Evolution of Project Management: From Expert-Driven Methodologies to Widely Accessible but Less Effective Approaches

Convergence Consulting’s latest blog post explores the evolution of project management from its historical roots to the present, highlighting the shift from expert-driven methodologies to widely accessible but less effective approaches. We delve into the concept of Active Project Management, which emphasises forward-looking strategies, risk modelling and trend-based management to tackle modern challenges effectively. We discuss how leveraging scheduling tools and adopting a proactive mindset can transform project management practices to keep projects on track. These insights could help you stay ahead of the curve and ensure successful outcomes in increasingly complex environments.

A Bit of History

Projects have always been managed based on experience, knowledge and the ability to work with people. In more recent times, the field of project management began to take shape with the advent of mathematical methods and computer programs that allowed for project scheduling. In the 1980’s, computers were expensive, computer programs were costly and only true professionals worked with them.

Then, at some time after that came personal computers, more affordable programs and the widespread adoption of project management methods and tools. However, the level of professionalism sharply declined. Criteria such as ‘Easy to Learn’ and ‘Easy to Use’ came to the forefront. Development shifted towards soft skills such as leadership and communication over technical acumen. The advancement of professional project management methods and tools reduced, however standardisation emerged.

Use of Standards

If you look at the development of the PMBOK Guide, comparing the first version from twenty years ago with the latest, the content has not actually changed much, except for the addition of the knowledge area of stakeholder management. Standards need to be known to communicate in a professional language, however they should not be followed blindly.

It is also important to note that standards are not methodologies. They describe typical processes and cover established processes and methods that have been in use for a long time, meaning they are not necessarily the best or the latest, just the most widespread.

Project Management Today

Project management standards incorporate common sense, but that’s not enough today. Today we have computers that can calculate more options than a human and process more information to optimise decisions. However, this must be used correctly by a project professional.

It is concerning that overly simplified methods, such as solely milestone-based management are being popularised. In government Departments and Agencies, project management is often replaced by task management. Methods that are reactive, rather than active, are used. Problems are identified but not anticipated, leading to the need for timely and effective decisions to be made at the last minute.

Active Project Management

Plans should be developed considering all existing constraints. Risk analysis and determining necessary reserves for time, cost and resources are mandatory to achieve set goals with a high probability. Risk management is a continuous process involving constant monitoring of the probability of achieving target goals, but needs to consider changing circumstances. Given this, trend-based management requires immediate responses to negative trends.

Resource Critical Path – a Thing?

The traditional Critical Path Method, which determines the longest chain of operations, could be argued to only work on projects with inexhaustible resources. This is because the Critical Path Method is based on the assumption that there are no constraints on resources such as manpower, equipment or materials. It calculates the longest path through a project’s network of tasks, assuming that each task can start and finish on schedule without delay due to resource shortages. In reality, most projects face resource limitations, which can affect the actual duration and scheduling of tasks. One must determine the critical sequence of operations considering all constraints, taking into account the Resource Critical Path and/ or Critical Chain. Let’s consider a simple example, the following project consisting of only five tasks and one resource.

The project, calculated using the Critical Path Method, shows the Critical Path as tasks 3, 4, and 5. However, resource A, used in tasks 2 and 4, is overloaded.

However, what I term the Resource Critical Path (considering only continuous resource A) is against tasks 3, 4 and 2. If Microsoft project was able to actually calculate this as a critical path and not simply only resource level, the overload of resource A is eliminated while producing a path:

Not many scheduling tools can perform such calculations (a Resource Critical Path that also considered Material and Financial constraints). This is because schedule software packages are somewhat primitive due to, in my opinion, general project management capability.

Risk Modelling and Determining Necessary Reserves

Risk modelling allows us to determine the probability of achieving target indicators or to set such reliable indicators. This could technically be done by the three-scenario method and the Monte Carlo method.

Risk Management

It is necessary to continuously monitor project risks, which can appear, change and disappear. Regular risk modelling of the remaining part of the project and constant recalculation of the probabilities of achieving directive indicators are required to assess project performance effectively.

Trend-Based Management

For management to be effective, it must respond to negative trends and address them promptly. If you think about it, utilising only the current project status will not provide enough information for timely decision-making, as outlined in the following example: If a project is ahead of the baseline plan by 10 days, but a month ago it was 20 days ahead and two months ago it was 35 days ahead, the status shows that everything is fine and milestones are being met on time. However, the trend is negative and if it continues, issues will be realised.

Additionally, changes are inevitable in a project. Future tasks, resources and risks may change. Thus, analysing past performance is insufficient. It is necessary to continuously review forecasts and analyse not only past performance, but also future projections. The most effective method of performance analysis is trend analysis of the probability of achieving planned indicators. Negative trends in success probability indicate that reserves, or buffers, are being used up faster than expected and corrective actions are needed.

Active Project Management

Active project management looks forward, unlike common methods that draw conclusions based on past analysis. Active project management is based on trend analysis, preventing the development of negative trends. It is universally applicable to project, program and project portfolio management.

Conclusion The commonly accepted project management methods described in standards need to be known, but they should not be seen as best practices. Be creative, familiarise yourself with alternative thinking such as Active Project Management. If you wish to learn more about this in detail, feel free to reach out to Convergence Consulting!