100,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
- Kategorie: Fachliteratur
- Sprache: Englisch
Delivers practical guidance on navigating global project execution challenges with real-world strategies and case studies
Global projects demand more than just planning—they demand resilience, adaptability, and the ability to navigate disruption during execution. As organizations expand across borders, industries, and cultures, the mid-project phase has emerged as the most critical and complex stage of project management. It is during this phase that teams encounter unclear requirements, shifting priorities, stakeholder misalignment, and cultural barriers, all of which can derail progress if not addressed with clarity and strategy. The Global Project Management Playbook: Strategies for Mid-Project Challenges addresses this exact need, providing a structured yet flexible framework for managing execution-phase challenges in global initiatives.
Drawing on contributions from over fifty leading organizations—including many Fortune 500 companies—this in-depth volume combines strategic analysis with field-based case studies from professionals who have faced and overcome real-world obstacles. Readers gain insight into how global project teams navigate complex governance structures, balance executive sponsorship with team-level decision-making, and course-correct under pressure. The Playbook not only examines challenges, but also distills lessons learned from successful recoveries and adaptations, providing actionable tools for both academic instruction and professional application.
Equipping readers with the skills and knowledge to drive projects forward in today’s interconnected world, The Global Project Management Playbook:
- Builds on Harold Kerzner’s extensive body of work, adding fresh perspectives on global execution challenges
- Places a unique focus on the mid-project execution phase, where real challenges surface and success is determined
- Features detailed case studies drawn from diverse industries and global organizations that provide a breadth of practical insights
- Provides frameworks for addressing executive sponsorship, governance, and organizational accountability
- Explores team dynamics, conflict resolution, and decision-making under pressure
- Contains practical tools for navigating scope creep, shifting priorities, and stakeholder misalignment
Written by one of the most influential voices in project management, The Global Project Management Playbook is ideal for graduate and advanced undergraduate students in project management, international business, and organizational leadership programs, as well as those taking PMP®/CAPM® certification and professional training courses. It is also an indispensable reference for project managers, program directors, and executives engaged in global initiatives across industries.
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 1189
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2026
Ähnliche
Table of Contents
Cover
Table of Contents
Title Page
Copyright Page
Dedication
Preface
1 The Growth of Global Project Management Challenges
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Defining a Project Challenge
1.3 Project Management Challenges: 1945–1960
1.4 Project Management Challenges: 1960–1985
1.5 Accidental Project Management
1.6 Project Management Challenges: 1985–2025
1
1.7 Creating the Right Culture
1.8 Global Project Management
1.9 Growth of Project Management Challenges
1.10 Types of Project Management Challenges
1.11 Early Warning Signs of Challenges
1.12 Barriers That Cause Global Challenges
1.13 Managing Multicultural Challenges in Latin America and the Caribbean
3
1.14 Overcoming Project Ambiguity: How Dubai Customs Integrates Strategic Foresight to Build Resilient Initiatives
4
1.15 Kombs Engineering
2 Role of the Executive in Managing Challenges
2.1 Introduction
2.2 An Executive's View of Project Management
2.3 The Growth in Project Governance
2.4 Excellence in Project Sponsorship
2.5 When Sponsorship Struggles
2.6 Empowerment of Project Managers
2.7 Recent Sources of Challenges
2.8 The Growth of Nontraditional Projects
2.9 Impact of the VUCA Environment
2.10 The Impact of the COVID‐19 Pandemic on Project Management
2.11 General Motors and Ventilators
3
2.12 When Executive Sponsorship Fails
2.13 The Need for Project Cancellation Criteria
2.14 Growth of Project Management Offices
2.15 Waha Oil Company Success Story
10
2.16 Embedding Transformation: A Case Study in Clarity, Ownership, and Execution at Scale
11
2.17 Motorola
2.18 Roadway Express
3 Training and Education Challenges
3.1 An Introduction to the Need for Training
3.2 Training in Modern Project Management Practices
3.3 Need for Business Education
3.4 Traditional Need for Training
3.5 Today’s Need for Training
3.6 Selecting Participants
3.7 The Need for Executive‐Level Education
2
3.8 Fundamentals of Project Management Education
3.9 Recent Changes in Project Management Education
3.10 Designing Courses and Conducting Training
3.11 The Growth in Project Management Education
3.12 PM Ready: Empowering Young Changemakers with Project Management
4
3.13 Project Launching eSpelman at Spelman College: Project Management Approaches in Online Education
5
3.14 Project Management Is a Profession
3.15 Corporate Training: How Education Empowers Organizations to Overcome Project Management Challenges
6
3.16 How Consulting Helps Clients Overcome Project Management Challenges
7
3.17 Overcoming Global Project Management Challenges at GEA
8
3.18 Avalon Power and Light
4 The Role of Best Practices in Managing Challenges
4.1 The Need for Capturing Best Practices
4.2 Step 1: Definition of a Best Practice
4.3 Step 2: Seeking Out Best Practices
4.4 Step 3: Validating the Best Practice
4.5 Step 4: Levels of Best Practices
4.6 Step 5: Management of Best Practices
