The purpose of this paper is to provide some insights about P2M, and more specifically, to develop some thoughts about Project Management seen as a Mirror, a place for reflection…, between the Mission of organisation and its actual creation of Values (with s: a source of value for people, organisations and society). This place is the realm of complexity, of interactions between multiple variables, each of them having a specific time horizon and occupying a specific place, playing a specific role.
Before developing this paper I would like to borrow to my colleague and friend, Professor Ohara, the following, part of a paper going to be presented at IPMA World Congress, in New Delhi later this year in November 2005.
“P2M is the Japanese version of project & program management, which is the first standard guide for education and certification developed in 2001. A specific finding of P2M is characterized by “mission driven management of projects” or a program which harness complexity of problem solving observed in the interface between technical system and business model.” (Ohara, 2005, IPMA Conference, New Delhi)
“The term of “mission” is a key word in the field of corporate strategy, where it expresses raison d’etre or “value of business”. It is more specifically used for expressing “the client needs” in terms of a strategic business unit. The concept of mission is deemed to be a useful tool to share essential content of value and needs in message for complex project.” (Ohara, 2005, IPMA Conference, New Delhi)
“Mission is considered as a significant “metamodel representation” by several reasons. First, it represents multiple values for aspiration. The central objective of mission initiative is profiling of ideality in the future from reality, which all stakeholders are glad to accept and share.
Second, it shall be within a stretch of efforts, and not beyond or outside of the realization. Though it looks like unique, it has to depict a solid foundation. The pragmatic sense of equilibrium between innovation and adaptation is required for the mission. Third, it shall imply a rough sketch for solution to critical issues for problems in reality.” (Ohara, 2005, IPMA Conference, New Delhi)
“Project modeling” idea has been introduced in P2M program management. A package of three project models of “scheme”, “system” and “service” are given as a reference type program. (Ohara, 2005, IPMA Conference, New Delhi)
If these quotes apply to P2M, they are fully congruent with the results of the research undertaken and the resulting meta-model & meta-method developed by the CIMAP, ESC Lille Research Centre in Project & Program Management, since the 80’s.
The paper starts by questioning the common Project Management (PM) paradigm. Then discussing the concept of Project, it argues that an alternative epistemological position should be taken to capture Page 2 / 11 the very nature of the PM field. Based on this, a development about “the need of modelling to understand” is proposed grounded on two theoretical roots. This leads to the conclusion that, in order to enables this modelling, a standard approach is necessary, but should be understood under the perspective of the Theory of Convention in order to facilitate a situational and contextual application.
[1]
René Guénon,et al.
Initiation et réalisation spirituelle
,
1967
.
[2]
M. Boisot.
Knowledge Assets: Securing Competitive Advantage in the Information Economy
,
1998
.
[3]
C. Gersick.
REVOLUTIONARY CHANGE THEORIES: A MULTILEVEL EXPLORATION OF THE PUNCTUATED EQUILIBRIUM PARADIGM
,
1991
.
[4]
Donald A. Schön,et al.
Organizational Learning: A Theory Of Action Perspective
,
1978
.
[5]
Pierre-yves Gomez,et al.
Conventions: An Interpretation of Deep Structure in Organizations
,
2000
.
[6]
R. Ackoff,et al.
Mechanisms, organisms and social systems
,
1984
.
[7]
R. P. Declerck,et al.
Méthode de direction générale : le management stratégique
,
1983
.
[8]
Cynthia F. Kurtz,et al.
The new dynamics of strategy: sense-making in a complex and complicated world
,
2003,
IEEE Engineering Management Review.
[9]
Christophe Bredillet,et al.
Genesis and role of standards : theoretical foundations and socio-economical model for the construction and use of standards
,
2003
.
[10]
L. Mises,et al.
Epistemological Problems of Economics
,
1961
.
[11]
Joseph A. Schumpeter,et al.
Essays: On Entrepreneurs, Innovations, Business Cycles and the Evolution of Capitalism
,
1989
.
[12]
P. Senge.
The fifth discipline : the art and practice of the learning organization/ Peter M. Senge
,
1991
.
[13]
David Lewis.
Convention: A Philosophical Study
,
1986
.
[14]
André Orléan,et al.
Pour une approche cognitive des conventions économiques
,
1989
.
[15]
C. Lévi-Strauss.
The Elementary Structures of Kinship
,
1969
.
[16]
A. Kellerman,et al.
The Constitution of Society : Outline of the Theory of Structuration
,
2015
.
[17]
T. Kuhn,et al.
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.
,
1964
.