure: so-called ‘mega-projects’. Based on a longitudinal, inductive analysis of three megaprojects in London, we argue that a mega-project is a meta-organization with two symbiotically-related constituent structures. The core, led by a coalition, is a mutable collective that shares control over the goal of the project and corresponding high-level design choices. The periphery is a supply chain selected to design and build the
infrastructure, but lacks the authority to change the high-level choices. As the megaproject structure evolves over time, we show that the founders and new comers renegotiate the high-level choices and slippages in performance targets ensue. The conflation of committals to different baselines, differing preferences for efficiency and effectiveness, and rivalry in high-level choices gives rise to competing performance narratives which cannot be reconciled. Thus, we argue, the disappointing and controversial (under) performance of mega-projects may be a result of how their organizational structure develops, rather than due to any agency or competence related failure per se.

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[Stephen Grey]

in reply to: Biographies of forum members #11740

Up

0

::

Steve Grey bio

Based in Melbourne

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[Stephen Grey]

in reply to: General Discussion – MRC SIG #11699

Up

0

::

Are there any resources on the ICCPM site that cover Kay Remington’s model?

I have read the preface to her book online but I’m reluctant to shell out more than $200 to go any further.

From what I can gather, it’s standard complexity science ideas with a focus on four topics that seem to me to be, rephrasing to test my understanding:

• Linkage between elements of a project
• Novelty
• Objectives and priorities
• Environmental fluidity

 

[Author]

Posts