PROFOUND PROJECT KNOWLEDGE - …projectmanager.org/images/downloads/PDC_2018_Presentations/larry... · Theory of Knowledge ... Adapted from: Dettmer, H. William, “Thinking ... “The

PMI Utah Conference 2018 Larry W. Smith

April 27, 2018 1

PROFOUND PROJECT KNOWLEDGE

Bringing together the PMI® Talent Triangle, changes in the Sixth Edition of the PMBOK® Guide, and Edward Deming’s seminal System of Profound Knowledge, this presentation

will highlight the importance of Leadership, Strategic Project Knowledge, and Team Development using multiple case studies in large, medium, and small projects.

Larry W. Smith

Systems Engineer and Project ConsultantApril 27, 2018

Presentation Outline

PMI® Talent Triangle and New Adjustments – Why?

Principles of Profound Knowledge (Deming)

1. Appreciation for a System

2. Knowledge about Variation

3. Theory of Knowledge Knowledge about Individuals Knowledge about Teams Knowledge about Programs

4. Knowledge of Psychology

5. Added: Knowledge of Leadership

Examples of Knowledge Capture

Summary: Reflections on Profound Knowledge


April 27, 2018 2

PMI® Talent Triangle

Why did PMI make the following changes to the PMOBK® Guide 6th Edition? Added: Manage Project Knowledge (Executing | Integration Mgmt) Added: Control Resources (Monitoring and Controlling | Resource Mgmt) Added: Implement Risk Responses (Executing | Risk Mgmt) Changed: Control Stakeholder Expectations > Manage Stakeholder Engagement Added: Agile Practice Guide Increased?: Common tools grouped: Data gathering, analysis, representation, etc. (ITTOS 618 > 722)

“The description of the areas of competence, in which a project manager can act safely, in order to optimally fulfill his role.”

“Methodical project management knowledge.”

“Ability to lead and develop a team and to show a situationally

appropriate behavior in dealing with the various stakeholders.”

“ ‘Strategic knowledge and industry knowledge’, which improve the project implementation and promote better corporate results.”

Sources: PMI’s Pulse of the Profession In‐depth Report: Navigating Complexity. (Effective 1 December 2015.) Markus Klein, “The Talent Triangle – PMI has Changed the Re‐certification Modalities, www.ProjectManagement.com/blog‐post, Posted 15 Dec 2015.

PM as Business Expert

PM as Thinker and Integrator

PM as Leader

14 Key Principles for Management1. Create constancy of purpose toward improvement of product and

service, with the aim to become competitive and to stay in business, and to provide jobs.

2. Adopt the new philosophy. We are in a new economic age…must awaken to the challenge…learn responsibilities…take on leadershipfor change.

3. Cease dependence on inspection to achieve quality.4. End the practice of awarding business on the basis of price tag.

Instead, minimize total cost. …relationship(s) of loyalty and trust.5. Improve constantly and forever the system of production and

service... .6. Institute training on the job.7. Institute leadership. The aim of supervision … to help people and

machines and gadgets to do a better job. Supervision…in need of overhaul… .

William J. Latzko, David M. Saunders, Four Days with Dr. Deming: A Strategy for Modern Methods of Management, 1st Ed., Prentice Hall, February 1995.


April 27, 2018 3

14 Key Principles for Management8. Drive out fear, so that everyone may work effectively for the company.9. Break down barriers between departments. People…must work as a

team, to foresee problems… . 10. Eliminate slogans, exhortations, and targets for the work force…only

create(s) adversarial relationships…the bulk of the causes of low quality/productivity belong to the system… .a. Eliminate work standards (quotas) on the factory floor. Substitute

leadership.b. Eliminate management by objective. Eliminate management by

numbers, numerical goals. Substitute leadership.11. Remove barriers that rob the hourly worker of his right to pride of

workmanship. 12. Remove barriers that rob people in management and in engineering of

their right to pride of workmanship.13. Institute a vigorous program of education and self‐improvement.14. Put everybody in the company to work to accomplish the

transformation. The transformation is everybody’s job.

Profound KnowledgeSystemofProfoundKnowledge®(SoPK)istheculminationofW.EdwardsDeming’slifelongwork.

1. Appreciationforasystem Leadershould understandthesystemthoroughly. Tofixoraltermustrealize:thewholeisgreaterthanthesumoftheparts.

