In a response to the new definition of PM 2.0, it was stated
Project Management 2.0 is an approach to managing projects that is brought to life by the use of Web-based, emergent, collaborative project management software and that focuses on collective intelligence, productivity and project leadership as the basic factors of project success.
It turns out from research there are a common set of attributes found in troubled projects:
- Inattention to budgetary responsibilities
- Work authorization not always followed
- Budget and data reconciliation issues
- Lack of an integrated management system
- Baseline fluctuations & frequent replanning
- Current period and retroactive changes Improper use of management reserve
- Performance measurement techniques not reflecting actual accomplishments
- Untimely and unrealistic Latest Revised Estimates (LRE)
- Progress not monitored in a regular and consistent manner
- Lack of vertical and horizontal traceability (critical path)
- Not capturing and using cost and schedule data for corrective action
- Lack of predictive variance analysis
- Lack of internal surveillance and controls Managerial actions not demonstrated using Earned Value
So an open question to the "leading voices" of PM 2.0.
How can PM 2.0 address these problems (or other identified problems for that matter) in specific ways in order to increase the probability of project success?
