Managing Complex Projects and Programs (HEASLIP: MANAGING COMPLEX PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS) || Glossary of Newly Introduced Terms

287

GLOSSARY OF NEWLY INTRODUCED TERMS

Business governance committee

A committee of stakeholders convened to govern how projects or programs utilize an organization ’s assets. Common business governance committees include portfolio review committees and resource review committees. Business governance committees usually assume responsibility for compiling and main-taining accurate information about resource needs of organizational projects and programs, for conducting analyses of those needs according to preferred organizational practices, and for ensuring that resources are used in a manner that is consistent with an organization ’s defi ned priorities. The decision-making versus advisory responsibilities of such committees may vary from organization to organization. (Chapter 7)

Directional complexity

See stakeholder complexity. (Chapter 4)

Directional uncertainty

See stakeholder uncertainty. (Chapter 4)

Enabling conditions

Organizational conditions that support the pursuit of organizational projects or programs. Enabling conditions established by organizations might be expected to include, for example, the conditions that provide support in the form of resources (human and fi nancial), infrastructure (technological and physical), and oversight (leadership, management, and governance) of an organization ’s projects and programs. (Chapter 6)

Environmental complexity

The complexity associated with managing environmental uncertainty. (Chapter 4)

Managing Complex Projects and Programs: How to Improve

Leadership of Complex Initiatives Using a Third-Generation

Approach by Richard J. Heaslip, PhDCopyright © 2014 Richard J. Heaslip. All rights reservedPublished by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey

288 GLOSSARY OF NEWLY INTRODUCED TERMS

Environmental uncertainty

The uncertainty that is external to a project or program, but that may infl uence its direction. Environmental uncertainty is a lack of surety that environmental conditions will remain stable, and thereby continue to support the pursuit of a project or program as planned. (Chapter 4)

Exasperados

A group of experienced and successful project management professionals who have grown exasperated with trying to function within the increasingly complex programmatic oversight systems used by their organizations to manage com-plex programs and projects. An examination of the causes of Exasperado frus-tration and of the common experiences of Exasperados led to the proposal of third-generation programmatic approaches for the management and oversight of complex projects and programs. (Chapter 4)

First-generation programmatics (fi rst-generation programmatic approach)

An approach for managing organizational projects that is characterized by strict governing committee control over project strategies, plans, timelines, budgets, and specifi cations. Under fi rst-generation programmatic approaches managing committees authorize projects and approve their strategies and plans, and proj-ect teams (usually under the direction of project management professionals) assume accountability for pursuing those plans precisely as defi ned to assure that their intended outputs are effi ciently delivered—on time, on budget, and to specifi cations. (Chapter 2)

Five-complexities framework

A framework used to categorize the types of uncertainty and complexity faced by programs and projects, and to assign responsibilities for complexity manage-ment. Under this framework, the fi ve types of programmatic uncertainty and complexity are defi ned as: operational, outcome-based, stakeholder, organiza-tional, and environmental uncertainties and complexities. (Chapter 4)

Fully empowered programmatic oversight model

An organizational management model in which a program ’s strategy and plans are managed by an “outcome sage” – program manager who is given broad authority to manage a program ’s pursuit of its intended benefi ts and value. Fully empowered programmatic oversight models seek to enable program manag-ers to more agilely and adaptively manage their program ’s strategies and plans

GLOSSARY OF NEWLY INTRODUCED TERMS 289

by allowing them greater freedom to implement changes without the formal approval of governing committees. (Chapter 12)

Fully governed project (or programmatic) oversight model

An organizational management model in which the strategies and plans of projects or programs are closely managed by organizational governance com-mittees. Within a fully governed project oversight model, approval of one or more organizational governance committees is required before establishing or changing a project ’s or program ’s strategy or plans. Fully governed project oversight models maximize an organization ’s control over its projects and pro-grams by assuring governing committee review and approval of a project ’s or program ’s planned approach. (Chapter 6)

Inclusivist perspective

A view that a given programmaticist should assume personal responsibility for delivering outcome-dependent benefi ts from his or her program(s) and project(s). Stakeholders who have an Inclusivist perspective believe that a programmaticist should be personally responsible for managing or ensuring the management of outcome-based, operational, stakeholder, and organizational uncertainties or complexities. Stakeholders who have an Inclusivist perspective believe that gov-ernance committees should principally serve an enabling function—providing an appropriate organizational environment, adequate resources, and the ben-efi ts of their knowledge, experience, and insight. (Chapter 5)

Operational complexity

The complexity that is associated with managing project planning uncertainty. (Chapter 4)