4.7 Step 6: Revalidating Best Practices
4.8 Step 7: What to Do with a Best Practice
4.9 Step 8: Communicating Best Practices Across the Company
4.10 Step 9: Ensuring Usage of the Best Practices
4.11 Common Beliefs
4.12 The Dark Side of Project Management Best Practices
4.13 Best Practices Library
4.14 Determining the Value of a Best Practice
4.15 Educational Best Practices
4.16 Education on Brainstorming Becomes a Best Practice
4.17 Apple Computer and Cell Phones
4.18 Intel Corporation and “Map Days”
4.19 Dashboards and Scorecards
4.20 Key Performance Indicators
5 Managing the Challenges
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Understanding Solutions to Challenges
5.3 Unclear Requirements Challenges
5.4 Changing Requirements Challenges
5.5 Outdated Requirements Challenges
5.6 Stakeholder Engagement Challenges
5.7 Political Challenges
5.8 Scope Creep Challenges
5.9 Budget Constraints Challenges
5.10 Cash Flow Challenges
5.11 Heavy Focus on Profit Margin Challenges
5.12 Management Reserve Challenges
5.13 Unrealistic Schedule Challenges
5.14 Trade‐Off Challenges
5.15 Competing Priorities Challenges
5.16 Project Termination Challenges
5.17 Defining Success and Failure Criteria Challenges
5.18 Risk Management Challenges
5.19 Ineffective Communications Challenges
5.20 Accountability Challenges
5.21 Team Conflict Challenges
5.22 Workload Mismanagement Challenges
5.23 Skills Gap Challenges
5.24 Enterprise Project Management Methodologies Challenges
5.25 Common Global Environment Challenges
5.26 Identifying Project Management Challenges
2
5.27 Aligning Expectations Through Root Cause Analysis of Project Challenges
3
5.28 Blockchain in Cross‐Border E‐Commerce: Dubai Customs’ Path to Global Leadership
4
5.29 MTDG: The Helwan Tank Ammunition Facility Project
5
5.30 A Case Study on Overcoming Global Project Management Challenges
6
6 Workforce Management Challenges
1
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Workforce Expectations
6.3 Finding Critically Skilled Workers
6.4 The Inventory Skills Matrix
6.5 Staffing with Temporary and Contract Workers
6.6 The Technical Prima Donna Challenges
6.7 The Lazy Worker Challenges
6.8 The Team Friction Challenges
6.9 Walk the Halls Project Management
2
6.10 The Toxic Team Member Challenges
6.11 Creativity Boundary Conditions
6.12 Cognitive Biases and Challenges
6.13 Stakeholder Involvement in Project Staffing Challenges
6.14 Developing Project Workforce Backup Plans
6.15 Other Staffing Challenges
7 Cult ure Challenges
7.1 Introduction
7.2 Creation of a Corporate Culture
7.3 Corporate Values
7.4 Types of Cultures
7.5 Corporate Cultures at Work
7.6 Texas Instruments
3
7.7 GEA and Heineken Collaboration: A Learning Experience
5
7.8 Indra Group: Building a Cohesive Culture
7
7.9 Disney
9
7.10 How COMAU Created a Culture of Data to Drive Performance
10
7.11 Barriers to Implementing Project Management in Emerging Markets
8 Complexity Challenges
8.1 Introduction
8.2 The Complexity in Defining “Complexity”
8.3 Trade‐Offs and Scope Changes
8.4 Prioritization of Constraints
8.5 Full‐Time Versus Part‐Time Assignments
8.6 Problem‐Solving and Decision‐Making
8.7 Impact of Project Duration
8.8 Tracking Assumptions
8.9 The Importance of Business Value
8.10 Growth of Solution Providers
8.11 Classification Method for Demands and Projects Based on Level of Complexity
1
8.12 Project Management and Agile Approaches in Drug Development
2
8.13 Global Finance and Accounting Transformation—A Strategic Transition Initiative
3
References
9 Smaller Challenges
9.1 Introduction
9.2 Examples of Smaller Challenges
9.3 Information Is Power Challenges
9.4 Outsourcing Challenges
9.5 Recognizing Achievements Challenges
10 Merger, Acquisition, and Partnership Challenges
10.1 Introduction
10.2 Planning for Growth
10.3 Effects of Mergers and Acquisitions on Project Management
10.4 Effects of Partnerships on Project Management
10.5 Project Management Value‐Added Chain
10.6 Preacquisition Decision‐Making
10.7 Landlords and Tenants
10.8 Solutions to Challenges When Companies Work Together
10.9 Integration Results
10.10 Value Chain Strategies
10.11 Failure and Restructuring
10.12 Success After Two Years: A Stalled SaaS Migration
2
10.13 Bridging Borders and Breaking Silos: Leading a Complex Multinational Infrastructure Rollout
3
10.14 The Global Leap: Project Management Strategies for International Growth
4
10.15 Project Study—X—From Barriers to Breakthroughs: A Smarter Approach
5
11 Challenges with Project Management Methodologies
11.1 Introduction
11.2 Excellence Defined
11.3 Recognizing the Need for Methodology Development
11.4 Enterprise Project Management Methodologies
11.5 Benefits of a Standard Methodology
11.6 Critical Components
11.7 The Importance of Benefits and Value
11.8 Valmet Customer Project Management
9
11.9 Hitachi: Program and Project Management Standardization in Global Projects
11.10 Howard Consulting: IT Operational Biopharmaceutical Efficiency Case Study
10
11.11 Project Management Tools and Socialized Project Management
11.12 Artificial Intelligence and Project Management
11.13 Listening to the Voices in Artificial Intelligence Deployments
12
11.14 Overcoming Project Challenges with AI: State of the Art—Generative AI—Open Innovation
13
11.15 Life‐Cycle Phases
11.16 Churchill Downs Incorporated
11.17 Indra Group: The Need for a Methodology
11.18 Implementing the Methodology
11.19 Implementation Blunders
11.20 Overcoming Development and Implementation Barriers
11.21 Wärtsilä: Recognizing the Need for Supporting Tools
16
11.22 General Motors Powertrain Group
11.23 Indra Group: Closing the Project
17
11.24 When Traditional Methodologies May Not Work
11.25 Siemens: The Pill Before—Doping for Agile Transformation
18
References
12 Challenges with Integrated Processes
12.1 Introduction
12.2 Understanding Integrated Management Processes
12.3 Evolution of Complementary Project Management Processes