2. Knowledgeaboutvariation Commoncause:Withinthesystemstructures(oftenconsistent)thatcanbepredicted. Specialcause:Occursunexpectedlywith/withoutaknownchange.

3. Theoryofknowledge Howdoweknowwhatweknow?Areourfactscorrect? Whatotherwaysshouldwelookatthings?

4.Knowledgeofpsychology Howdowebestmotivatepeople?Howdowebestresolveconflicts? Inwhatwaysarepeopleandtheirbehaviorspredictableandknowable?


April 27, 2018 4

1. Appreciation for a SystemOrganizations and Projects as Systems

Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systems_theory Adapted from: Dettmer, H. William, “Thinking Processes Workshop,” Goal Systems International, 2000.

“The goal of systems theory is systematically discovering a system's dynamics, constraints, conditions and elucidating principles (purpose, measure, methods, tools, etc.) that can be discerned and applied to systems at every level of nesting, and in every field for achieving optimized equifinality.” [The principle that in open systems a given end state can be reached by many potential means.]

System Goal

NecessaryConditions

Measuresof Success

What’s happening thatwe DON’T LIKE with

respect to the “benchmarks”of our system?

UndesirableEffects[ UDE ]

CauseEffect Cause

CauseEffect

CauseEffect

CauseCauseEffect Cause

CauseEffect

RootCause

Cause

CauseEffect

CurrentRealityTree

(FocusingTool)

Case Study: Common Root Causes

200 Developer personnel assigned to this project do

not have the necessary experience.


not have the necessary skill.


not have the necessary training

215 The developert does not have well defined

for this project.

correct processes

235 The developer must rely on the capabilities of

assigned personnel for project success.

225 Developer personnel are not well prepared to

accomplish their assigned project responsibilities.

240 The developer exhibits immature software

development behavior.

220 There are no other qualified sources for providing support to developer personnel

assigned to the project.

A C

230 Senior management does not eliminate the

root causes.

Role:Developer

1. WhatProfoundKnowledgeisgainedfromthisview?

2. Whatwouldyoudowiththisinsight?

3. Whatmightbetheresults?


April 27, 2018 5

2. Knowledge about VariationExample: Schedule Predictability and Reliability

Whole Project (t=?)

4.0 7.0

6.0

8.0 8.0

14.0 21.016.0

7.0 15.09.0

2.0 4.03.0

9.0 13.011.0

1.0 11.02.0

4.0 9.0

5.0

0.5 5.04.0

2.0 22.010.0

r1

r1

rx=0

r1

r1

r1r1

rx=0r1

r1 r1

rx=15

r1 = random number within each activities statistical range for the first iteration

Milestone Y(Hard)

Milestone X(Soft)

t = 5.8

t = 16.5

t = 8.0

t = 9.6

t=3.0

t = 11.0

t = 3.3 t = ??

t = 3.6

t = 5.5

t = 0

t = 0

Monte Carlo Simulation

Setup

Monte Carlo Simulation

10

Completion Std Deviation: 3.7d95% Confidence Interval: 0.5dEach bar represents 1d.

Completion Probability Table

Completion Date

3/20/09 4/6/09 4/20/09

3

6

9

12

15

18

21

24

27

30

Sample Count

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

Cumulative Probab

ility

Date: 3/20/09 12:47:23 PMNumber of Samples: 200Unique ID: 1Name: Sample Project (Risk)

Prob Date Prob Date0.05 3/26/09 0.66 4/7/090.10 3/28/09 0.60 4/7/090.15 4/3/09 0.65 4/10/090.20 4/3/09 0.70 4/10/090.25 4/4/09 0.75 4/11/090.30 4/4/09 0.80 4/11/090.35 4/5/09 0.85 4/12/090.40 4/5/09 0.90 4/13/090.45 4/6/09 0.95 4/14/090.50 4/6/09 1.00 4/20/09

Early Completion

Date

ExpectedCompletion

Date

LatestCompletion

Date

Only a 20% probability of completing the

project as expected on 4/3/09


April 27, 2018 6

Variation by Modeling and Simulation

Modeling

The technique of a building a model of a real or proposed system so that the behavior of the system under specific conditions may be studied.

Simulation

“The technique of imitating the behavior of some situation or system (economic, mechanical, etc.) by means of an analogous model, situation, or apparatus, either to gain information more conveniently or to train personnel.” (Oxford English Dictionary)

Power of Simulation:

Accurate (as possible) depiction of reality to make more accurate decisions/solutions

Systems: Important to understand; complex, meaningfully represent randomness (reality)

Advanced Optimization: Test multiple experiments and behaviors

Insightful systems evaluations at real time or compressed time

Animation: Visual model for verification and training

Current vs Future | Static vs Dynamic

Static Current State VSM

“Boring!”

