Of course, it was nice to Crossderry included. It was even better that my “short post” style was appreciated. Lots of sweat goes into getting these posts under 250 words!
Last week Michael and I had a great discussion on PMOs — what they are and how they contribute to IT governance and project success. In particular, the SAP PMOs have a unique role in optimizing the success of the entire SAP ecosystem…otherwise, relations among the stakeholders can devolve into what Michael calls the IT Devil’s Triangle.
The post and podcast (player is at the top of the post), are here. Thanks to Michael for arranging this and for even taking a good photo of me!
FYI, a Wall Street Journal article (“Dangers of Clinging to Solutions of the Past”) based in part on interviews w/ yours truly came out today (link here, page B4 in the paper). Thanks to Kishore Sengupta of INSEAD for pointing the WSJ my way and to Phred Dvorak of the WSJ for conveying the perils of experience so well and so succinctly.
As I’ve noted to a couple of colleagues, it is hard to believe that only 250 words of copy came out of two hours of interview time. Insert your own joke re: my verbosity here…
Filed under: Complexity, Knowledge Management, Organizational Change Management, People Development, Performance Management, PMO, Portfolio Management, Program Management, Project Management, Project Success Factors | Tagged: INSEAD, Kishore Sengupta, Paul Ritchie, Phred Dvorak, The Experience Trap, Wall Street Journal | 1 Comment »
By now, the preponderance of my readers are syndicated (via newsreaders). However, at first, most were e-mail subscribers, but now they’re only about 10 percent of the total. If you’re interested in getting Crossderry in your inbox, use the following link to sign up:
Peter Thomas’s recent comment (here) and his post on developing an international BI strategy (here), reminded me that I had forgotten to post on some interesting dimensions of project and project complexity. Or at least they’re interesting to me…
This PDF outlines some of the complexity that culture introduces to managing global projects. It’s nothing revolutionary, but I’ve always liked two aspects of these slides:
- One slide outlines the cultural dilemnas well: “How does an India-based SAP project manager talk to a Manhattan-based marketing analyst?”
- Another reminds us that we need to remember that we’re individuals, not stereotypes… and yes, I’m the Paul R. on that slide.
Finally got a chance to meet one of my fellow bloggers in meatspace… Jerry Manas (from The Marengo Group and PMThink!) and I presented at the PMO Summit put on by The Performance Institute. Excellent conversations, as Jerry relates.
I’ll post later on some key points of my presentation later and the rest of the day I attended, but for now here’s a link to Jerry’s thoughts on the virtual PMO.
I just realized that I forgot to tout an upcoming talk I’m giving at the 2009 Project Management Office Summit, 5-6 February 2009 (info and registration here, brochure here). My session is the Friday keynote at 0900h: Advance an Established and Operational PMO: Lessons from a Mature PMO.
You can find plenty of good advice about how to spin up a new PMO, but I’ve not seen enough solid guidance on how to build upon initial successes. In fact, a successful PMO can sow the seeds of its own demise if it doesn’t continuously change — e.g., what worked in year one becomes dysfunctional in year three. To that end, I’ll talk about common pitfalls and how to overcome or avoid them.
I hope that Crossderry readers will be able to make it… I look forward to chatting with you all!
I’m fascinated by complexity theory and attempts to apply its insights to the software business. If you’re interested in those topics you could do worse that to add two bloggers — Jurgen and Bas — to your newsreader (don’t forget about Crossderry).
Both touch on complexity regularly (Jurgen’s latest here, Bas’s latest here) and they’re clearly big fans of the theory and its implications. I agree there’s much that’s applicable, especially the concepts of iteration and feedback, which can even be used in “waterfall” approaches (here and here). My academic background makes me especially sympathetic to the limits of central planning (start here re: Hayek).
That said, I’m not sure we can rely on self-organization for everything. The most effective models of complex adaptive systems are derived from simple rules that generate complex phenomena. This approach is mimicked effectively in agile, iterative, and other rapid development techniques (list of SW methodologies here). Simple feature lists, regular interactions with stakeholders, short cycles, many versions of usable work product, etc. can generate feature-rich and useful applications.
However, the scalability and stability of these applications is often problematic. IMO, this result is to be expected given the evolution of complexity among living things. We like to point to complex creatures and structures — e.g., human brains — to support applications of complexity theory.
But do we remember that most life is still very simple (about half of the biomass is microscopic)? Also, aren’t complex creatures the ones that have had the spectacular denouements over the eons? Betting on self-organization isn’t always a winning bet. As I said, I instinctively like leveraging complexity concepts, but we must remember that they cut both ways.
Filed under: Complexity, Methodology, Portfolio Management, Program Management, Project Management, Requirements Management, Scope Management | Tagged: agile, Bas de Baar, complex adaptive systems, complexity theory, evolution, iterative, Jurgen Appelo, Paul Ritchie, RAD, waterfall | Leave a Comment »
It isn’t that this article by Navi Radjou of Forrester is wrong (here), but it misses at least three areas in which SAP leverages India’s talent and mind-set Sure, what Ranjan and the SAP India team have done (and are doing) is impressive, but the impact of India and a globally adaptive approach are far more widespread:
- Solution Development: I won’t belabor this, but many key parts of the SAP solution portfolio are developed in India. The various SAP Labs sites in India moved quickly from coding functions, to designing modules, to delivering entire solutions.
- Global Services Delivery: Jan Grasshof’s team is much more than a simple “me-too” outsourcing shop. I was in Bangalore last week and saw the sophistication and speed with which they could bring value to the table. A great example — coincidentially with Nokia, also in Navi’s article — was when SAP Global Delivery both supply chain expertise and rapid prototyping to accelerate an implementation.
- Management Development: My organization’s management program includes one week in Bangalore, a measure of how integrated a global mindset has become in our way of working. SAP sends executives and managers half-way around the world so they can feel, taste, and touch what this new business world is all about. We also have exchange programs — even within projects — to ensure better, more consistent communications and understanding among our various teams.
Filed under: Collaboration, Communications, Complexity, Globalization, Leadership, Organizational Change Management, People Development, SAP | Tagged: Cisco, Forrester, Global Delivery, Globalization, India, Jan Grasshof, management training, Navi Radjou, Nokia, Paul Ritchie, SAP Labs, team building, virtual teams | Leave a Comment »