12.4 Total Quality Management
12.5 Concurrent Engineering
12.6 Risk Management
12.7 Wärtsilä: The Need for Proactive Risk Management
12.8 Indra Group: When a Risk Becomes Reality (Issue Management)
5
12.9 The Failure of Risk Management
12.10 Defining Maturity Using Risk Management
12.11 Boeing Aircraft Company
12.12 Change Management
12.13 Other Management Processes
13 Challenges with Informal Project Management
13.1 Introduction
13.2 Informal Versus Formal Project Management
13.3 Trust
13.4 Communication
13.5 Cooperation
13.6 Teamwork
13.7 Color‐Coded Status Reporting
13.8 Crisis Dashboards
13.9 The Risks of Using Informal Project Management
14 Innovation Project Management Challenges
14.1 Introduction
14.2 The Failure of Success Challenges
14.3 One‐Size‐Fits‐All Challenges
14.4 Insufficient Line of Sight Challenges
14.5 Failing to Search for Ideas Challenges
14.6 Sense of Urgency Challenges
14.7 Intellectual Property Rights Challenges
14.8 Not Understanding the Relationship Between Creativity and Innovation Challenges
14.9 Too Many Assumptions Challenges
14.10 Innovation Funding Challenges
14.11 Cash Flow and Financial Uncertainty Challenges
14.12 Control, Control, and Control Challenges
14.13 Analysis–Paralysis Challenges
14.14 Naviair: On Time on Budget
1
14.15 Ericsson: Managing Change Within Research and Development at Business Area Networks
2
14.16 Building Tomorrow’s Homes, Today: MBRHE’s Triumph in Landmark 3D‐Printed Villa
3
15 The Project Management Office
15.1 Introduction
15.2 No PMO, No Problem. Just Ask Boeing
2
15.3 Churchill Downs Incorporated: Establishing a PMO
15.4 Churchill Downs Incorporated: Managing Scope Changes
3
15.5 Types of Project Offices
15.6 Project Audits and the PMO
15.7 PMO of the Year Award
16 Global Project Management Excellence
16.1 Introduction
16.2 IBM: Overcoming Project Management Challenges
1
16.3 Deloitte and Enterprise Value Delivery for Agile Method
2
16.4 Deloitte: Enterprise Program Management
3
Index
End User License Agreement
List of Tables
Chapter 1
Table 1.1 Five Phases of the Project Management Life Cycle
Table 1.2 Critical Factors in the Project Management Life Cycle
Chapter 2
Table 2.1 Types of Project Governance
Table 2.2 Differences Between Traditional and Nontraditional Projects
Table 2.3 MPD PMO Planned Approach
Table 2.4 MPD Governance Model
Chapter 3
Table 3.1 Emphases in Various Training Programs
Table 3.2 Common Pitfalls in Hiring External Trainers and Speakers
Table 3.3 Consulting Results
Chapter 4
Table 4.1 Improper Application of Best Practices
Table 4.2 Comparing Features
Table 4.3 Three Types of Performance Dashboards
Chapter 5
Table 5.1 Relevancy Matrix of Challenge Resolution by Main Practices
Chapter 7
Table 7.1 Changes Due to Boeing 777 New Airplane Project
Chapter 8
Table 8.1 Classification of Demands
Table 8.2 Proposed Project Management Model
Table 8.3 Model Experimentation
Chapter 10
Table 10.1 Types of Objectives
Table 10.2 Potential Problems with Combining Methodologies before Acquisitions...
Table 10.3 Possible Integration Outcomes
Chapter 11
Table 11.1 Gates in Valmet PEM
Table 11.2 Example of a gate checklist in Valmet PEM
Chapter 12
Table 12.1 Risk Categories at Boeing
Chapter 13
Table 13.1 Formal Versus Informal Project Management
Table 13.2 Benefits of Trust in Customer–Contractor Working Relationships
Table 13.3 Differentiating Between a Problem and a Crisis
Chapter 16
Table 16.1 Key Agile Delivery Imperatives
List of Illustrations
Chapter 1
Figure 1.1 Dubai customs operational foresight framework.
Figure 1.2 Mapping foresight integration with PMI knowledge areas.
Chapter 2
Figure 2.1 OPM3 assessment report.
Figure 2.2 PMO framework.
Figure 2.3 PMO governance framework.
Chapter 3
Figure 3.1 Overview of critical process points in execution phase—GEA project ...
Figure 3.2 Project management career path.
Figure 3.3 Learning path project management competence.
Chapter 4
Figure 4.1 Levels of best practices.
Figure 4.2 Creating a best practices library.
Figure 4.3 Best practices library.
Figure 4.4 Typical financial health dashboards.
Figure 4.5 Typical financial health dashboards.
Chapter 5
Figure 5.1 Stakeholder mapping.
Figure 5.2 Blockchain platform architecture.
Figure 5.3 Overview of the global organizations and projects.
Figure 5.4 Value engagement process.
Figure 5.5 Six pillars of customer value model.
Figure 5.6 Manage change with human perspective: journey articulation.
Chapter 7
Figure 7.1 Types of values.
Figure 7.2 Success pyramid.
Figure 7.3 Project process house.
Figure 7.4 Project management portal (entry page).
Figure 7.5 Critical process points.
Figure 7.6 Project management foundations.
Figure 7.7 People: internal trainers.
Figure 7.8 “Project Management at Indra” course on the e‐learning platform.
Figure 7.9 “PMPnet” in Sharing Knowledge tool.
Figure 7.10 COMAU—The changed business blueprint.
Figure 7.11 The challenge/solution grid.
Figure 7.12 The Ds of our data‐culture.
Figure 7.13 The ultimate purpose of data‐culture.
Chapter 8
Figure 8.1 Problem identification and solution.
Figure 8.2 Long‐term globalization project management strategy.
Figure 8.3 Breakdown of progression in early drug development with approximate...
Chapter 10
Figure 10.1 Generic value‐added chain.
Figure 10.2 Project management value‐added chain.
Figure 10.3 Project management problem areas after an acquisition.
Figure 10.4 Project management system after acquisition.
Figure 10.5 Four generic strategies for project management.
Figure 10.6 Risk spectrum for the type of project.
Figure 10.7 Risk spectrum for the types of R&D projects.
Figure 10.8 Restructuring outcomes.
Figure 10.9 Prioritization based on value and effort (higher value and lower e...
Chapter 11
Figure 11.1 When to prepare the charter.
Figure 11.2 Project delivery process with nine gates used in Valmet PEM.
Figure 11.3 Hitachi Phase Gate model.
