Two Most Common Project Management Issues Essay

Question

Discuss About The Two Most Common Project Management Issues?

Answer:

Introduction

This assignment deals with the analysis of two most common project management issues that is encountered in the global context. Moreover, some additional work has been undertaken to analyze some other important factors of project management like team dynamics and team composition process.

Project Management Concepts

Project Significance, Aims, Objectives

The main significance of this project is that it helps to develop a considerable amount of insight and knowledge on the topic of project management as well as the issues encountered during project management processes.

The main aim of this project is to analyze different aspects of project management and the main objective is to identify two common issues encountered during project management and execution.

Key Problems Encountered

The key problems that were encountered were as follows.

  • The reference data was mainly based on a global point of view and hence, organization-specific data could not be generated.

Team Dynamics and Insights

Team Dynamic is defined as the chemistry between the team members during the execution of the project. When a team member feels valued by the project manager and other team members, her morale and confidence go up. She tends to feel more commitment to the project and is likely to contribute more discussions, task completion and other project activities. A positive team atmosphere usually leads employees to feel empowered (Heizer and Barry 2013). They’re more comfortable taking calculated risks and seeking out innovative solutions to complex problems. Team members who disrespect each other tend to focus on their differences, not their commonalities. Establishing an environment in which employees can thrive without conflict involves improving the group dynamic so that team members listen to each other, value individual experience and consider other perspectives before making a decision.

Key Team Dynamics

A sufficient team dynamic can be harder to develop than breaking down one, since it is diverse for each of the different teams. Systems that work for an arrangement of individuals may not work for others. An independent venture pioneer needs to set up a situation helpful for coordinated effort, collaboration and profitability. Inability to perceive the significance of group flow in venture administration may confine your group's accomplishments. Setting up a successful group includes characterizing an unmistakable reason, objectives, conditions and responsibility. At the point when groups work firmly, they are not occupied by negligible contentions and things that don't really make a difference to the primary concern.

Team Composition and Process

Despite the fact that a project concentrates on picking up the advantages from the developments, it is in a general sense a human attempt. To this end, the most imperative assets for any project are the general participants who will be required in planning and actualizing it. It is the dedication and abilities that these individuals bring that will eventually decide whether the project arranging procedure will bring about the improvement of powerful systems that will genuinely be actualized and assessed after some time. On the off chance that the project sets off with the opportune individuals, structures and procedures required in the project, the association ought to have the capacity to propel the project rapidly and effectively and have a decent shot of being at last fruitful. Then again if any of these perspectives is inadequate with regards to, the project is probably going to be incapable as well as wasteful.

Project Management Issues

Two Project Management Issues

Two main project management issues identified in this course are the challenges in project status reporting and the effect of institutional complexity on the project management. Regarding the first issue, employees want to be seen as capable performers according to senior administration. On the off chance that bad news would adversely affect them, they have a solid impetus to paint a ruddy picture. Additionally, if a employee is in charge of the occasions that made the "awful news" or trusts that he or she will be considered responsible, he or she will have a tendency to put off conveyance of the awful news or to make light of the seriousness of the negative data with the expectation that the issue can be settled before its earnestness is found (Verzuh 2015). The second issue is related to the effect of institutional complexity on a project. Complexity is viewed as a fundamental figure the field of project administration. In any case, the attributes and nature of project complexity is a questionable civil argument. While a few variables are considered as drivers of project complexity, the reviews researching those are rare. The expression "complexity" can subsequently be seen through different undertones in various fields as well as also within a similar field.

