Beyond Competence: Developing Managers of Complex Projects Lynn Crawford Professor of Project Management Bond University Australia ESC Lille France

Beyond Competence: Developing Managers of

Complex Projects

Lynn CrawfordProfessor of Project Management

Bond UniversityAustralia

ESC LilleFrance

The real agenda

• Why competence for the complex?

• What do this really mean?

• What is the real problem?

• How do we address it?

• Is there anything new under the sun?

Why complex projects?

• Reaction to the focus on the common denominator – In PM standards, certification, education and

training

• Need for managers of more challenging projects

• Failure of organisations to grow their own

• “Significant growth in project work”1

• Development boom• Aging workforce• Challenge of Gen Y

1. Winter, Smith, Morris & Cicmil, 2006

Various perspectives

• Rethinking PM, 2006– “complexity of projects”– “complex project environments”

• Whitty and Maylor, 2007– “complexity in the project

environment”

• Cooke-Davies et al, 2007– “complexity in projects”

• GAPPS, 2006– “management complexity” of projects

Arguably all projects are complex

• …if people are involved“Consider what happens in an

organisation when a rumour of reorganisation surfaces: the complex human system starts to mutate and change in unknowable ways; new patterns form in anticipation of the event.

On the other hand, if you walk up to an aircraft with a box of tools in your hand, nothing changes”

Snowdon, 2002

In practice……

• Organisations use – Average of 5

attributes– Between 2 &

12 attributes• to categorise

complexity of projects

Number of attributes used to characterise complexity

12.010.08.06.04.02.0

20

15

10

5

0

Std. Dev = 2.16

Mean = 4.9

N = 57.00

Crawford, Hobbs & Turner, 2005

Categorising for Complexity

Crawford, Hobbs & Turner, 2005

Attribute Count %1 Project scope 45 16.0%2 Technical complexity 39 13.8%3 Number of functions and skills 30 10.6%4 Organisational involvement 30 10.6%5 Level of ambiguity / uncertainty 27 9.6%6 Number of sites, locations, countries 26 9.2%7 Organisational impact 24 8.5%8 Clarity of goals / objectives 22 7.8%9 Risk source and location 15 5.3%

10 Familiarity 13 4.6%11 Standalone or component of larger project 11 3.9%

N = 282 100.0%

A continuum….

Goals/objectivesclearly defined

Goals/objectives highlyambiguously defined

Physical artefact Abstract concept

Only quantitativemeasures

Only qualitativemeasures

Not subject toexternal influences

Highly subject toexternal influences

Refinement ofsingle solution

Exploration of manyalternative solutions

Expert practitioner,no stakeholderparticipation

Facilitative practitioner,high stakeholder

involvement

Values technicalperformance andefficiency, manages bymonitoring and control

Values relationships,culture and meaning,

manages by negotiationand discussion

0 100

0 100

0 100

0 100

0 100

0 100

0 100

1. Goal Clarity

2. Goal Tangibility

3. Success Measures

4. Project Permeability

5. Number of Solution Options

6. Participation and Practitioner Role

7. Stakeholder Expectations

Crawford &Pollack

GAPPS: CIFTER Table

© Global Alliance for Project Performance Standards 2006 – 2007www.globalPM standards.org

What is competence?

That contribute to job performance

That can be assessed

That can be developed

Knowledge Skills Attitudes Behaviours

Performance based competency standards specify…..