Figure 11.4 Alignment assessment results (example).
Figure 11.5 Case study diagram.
Figure 11.6 Components of intellectual property.
Figure 11.7 The Churchill Downs Incorporated methodology.
Figure 11.8 Project management life cycle.
Figure 11.9 Indra's project management life cycle.
Chapter 12
Figure 12.1 Six components of excellence.
Figure 12.2 Totally uncoupled processes.
Figure 12.3 Partially integrated processes.
Figure 12.4 Totally integrated processes.
Figure 12.5 Integrated processes for twenty‐first century.
Figure 12.6 Future risks.
Figure 12.7 Proactive project risk management process in Wärtsilä power plants...
Figure 12.8 Indra's project risk management process.
Figure 12.9 Indra's project risk monitoring in the PMIS.
Chapter 13
Figure 13.1 Evolution of policies, procedures, and guidelines.
Figure 13.2 Evolution of paperwork and change of formality levels.
Figure 13.3 Internal and external communication channels for project managemen...
Chapter 14
Figure 14.1 How to make big and complex programs a success.
Figure 14.2 On‐time–on‐budget framework (Naviair).
Figure 14.3 High‐performance teams.
Figure 14.4 Evolved managing complex change model, Marianne Rimbark, 2017
Figure 14.5 The Old Way. 2017.
Chapter 16
Figure 16.1 5 key trends for 2025.
Figure 16.2 Key automation metrics.
Figure 16.3 Digital PMO.
Figure 16.4 Skills.
Figure 16.5 IBM PM certification requirements.
Figure 16.6 IBM PM badges.
Figure 16.7 CPM qualities.
Figure 16.8 WWPMM overview—method proposal insert.
Figure 16.9 PM practices.
Figure 16.10 Mosaic methodology overview.
Figure 16.11 Maturity assessment guide.
Figure 16.12 Deloitte EVD for agile framework.
Figure 16.13 Delivery process work breakdown structure.
Figure 16.14 EVD standards by phase.
Figure 16.15 Job roles.
Figure 16.16 Deloitte enterprise program management framework.
Figure 16.17 Deloitte Enterprise Value Map™ (EVM).
Figure 16.18 Deloitte portfolio management framework.
Figure 16.19 Deloitte investment framework.
Figure 16.20 Deloitte Portfolio Management Process.
Figure 16.21 Deloitte program management framework.
Figure 16.22 Comparison of fixed organizational factors versus variable factor...
Figure 16.23 Deloitte PM tool characteristics.
Figure 16.24 Key factors for PM deployment.
Figure 16.25 Activities required to develop a work plan.
Figure 16.26 Deloitte project portfolio governance framework.
Figure 16.27 Deloitte people dimension of transformation framework.
Guide
Cover Page
Table of Contents
Title Page
Copyright Page
Dedication
Preface
Begin Reading
Index
Wiley End User License Agreement
Pages
iii
iv
v
xv
xvi
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
The Global Project Management Playbook
Strategies for Mid‐Project Challenges
Harold Kerzner, Ph.D.
Marina del Rey, California, USA
Copyright © 2026 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial intelligence technologies or similar technologies.
Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey.
No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior written permission of the Publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per‐copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, (978) 750–8400, fax (978) 750–4470, or on the web at www.copyright.com. Requests to the Publisher for permission should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, (201) 748–6011, fax (201) 748–6008, or online at http://www.wiley.com/go/permission.
The manufacturer’s authorized representative according to the EU General Product Safety Regulation is Wiley‐VCH GmbH, Boschstr. 12, 69469 Weinheim, Germany, e‐mail: [email protected].
Trademarks: Wiley and the Wiley logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. and/or its affiliates in the United States and other countries and may not be used without written permission. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book.
Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and the authors have used their best efforts in preparing this work, including a review of the content of the work, neither the publisher nor the authors make any representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this work and specifically disclaim all warranties, including without limitation any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives, written sales materials or promotional statements for this work. The fact that an organization, website, or product is referred to in this work as a citation and/or potential source of further information does not mean that the publisher and authors endorse the information or services the organization, website, or product may provide or recommendations it may make. This work is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a specialist where appropriate. Further, readers should be aware that websites listed in this work may have changed or disappeared between when this work was written and when it is read. Neither the publisher nor authors shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.
For general information on our other products and services or for technical support, please contact our Customer Care Department within the United States at (800) 762–2974, outside the United States at (317) 572–3993 or fax (317) 572–4002.
Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic formats. For more information about Wiley products, visit our web site at www.wiley.com.
Library of Congress Cataloging‐in‐Publication Data Applied forHardback ISBN: 9781394382941
Cover Design: WileyCover Images: © Material in this section provided by Yan Xu, Ph.D. PMP, PMI‐ACP/eSpelman Online Program Director at Spelman College. © 2025 by Yan Xu. All rights reserved. Reproduced with permission., © enjoynz/Getty Images
To our newest grandson,
Vaughn Hayes Thompson
Preface
During the past two decades, there has been a remarkable growth in companies seeking to expand their business globally. At the same time, companies realized that they were managing their business by projects and that successful project management practices were a necessity for global expansion success.
Transitioning from domestic products and services to international ones requires significant changes. Unfortunately, companies did not fully realize that managing global projects requires international project management knowledge to overcome the challenges and obstacles that span across different countries. The challenges come from managing teams from different cultures, having to understand the different religions in each country and how they impact projects, understanding how country politics and ethical factors can impact project decision‐making, and how legal issues may dictate how projects are executed. For most project managers who were experienced in managing simple local projects or projects that remained entirely within their parent organization or in a domestic environment, international project management practices were a rude awakening.
Some of the critical challenges in global project management include:
Not understanding that people with different cultural backgrounds have different work styles and may not envision the importance of project management in the same light as the project manager.
People with different cultural backgrounds may have different impressions of the leadership style needed and how problems will be identified and solved.
In some countries, ethical decisions on projects may be based upon religious beliefs, politics, and work habits rather than what is in the best interest of the project.