Operational uncertainty

The uncertainty that is associated with defi ning, scheduling, and completing those activities required to generate the outputs and outcomes of a project or program— the project or program plan. Operational uncertainty is a lack of certainty that a project plan, in its current form, can be completed precisely as prescribed to deliver the intended outputs on time, on budget, and to specifi cations. (Chapter 4)

Operationalist perspective

A view that a given programmaticist should have a broad mandate for defi ning a project ’s operational plans and for independently managing operational uncer-tainty and complexity that might affect those plans. Under the Operationalist perspective a programmaticist is recognized to be an operational planning


expert. He or she is expected to ensure that projects deliver their outputs as expected (on time, on budget, and to specifi cations), while autonomously man-aging any operational uncertainty and complexity that those endeavors might face. (Chapter 5)

Operationally empowered programmatic oversight model

An organizational management model in which a project ’s operational plan is managed by an “operational savant” project manager who is given authority to initiate and manage change in a project ’s operational plans. Operationally empowered project oversight models seek to enable project managers to more agilely and adaptively manage their project plans by allowing them freedom to implement operational changes without the formal approval of governing com-mittees. (Chapter 12)

Organizational complexity

The complexity associated with managing organizational uncertainty. (Chapter 4)

Organizational uncertainty

The uncertainty that is associated with trying to align the views and secure the endorsements of organizational committees with distinct roles, responsibili-ties, perspectives, and priorities. Programmaticists must manage organizational uncertainty whenever the approvals or endorsements of different committees must be obtained before a project ’s or program ’s strategies and plans can be implemented or changed. Organizational uncertainty is a lack of certainty that any given proposed strategy or plan will be supported by each of the endeavor ’s governing or review committees. (Chapter 4)

Outcome complexity

The complexity associated with managing outcome uncertainty. (Chapter 4)

Outcome uncertainty

The uncertainty that is associated with a plan ’s dependence on activities that do not have known or predictable results. Outcome uncertainty is a lack of cer-tainty that a project plan will produce the results (outcomes) that are intended or desired. (Chapter 4)

Program

An endeavor that seeks to deliver benefi ts via activities that by their nature have uncertain outcomes. The uncertainty associated with programs dictates


that they need to be managed adaptively, so that their strategies and plans can be modifi ed in response to emergent outcomes. As a result, programs may be highly complex. The outcomes required by programs are pursued via projects, subprograms, and other program-related activities. (Chapter 10)

Program management

A profession in the programmatic sciences that ensures the optimal delivery of program benefi ts by adaptively managing program strategies and plans. Program management involves the application of specialized knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to ensure that programs are responsive to the outcomes they generate as they pursue their intended benefi ts Program management is practiced by program managers who work collaboratively with project man-agers, subprogram managers, and other members of program teams to ensure the completion of required program activities and the delivery of important program outcomes. (Chapter 10)

Program manager

A professional who is responsible for managing a program ’s pursuit of its intended benefi ts. Program managers are responsible for ensuring that a pro-gram ’s strategy and plans are adapted appropriately in response to program outcomes, to ensure the most effective pursuit of targeted program benefi ts. Program managers are adaptive leaders who work closely with project man-agers, subprogram managers, and other members of their program teams to ensure completion of required program activities. (Chapter 10)

Programmatic

Of or relating to programs and/or projects, or the managerial systems and principles used by organizations to oversee their programs and/or projects. (Chapter 1)

Programmatic complexity

A characteristic of projects and programs that refl ects the diffi culty of under-standing and defi ning the most appropriate strategy or plan for pursuing project or program goals. Programmatic complexity grows larger when the uncertainty associated with a project ’s or program ’s strategy or plan increases, and when the number of possible responses to that uncertainty increases. Managing program-matic complexity can be diffi cult because it must be done dynamically—as ele-ments of a project ’s or program ’s strategy or plan are completed, the impact of their uncertainty is realized, issues emerge, and viable options for responding to that uncertainty are clarifi ed. (Chapter 4)


Programmatic science

The study of managerial systems, principles, practices, and processes used by organizations to pursue their goals via programs and/or projects. The purpose of programmatic science is to develop and advance an understanding of those strategies that contribute to organizational success when managing programs and projects, and the leadership competencies that are required by those respon-sible for executing these strategies. Programmatic science should be viewed as a social science that seeks to study and understand the dynamics of managing pro-grams and projects within an organization, much the same as “political science” is a social science that seeks to study and understand the dynamics of managing governments and governmental institutions. (Chapter 1)

