Will the Triple Constraint become the Project Diamond?

Craig Brown shares his experience (here) using a project diamond instead of the triple constraint (a.k.a., the Iron Triangle).  I was wondering whether someone would do like this… I’ve seen quality represented as a “Q” in the middle of the triangle or as an area “under” the triangle. 

I’ll have to think some more about how to use it.   I like the concept in theory, but I’m not sure how well the prioritization exercise Craig describes would work in practice.


2 Responses

  1. The original ‘iron triangle’ appears to have been developed by Dr. Martin Barnes in 1969 (for more on the see ‘The Origins of Modern Project Management’ at http://www.mosaicprojects.com.au/Resources_Papers_050.html) His original definition was Time, Cost and Output which summarises the requirements far better then ‘scope or ‘quality’.

    If anyone know of a use of the ‘triple constraint’ pre 1969 I will be interested to know and update the paper.

  2. […] spend a bit more in resources to get speed and thoroughness (that pesky triple constraint… here and here).  But there’s also the risk management angle to […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: