Not recorded

The Evolution of Project Management

~ By Sandro Azzopardi

The importance of Project Management is an

important topic because all organisations, be they
small or large, at one time or other, are involved in
implementing new undertakings. These undertakings
may be diverse, such as, the development of a new
product or service; the establishment of a new
production line in a manufacturing enterprise; a
public relations promotion campaign; or a major
building programme. Whilst the 1980s were about
quality and the 1990s were all about globalisation, the
2000s are about velocity. That is, to keep ahead of their
competitors, organisations are continually faced with
the development of complex products, services and
processes with very short time-to-market windows
combined with the need for cross-functional expertise.
In this scenario, project management becomes a very
important and powerful tool in the hands of organisations that understand its use and have the
competencies to apply it.

The development of project management capabilities in organisations, simultaneously with the application
of information management systems, allow enterprise teams to work in partnership in defining plans and
managing take-to-market projects by synchronising team-oriented tasks, schedules, and resource
allocations. This allows cross-functional teams to create and share project information. However, this is not
sufficient, information management systems have the potential to allow project management practices to
take place in a real-time environment. As a consequence of this potential project management proficiency,
locally, nationally or globally dispersed users are able to concurrently view and interact with the same
updated project information immediately, including project schedules, threaded discussions, and other
relevant documentation. In this scenario the term dispersed user takes on a wider meaning. It not only
includes the cross-functional management teams but also experts drawn from the organisation's supply
chain, and business partners.

On a macro level organisations are motivated to implement project management techniques to ensure that
their undertakings (small or major) are delivered on time, within the cost budget and to the stipulated
quality. On a micro level, project management combined with an appropriate information management
system has the objectives of: (a) reducing project overhead costs; (b) customising the project workplace to
fit the operational style of the project teams and respective team members; (c) proactively informing the
executive management strata of the strategic projects on a real-time basis; (d) ensuring that project team
members share accurate, meaningful and timely project documents; and (e) ensuring that critical task
deadlines are met. Whilst the motivation and objectives to apply project management in organisations is
commendable, they do not assure project success.

However, before discussing the meaning and achievement of project success it is appropriate at this stage
to provide a brief history of project management.

1
Brief History of Project Management
Project management has been practiced for thousands of years dating back to the Egyptian epoch, but it
was in the mid-1950s that organisations commenced applying formal project management tools and
techniques to complex projects. Modern project management methods had their origins in two parallel but
different problems of planning and control in projects in the United States. The first case involved the U.S
Navy, which at that time was concerned with the control of contracts for its Polaris Missile project. These
contracts consisted of research, development work and manufacturing of parts that were unique and had
never been previously undertaken.

This particular project was characterised by high uncertainty, since neither cost nor time could be
accurately estimated. Hence, completion times were based on probabilities. Time estimates were based on
optimistic, pessimistic and most likely. These three time scenarios were mathematically assessed to
determine the probable completion date. This procedure was called program evaluation review technique
(PERT). Initially, the PERT technique did not take into consideration cost. However, the cost feature was
later included using the same estimating approach as with time. Due to the three estimation scenarios,
PERT was found (and still is) to be best suited for projects with a high degree of uncertainty reflecting their
level of uniqueness. The second case, involved the private sector, namely, E.I du Pont de Nemours
Company, which had undertaken to construct major chemical plants in U.S. Unlike the Navy Polaris
project, these construction undertakings required accurate time and cost estimates. The methodology
developed by this company was originally referred to as project planning and scheduling (PPS). PPS
required realistic estimates of cost and time, and is thus a more definitive approach than PERT. The PPS
technique was later developed into the critical path method (CPM) that became very popular with the
construction industry.

During the 1960s and 1970s, both PERT (Program Evaluation Review Technique) and CPM (Critical Path
Method) increased their popularity within the private and public sectors. Defence Departments of various
countries, NASA, and large engineering and construction companies world wide applied project
management principles and tools to manage large budget, schedule-driven projects. The popularity in the
use of these project management tools during this period coincided with the development of computers
and the associated packages that specialised in project management. However, initially these computer
packages were very costly and were executed only on mainframe or mini computers. The use of project
management techniques in the 1980s was facilitated with the advent of the personal computer and
associated low cost project management software. Hence, during this period, the manufacturing and
software development sectors commenced to adopt and implement sophisticated project management
practices as well. By the 1990s, project management theories, tools and techniques were widely received by
different industries and organisations.

Four Periods in the Development of Modern

Project Management
[1] Prior to 1958: Craft system to human relations. During this time, the evolution of technology, such as,
automobiles and telecommunications shortened the project schedule. For instance, automobiles allowed
effective resource allocation and mobility, whilst the telecommunication system increased the speed of
communication. Furthermore, the job specification which later became the basis of developing the Work
Breakdown Structure (WBS) was widely used and Henry Gantt invented the Gantt chart. Examples of
projects undertaken during this period as supported by documented evidence include: (a) Building the
Pacific Railroad in 1850s; (b) Construction of the Hoover Dam in 1931-1936, that employed approximately
5,200 workers and is still one of the highest gravity dams in the U.S. generating about four billion kilowatt

2
hours a year; and (c) The Manhattan Project in 1942-1945 that was the pioneer research and development
project for producing the atomic bomb, involving 125,000 workers and costing nearly $2 billion.

[2] 1958-1979: Application of Management Science. Significant technology advancement took place
between 1958 and 1979, such as, the first automatic plain-paper copier by Xerox in 1959. Between 1956 and
1958 several core project management tools including CPM and PERT were introduced. However, this
period was characterised by the rapid development of computer technology. The progression from the
mainframe to the mini-computer in the 1970s made computers affordable to medium size companies. In
1975, Bill Gates and Paul Allen founded Microsoft. Furthermore, the evolution of computer technology
facilitated the emergence of several project management software companies, including, Artemis (1977),
Oracle (1977), and Scitor Corporation (1979). In the 1970s other project management tools such as Material
Requirements Planning (MRP) were also introduced.

Examples of projects undertaken during this period and which influenced the development of modem
project management as we know it today include: (a) Polaris missile project initiated in 1956 that had the
objective of delivering nuclear missiles carried by submarines, known as Fleet Ballistic Missile for the U.S
Navy. The project successfully launched its first Polaris missile in 1961; (b) Apollo project initiated in 1960
with the objective of sending man to the moon; and (c) E.I du Pont de Nemours chemical plant project
commencing in 1958, that had the objective of building major chemical production plants across the U.S.

[3] 1980-1994: Production Centre Human Resources. The 1980s and 1990s are characterised by the
revolutionary development in the information management sector with the introduction of the personal
computer (PC) and associated computer communications networking facilities. This development resulted
in having low cost multitasking PCs that had high efficiency in managing and controlling complex project
schedules. During this period low cost project management software for PCs became widely available that
made project management techniques more easily accessible.

Examples of major projects undertaken during this period that illustrate the application of high
technology, and project management tools and practices include: (a) England France Channel project, 1989
to1991. This project was an international project that involved two governments, several financial
institutions, engineering construction companies, and other various organisations from the two countries.
The language, use of standard metrics, and other communication differences needed to be closely
coordinated; (b) Space Shuttle Challenger project, 1983 to 1986. The disaster of the Challenger space shuttle
focused attention on risk management, group dynamics, and quality management; and (c) xv Calgary
Winter Olympic of 1988, which successfully applied project management practices to event management.

[4] 1995-Present: Creating a New Environment. This period is dominated by the developments related to
the Internet that changed dramatically business practices in the mid 1990s. The Internet has provided fast,
interactive, and customised new medium that allows people to browse, purchase, and track products and
services online instantly. This has resulted in making firms more productive, more efficient, and more
client oriented. Furthermore, many of today's project management software have an Internet connectivity
feature. This allows automatic uploading of data so that anyone around the globe with a standard browser
can: (a) input the most recent status of their assigned tasks; (b) find out how the overall project is doing; (c)
be informed of any delays or advances in the schedule; and (d) stay "in the loop" for their project role,
while working independently at a remote site.