Academic Theory on the First Issue

Employees want to be seen as capable performers according to senior administration. On the off chance that bad news would adversely affect them, they have a solid impetus to paint a ruddy picture. Additionally, if a employee is in charge of the occasions that made the "awful news" or trusts that he or she will be considered responsible, he or she will have a tendency to put off conveyance of the awful news or to make light of the seriousness of the negative data with the expectation that the issue can be settled before its earnestness is found (Heizer and Barry 2013). This happens to some degree since employees are more often than not on the weaker side of a power relationship. At the point when the hierarchical atmosphere is not open to awful news, honest revealing can be restrained. Most administrators expect that employees will talk up when they see issues that may unfavourably affect a project and hence normally accept that representatives will do precisely that. Sadly, a large portion of the reviews demonstrate this is a credulous suspicion. Explore demonstrates that numerous employees tend to put a positive turn on anything they answer to senior administration. Rather than taking a representative's status report at face esteem, officials ought to request the assessments of other people who are near the project. In doing as such, it is essential to get sees from various levels inside the association. In the event that everybody substantiates the status, the officials can have substantially more noteworthy trust in the exactness of what has been transmitted. In one review, scientists evaluated the records of 56 experienced programming project supervisors and found that project administrators compose one-sided reports 60% of the time and that their inclination is more than twice as liable to be hopeful (that is, to improve things look than they truly are) than cynical (Verzuh 2015). On the off chance that employees have watched negative results for other people who have conveyed awful news, they may expect that officials will shoot the dispatcher.

Insight on the First Issue

Officials tend to credit distorting to poor moral conduct on the representative's part. While the examination showed that people with a more noteworthy feeling of individual ethical quality are all the more ready to report the awful news when a project includes a faulty item that can possibly hurt others, it likewise uncovered that representatives distort for an assortment of reasons and that individual characteristics, work atmosphere and social standards all assume a part. As far as identity characteristics, hazard affinity matters with regards to choosing the correct colleagues for a project (Heizer and Barry 2013). A project supervisor who is a daring person might probably take a risk and participate in some change management, for instance. Furthermore, colleagues who tend to see the glass as "half-full" (as opposed to "half-unfilled") will probably be more hopeful when they report their project's status. Specialists have studied around 250 colleagues required in state government extends and got some information about themselves, their work atmosphere and their detailing rehearses. The itemized consider proposed that people with a higher penchant for hazard taking or higher vocation yearnings will probably distort. In a review looking at social reactions of 162 working experts in the United States with 192 working experts in Singapore, every one of whom were taking master's-level night classes, scientists found a linkage between national culture and individual inclination toward quiet inside an association. This review analyzed working experts from a more "individualistic" national culture (for this situation, the U.S.) with those from a more "collectivist" national culture (Singapore) regarding their status-announcing practices. The analysts have found that representatives from an individualistic culture had a tendency to be more touchy to their work atmosphere than those from a collectivist culture and reacted all the more firmly to guarantees of prizes for precise detailing. Another review uncovered that representatives in an individualistic culture tended to move accuse more regularly than people in a collectivist culture (Verzuh 2015). At the point when there was a chance to move fault to an outsider merchant, for instance, people from a more individualistic culture (for this situation, the U.S.) had a tendency to be all the more ready to report awful news, yet people from a more collectivist culture (in this present review's case, South Korea) did not. An investigation of government labourers likewise uncovered that impression of work atmosphere are emphatically connected with announcing conduct. In particular, representatives who work in atmospheres that bolster self-intrigued conduct will probably distort than employees who work in atmospheres in light of "standards and code" (at the end of the day, where representatives hold fast entirely to tenets or expert sets of accepted rules) (Heizer and Barry 2013). It is fascinating to note that these atmospheres may differ crosswise over work units, even inside a similar expansive association. Specialists additionally found that employees from a collectivist culture had a tendency to probably conceal terrible news for an expanded timeframe in the event that they trusted that it would give their project group more opportunity to take care of the issue or issues. The accompanying are proposals to solve the issues.

  • Invest energy considering the synthesis of project groups, particularly extend administrator positions. Of specific note are identity characteristics, representatives' impression of the work atmosphere and employees' social foundations.
  • The organizations should be particularly careful about hopeful people and daring individual employees.
  • When the organization sees how representatives inside different units (and subunits) see their authoritative atmosphere, they ought to think that its simpler to foresee their status-announcing practices — and perhaps start to change the atmosphere.
  • With regards to social inclinations, one of the best cures is building various groups, which can help offset socially particular conduct that may hinder exact project revealing.