Effective communications can be troublesome if workers refuse to hear bad news or are afraid to relay bad news. Workers can be afraid to say what they are really thinking if the local culture is to punish people for coming up with ideas that others might criticize.
Global cultures, religions, and external politics may create new types of risks that project teams have never experienced. This can make risk management practices difficult.
Project managers may not have control over the assigned resources the same way as in domestic projects.
In some countries, workers believe that they have the right to own a job. Therefore, if they cannot be removed from a position for poor performance, asking the workers for compliance with project requirements and commitment to the project may be spoken to deaf ears.
Some environments have very little funding available for project management training for local workers, making them ill‐prepared for some assignments.
Inadequate tools may exist, resulting in a lack of good information for status reporting practices.
Project managers may have to learn a new way of working and managing globally to be successful.
Project management training programs as well as project management degrees are now including coursework in international project management practices. There are also undergraduate and graduate degrees in international project management and significant growth is expected.
This book was written to help educate organizations and project personnel on the challenges and obstacles companies are facing and will be facing when managing global projects. Many of the case studies and examples provided in the text were written by worldwide project personnel who had to endure the challenges of managing global projects. The case studies show not only the challenges they faced but also how they were managed and the outcomes. I am indebted to Lori Milhaven, Executive Vice President for Strategic Projects, at the International Institute for Learning, for her assistance in collaborating with worldwide contributors to the book.
Harold Kerzner, 2026
1The Growth of Global Project Management Challenges
1.1 Introduction
During the past several decades, there has been remarkable growth in the use of project management practices worldwide for executing a strategic plan and running a business. However, with the acceptance of the new practices come challenges that must be addressed. Many of the global companies now implementing project management practices are facing the same challenges that mature project management organizations endured decades ago.
All projects are plagued with challenges sooner or later. Some challenges are easily resolved, whereas others can result in project failure. In order to understand the project management challenges and issues, one must begin with the definition of a project because each of the components of the definition can create challenges. A project can be any series of activities and tasks that:
Have a specific objective, with a focus on the creation of business value, to be completed within certain specifications
Have defined start and end dates
Have funding limits (if applicable)
Consume human and nonhuman resources (i.e., money, people, equipment)
Are multifunctional (i.e., cut across several functional lines and/or continents using diverse global project teams)
The result or outcome of the project can be unique or repetitive and must be achieved within a finite period. Because companies have very limited resources, care must be taken that the right mix of projects is approved. As such, another outcome of a project is that it provides business value to the company as opposed to being a “pet” project for the personal whims of one person.
Project management is the application of knowledge, skills, and tools necessary to achieve the project's requirements. Since most projects are unique rather than repetitive, new challenges continuously appear.
Project management has evolved from a set of processes that were once considered “nice to have” to one or more methodologies that are now considered mandatory for the growth and even the survival of most companies worldwide. Companies are now realizing that their entire business, including most of the routine activities, can be regarded as a series of projects. Simply stated, we are managing our business by projects.
Project management is now regarded as both a project management process and a business process. Therefore, project managers are expected to make business as well as project decisions. The necessity for achieving project management excellence is now readily apparent to almost all businesses.
As the relative importance of project management permeates each facet of the business, new project management challenges keep appearing. The decision as to when and how to resolve some of the challenges may be delayed, whereas other challenges may need resolution quickly so that the impact on the project’s expected outcome will be minimized.
Companies are now performing strategic planning for project management because of the benefits and contribution to sustainable business value. One of the benefits of performing strategic planning for project management is that it usually promotes the necessity to identify the need for a good understanding of the global challenges and issues before a significant financial investment occurs. Unfortunately, this is easier said than done. One of the reasons for this difficulty, as will be seen later in the book, is that many companies today, as well as employees at all levels, may not agree with the definition of a project management challenge, nor do they fully understand the impact that a challenge or issue may have on their business and other ongoing or future projects.
Project managers, as well as project team members, are now active participants in resolving the challenges, whereas in the past, there was a tendency to find others responsible for the remedies. Project management, strategic planning, and problem resolution are no longer separate activities.
Project management is now regarded as the vehicle that provides the deliverables that create business benefits and business value. In the last few years, there has been tremendous global growth in the need for a better understanding of identifying and resolving project management challenges.
Some organizations have set up a Project Management Centre of Excellence (PMCoE) or a Project Management Office (PMO) that has the responsibility (among other duties) to identify and evaluate lessons learned and best practices that can help minimize the damage from challenges or prevent them from reoccurring.
1.2 Defining a Project Challenge
There are several things that can go wrong on projects. Authors of project management papers use words such as problems, barriers, obstacles, issues, difficulties, limitations, uncertainties, complexities, and challenges. In a project environment, they all tend to imply a situation that arises that can potentially negatively impact the project’s timeline, budget, scope, or quality, requiring proactive management and problem‐solving to overcome the situation and achieve project goals successfully.
Unfortunately, the same words can be interpreted differently by each person using them. The meaning of these words used to identify things that have gone wrong can range from a minor inconvenience to a significant disruption that can lead to project failure. Minor inconveniences are not managed the same way as situations that could result in complete project failure.
In this book, the focus will be on project “challenges,” with the implication that a failure in overcoming a challenge might lead to complete project failure. Unlike minor inconveniences, resolving challenges can involve:
The impact of possibly multiple competing constraints, rather than just one constraint
The decision‐making process to overcome the challenge will possibly involve coordination and participation from all the stakeholders, senior management, and possibly contractors
Politics and hidden agendas by decision‐makers are likely
The challenging situation must be clearly understood by all participants and more than one meeting may be required to evaluate possible outcomes
The situation is most likely new to the organization and previous history may not be available on recovery tactics
By knowing what types of challenges can occur, the project team is in a better position to resolve the challenges and mitigate potential damage.
1.3 Project Management Challenges: 1945–1960
Students often ask, “Why are we discussing project management history?” The reason is that not all companies worldwide become reasonably good or excellent at project management at the same rate and must overcome the same challenges. Many countries have strong political and cultural factors that, for years, have prevented the growth of project management. Many of these countries are now beginning to accept project management and are making some of the same mistakes that were made in the United States and other countries years ago. By looking at history, we can see the growth in the types of challenges companies can expect as they try to become excellent in project management.
