Visionary Project

From FORwiki

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Concept)
 
(6 intermediate revisions not shown)
Line 11: Line 11:
'''Visionary Project''' is the third lecture from a module on [[Project Visions and Visioning|Visions and Visioning]], first taught to graduate students from the Communication Faculty of the National School for Political and Administration Studies (Romania).
'''Visionary Project''' is the third lecture from a module on [[Project Visions and Visioning|Visions and Visioning]], first taught to graduate students from the Communication Faculty of the National School for Political and Administration Studies (Romania).
-
=== No vision, no projects ===
+
=== No Vision, No Projects ===
-
[[File:Vision-project.png|400px|thumb|left|''Figure 1: The relation between visioning and building good projects'']]
+
[[File:Vision-project.png]]
 +
 
 +
==== project management - a troubled discipline ====
 +
 
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>optimization school - how to plan a project?</li>
 +
<li>factor school - what determines a project’s success?</li>
 +
<li>contingency school - why do projects differ?</li>
 +
<li>behavior school - how do projects behave?</li>
 +
<li>governance school - how are projects governed?</li>
 +
<li>relationship school - how are projects generated?</li>
 +
<li>decision school - why do projects continue to live?</li>
 +
</ul>
 +
 
 +
==== cross-fertilization ====
 +
 
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>a simple and clear-cut definition of project and project management would be a difficult feat</li>
 +
<li>projects are defined as complex sets of activities, complex tasks, organizational structures, organization processes, transactions, networks, large-scale investments</li>
 +
<li>some overlap and shared ideas are discerned regarding project definition, such as temporarity, complexity, and interdisciplinary</li>
 +
</ul>
 +
 
 +
=== Temporary Social Systems ===
 +
 
 +
==== temporary organisation ====
 +
 
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>the time dimension is reflected by various concepts that are being used: temporary work, temporary systems, projectification and temporary organisations
 +
<li>groups of people collaborating to accomplish a joint task with the duration of the collaboration explicitly fixed, either by a specific date or by the attainment of a predefined task or condition
 +
</ul>
 +
 
 +
==== some features of TOs ====
 +
 
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>a set of diversely skilled people working together on a complex task over a limited period of time
 +
<li>limited in duration and membership, and in which people come together, interact, create something, and then disband
 +
<li>structures of limited duration that operate within and between permanent organisations.
 +
<li>bringing together a group of people who are unfamiliar with one another’s skills, but must work interdependently on complex tasks
 +
<li>separate legal and financial entities set up for a specific task and dissolved upon its completion
 +
</ul>
 +
 
 +
==== communalities & variables ====
 +
 
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>four common elements:
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>limited duration
 +
<li>one or more tasks to achieve, which are the reason for which the TO is set up
 +
<li>one or more teams interacting and working on the task(s)
 +
<li>the production of change through action and the completion of tasks(s)
 +
</ul>
 +
<li>variables:
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>the complexity of the tasks
 +
<li>the level of uncertainty as to whether the objective will be met
 +
<li>the interdependence of team members
 +
<li>limited resources (time, instruments, budget)
 +
<li>the degree of red tape within the TO
 +
<li>leadership style
 +
<li>methods and styles of communication
 +
<li>levels of complexity of intra- or inter-organisational TOs
 +
level of isolation and/or interdependence of the TO with respect to the organisational contexts
 +
</ul>
 +
</ul>
 +
 
 +
==== interorganisational TOs ====
 +
 
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>composed of independent and sovereign organizations collaborating mainly to contribute to a common task
 +
characteristic elements:
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>partnerships
 +
<li>team structure
 +
<li>goals
 +
<li>roles
 +
<li>responsibilities
 +
<li>products
 +
<li>paperwork
 +
<li>assessment criteria
 +
</ul>
 +
</ul>
 +
 
 +
==== trans-national European projects ====
 +
 
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>pre-project - the preparation and planning of the project proposal and the establishment of the consortium
 +
<li>implementation, monitoring and on-going evaluation of the project work-plan
 +
<li>reporting – sets out and clarifies achieved, on-going and final results and deliverables and their consistency with planned aims, objectives, defined resources and timing.
 +
<li>exploitation and mainstreaming - criteria in assessing the projects’ effectiveness and results
 +
</ul>
 +
 
 +
==== ITOs organizational dimension ====
 +
 
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>micro: core partners - information, decision-making, co-ordination flows, work flows are most stable over time
 +
<li>meso: partner’s consortium - competences and roles are defined during the bid preparation stage
 +
<li>macro: stakeholder network - fragile with respect to external stresses
 +
</ul>
 +
 
 +
=== Shrinking Time ===
 +
 
 +
==== life in the dromosphere ====
 +
 
 +
<ul>
 +
<li> in this new world of accelerated reality, traditional planning becomes in many ways a contradictory effort
 +
<li> planning requires a model that structures the world and allows change to be studied in a context that is assumed to remain stable
 +
<li> planning works best when the dimensions of the problem remain the same
 +
</ul>
 +
 