Future Influence of the Learning

In the future, this piece of learning will help me identify the issues with project management that is mainly involved with the project status reporting. Employees want to be seen as capable performers according to senior administration. On the off chance that bad news would adversely affect them, they have a solid impetus to paint a ruddy picture. Additionally, if a employee is in charge of the occasions that made the "awful news" or trusts that he or she will be considered responsible, he or she will have a tendency to put off conveyance of the awful news or to make light of the seriousness of the negative data with the expectation that the issue can be settled before its earnestness is found. This happens to some degree since employees are more often than not on the weaker side of a power relationship. At the point when the hierarchical atmosphere is not open to awful news, honest revealing can be restrained. Most administrators expect that employees will talk up when they see issues that may unfavourably affect a project and hence normally accept that representatives will do precisely that. Sadly, a large portion of the reviews demonstrate this is a credulous suspicion. From this lesson, I have gathered a lot of knowledge for identifying and mitigating the issue.

Academic Theory on the Second Issue

Complexity is viewed as a fundamental figure the field of project administration. In any case, the attributes and nature of project complexity is a questionable civil argument. While a few variables are considered as drivers of project complexity, the reviews researching those are rare. The expression "complexity" can subsequently be seen through different undertones in various fields as well as also within a similar field. To help better present day extend administration, extend complexity should be comprehended and measured productively. Development projects, especially super undertakings, include an assortment of interconnected elements, which create complexity with characterized qualities (Heizer and Barry 2013). On one hand, the expression "Complexity" is not plainly characterized in the writing, rather writers have proposed to give careful consideration towards characterizing and dealing with the unpredictable projects. Then again, it is viewed as that the project execution is firmly identified with project complexity. Along these lines, it is ideal to support and comprehend complexity in the project setting amid project administration instead of diminishing or dodging it inside and out. Accordingly, the project complexity with a firm definition ought to be absolutely measured keeping in mind the end goal to accomplish viable administration of undertakings (Lientz and Rea 2016). Institutional complexity, the fundamental sort of complexity, incorporates: allotment of undertakings, circulation of the obligation and expert for basic leadership and assignment of the connections regarding announcing and correspondence. In any case, it merits specifying that the complexity can contrarily impact a project execution and additionally extend results as the properties rising up out of complexity can make certain new prospects. Indeed, it is for the most part concurred that as a result of the troubles related with decision making and objective achievement which seem to originate from complexity, the comprehension of complexity is essential for project administration. Despite the fact that the significance of project complexity in project administration has been broadly recognized, inadequate target measures exist for the appraisal of project complexity, fundamentally in light of the fact that the complexity is essentially identified with the subjectivity of the spectator (Tan 2016). The achievement of a project along these lines eventually relies on project execution and its related project complexity. The development activities are traditionally described by the inclusion of various unmistakable and assorted associations, for example, contractual workers and experts, for a clear time traverse. This focuses to the production of a multi-hierarchical structure for the administration of development project incidentally.