During the 1940s, line managers functioned as project managers and used the concept of over‐the‐fence management to manage projects. Each line manager, temporarily wearing the hat of a project manager, would perform the work necessitated by his or her line organization and, when that effort was completed, would “throw the ball over the fence” in the hope that someone would catch it. Once the ball was thrown over the fence, the line managers would wash their hands of any responsibility for the project because the ball was no longer in their yard. If a project failed, blame was placed on whichever line manager had the ball at that time.
The problem with over‐the‐fence management was that the customer had no single contact point for questions. This posed a serious problem when issues needed to be resolved. The filtering of information wasted precious time for both the customer and the contractor. Customers who wanted firsthand information, especially about resolving problems, had to seek out the manager in possession of the ball. For small projects, this was easy. However, larger and more complex projects made this harder.
During this time, very few problem resolution practices were identified. Project management was not seen as a career‐path position in most companies, and project managers were willing to walk away from projects rather than resolve issues. If there were approaches for resolving issues, they would stay within a given functional area, often never to be shared with the remainder of the company. Suboptimal project management decision‐making was the norm.
Following World War II, the United States entered into the Cold War with the Soviet Union. To win the Cold War, the United States had to compete in an arms race and rapidly build weapons of mass destruction. In a cold war, the side that has the capability to respond with overwhelming force is often seen as having an advantage. Development of weapons of mass destruction involved very large projects involving a multitude of contractors.
The arms race made it clear that the traditional use of over‐the‐fence management would not be acceptable to the Department of Defense for projects such as the B‐52 bomber, the Minuteman intercontinental ballistic missile, and the Polaris submarine. The government wanted a single point of contact, namely a project manager who had total accountability through all project phases. In addition, the government wanted the project manager to possess a command of technology rather than just an understanding of technology, which meant that the project manager would be an engineer, preferably with an advanced degree in some branch of technology. The side benefit was that the project manager had the competence to resolve most technical challenges, but not business‐related issues. The use of project management was then mandated for some smaller weapon systems, such as jet fighters and tanks. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) mandated the use of project management for all activities related to the space program.
Many projects in the aerospace and defense industries had cost overruns of more than 200–300%. Blame was erroneously placed on improper implementation of project management when, in fact, the real problem was the inability to forecast technology, resulting in numerous scope changes occurring. Forecasting technology is extremely difficult for projects that could last 10–20 years. Scope change challenges were the primary issue and played havoc with project decision‐making efforts.
By the late 1950s and early 1960s, the aerospace and defense industries were using project management on virtually all projects and were pressuring their suppliers to use it as well. Project management was growing, but at a relatively slow rate, except for aerospace and defense. Other industries saw the project management implementation challenges faced in aerospace and defense and were reluctant to use project management practices.
Because of the vast number of contractors and subcontractors, the government needed standardization, especially in the planning process and the reporting of status information. The government established a life cycle planning and control model and a cost‐monitoring system, and created a group of project management auditors that visited each contractor to make sure that the government's money was being spent as planned. These practices were to be used on all government programs above a certain dollar value.
The biggest challenges during this time were significant cost overruns and schedule slippages. Private industry viewed the project management practices as an overmanagement cost and saw no practical value in project management. The project management challenges on government programs were well‐publicized in the news and journal articles.
Because many firms saw no practical value in project management in their early years, there were misconceptions about it. Some of the misconceptions included:
Project management is a scheduling tool like PERT/CPM (Program Evaluation and Review Technique/Critical Path Method) scheduling.
Project management applies to large projects only.
Project management is designed for government projects only.
Project managers must be engineers, preferably with advanced degrees.
Project managers need a command of technology to be successful.
Project success is measured in technical terms only. (Did it work?)
1.4 Project Management Challenges: 1960–1985
Between 1960 and 1985, a better understanding of project management existed. Growth in the field had come about more through necessity than through desire, but at a very slow rate. Its slow growth can be attributed mainly to a lack of acceptance of the new management techniques necessary for successful implementation of project management. An inherent fear of the unknown acted as a deterrent for both managers and executives.
Other than aerospace, defense, and construction, many companies in the 1960s managed projects informally. In informal project management, just as the words imply, projects were handled on an informal basis, and the authority of the project manager was minimized. Most projects were handled by functional managers and stayed in one or two functional lines, and formal communications were either unnecessary or handled informally because of the good working relationships between line managers. Those individuals who were assigned as project managers soon found that they were functioning more as “accidental” or temporary project leaders or project monitors than as real project managers. Functional managers were responsible for resolving issues. Many organizations today, such as low‐technology manufacturing, have line managers who have been working side by side for 10 or more years. In such situations, informal project management may be effective for capital equipment or facility development projects, and project management is not regarded as a profession.
By 1970 and through the early 1980s, more companies departed from informal project management and restructured to formalize the project management process, mainly because the size and complexity of their activities had grown to a point where they were unmanageable within the current structure. The opportunity for more types of challenges was increasing.
Not all industries needed project management, and executives had to determine whether there was an actual need before making a commitment. Several industries with simple tasks, whether in a static or a dynamic business environment, did not need formalized project management. Manufacturing industries with slowly changing technology did not need project management, unless, of course, they had a requirement for several special projects, such as capital equipment activities, that could interrupt the normal flow of work in the routine manufacturing operations. The slow growth rate and acceptance of project management were related to the fact that the limitations of project management were readily apparent, yet the advantages were not completely recognizable. Project management requires organizational restructuring. The question, of course, is: “How much restructuring?” Executives avoided the subject of project management for fear that “revolutionary” changes would have to be made in the organization.
