The Differences Between a Conventional Project Manager Versus a Contemporary Project Manager

The conventional project management methodologies will work best if the projects do not have lots of uncertainties nor there are many moving variables to take care of simultaneously. Nowadays, projects gets more and more complicated and the complexities increased as compared to those old days where simple methodologies and project tools just can't aren't feasible no more for today's projects.

Here are some of the key differences between conventional vs contemporary Project management.

1. Conventional project management is suitable for projects with low budget, contain 2-3 variables only, and with a medium time frame not more than 6 months from envisioning to deployment. While contemporary project management is not feasible for someone without the experience or required skills to manage because of its complexities. That's the reason why PMP certificate has been called out as the pre-requisite for a project manager today.

2. Replace predictive planning with adaptive planning. In the traditional world, everything is much simpler and therefore predictable. A simple project management tool will do the work for the predictive project planning. We are now transitioning to a new arena where project management skills have increasing being called out as 'essential' in an organization due to the increased complexities in today's projects and the multiple problems around it, with so many constraints to take care of

3. Contemporary project manager response to changes with Adaptive action and not Corrective action which has been commonly used as an approach in conventional projects. The fundamental problem with many conventional project management frameworks is probably even more relevant to science than it is to business. In today's world, project manager need to be flexible enough to handle and manage multiple changes simultaneously. To enable this, the only way is to get adapted to the surroundings and the many different constraints which the project is having. The fundamental problem with many conventional project management frameworks is probably even more relevant to science than it is to business

4. No doubt a good planning is essential to kick off a project successfully but a perfect plan is really a myth. There is no such thing as perfect plan and perfect project. Theoretically, books on project management will provide guidelines as to work a good plan can be work out from. Nevertheless, from the eyes of a modern project manager, it is the ability to stand and adapt to these changes which make the difference.

5. Contemporary project management is stressing on the EXECUTION, rather than the PLANNING aspect of a project. This does not mean that planning is not important, but the key stress and the main focus should be on the EXECUTION aspect of the project once the project has exited envisioning and planning phases. All the pending action items need very close follow up and monitoring. This is to ensure there are no missing items unaware of, no over-look of open issues or pending action items and no hidden gaps unexplored... etc.

6. Traditional project manager does not focus on collaboration of the team work for the project. They are taught for top- down approach in mind and not meant for open collaboration. The traditional Project management tools make the Project manager the core element for communication, inclusive of the need to remind the team members on the dead-lines and overdue tasks. Contemporary project managers see this as a waste of resources as it is not the PM responsibility to keep on reminding the dead-lines, but to ensure close collaboration is in place within the whole team itself. If everyone in the project are fully committed, reminders on dead-lines or on overdue tasks are actually not necessary at all.

The Difference Between Typical Project Management and Six Sigma Project Management

The Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBoK) became an accepted standard (as established by the Project Management Institute) that is still widely used in many industries around the world. At a basic level, many of the methodologies advocated by PMBoK and Six Sigma have a great deal in common. Both seek to establish a sound plan; identify and communicate with stakeholders; conduct regular reviews; and manage schedule, cost, and resources.

Six Sigma is not just another project management initiative or process improvement program. Six Sigma is not just a new term for project management nor is it a mere repackaging of old concepts. It is more than that because it is a robust continuous improvement strategy and process that includes cultural and statistical methodologies. Six Sigma is complementary with existing project management programs and standards but differs in significant ways. Both disciplines seek to reduce failures, prevent defects, control costs and schedules, and manage risk. Generally, professional project management attempts to achieve these goals by encouraging best practices on a project-by-project basis, often through the mechanism of a project office that promulgates policy, provides templates and advice, promotes appropriate use of tools such as critical path method, and perhaps performs periodic project reviews.

Too many project management methods have failed not because they weren't adding value but because you couldn't measure the effectiveness of the methodology or quantify the value added by process changes. Six Sigma provides a structured data-driven methodology with tools and techniques that companies can use to measure their performance both before and after Six Sigma projects. Using Six Sigma, management can measure the baseline performance of their processes and determine the root causes of variations so they can improve their processes to meet and exceed the desired performance levels.

Six Sigma allows managers to take their projects to new levels of discipline and comprehensive commitment. For standard project management ideas, you can approach them ad hoc and implement them as you learn them. You can't do Six Sigma halfheartedly, and that is a good thing. Six Sigma is not for dabblers. You can't implement it piecemeal. If you're in, you're in deep, and you're in for the long haul. Again, that is a good thing because that level of commitment not only gets everyone involved and keeps them involved but also leads to more substantial and far-reaching change in your processes.

There are many challenges facing project managers: data gathering and analysis, problem solving, understanding and evaluating existing processes, developing and tracking measurements in a standardized manner, and making quantitative evaluations. Six Sigma methodology provides tools and techniques to help a manager be successful in all of these challenges. This success is accomplished by means of understanding what the methodology is, how it is applied, and how it used.

Six Sigma is not simply another supplement to an organization's existing management methods. It is a complementary management methodology that is integrated into and replaces the existing ways of determining, analyzing, and resolving/avoiding problems, as well as achieving business and customer requirements objectively and methodically. Six Sigma can be applied to operational management issues, or it can directly support strategic management development and implementation. Six Sigma's set of tools are more broadly applicable than those commonly applied within typical project management. Six Sigma is more oriented toward solutions of problems at their root cause and prevention of their recurrence rather than attempting to control potential causes of failure on a project-by-project basis.

The breadth, depth, and precision of Six Sigma also differentiate it from typical project management. Six Sigma has a well-defined project charter that outlines the scope of a project, financial targets, anticipated benefits, milestones, etc. It's based on hard financial data and savings. In typical project management, organizations go into a project without fully knowing what the financial gains might be. Six Sigma has a solid control phase (DMAIC: Define-Measure-Analyze-Improve-Control) that makes specific measurements, identifies specific problems, and provides specific solutions that can be measured.

Six Sigma is a robust continuous improvement strategy and process that includes cultural methodologies such as Total Quality Management (TQM), process control strategies such as Statistical Process Control (SPC), and other important statistical tools. When done correctly, Six Sigma becomes a way toward organization and cultural development, but it is more than a set of tools. Six Sigma is the strategic and systematic application of the tools on targeted important projects at the appropriate time to bring about significant and lasting change in an organization as a whole.

Peter Peterka is President of Six Sigma us. For additional information on Six Sigma Green Belt or other Six Sigma Certification project programs contact Peter Peterka.

Peter Peterka is the Principal Consultant in practice areas of DMAIC and DFSS. Peter has eleven years of experience performing as a Master Black Belt, and has over 15 years experience in industry as an improvement specialist and engineer working with numerous companies, including 3M, Dell, Dow, GE, HP, Intel, Motorola, Seagate, Xerox and even the US Men's Olympic Team. For partial list look here. Peter is a certified a Master Black Belt and holds an MS degree in Statistics from Iowa State and a BS in Chemical Engineering from Purdue. Peter worked for 3M over 10 years where he gained extensive experience applying Sigma Methodologies to a variety of processes.

Peter has successfully developed Six Sigma deployment strategies and training for Product and Process Development, Manufacturing and Business Process Improvement. His broad experience across many technologies helped him gain insight on how to apply Six Sigma methods to Business Processes.