• For an occupation or role– what people have to be able to

do, – the level of performance

required and – the circumstances in which that

level of performance is to be demonstrated

JOB ROLEJOB ROLEREQUIREMENTSREQUIREMENTS

Caliper ProfileCaliper ProfileMBTMBT16PF16PF

Hay McBerHay McBer

Performance BasedPerformance BasedCompetencyCompetency

Standards for Standards for PMPM

KnowledgeKnowledge

Qualifications & Qualifications & experienceexperience

UnderlyingUnderlyingenablingenabling

attitudes andattitudes andbehavioursbehaviours

DemonstrableDemonstrableperformanceperformance

INPUTINPUTCOMPETENCIESCOMPETENCIES

PERSONALPERSONALCOMPETENCIESCOMPETENCIES

OUTPUTOUTPUTCOMPETENCIESCOMPETENCIES

PMPMCOMPETENCECOMPETENCE

Curriculum VitaeCurriculum Vitae

PM Bodies ofPM Bodies ofKnowledgeKnowledge Competency

Framework

ROLEROLEDESCRIPTIONDESCRIPTION

PROJECTPROJECTTYPETYPE

PerformanceBasedCompetence

AttributeBasedCompetence

KnowledgeKnowledge









CompetencyCompetencyModelModel

Attribute-based Performance-based +

Superior Performance

CompetencyCompetencyStandardsStandards

Threshold Performance

Knowledge, Skills, Attitudes, Behaviours,

Personality

Workplace performanceDemonstrated

use of practices

USA South Africa,UK, Australia, New Zealand

Approaches to Competence



Assessment CenterAssessment Center


Standards for Standards for PMPM (eg ANCSPM)(eg ANCSPM)

KnowledgeKnowledge










PM Bodies ofPM Bodies ofKnowledgeKnowledge

(eg PMBOK ®(eg PMBOK ®Guide)Guide)

Threshold Performance



KnowledgeKnowledge


(eg PMBOK ®(eg PMBOK ®Guide)Guide)






Curriculum VitaeCurriculum Vitae Qualifications & Qualifications & experienceexperience












KnowledgeKnowledge







(eg PMBOK ®(eg PMBOK ®Guide)Guide) Superior

Performance



Novicesact on the basis of context-independent rules.

Advanced Beginnersalso use situational elements, which they have learned to interpret on the basis of their own

experience from similar situations.

Competent Performersare characterized by the involved choice of goals and plans as the basis for their actions.

Goals and plans store both context-dependent and context-independent information.

Proficient Performersidentify problems, goals and plans intuitively from their own experientially-based perspective.

Intuitive choice is checked by analytical evaluation before action.

Expertsbehaviour is intuitive, holistic, and synchronic, understood in a way that a given situation

releases a picture of problem, goal, plan, decision and action in one instant.

Dreyfus and Dreyfus (1986)

Novices

Advanced Beginners

Competent Performers

Proficient Performers

Experts

And beyond?

Beyond Competence

Project ManagementStandards, Training, Education

Dewey: Learning from Experience

• Continuity– Each experience is preparation for the next– The quality of present experience influences future

experience

• Interaction– The environment is whatever conditions interact with

personal needs, desires, purposes and capacities to create the experience

• Purpose– Participation of the learner in formulation of the

purposes which “direct his activities in the learning process” Dewey, 1938, p. 67

Cont.

• Use of scientific method– Systematic utilisation of scientific

method as the pattern and ideal of intelligent exploration and exploitation of the potentialities inherent in experience

• Reflection– To look back over what has been

done to extract meaning for future experience

Dewey, J. (1938) Experience and education: the Kappa Delta Pi Lecture SeriesDewey, J. (1933) How we think: a restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process.

Conclusions

• Experience is fundamental to developing ‘proficient performers’ and ‘experts’1

• The organisation provides the best environment for effective ‘interaction’ 2 and experiential learning

• “Beyond the Stable State”3 – organisations no longer provide continuity of experience

• How can educators meet this challenge?1. Dreyfus, H.L. and Dreyfus, S.E. (1986) Mind over machine: the power of human intuition and expertise in the era of the computer, New York: The Free Press2. Dewey, J. (1938) Experience and education: the Kappa Delta Pi Lecture Series3. Schon, D.A. (1971) Beyond the stable state: public and private learning in a changing society, Hammondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin Books.

Beyond Competence: Developing Managers of

Complex Projects

Lynn CrawfordProfessor of Project Management

Bond UniversityAustralia

ESC LilleFrance

Documents

Beyond Competence: Developing Managers of Complex Projects Lynn Crawford Professor of Project Management Bond University Australia ESC Lille France