Project management restructuring has permitted companies to:
Accomplish tasks that could not be effectively handled by the traditional structure
Accomplish one‐time activities with minimum disruption of routine business
The second item implies that project management is a “temporary” management structure and, therefore, causes minimum organizational disruption. The major problems identified by those managers who endeavored to adapt to the new system all revolved around conflicts in authority and resource allocation issues. Companies began to recognize the need for capturing best practices, especially those that could reduce some human behavior issues. Improvements in the methodologies were also taking place.
Another major concern was that project management required upper‐level managers to relinquish some of their authority through delegation to middle managers. In several situations, middle managers soon occupied the power positions, even more so than upper‐level managers.
Project management became a necessity for many companies as they expanded into multiple product lines, many of which were dissimilar, and organizational complexities grew. This growth can be attributed to four factors:
Technology increasing at an astounding rate
More money being invested in research and development (R&D)
More information being available
Shortening of project life cycles
To satisfy the requirements imposed by these four factors, management was “forced” into organizational restructuring; the traditional organizational form that had survived for decades was inadequate for integrating activities across functional “empires.” Restructuring brought new types of challenges to project management.
By 1970, the environment began to change rapidly. Companies in aerospace, defense, and construction pioneered the implementation of project management, and other industries soon followed, some with great reluctance. NASA and the DoD “forced” subcontractors to accept project management.
Because current organizational structures were unable to accommodate the wide variety of interrelated tasks necessary for successful project completion, the need for project management had become apparent. It was usually first identified by those lower‐level and middle managers who found it impossible to control their resources effectively for the diverse activities within their line organization. Quite often, middle‐level managers felt the impact of the changing business environment more than upper‐level executives.
Once the need for change was identified, middle management had to convince upper‐level management that such a change was warranted. If top‐level executives could recognize the problems with resource control, then project management would not be adopted, at least formally. Informal acceptance, however, was another story.
As project management developed, some essential factors in its successful implementation were recognized. The major factor was the role of the project manager, which became the focal point for integrative responsibility. The need for integrative responsibility was first identified in complex R&D projects. This brought to the surface more challenges that previously were simply ignored and treated as part of doing business.
R&D technology broke down the boundaries that used to exist between industries. Once stable markets and distribution channels were now in a state of flux. The industrial environment was turbulent and increasingly hard to predict. Many complex facts about markets, production methods, costs, and scientific potential were related to investment decisions in R&D.
All of these factors have combined to produce a king‐size managerial headache. There were just too many crucial decisions to have them all processed and resolved at the top of the organization through regular line hierarchy. Decision‐making challenges began to grow. They had to be integrated in some other way.
Providing the project manager with integrative responsibility resulted in:
Total project accountability being assumed by a single person
Project rather than functional dedication
A requirement for coordination across functional interfaces
Proper utilization of integrated planning and control
The resolution of challenges
Without project management, these five elements must be accomplished by executives, and it is questionable whether these activities should be part of an executive's job description. An executive in a Fortune 500 corporation stated that he was spending 70 hours each week working as both an executive and a project manager, and he did not feel that he was performing either job to the best of his abilities. During a presentation to the staff, the executive stated what he expected of the organization after project management implementation:
Push decision‐making down in the organization.
Eliminate the need for committee solutions.
Trust the decisions of peers.
Those executives who chose to accept project management soon found the advantages of the new technique:
Easy adaptation to an ever‐changing environment
Ability to handle a multidisciplinary activity within a specified period of time
Horizontal as well as vertical workflow
Better orientation toward customer problems
Easier identification of activity responsibilities
A multidisciplinary decision‐making process
Innovation in organizational design
As project management evolved, best practices became important. Best practices were learned from both successes and failures. Unfortunately, the number of challenges increased significantly. In the early years of project management, private industry focused on learning the best practices from successes to help resolve the challenges. The government, however, focused on learning about the best practices from failures. When the government finally focused on learning from successes, the knowledge of best practices came from its relationships with both prime contractors and subcontractors. Some of these best practices that came out of the government included:
Use of life‐cycle phases
Standardization and consistency
Use of templates (e.g., for statement of work [SOW], work breakdown structure [WBS], and risk management)
Providing military personnel in project management positions with extended tours of duty at the same location
Use of integrated project teams
Control of contractor‐generated scope changes
Use of earned value measurement techniques
1.5 Accidental Project Management
In most private and public sector companies worldwide, project management is treated as a profession. However, there are still companies in the global marketplace that are reluctant to treat project management as a profession and career path position. These companies are often reluctant to recognize the value in project management as a profession and use the concept of “accidental” or part‐time project managers.
A worker is selected to function as a project manager because of his/her special technical skills, writing ability, or contact with specific clients and stakeholders. The accidental project manager may function as a project manager just for a short period of time, in addition to one’s normal duties.
Accidental project management exists because there are companies that do not want to provide people with the salary and responsibility expected as a project manager, are reluctant to pay for project management education, and fear giving project managers authority and decision‐making responsibility. The use of accidental project managers can become a serious issue affecting project success when using diverse, global project teams where each participating organization views project management differently.
1.6 Project Management Challenges: 1985–20251
By the 1990s, companies had begun to realize that implementing project management was a necessity, not a choice. Project management had spread to virtually every industry and best practices were being captured to help prevent and manage challenges. In the author's opinion, the appearance of best practices by industry can be summarized as follows:
1960–1985: Aerospace, defense, and construction
1986–1993: Automotive suppliers
1994–1999: Telecommunications
2000–2003: Information technology
2004–2006: Healthcare
2007–2008: Marketing and sales
2009–Present: Global public and private sector companies of all sizes
Table 1.1 Five Phases of the Project Management Life Cycle
Embryonic
Executive Management Acceptance
Line Management Acceptance
Growth
Maturity
Recognize Need
Get visible executive support
Get line management support
Recognize use of life‐cycle phases
Develop a management cost/schedule control system
Recognize Benefits
Achieving executive understanding of project management
Achieving line management commitment
Develop a project management methodology
Integrate cost and schedule control
Recognize Applications
Establish project sponsorship at executive levels
Provide line management education
Make the commitment to planning
Develop an educational program to enhance project management skills
Recognize What Must Be Done
Become willing to change the way of doing business
Become willing to release employees for project management training
Minimize creeping scopeSelect a project tracking system
The question now is not how to implement project management, but how fast it can be done. How quickly can we become mature in project management? Can we use the best practices to accelerate the implementation of project management? How can we quickly resolve the challenges that will be appearing?
