Rob Schneider posted a comment suggesting the PM 2.0 proponents "are people (that) tend to have experience/careers in industries and on projects where scope is fungible."
I'm wondering out loud how many software projects have these attributes. I have no experience in that domain. I've experienced firms that hired us to rescue projects where they started out that way. Product companies and internal IT development efforts (mostly ERP).
But could it be that PM 2.0 is targeted to "projects" where the scope has no bounds and therefore the budget doesn't either. Brian Kennemer says the budget controls are rare on the projects he helps.
Is these actually the case over the broad spectrum of software development activities. There are 36 NAICS codes for "software." The 541XXX section is for development. I'll poke around to see what amount they contribute to the GDP.
Maybe all this fuss about the applicability of PM 2.0 is moot. Maybe the number of firms that don't care about managing cost, schedule, and technical performance in ways similar to PMBOK is trivially small.
So here's a quick summary from the Bureau of Labor Statistics for the 541500 NAICS code (Computer System Design and Related Services), by subcategory and number employed as of May 2008
- Computer Programmers - 394,320
- Computer software engineers, applications - 494,160
- Computer software engineers, system - 381,830
- Computer systems analyst - 489,890
- Data Base Administrators - 115,770
- Network and Computer Systems Administrators - 327,850
- Network Systems and Data Communications Analyst - 230,410
When you add in the other ancillary occupations related to computing systems you get 3,308,260 people working in the Computer and Mathematical Sciences Industry.
So which of those 3,308,260 have some concern for staying on budget and schedule? How can PM 2.0 processes as described in this post help them do this?
Now add to those, the other "project" based activities - construction, product development, industrial operations, and similar labor codes and ask how many "projects" can:
use Web-based, emergent, collaborative project management software and that focuses on collective intelligence, productivity and project leadership as the basic factors of project success?
Rather than a credible Performance Measurement Baseline with proper project controls to avoid the root causes of project difficulties described by:
- 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 (or some form of performance assessment)