Unable to assess, verify, make adjustments quickly

Unable to envision and consider more useful Future State

Static Future State VSM

“That’s fine, but…”

Unable to check basic validity of ideas

Buy‐in reduced

Versus


April 27, 2018 7

System Simulation: Profound Knowledge

Refurbishment

Enterprise Aircraft Routed Parts (Back shop)

Wings and Flight Controls

Benefits: Modeling and Simulation

Modeling

Ability to consider the future of the future by stepping into the future Highlight potential problems that may occur during the transition from current to future state

Provided a forum for thorough debate and hence a quicker resolution of key issues

Simulation

“The technique of imitating the behavior of some situation or system (economic, mechanical, etc.) by means of an analogous model, situation, or apparatus, either to gain information more conveniently or to train personnel.” (Oxford English Dictionary)

Power of Simulation:

Accurate (as possible) depiction of reality to make more accurate decisions/solutions

Systems: Important to understand; complex, meaningfully represent randomness (reality)

Advanced Optimization: Test multiple experiments and behaviors Insightful systems evaluations at real time or compressed time Animation: Visual model for verification and training


April 27, 2018 8

3. Theory of KnowledgeKnowledge of Individuals | Teams | Programs

Core: “Importance of understanding how people think–and act–based on what

they believe they know to be true.”1.Whatdoweknowthatisn’tso?2. Howcanweavoidthemistakesweareindangerofmakinginourthinking?3. Howcanweimprovethelearningprocess?4. Howdoesthesourceofanideaaffectmyevaluationoftheidea?5. Aremyjudgmentscloudedbyunimportantfactors?

Other Issues:

Confirmation Bias: Seize on what evidence we believe, like, or supports us; reject or ignore evidence that does not support us

Experiment: Plan‐Do‐Check‐Act

Prediction: Learn more from thinking deeply about system, etc. (Risk Analysis)

Misunderstandings and Misinterpretations

Value Judgments: Operational definitions and data

Reference: John Hunter, Theory of Knowledge, W. Edwards Deming Institute Blog, December 12 2012.

Knowledge of IndividualsStrengthsFinders® (Gallop,)

JH1. Futuristic2. Strategic3. Ideation4. Significance5. Learner6. Intellection7. Input8. Competition9. Command10. Restorative11. Relator12. Achiever13. Focus14. Analytical15. Individualization16. Adaptability17. Communication18. Connectedness19. Activator20. Arranger21. Deliberative22. Woo23. Belief24. Positivity25. Responsibility26. Self‐Assurance27. Maximizer28. Includer29. Harmony30. Discipline31. Developer32. Context33. Empathy34. Consistency

RS1. Learner2. Responsibility3. Ideation4. Analytical5. Relator6. Strategic7. Achiever8. Includer9. Connectedness10. Futuristic11. Belief12. Deliberative13. Individualization14. Developer15. Maximizer16. Restorative17. Arranger18. Harmony19. Intellection20. Input21. Focus22. Positivity23. Competition24. Discipline25. Context26. Significance27. Empathy28. Communication29. Activator30. Self‐Assurance31. Consistency32. Adaptability33. Command34. Woo

JF1. Learner2. Connectedness3. Responsibility4. Relator5. Intellection6. Discipline7. Individualization8. Analytical9. Belief10. Input11. Consistency12. Developer13. Arranger14. Empathy15. Adaptability16. Futuristic17. Self‐Assurance18. Harmony19. Ideation20. Deliberative21. Focus22. Achiever23. Communication24. Restorative25. Significance26. Positivity27. Context28. Competition29. Includer30. Maximizer31. Woo32. Command33. Strategic34. Activator

KM1. Woo2. Positivity3. Communication4. Connectedness5. Context6. Input7. Empathy8. Developer9. Individualization10. Includer11. Ideation12. Belief13. Maximizer14. Intellection15. Self‐Assurance16. Adaptability17. Strategic18. Learner19. Arranger20. Harmony21. Activator22. Consistency23. Relator24. Analytical25. Discipline26. Significance27. Focus28. Command29. Responsibility30. Achiever31. Competition32. Futuristic33. Restorative34. Deliberative