 +
==== strategic information systems ====
 +
 
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>IS developed with the intention of furthering or enabling a specific strategy
 +
<li>most important SIS applications are those which enable an organization to form its future relationship with its environment
 +
<li>the challenge is to break the rules of the past and structure IS to meet a variety of changing information requirements, some of which cannot even be known before the systems are built
 +
</ul>
 +
 
 +
===== vision failures =====
 +
 
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>the problem is that, by modeling processes and structures as they are at present, SIS developments are failing to take into account future requirements
 +
<li>detrimental effects:
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>the organisation's SIS development effort will be diverted or wasted
 +
<li>the SIS will not support the organisation's long-term strategy
 +
<li>the organisation's strategic flexibility may be compromised
 +
</ul>
 +
</ul>
 +
 
 +
===== step 1: conception =====
 +
 
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>creative, generative mental process, probably with a high degree of originality and with relatively little formality or routine
 +
<li>potential techniques may support the process:
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>creativity methods – ”blue-sky thinking”, ”brainstorming”, ”world caffe”
 +
<li>abstractization – SWOT, TOWS, STEEP, PESTE analysis
 +
</ul>
 +
</ul>
 +
 
 +
===== step 2: interpretation =====
 +
 
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>abstract and intuitive qualities of vision are at odds with the precision which is necessary for analysing, specifying and designing information systems
 +
<li>support:
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>focussing techiques – SODA (Strategic Options Development & Analysis), SCA (Strategic Choice Approach)
 +
<li>giving meaning - semantic analysis techniques
 +
</ul>
 +
</ul>
 +
 
 +
===== step 3: intention =====
 +
 
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>interpretation of the abstract vision onto achievable objectives, define targets and levels of performance
 +
<li>techniques for:
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>objective-setting – Strategic Options Generator, ICA model
 +
<li>target-setting – CSF (critical success factor analysis)
 +
</ul>
 +
</ul>
 +
 
 +
===== step 4: synthesis =====
 +
 
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>contributions of the various participants and the various strategic options which have been identified at the previous stage are synthesized into ”a single ambition”
 +
<li>practices
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>participation – soft systems methodology
 +
<li>consensus-building – Delphi technique
 +
</ul>
 +
</ul>
 +
 
 +
===== step 5: integration =====
 +
 
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>communicating the agreed values, norms, behviours and having them accepted as the ”cultural norm”
 +
<li>components:
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>communication techniques
 +
<li>inspiration - inspiring the participants to accept and follow the vision; team-building techniques
 +
</ul>
 +
</ul>
 +
 
 +
===== step 6: implementation =====
 +
 
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>the information system would be designed as it should be, not as it is presently
 +
<li>architectures and models are based largely on normal analysis and design techniques such as entity-relationship models, data flow diagrams and a variety of referential matrixes
 +
<li>the approach may be forward-looking, but the  techniques for developing requirements don’t support it
 +
</ul>
 +
 
 +
==== what about the nature of projects? ====
 +
 
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>the structural relation between project and vision crumbles, as the vision implodes into a project that is both determined by the vision and its container
 +
<li>the project is re-shaped into an evolutionary endeavor, in which even the word “project” is recursively re-imprinted
 +
<li>the reason for “project” proves to be internal, rather than external, while dissatisfaction is revealed to result from alienation, rather than stress factors
 +
</ul>
 +
 
 +
=== Concept ===
 +
 
 +
==== probing the future ====
 +
 
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>a concept car is a car prototype made to showcase a new vehicle’s styling, technology, and overall design before production
 +
<li>they are often shown at motor shows to gauge customer reaction to new and radical designs which may or may not have a chance of being produced
 +
</ul>
 +
 
 +
==== concept vehicles ====
 +
 
 +
<ul>
 +
<li>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94jBukpqCgM Toyota Concept Car]
 +
<li>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_o_v47fzHQ Mercedes Concept Car]
 +
<li>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owPFH53rtbM BMW Concept Car]
 +
<li>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9Z-aT4oBl0 Chevrolet Concept Car]
 +
<li>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xmuSCT6FnE Dacia Concept Car]
 +
</ul>

Current revision as of 08:26, 13 December 2012

Project Visions and Visioning
File:Vision.jpg This article is developed within the scope of the Project Visions and Visioning, an effort to enhance Foresight learning through collaborative work.


Visionary Project is the third lecture from a module on Visions and Visioning, first taught to graduate students from the Communication Faculty of the National School for Political and Administration Studies (Romania).