An example of a major project undertaken during this period is the Year 2000 (Y2K) project. The Y2K
Project, known as the millennium bug referred to the problem that computers may not function correctly
on January lst, 2000 at 12 AM. This was a global phenomenon and was highly problematic because
resolving the problem at one's organisation did not guarantee immunity, since a breakdown in the
organisation's supply chain could affect the organisation's operating capability. Many organisations set up
a project office to control and comply with their stakeholders regarding the Y2K issue. Furthermore, use of

3
the Internet was common practice that led to the establishment of the virtual project office. The goal of this
virtual project office was: (a) to deliver uninterrupted turn-of-the-century; (b) monitor Y2K project efforts;
(c) provide coordination; (d) develop a risk management plan; and (e) communicate Y2K compliance
efforts with various stakeholders. Thus, the virtual project office was a focal point for all the project works,
and it increased the awareness and importance of risk management practices to numerous organisations.

Why Project Management?

There is no doubt that organisations today face more aggressive competition than in the past and the
business environment they operate in is a highly turbulent one. This scenario has increased the need for
organisational accountability for the private and public sectors, leading to a greater focus and demand for
operational effectiveness and efficiency.

Effectiveness and efficiency may be facilitated through the introduction of best practices that are able to
optimise the management of organisational resources. It has been shown that operations and projects are
dissimilar with each requiring different management techniques. Hence, in a project environment, project
management can: (a) support the achievement of project and organisational goals; and (b) provide a
greater assurance to stakeholders that resources are being managed effectively.

Research by Roberts and Furlonger in a study of information systems projects show that using a
reasonably detailed project management methodology, as compared to a loose methodology, improves
productivity by 20 to 30 percent. Furthermore, the use of a formalised project management structure to
projects can facilitate: (a) the clarification of project scope; (b) agreement of objectives and goals; (c)
identifying resources needed; (d) ensuring accountability for results and performance; (e) and encouraging
the project team to focus on the final benefits to be achieved. Moreover, the research indicates that 85-90%
of projects fail to deliver on time, on budget and to the quality of performance expected. The major causes
identified for this situation include:

1. Lack of a valid business case justifying the project;

2. Objectives not properly defined and agreed;
3. Lack of communication and stakeholder management;
4. Outcomes and/or benefits not properly defined in measurable terms;
5. Lack of quality control;
6. Poor estimation of duration and cost;
7. Inadequate definition and acceptance of roles (governance);
8. Insufficient planning and coordination of resources.

It should be emphasised that the causes for the failure to deliver on time, on budget and to the quality of
performance expected could be addressed by the application of project management practices.
Furthermore, the failure to deliver on time, on budget and to the quality of performance expected does not
necessarily mean that the project was itself a failure. At this stage what is being discussed is the
effectiveness and efficiency of project execution and not whether a project is a success or failure.

Conclusion
Project management should be viewed as a tool that helps organisations to execute designated projects
effectively and efficiently. The use of this tool does not automatically guarantee project success. (project
success will be discussed in a subsequent issue). However, in preparation for the next issue, I would like
you to think about the distinction between project success and project management success. This
4
distinction will provide further insight to the questions: Why are some projects perceived as failures when
they have met all the traditional standards of success, namely, completed on time, completed within
budget, and meeting all the technical specifications? Why are some projects perceived to be successful
when they have failed to meet two important criteria that are traditionally associated with success, namely,
not completed on time and not completed within budget?

Sandro Azzopardi is a professional author who writes articles on various subjects on his web site and local
newspapers and magazines.

©Project Smart. All rights reserved ~ www.projectsmart.co.uk