KS1. Restorative2. Empathy3. Responsibility4. Belief5. Arranger6. Deliberative7. Context8. Consistency9. Discipline10. Harmony11. Adaptability12. Relator13. Connectedness14. Futuristic15. Self‐Assurance16. Includer17. Significance18. Focus19. Intellection20. Developer21. Learner22. Input23. Maximizer24. Positivity25. Communication26. Woo27. Achiever28. Activator29. Command30. Competition31. Strategic32. Ideation33. Analytical34. Individualization


April 27, 2018 9

Knowledge of IndividualsMyers‐Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) Indices

Source of Energy

Data Gathering

Decision Making

Lifestyle or Orientation

Attitude

Attitude

Irrational Function

Rational Function

Extraversion Introversion

INtuitionSensing

Thinking Feeling

Judging Perceiving

Myers‐Briggs Type Indicator and MBTI® and are registered trademarks of Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc., Palo Alto, CA 94303.

Knowledge of Individuals (on Teams) Case Study: MBTI Preferences

Myers‐Briggs Type Indicator and MBTI® and are registered trademarks of Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc., Palo Alto, CA 94303.The Type Table is copyrighted by Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc., Palo Alto, CA 94303.

ISTJ Contracts Manager (F) Team Lead (F) Programmer-Technician (M)

ISFJ INFJ

Hardware Support (M) Systems Analyst (M)

INTJ

Project Manager (M) Quality Assurance (M) Systems Analyst (M)

ISTP ISFP INFP INTP

Programmer-Technician (M)

ESTP Programmer-Technician (F)

ESFP ENFP ENTP

Programmer-Technician (M)

ESTJ

Senior Project Manager (M) Programmer-Technician (M)

ESFJ ENFJ ENTJ

Team Lead (M) Programmer-Technician (M) Systems Analyst (M)

Team Size: 16 members Group Type: INTJ


April 27, 2018 10

Knowledge of Teams

Source: David Sibbet and Allan Drexler, Graphic Guide to Team Performance, Grove Consultants International, San Francisco, CA, 1994.

Drexler‐Sibbet Team Performance™Model

Knowledge of Teams (of Individuals)

Source: David Sibbet and Allan Drexler, Graphic Guide to Team Performance, Grove Consultants International, San Francisco, CA, 1994.

Drexler‐Sibbet Team Performance™Model


April 27, 2018 11

Knowledge of ProgramsCase Study: Program Risk Assessment

Team Sprint Burn down Chart for Sprint 3

How’stheProductDevelopment

going?

Whysuchahighlevelofexposure?

Howarewegoingtogetinsightandexplainthis?

Knowledge of ProgramsCase Study: Program Risk Assessment

Minimal Low Medium High Very High

(Negligible) (Marginal) (Moderate) (SignificantCritical)

(CatastrophicGrievious)

TimeframeProbability

Very High 100% 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0

(Very Likely)90% 0.9 1.8 2.7 3.6 4.5 5.4 6.3 7.2 8.1 9.0

High 80% 0.8 1.6 2.4 3.2 4.0 4.8 5.6 6.4 7.2 8.0Imminent

(Likely)70% 0.7 1.4 2.1 2.8 3.5 4.2 4.9 5.6 6.3 7.0

Near-term

Medium 60% 0.6 1.2 1.8 2.4 3.0 3.6 4.2 4.8 5.4 6.0Mid-term

(Probable)50% 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0

Far-term

Low 40% 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.4 2.8 3.2 3.6 4.0Very-far

(Possible)30% 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.4 2.7 3.0

Minimal 20% 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0

(Improbable)10% 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Impact

Red [A] Greater than or equal to 6.0 Shown in "orange"

Yellow [B] Greater than 2.0 and less than 6.0 (if greater than 4.0 complete a mitigation plan)

Green [C] Greater than 0.1 and less than 2.0

10 8 6 4 2


April 27, 2018 12

Knowledge of ProgramsRisk Assessment: Results for Open Discussion

Risk ID

Condition Consequence CurrentProbability (Likelihood)

CurrentImpact

(Severity)

Risk Rating

(Current)

Action to Mitigate POC RiskCategory

MitigationDue

$ Context and Notes

C014 If funding is not received with enough lead time to allow for contract/mod award before current funding runs out;

Then the schedule will be delayed and key individuals will be lost requiring effort to be spent on the hiring and assimilation processes.