Insight on the Second Issue

Subsequent to checking on the project complexity models, an aggregate of 33 elements were chosen and ordered under project complexity for assessment. A poll study was utilized to decide the components which widely add to the project complexity and consequently the project administration execution as indicated by global project administration (Floricel et al. 2014). Likewise to guarantee that the respondents have suitable experience they ought to have been intricate in complex undertakings and will have the capacity to give a powerful commitment to the exploration subject. The inquiries were set for the project complexity components in light of our writing survey and were conveyed haphazardly among the project administrators, extend administration speakers and project administration experts in around the world. The reaction from the project chiefs was certain, 124 poll reactions were gotten. All things considered, a number were insufficient and resulting information approval the last specimen size is 101 it would be 81.5% of the respondents a sum of 101 respondents were enlisted from the example. The respondents were fragmented into three gatherings; the principal bunch incorporated the project engineers required with the project procedure or arranging and supervision prepare (71%). The level of commonality of the respondents was assessed utilizing 5-point Likert scale estimation (Heizer and Barry 2013). The second gathering incorporated the project administration experts with at least 10 years of experience (18%), while the third gathering incorporated the project administration addresses showing project administration at the global Universities (11%). Productive complexity measures ought to be expounded and unmistakably clarified at the nearby level, which may prompt a superior vision of project complexity impact on project results and therefore the better project execution in tasks. The effective administration of activities relies on upon the fitting moves made by certain basic qualities of the projects. A long time of involvement, size of the project and level of complexity of the tasks were the principle variables to separate among the 3 respondent gatherings. The creators suggest that the project complexity ought to be comprehended regarding interdependencies and assorted qualities. The outcome to project complexity is mix by course, control and correspondence (Floricel et al. 2014). The idea of project complexity, in this way merits encourage thought and broad research in future. The motivation behind the paper was to give an audit of project complexity and to empower a conclusion in this slacking subject. For the project supervisors to achieve this complexity level, productive complexity models and measures should be expounded and involved. Additionally, by clearing the idea at the nearby level and giving a superior vision of the spread of progress by exploring through the model at neighbourhood level, the project complexity impact on project advancement could be comprehended for a superior project execution in around the world. As activities have end up being progressively mind boggling there will be a developing worry about the idea of project complexity and its impact on the project administration handle. The complexity must be overseen successfully keeping in mind the end goal to accomplish more noteworthy levels of project execution. Nonetheless, overseeing complexity does not mean keeping away from or decreasing it completely, a great project administrator ought to have the capacity to oversee complexity each time by maintaining the upper and lower levels of project complexity. One ought to have the capacity to accomplish the goals capably to evaluate the effect of progress or any choice and reproduce distinctive situations of advancement (Heizer and Barry 2013). The inquiries were set for the project complexity variables in light of our writing audit and were dispersed arbitrarily among the project chiefs, extend administration instructors and project administration experts in around the world (Samset and Volden 2016). Additionally to guarantee that the respondents have fitting knowledge they ought to have been detailed in complex undertakings and will have the capacity to give a successful commitment to the exploration theme. The reaction from the project administrators was sure, 124 poll reactions were analyzed.

Future Influence of the Learning

In the future, this piece of learning will help me identify the issues with project management that is mainly involved with the project status reporting. Complexity is viewed as a fundamental figure the field of project administration. In any case, the attributes and nature of project complexity is a questionable civil argument. While a few variables are considered as drivers of project complexity, the reviews researching those are rare. The expression "complexity" can subsequently be seen through different undertones in various fields as well as also within a similar field. To help better present day extend administration, extend complexity should be comprehended and measured productively. Development projects, especially super undertakings, include an assortment of interconnected elements, which create complexity with characterized qualities. On one hand, the expression "Complexity" is not plainly characterized in the writing, rather writers have proposed to give careful consideration towards characterizing and dealing with the unpredictable projects. Then again, it is viewed as that the project execution is firmly identified with project complexity. Along these lines, it is ideal to support and comprehend complexity in the project setting amid project administration instead of diminishing or dodging it inside and out. From this lesson, I have gathered a lot of knowledge for identifying and mitigating the issue.

References

Adam, M.P., Arzel, M., Baux, D., Beugnard, A., Coupez, J.P., Le Goff-Pronost, M., Morvan, M., Tr?menbert, P. and Vinouze, B., 2016, September. Boosting advanced skills in project management thanks to complex human and technical situations. In SEFI 2016: European Society for Engineering Education annual conference (pp. 1-11).

Brones, F., de Carvalho, M.M. and de Senzi Zancul, E., 2014. Ecodesign in project management: a missing link for the integration of sustainability in product development?. Journal of Cleaner Production, 80, pp.106-118.

Cohen, I., Iluz, M. and Shtub, A., 2014. A simulation?based approach in support of project management training for systems engineers. Systems Engineering, 17(1), pp.26-36.

