November - December 2004 Featured Papers
Managing Program Risk
Developing high technology products is risky business by nature – technology risk alone is a constant. Failure to properly manage risk can lead to substantial loss, including the possibility that a product will fail to achieve the business results intended (such as increased market share or increased revenue). A product development program manager must mange risk across multiple projects. This requires a different perspective and techniques than managing risk on a single project. Managing Program Risk will describe the difference between managing program risk and project risk, describe how risk is managed across multiple projects on a product development program, and provide practical tips on managing risk at the program level.
In this article we will explain why risk management is a critical program management process at Intel and Tektronix, demonstrate the difference between program risk and project risk, and provide some key learnings for managing risk from personal experiences in managing product development programs in the high-technology industry.
About the Authors:
Russ
Martinelli, Manager of Program Management Methods at Intel, has many years
of experience in System Engineering, General Management, and Project and
Program Management in the high-technology and aerospace industries. Russ
is the chairman of Intel's Program Management Community of Practice, and
an Adjunct Professor for IT Business Systems at the University of Phoenix
in Portland, Oregon.
russell.martinelli@intel.com
Jim
Waddell, independent consultant and former Director of Program Management
for Tektronix, Inc. Jim has held a wide spectrum of managerial and operational
roles ranging across engineering, marketing, systems and manufacturing in
the high tech, energy and construction industries. Jim has taught classes
at various universities, and has been a speaker at numerous conferences
nationwide.
james.w.waddell@exgate.tek.com
The Herding Cats Column of Glen Alleman
On Integrated Project Management and Systems Engineering
A Recent “Encounter”
Glen Alleman
Carl Gustav Hempel (1905 – 1997) posed a paradox. If we want to prove the hypotheses such as “all ravens are black,” we can look for many ravens and determine of they all meet the blackness criteria. Hempel suggested changing the hypothesis to it counter positive (rewording with identical meaning) would be easier. The new hypothesis is: “all non–black things are non–ravens.” This transformation, supported by the laws of logic, makes it much easier to test. Unfortunately, the premise is ridiculous. Hemple’s Raven paradox points out the importance of common sense and proper background exploration, even in subjects as complex as project management.
I have recently been engaged in a conversation of sorts based on the statement — “PERT/CPM fails as a predictive tool is quite obvious and has been proven ad nauseam.” The author of this statement firmly believes, following Hempel’s inverted logic that unequivocal statements make common sense, when in fact the statement above is ridiculous.
This roundabout introduction comes from my recent stint as an “IMP/IMS” provider to spacecraft program. IMP/IMS is the code word for Integrated Master Plan / Integrated Master Schedule, which is a process of developing costs and schedules in aerospace and government procurement contracts. Although the approach provided by IMP/IMS seems obvious, it is not. More on that later, but a quote from Execution: The Discipline of Getting Things Done, Larry Bossidy and Ram Charan.
"You cannot have an execution culture without robust dialogue – one that brigs reality to the surface through openness, candor, and informality. This is call “truth over harmony.”"
Read the full text: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3
Editor's Note: The Integrated Master Plan/Integrated Master Schedule is critical to providing the visibility necessary for the management of a major complex project.
The Project Managers Guide to Use Cases
by Elizabeth and Richard Larson
We all know that achieving project success without complete product requirements is very difficult. Yet, gathering complete requirements without exhausting the project schedule and budget remains elusive for many project managers. When new technology is added to the mix, the challenges are even greater.
“The Project Manager’s Guide to Use Cases” co-written by Elizabeth Larson & Richard Larson, Principals of Watermark Learning, addresses questions frequently asked by project managers about Use Cases, a requirements-gathering technique which is often associated with newer technology.
Read the full text of "The Project Manager's Guide to Use Cases"
About the Authors
Elizabeth
Larson and Richard Larson, co-principals of Edina-based Watermark Learning,
have over 25 years each of experience in business, project management, business
analysis, and training/consulting. They have presented numerous workshops,
seminars, and presentations to over 10,000 participants on project management,
requirements analysis, and related subjects.
Contact Elizabeth Larson at
elarson@watermarklearning.com
Contact Rich Larson at
rlarson@watermarklearning.com
or (952) 921-0900 ext. 203.