Table 1.1 shows the typical life‐cycle phases that an organization goes through to implement project management. In the first phase—the embryonic phase—the organization recognizes the apparent need for project management. This recognition normally takes place at the lower and middle levels of management, where the project activities take place. The executives are then informed of the need and assess the situation.
Six driving forces lead executives to recognize the need for project management:
Capital projects
Customer expectations
Competitiveness
Executive understanding
New project development
Efficiency and effectiveness
Manufacturing companies are driven to project management because of large capital projects or a multitude of simultaneous projects. Executives soon realize the impact on cash flow and that slippage in the schedule could end up idling workers.
Companies that sell products or services, including installation, to their clients must have good project management practices. These companies are usually non‐project‐driven but function as though they were project‐driven. These companies now sell solutions to their customers rather than products. It is almost impossible to sell complete solutions to customers without having superior project management practices because what you are selling is your project management expertise (i.e., your project management processes).
There are two situations where competitiveness becomes the driving force: internal projects and external (outside customer) projects. Internally, companies get into trouble when they realize that much of the work can be outsourced for less than it would cost to perform the work themselves. Externally, companies get into trouble when they are no longer competitive on price or quality or when they simply cannot increase their market share. Both situations are accompanied by challenges.
Executive understanding is the driving force in those organizations that have a rigid traditional structure that performs routine, repetitive activities. These organizations are quite resistant to change, unless the change is driven by the executives. This driving force can exist in conjunction with any of the other driving forces.
New product development is the driving force for those organizations that are heavily invested in R&D activities. Given that only a small percentage of R&D projects ever make it into commercialization, where the R&D costs can be recovered, project management becomes a necessity. Project management can also be used as an early warning system so that a project can be canceled.
Efficiency and effectiveness, as driving forces, can exist in conjunction with any other driving forces. Efficiency and effectiveness take on paramount importance for small companies experiencing growing pains. Project management can be used to help such companies remain competitive during periods of growth and to assist in determining capacity constraints.
Because of the interrelation of these driving forces, some people contend that the only true driving force is survival. When the company recognizes that survival of the firm is at stake, the decision to implement project management becomes easier, but resolving the challenges becomes greater.
Enrique Sevilla Molina, PMP®, formerly corporate PMO Director at Indra Group, discusses the driving forces at Indra Group that necessitated the need for excellence in project management:
The internal forces were based on our own history and business experience. We soon found out that the better the project managers, the better the project results. This realization came together with the need to demonstrate in national and international contracts, with both US and European customers, our real capabilities to handle big projects. These big projects required world‐class project management, and for us managing the project was a greater challenge than just being able to technically execute the project. Summarizing, these big projects set the pace to define precise procedures on how to handle stakeholders, big subcontractors and become a reliable main point of contact for all issues related to the project.
The speed at which companies reach some degree of maturity in project management is most often based on how important they perceive the driving forces to be. Competitiveness is the slowest path because these types of organizations do not recognize that project management affects their competitive position directly. For project‐driven organizations, the path is reversed. Competitiveness is the name of the game, and the vehicle used is project management.
Once the organization perceives the need for project management, it enters the second life‐cycle phase of Table 1.1, executive acceptance. Project management cannot be implemented rapidly in the near term without executive support. Furthermore, the support must be visible to all.
The third life‐cycle phase is line management acceptance. It is highly unlikely that any line manager would actively support the implementation of project management without first recognizing the same support coming from above. Even minimal line management support will still cause project management to struggle.
The fourth life‐cycle phase is the growth phase, where the organization becomes committed to the development of the corporate tools for project management. This includes the processes and project management methodology for planning, scheduling, and controlling as well as selection of the appropriate supporting software. Portions of this phase can begin during earlier phases.
The fifth life‐cycle phase is maturity. In this phase, the organization begins using the tools developed in the previous phase. Here, the organization must be totally dedicated to project management. The organization must develop a reasonable project management curriculum to provide the appropriate training and education in support of the tools as well as the expected organizational behavior.
By the 1990s, companies finally began to recognize the benefits of project management. Table 1.2 shows the critical success factors (CSFs) and critical failure factors (CFFs) that have led to changes in our view of project management. Many of these factors were identified through the discovery and implementation of best practices.
Table 1.2 Critical Factors in the Project Management Life Cycle
Critical Success Factors
Critical Failure Factors
Executive Management Acceptance Phase
Consider employee recommendations
Refuse to consider ideas of associates
Recognize that change is necessary
Unwilling to admit that change may be necessary
Understanding the executive role in project management
Believe that project management control belongs at executive levels
Line Management Acceptance Phase
Willing to place company interest before personal interest
Reluctant to share information
Willing to accept accountability
Refuse to accept accountability
Willing to see associates advance
Not willing to see associates advance
Growth Phase
Recognize the need for a corporate‐wide methodology
View a standard methodology as a threat rather than as a benefit
Support uniform status monitoring/reporting
Fail to understand the benefits of project management
Recognize the importance of effective planning
Provide only lip service to planning
Maturity Phase
Recognize that cost and schedule are inseparable
Believe that project status can be determined from schedule alone
Track actual costs
See no need to track actual costs
Develop project management training
Believe that growth and success in project management are the same
Recognizing that the organization can benefit from the implementation of project management is just the starting point. The question now becomes: How long will it take us to achieve these benefits?
During the first decade of the twenty‐first century, the understanding and acceptance of the benefits began permeating all levels of senior management rather than just those executives who interfaced with projects on a daily basis. Three comments from senior management at American Greetings Corporation illustrate this point:
Through project management, we've learned how to make fact‐based decisions. Too often in the past we based our decisions on what we thought could happen or what we hoped would happen. Now we can look at the facts, interpret the facts honestly and make sound decisions and set realistic goals based on this information.