Davis, K., 2014. Different stakeholder groups and their perceptions of project success. International Journal of Project Management, 32(2), pp.189-201.

Fei, W.A.N.G., Yang, H.E. and Hong, L.I., 2014. Multi-project management based on critical chain. Journal of Hebei University of Engineering (Natural Science Edition), 1, p.028.

Floricel, S., Bonneau, C., Aubry, M. and Sergi, V., 2014. Extending project management research: Insights from social theories. International Journal of Project Management, 32(7), pp.1091-1107.

Ge, Y. and Ho, K.C., 2014. Researching international student migration in Asia: research design and project management issues. Journal of Population Research, 31(3), pp.197-217.

Heizer, R. and Barry, R., 2013. Operation Management, Sustainability and Supply Chain management (Vol. 11). Pearson, UK.

Hoda, R. and Murugesan, L.K., 2016. Multi-level agile project management challenges: A self-organizing team perspective. Journal of Systems and Software, 117, pp.245-257.

Idries, A., Mohamed, N., Jawhar, I., Mohamed, F. and Al-Jaroodi, J., 2015, March. Challenges of developing UAV applications: A project management view. In Industrial Engineering and Operations Management (IEOM), 2015 International Conference on (pp. 1-10). IEEE.

Jiang, J.J. and Klein, G., 2014. Special section: IT project management. Journal of Management Information Systems, 31(1), pp.13-16.

Kaiser, M.G., El Arbi, F. and Ahlemann, F., 2015. Successful project portfolio management beyond project selection techniques: Understanding the role of structural alignment. International Journal of Project Management, 33(1), pp.126-139.

Ko, C.H., 2016. Solving Engineering, Project, and Production Management Problems through Modeling. Journal of Engineering, Project, and Production Management, 6(1), p.1.

Le, K.N., Fung, I.W., Tam, V.W., Yip, L. and Lee, E.W., 2014. Building information modeling using hardware genetic algorithms with field-programmable gate arrays. International Journal of Information Technology Project Management (IJITPM), 5(4), pp.24-49.

Lientz, B. and Rea, K., 2016. Breakthrough technology project management. Routledge.

Pheng Low, S., Gao, S. and Lin Tay, W., 2014. Comparative study of project management and critical success factors of greening new and existing buildings in Singapore. Structural Survey, 32(5), pp.413-433.

Qureshi, S.M. and Kang, C., 2015. Analysing the organizational factors of project complexity using structural equation modelling. International Journal of Project Management, 33(1), pp.165-176.

Rainer, R.K., Prince, B. and Watson, H.J., 2014. Management Information Systems. Wiley Publishing.

Samset, K. and Volden, G.H., 2016. Front-end definition of projects: Ten paradoxes and some reflections regarding project management and project governance. International Journal of Project Management, 34(2), pp.297-313.

Schwindt, C. and Zimmermann, J., 2015. Project Management and Scheduling. Handbook on Project Management and Scheduling, 2, p.640.

Shane, J., Strong, K., Gransberg, D. and Jeong, D., 2015. Guide to Project Management Strategies for Complex Projects (No. SHRP 2 Report S2-R10-RW-2).

Silva, P., Moreno, A.M. and Peters, L., 2015. Software Project Management: Learning from Our Mistakes. IEEE Software, 32(3).

Snyder, C.S., 2014. A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge: PMBOK (®) Guide. Project Management Institute.

Stanley, D. ed., 2016. Clinical Leadership in Nursing and Healthcare: Values into Action. John Wiley & Sons.

Tan, W.O., 2016. Interfacing and Complexity Issues in Project Management: A Case Study of A Condominium Construction Project in Klang Valley (Doctoral dissertation, UTAR).

Verzuh, E., 2015. The fast forward MBA in project management. John Wiley & Sons.

Williams, N., P. Ferdinand, N. and Croft, R., 2014. Project management maturity in the age of big data. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 7(2), pp.311-317.

Zangrando, V., 2015. Project Management Issues. Bolton meeting.

How to cite this essay: