Colin wrote:"Thanks for your insight, which I must say, is always an interesting read."Aren't you nice! Thanks!(I think. "Interesting" can be a very interesting adjective...) ;-)Fraternally in project management,Steve the Bajan
Very good point and congratualtions on spotting the deliberate omission and mistake :-)
I've now changed it adding the word "only" to reflect the original intent. The suggestion is that rather than just mange by the triple constraint, there will are other factors e.g. project value being the point.
"It will take a while for Project Management Offices (PMOs) to fully embrace the concept of ‘project value’ but the days of managing only by the triple constraint will soon be over."
You are also correct that it should be Scope and not Quality and that has been changed as well.Thanks for your insight, which I must say, is always an interesting read.Cheers,Colin
Colin, I liked seeing #4 on your list: "4. Project teams will begin to better define project ‘value’ " I've been waiting for this to happen for about a dozen years, since my book was published -- though I'm pessimistic it will happen until PMI starts including the word "investment" in its definitions of projects and programs. But then came a strange sentence:"It will take a while for Project Management Offices (PMOs) to fully embrace the concept of ‘project value’ but the days of managing by the triple constraint will soon be over."I honestly don't know what that means. Every project is, and always will be, circumscribed by a triple constraint triangle:The SCOPE side generates the project "value".The TIME side modifies the value of the SCOPE, i.e., time is money.The COST side is what is invested to get the value.Not to manage by "the triple constraint triangle" would mean, it seems to me, be not to manage the parameters of the investment in integration.“The triple constraint of time, cost and quality will remain important, and the project tools on the market will have to adapt to incorporate alternative ways of measuring success.”Actually, it's time, cost and scope (quality is a subset of scope -- other things than quality can generate value, and use time and money). And they don't have to incorporate alternative ways -- they just have to start understanding the ways that are already there in the Total Project Control approach to the triple constraint triangle. See the discussion with Tanveer in the <a href="http://www.planningplanet.com/forums/planning-scheduling-programming-di…, Scheduling & Programming</a> forum and the articles I mentioned.Fraternally in project management,Steve the Bajan
Colin wrote:"Thanks for your
Colin wrote:"Thanks for your insight, which I must say, is always an interesting read."Aren't you nice! Thanks!(I think. "Interesting" can be a very interesting adjective...) ;-)Fraternally in project management,Steve the Bajan
Hi Steve the Bajan, Very
Hi Steve the Bajan,
Very good point and congratualtions on spotting the deliberate omission and mistake :-)
I've now changed it adding the word "only" to reflect the original intent. The suggestion is that rather than just mange by the triple constraint, there will are other factors e.g. project value being the point.
"It will take a while for Project Management Offices (PMOs) to fully embrace the concept of ‘project value’ but the days of managing only by the triple constraint will soon be over."
You are also correct that it should be Scope and not Quality and that has been changed as well.Thanks for your insight, which I must say, is always an interesting read.Cheers,Colin
Colin, I liked seeing #4 on
Colin, I liked seeing #4 on your list: "4. Project teams will begin to better define project ‘value’ " I've been waiting for this to happen for about a dozen years, since my book was published -- though I'm pessimistic it will happen until PMI starts including the word "investment" in its definitions of projects and programs. But then came a strange sentence:"It will take a while for Project Management Offices (PMOs) to fully embrace the concept of ‘project value’ but the days of managing by the triple constraint will soon be over."I honestly don't know what that means. Every project is, and always will be, circumscribed by a triple constraint triangle:The SCOPE side generates the project "value".The TIME side modifies the value of the SCOPE, i.e., time is money.The COST side is what is invested to get the value.Not to manage by "the triple constraint triangle" would mean, it seems to me, be not to manage the parameters of the investment in integration.“The triple constraint of time, cost and quality will remain important, and the project tools on the market will have to adapt to incorporate alternative ways of measuring success.”Actually, it's time, cost and scope (quality is a subset of scope -- other things than quality can generate value, and use time and money). And they don't have to incorporate alternative ways -- they just have to start understanding the ways that are already there in the Total Project Control approach to the triple constraint triangle. See the discussion with Tanveer in the <a href="http://www.planningplanet.com/forums/planning-scheduling-programming-di…, Scheduling & Programming</a> forum and the articles I mentioned.Fraternally in project management,Steve the Bajan
Mike - very funny!I thought
Mike - very funny!I thought 'Survival' was standard part of the Project Managers job description :-)Emily
Hi Colin,We've just released
Hi Colin,We've just released ours and they very different http://bit.ly/wyH5amInteresting stuff.Emily
Hi Colin You missed the
Hi Colin
You missed the topmost priority for any company in 2012 - Survival.
Best regards
Mike Testro