Programmaticist

A professional leader or manager of an organization ’s projects or programs. A programmaticist is responsible for assuring that projects or programs are effec-tively pursued and for managing the interactions of a project or program team with its sponsoring organization. (Chapter 4)

Programmaticist ’s credo

Manage the uncertain; solve the complex; deliver the value. (Chapter 4)

Programmatics (or, programmatic approach)

A specifi c combination of applied systems, principles, practices, and processes, used by an organization for the purpose of managing its programs and projects. (Chapter 1)

Project

A temporary endeavor that seeks to deliver unique value and benefi ts via activities that are thought to have predictable outputs and/or outcomes. Projects are managed in a manner that seeks to ensure effi cient delivery of work products with precisely prescribed specifi cations, on time and on budget. (Chapter 10)

Project management

A profession in the programmatic sciences that focuses on the design and com-pletion of work plans to ensure the effi cient delivery of specifi ed work products on time, on budget, and to specifi cations. Project management is practiced by project managers who apply professional knowledge, skills, tools, and tech-niques to ensure the effective management of operational uncertainty and the resolution of operational complexity. (Chapter 10)


Project manager

A professional who is responsible for managing a project ’s pursuit of its intended outputs and/or outcomes. Project managers are operational leaders who are responsible for assuring that a project meets its operational goals for deliv-ering work products with prescribed specifi cations—on time and on budget. (Chapter 10)

Second-generation programmatics (second-generation programmatic approaches)

Approaches sometimes used to support the oversight of programmatic endeavors whose timelines, budget, and/or specifi cations need to be managed adaptively because pursuing the project is expected to result in the generation of outcomes or the acquisition knowledge that will (and should) infl uence the endeavor ’s strategy or plans. Under second-generation programmatic approaches, pro-grammaticists are given authority for managing the adaptation of their project ’s timelines, budget, and/or specifi cations (usually within previously established constraints) so as to enable more effective pursuit of the benefi ts desired from a project or program. Examples of second-generation programmatic approaches include those approaches used in the disciplines of Agile Project Management, Complex Project Management, and Extreme Project Management. (Chapter 2)

Secondary governance or review committee

A committee that is asked (as part of the organization ’s project oversight pro-cess) to review project results, analyses, needs, and proposals before they are presented to the project ’s primary sponsoring governing committee. Secondary governance or review committees usually have a narrower scope of responsibili-ties than a primary governing committee. They may, for example, be responsible for work being performed within an individual line function, work being con-ducted in a specifi c technological fi eld, support of an individual client group, or support of other business processes of the organization (such as budget, resource, or portfolio management). (Chapter 7)

Stakeholder complexity

The complexity associated with managing stakeholder uncertainty. (Chapter 4)

Stakeholder uncertainty

The uncertainty that is associated with a reliance on stakeholders to support the strategy or plan used by a project or program to achieve its goals. Stakeholder uncertainty might also be thought of as directional uncertainty because it relates to a reliance on stakeholders to support a project ’s or program ’s direction .


Stakeholder uncertainty is a lack of certainty that stakeholders will support the strategy or plan of a programmatic endeavor as desired, or that they will agree to support changes in the strategy or plan that may become necessary. (Chapter 4)

Third-generation programmatics (third-generation programmatic approaches)

An approach for managing organizational programs that relies upon the col-laborative contributions of two unique types of programmaticists: a project manager (or leader) responsible for providing operational leadership, and hence for delivering project outputs and their outcomes, and a program manager (or leader) responsible for stimulating and embodying adaptive leadership, and hence for optimizing delivery of program-level outcomes. Third-generation programmatics employs a three-party framework for managing programs through leadership that is collectively provided by governing committees, project management professionals, and program management professionals. (Chapter 11)

Traditionalist perspective

A view of programmaticist roles and responsibilities based on traditional fi rst-generation project management systems. Under Traditionalist perspectives, programmaticists are expected to deliver value by effi ciently and effectively managing the completion of work according to approved plans—on time, on budget, and to specifi cation. Those who espouse a Traditionalist perspective believe that a given programmaticist ’s primary role should be defi ned so as to maximize organizational control over operational uncertainty and variance, to improve the likelihood that projects or programs will deliver their expected results precisely as predicted. The Traditionalist perspective advocates that governing committees (or a program team responsible for project governance) should retain responsibility for authorizing any signifi cant changes to the plan or strategy of a project or program. (Chapter 5)

Documents

Managing Complex Projects and Programs (HEASLIP: MANAGING COMPLEX PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS) || Glossary of Newly Introduced Terms