90% 10 9.0 In the short term, work to resolve the immediate funding shortfall. Note: [] is working at the [] level both [] to provide funding in increments until [] isestablished in PB.

Funding The [] funding is expiring; requires external funding to continue product development. [] limited to [] or less. To meet schedule deadlines the [] must be mitigated first.

C015 If operational requirements continue to change with only partial agreement by key signatories;

Then the delivery date will continue to be delayed.

90% 9 8.1 Create a [] where any proposed changes must go through the [ ] and be agreed upon by the [] before a [] will be considered.

Requirements

Similar to E005. The [] requirements were finalized []. However, only one of the three key signatures are present.

E001 If the [] product development and testing team does not include a Subject Matter Expert (SME) from each service or using community;

Then the user interface will not be validated, operational usability will not be acceptable, [] will not recommend it and [ ] will be suspect as a beneficial tool,

80% 10 8.0 Place Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) on the development team as soon as possible. [] to request [] via [].

Resources [] has requested a []multiple times at the [] Meetings for participation in [].A SME has not yet been provided.

E010 If a 24/7Help Desk is not available for the user community (whether the user understands the product and its purpose or not);

Then [] the user community will increase until the product is not considered worthwhile.

80% 10 8.0 Coordinate a Help Desk requirement with the funding sponsor and the user community.

Support The level of sophistication of the user must be taken into account in a critical system.

4. Knowledge of PsychologySomething Deeper than Behavior

BEHAVIORS

ResponsiveWay“outofthebox”

ResistantWay“inthebox”

PERSON OBJECT

WayofBeing

Arbinger Institute, Leadership and Self‐Deception: Getting Out of the Box, 2nd ed., Berrett‐Koehler Publishers, Jan 2010. Diagram used by permission (page 36).

InfluenceWhateverI“do”onthesurface,peoplerespondtowhoIambeingwhenIamdoingit.Waybebeingdeterminesinfluence.

(TheChoice,§§ 5, ArbingerInstitute)


April 27, 2018 13

Knowledge of PsychologyInfluencing Relationships

WhatkindofinfluenceamIlikelytohaveonsomeoneI’mseeingas:

aVehicle?

anObstacle?

anIrrelevancy?

5. Knowledge of LeadershipCharacteristics of an Admired Leader

James Kouzes and Barry Posner, The Leadership Challenge: How to Make Extraordinary Things Happen in Organizations, Jossey‐Bass, 4th Ed., August 2008.


April 27, 2018 14

5. Knowledge of Leadership

James Kouzes and Barry Posner, The Leadership Challenge: How to Make Extraordinary Things Happen in Organizations, Jossey‐Bass, 4th Ed., August 2008.

Model the Way Clarify values by finding your voice and affirming shared values Set the example by aligning actions with shared values

Inspire a Shared Vision Envision the future by imagining exciting and ennobling possibilities Enlist others in a common vision by appealing to shared aspirations

Challenge the Process Search for opportunities; seizing initiative; looking for innovative ways to improve Experiment, take risks, consistently generating small wins, learning from experience

Enable Others to Act Foster collaboration by building trust and facilitating relationships Strengthen others by increasing self‐determination and developing competence

Encourage the Heart Recognize contributions by showing appreciation for individual excellence Celebrate the values and victories by creating a spirit of community

Leadership Practices

5. Knowledge of LeadershipLeadership Practice Inventory (LPI) ‐ SELF

Group 17:23 participants

Wherearetheirstrengths?

Wherearetheiropportunities?

Model the Way

Inspire aShared Vision

Challenge the Process

EnableOthers to Act

Encouragethe Heart

1 7.83 2 6.74 3 7.30 4 8.39 5 8.43

6 6.87 7 5.78 8 7.52 9 7.52 10 7.39

11 8.39 12 6.26 13 6.74 14 8.78 15 7.00

16 6.91 17 5.43 18 6.74 19 7.70 20 7.52

21 7.17 22 7.43 23 7.17 24 8.04 25 7.17

26 6.87 27 7.43 28 7.17 29 7.52 30 8.52

Tot 44.04 Tot 39.09 Tot 42.65 Tot 47.96 Tot 46.047.34 6.51 7.11 7.99 7.67

High 8.78 Low 5.43

Model the Way

Inspire aShared Vision

Challenge the Process

EnableOthers to Act

Encouragethe Heart

1 8.21 2 6.88 3 7.46 4 8.36 5 8.35

6 6.89 7 5.96 8 7.06 9 7.79 10 7.71

11 8.71 12 6.20 13 6.54 14 8.94 15 6.97

16 6.20 17 5.97 18 6.86 19 7.89 20 7.47

21 6.91 22 7.19 23 6.95 24 8.27 25 7.02

26 7.50 27 7.67 28 7.34 29 7.83 30 8.14

Tot 44.42 Tot 39.89 Tot 42.21 Tot 49.09 Tot 45.67

7.40 6.65 7.04 8.18 7.61

High 8.94 Low 5.96

Cumulative Total:20 Groups

328 participants

Wheredotheyneedcoaching?

