Upload
softwarecentral
View
696
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Bob Hughes University of Brighton 1
New developments in IS/IT project management -towards a 3rd edition
Bob Hughes
School of Information Management, University of Brighton
Bob Hughes University of Brighton 2
Project management - flavour of the month?
Down-sizing
Delayering
Loss of organisationalintelligence
Loss of ability toimplement change
CHANGINGWORLD
Bob Hughes University of Brighton 3
Traditional careerprogression
programmer
systemsanalyst
project manager
In many bureaucratic organisations, all projects were IT projects
Bob Hughes University of Brighton 4
A different view of PM
Out-sourcing
Supplier side(technical management)
Customer side(contract management)
Bob Hughes University of Brighton 5
Some consequences
■ Growth in interest in PM■ Professional bodies
– Association for Project Management (UK)
– Project Management Institute (US)– developing bodies of knowledge (BOK)
Bob Hughes University of Brighton 6
More consequences
■ Qualifications– PMI, APM, ISEB, BCS Diploma, NVQ/SVQ,
Institute of Management
■ New kids on the block– DSDM (Dynamic Systems Development
Method) project manager examination– ISEB Programme and Project Support
Office qualification
Bob Hughes University of Brighton 7
More consequences■ ‘Standards’
– PRINCE 2 - CCTA, APM etc.,– BS 6079 - British Standards Institution
– ISO 10006– ISO 12207
■ Backdoor approach to getting some structure back - Programme Management and Project Support Office
Bob Hughes University of Brighton 8
Programme management
Programme brief
‘Vision statement’
‘Blueprint’ projects
Project portfolio
Benefits managementsuccess = good development + good operation
Bob Hughes University of Brighton 9
PRINCE2 versus BS6079
PRINCE ■ procedures■ neologisms■ products■ project delivers
products
BS6079■ techniques (e.g.
NPV, EVA)■ traditional
terminology■ activities■ ‘project’ includes
operation
Bob Hughes University of Brighton 10
Earned value analysisPhase
Module DesignEst
DesignActual
CodeEst
CodeActual
TestEst
TestAct.
A 10 15 20 20 10 n/a
B 10 10 15 17 12 n/a
C 20 late 31 late 18 n/a
EV
Est. tots2040
3566 40
%EV = 55/146* 100 i.e 37.7%
Bob Hughes University of Brighton 11
New paradigms: DSDMthe nine characteristics■ active user involvement■ development team empowerment■ frequent product delivery■ business fitness is key■ iterative/incremental development
Bob Hughes University of Brighton 12
DSDM characteristics - contd.■ All changes reversible■ requirement set at high level only■ testing integrated throughout life-cycle■ collaboration between stakeholders
Bob Hughes University of Brighton 13
project management implications of DSDM
■ control on products and requirements■ time-boxing: fixed time-scales - contrast
with critical chain■ need to manage and motivate user
involvement■ MORE management needed not less
Bob Hughes University of Brighton 14
Grady Booch
■ Projects can be driven primarily by– calendar– requirements
– documentation– quality– architecture
Bob Hughes University of Brighton 15
DSDM and the Booch taxonomy■ RAD/DSDM seems to be essentially
– calendar driven i.e. ‘characterized by an obsessive focus on schedule’
■ Risks with calendar driven approach– chaotic development methods– lack of ‘business sustainability’ (e.g.
scaleability, extensibility etc.)
– long-term stress and demotivation
Bob Hughes University of Brighton 16
DSDM and Booch contd.
■ RAD/DSDM also seems to be requirements driven - ‘rigid focus on the system’s outwardly observable behaviour’
■ Risks– lack of motivation to deal with sustainabilty– architecture: large number of independent
functional components
Bob Hughes University of Brighton 17
Requirements vs architecture drivenSystem functions
Common infrastructureCommon infrastructure
System functions
Bob Hughes University of Brighton 18
Booch’s five habits of good OO projects
■ ruthless focus on providing essential minimum requirements
■ focus on results■ effective use of OO modelling■ strong architectural vision■ well-managed iterative/incremental
development life cycle
Bob Hughes University of Brighton 19
Effect of alternative paradigmsRAD/DSDM - iterations - how do we control them?Still need management milestones
Hide it withinprocess
Or make each iterationa project
Bob Hughes University of Brighton 20
Note also
■ Effect on metrics - different units of software
■ Reuse - being decoupled from OO
Bob Hughes University of Brighton 21
The dispersed project - Situational factors e.g.■ common/different organizations■ central/dispersed authority■ criticality■ motivation■ common culture■ ease of communication■ language■ shared resources incl. data
Bob Hughes University of Brighton 22
Freedom/constraint cycle FREEDOM
CONSTRAINT
orientation
trust building
goal setting
commitment
implementation
highperformance
renewal
Same tim
e/place
Same tim
e
Diff
eren
t tim
e/pl
ace
Same
time
/pla
ce
Bob Hughes University of Brighton 23
Future developments?■ Synergies with CSCW?■ Limits to project management?
experiments projects routines
analogies case-basedreasoning
parametricmodels