Contents

No Vision, No Projects

File:Vision-project.png

project management - a troubled discipline

  • optimization school - how to plan a project?
  • factor school - what determines a project’s success?
  • contingency school - why do projects differ?
  • behavior school - how do projects behave?
  • governance school - how are projects governed?
  • relationship school - how are projects generated?
  • decision school - why do projects continue to live?

cross-fertilization

  • a simple and clear-cut definition of project and project management would be a difficult feat
  • projects are defined as complex sets of activities, complex tasks, organizational structures, organization processes, transactions, networks, large-scale investments
  • some overlap and shared ideas are discerned regarding project definition, such as temporarity, complexity, and interdisciplinary

Temporary Social Systems

temporary organisation

  • the time dimension is reflected by various concepts that are being used: temporary work, temporary systems, projectification and temporary organisations
  • groups of people collaborating to accomplish a joint task with the duration of the collaboration explicitly fixed, either by a specific date or by the attainment of a predefined task or condition

some features of TOs

  • a set of diversely skilled people working together on a complex task over a limited period of time
  • limited in duration and membership, and in which people come together, interact, create something, and then disband
  • structures of limited duration that operate within and between permanent organisations.
  • bringing together a group of people who are unfamiliar with one another’s skills, but must work interdependently on complex tasks
  • separate legal and financial entities set up for a specific task and dissolved upon its completion

communalities & variables

  • four common elements:
    • limited duration
    • one or more tasks to achieve, which are the reason for which the TO is set up
    • one or more teams interacting and working on the task(s)
    • the production of change through action and the completion of tasks(s)
  • variables:
    • the complexity of the tasks
    • the level of uncertainty as to whether the objective will be met
    • the interdependence of team members
    • limited resources (time, instruments, budget)
    • the degree of red tape within the TO
    • leadership style
    • methods and styles of communication
    • levels of complexity of intra- or inter-organisational TOs level of isolation and/or interdependence of the TO with respect to the organisational contexts

interorganisational TOs

  • composed of independent and sovereign organizations collaborating mainly to contribute to a common task characteristic elements:
    • partnerships
    • team structure
    • goals
    • roles
    • responsibilities
    • products
    • paperwork
    • assessment criteria

trans-national European projects

  • pre-project - the preparation and planning of the project proposal and the establishment of the consortium
  • implementation, monitoring and on-going evaluation of the project work-plan
  • reporting – sets out and clarifies achieved, on-going and final results and deliverables and their consistency with planned aims, objectives, defined resources and timing.
  • exploitation and mainstreaming - criteria in assessing the projects’ effectiveness and results

ITOs organizational dimension

  • micro: core partners - information, decision-making, co-ordination flows, work flows are most stable over time
  • meso: partner’s consortium - competences and roles are defined during the bid preparation stage
  • macro: stakeholder network - fragile with respect to external stresses

Shrinking Time

life in the dromosphere

  • in this new world of accelerated reality, traditional planning becomes in many ways a contradictory effort
  • planning requires a model that structures the world and allows change to be studied in a context that is assumed to remain stable
  • planning works best when the dimensions of the problem remain the same

strategic information systems

  • IS developed with the intention of furthering or enabling a specific strategy
  • most important SIS applications are those which enable an organization to form its future relationship with its environment
  • the challenge is to break the rules of the past and structure IS to meet a variety of changing information requirements, some of which cannot even be known before the systems are built
vision failures
  • the problem is that, by modeling processes and structures as they are at present, SIS developments are failing to take into account future requirements
  • detrimental effects:
    • the organisation's SIS development effort will be diverted or wasted
    • the SIS will not support the organisation's long-term strategy
    • the organisation's strategic flexibility may be compromised
step 1: conception
  • creative, generative mental process, probably with a high degree of originality and with relatively little formality or routine
  • potential techniques may support the process:
    • creativity methods – ”blue-sky thinking”, ”brainstorming”, ”world caffe”
    • abstractization – SWOT, TOWS, STEEP, PESTE analysis
step 2: interpretation
  • abstract and intuitive qualities of vision are at odds with the precision which is necessary for analysing, specifying and designing information systems
  • support:
    • focussing techiques – SODA (Strategic Options Development & Analysis), SCA (Strategic Choice Approach)
    • giving meaning - semantic analysis techniques
step 3: intention
  • interpretation of the abstract vision onto achievable objectives, define targets and levels of performance
  • techniques for:
    • objective-setting – Strategic Options Generator, ICA model
    • target-setting – CSF (critical success factor analysis)
step 4: synthesis
  • contributions of the various participants and the various strategic options which have been identified at the previous stage are synthesized into ”a single ambition”
  • practices
    • participation – soft systems methodology
    • consensus-building – Delphi technique
step 5: integration
  • communicating the agreed values, norms, behviours and having them accepted as the ”cultural norm”
  • components:
    • communication techniques
    • inspiration - inspiring the participants to accept and follow the vision; team-building techniques
step 6: implementation
  • the information system would be designed as it should be, not as it is presently
  • architectures and models are based largely on normal analysis and design techniques such as entity-relationship models, data flow diagrams and a variety of referential matrixes
  • the approach may be forward-looking, but the techniques for developing requirements don’t support it

what about the nature of projects?

  • the structural relation between project and vision crumbles, as the vision implodes into a project that is both determined by the vision and its container
  • the project is re-shaped into an evolutionary endeavor, in which even the word “project” is recursively re-imprinted
  • the reason for “project” proves to be internal, rather than external, while dissatisfaction is revealed to result from alienation, rather than stress factors

Concept

probing the future

  • a concept car is a car prototype made to showcase a new vehicle’s styling, technology, and overall design before production
  • they are often shown at motor shows to gauge customer reaction to new and radical designs which may or may not have a chance of being produced

concept vehicles

Personal tools