Wheredotheyneedleadership?


April 27, 2018 15

Examples of Knowledge CaptureAssessment: Goals, Cause‐Effect, Priorities, Metrics, etc.

Large Team Multiple Supervisors Multiple Team Leads Critical Product

Medium Team Support Services Known challenges (Morale, Training) New Leadership

Small Team New Team Establishing a new Program Management Office (PMO) Unproven approach for support

Really Small Team Software Support Complex System Move to Agile, Scrum, Reporting

[Profound] Summary: ReflectionsWhat are we to do with our Profound Project Knowledge ?

…Something Useful It is a waste unless we take action Can also be put towards lame and harmful means

Opportunities Abound Individuals | Teams | Projects | Systems | Customers

Teams What small adjustment would help us team better? What would help us be profoundly better?

Questions to Ask What new information will help us do [ ] better? If we discovered how to do [ ], what would that mean? If we understood [ ], how would we adjust? What is our core conflict? What is our core constraint?

What would be really profound for us? Hold a discussion Consider the experiment Start…Try it out


April 27, 2018 16

References Arbinger Institute, Leadership and Self‐Deception: Getting Out of the Box, 2nd ed., Berrett‐Koehler Publishers, Jan 2010. Bennis, Warren, Managing People is Like Herding Cats, Executive Excellence Publishing, Provo, UT., 1999. Block, Peter. Stewardship. Berrett‐Koehler Publishers, Inc., San Francisco. 1993.Dettmer, H. William. Breaking Constraints to World‐Class Performance. ASQ Quality Press. Milwaukee, WI. 1997.Dettmer, H. William. Goldratt’s Theory of Constraints: A Systems Approach to Continuous Improvement. ASQ Quality Press. Milwaukee, WI. 1997.Deming, W. Edwards, Out of the Crisis, 1st Ed., MIT Press, August 2000. Goldratt, Eliyahu M. and Cox, Jeff. The Goal: A Process of Ongoing Improvement. North River Press. Great Barrington, MA. 1992. James Kouzes and Barry Posner, The Leadership Challenge: How to Make Extraordinary Things Happen in Organizations, Jossey‐Bass, 4th Ed., August 2008.Myers, Isabel Briggs and McCaulley, Mary H. et.al. 1998. MBTI Manual: A Guide to the Development and use of the Myers Brigg Type Indicator, 3rd Edition. Consulting Psychologist Press, Palo Alto, CA. Schein, Edgar H., Organizational Culture and Leadership, Jossey‐Bass, 1992 Scheinkopf, Lisa J. Thinking for a Change: Putting the TOC Thinking Processes to Use. CRC Press LLC. Boca Raton, FL, 1999. Senge, Peter M. The Fifth Discipline. Currency Doubleday. New York. 1990. Sibbet, David and Drexler, Allan, Graphic Guide to Team Performance, Grove Consultants International, San Francisco, CA, 1994. Smith, Larry W. “The Effect of Project Manager’s Personality Profiles on Projects.” Project Management Institute (PMI) 2001 Symposium. Nashville, TN. November. 2001. Smith, Larry W. “The Oft‐Forgotten Process of Building Project Teams.” Software Technology Conference (STC) 2001. Salt Lake City, UT. May 2001. Smith, Larry W. “Accelerating Project and Process Improvement using Advanced Software Simulation Technology: From the Office to the Enterprise Software.” Systems and Software Technology Conference (SSTC) 2010. Salt Lake City, UT. May 2010.William J. Latzko, David M. Saunders, Four Days with Dr. Deming: A Strategy for Modern Methods of Management, 1st Ed., Prentice Hall, February 1995.

Documents

PROFOUND PROJECT KNOWLEDGE - …projectmanager.org/images/downloads/PDC_2018_Presentations/larry... · Theory of Knowledge ... Adapted from: Dettmer, H. William, “Thinking ... “The