Anton Rossouw   Pmoz 2009 Adaptive Project Management
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Anton Rossouw Pmoz 2009 Adaptive Project Management

on

  • 1,584 views

Applying complexity science to project managment during change

Applying complexity science to project managment during change

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,584
Slideshare-icon Views on SlideShare
1,581
Embed Views
3

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
25
Comments
0

3 Embeds 3

http://www.slideshare.net 1
http://www.linkedin.com 1
http://www.slashdocs.com 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Anton Rossouw   Pmoz 2009 Adaptive Project Management Anton Rossouw Pmoz 2009 Adaptive Project Management Presentation Transcript

    • 10-12 August 2009, National Convention Centre, Canberra Adaptive Project Management Applying a Complexity Science approach to Project Management during organisational change. PhD Student: Anton Rossouw
    • Introduction  The challenge of Change:  “We are all trying to cope with a cataract of interwoven technological, economic, societal and ecological changes on a global scale” (McMillan, 2008, p14)  Equilibrium is death ! (Pascale et al., 2000)  “It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but the one that is most responsive to change” Charles Darwin 1859  Introducing Complexity science as a view of dynamical change, and interpreting it for use during projects as Adaptive Project Management.
    • Acceleration of change  Post 1950’s Information Age Megashift (Naisbitt,1982).  Instant access to information accelerates our lives and the pace of change (Gleick, 2000).  Globalisation, social networking communities, virtual worlds.  Projects are recognized as instruments of change (Blake and Bush, 2009).  Change models such as Complexity Science (Dooley, 2004) that will help us to improve the way we deal with change.
    • Complicated vs. Complex  Complicated System  Linear behaviour, Predictable.  Equal to the sum of its parts.  Complex System  Non-Linear responses, unpredictable behaviour.  Positive and Negative feedback, spontaneous emergence.  Cannot be adequately described by analysing the components alone. Source: Cilliers,1998.
    • In the “Zone” Ralph Stacey’s Agreement and Certainty Matrix: (Stacey,1996) More from Macmillan at http://www.plexusinstitute.org/edgeware/archive/think/main_aides3.html
    • Complexity Science  A shift away from the predictability of classical science.  A new multidisciplinary science, still emerging, with various interpretations and definitions. Offers a fundamental world-view shift (Dent, 1999).  Time driven dynamical systems; that are “living”, learning, evolving and spontaneously self-organising.  Open to environmental interaction, nonlinear behaviors, unpredictable emergent phenomena, self-organising.  Order for free at the edge of chaos (Kaufman, 1993).  Evolution and collapse of societies (Diamond, 2005).
    • Map of Complexity evolution Source : Brian Castellani : http://www.art-sciencefactory.com/complexity-map_feb09.html
    • Complexity in Action Robot powered by Physarum slime mould. Sources (17 June 2009) : http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2006/feb/15/uknews.robots http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/S/slime_mold.html Jazz Improvisation Manchester UK: Source: Johnson (2001) Source: Johnson (2007) Image 22 June 2009 Google Earth Ant Farm Simulator: Source (17 June 2009) : http://www.geocities.com/chamonate/hormigas/antfarm/ Flocking behaviour – 3D Boids: Source (17 June 2009) http://www.navgen.com/3d_boids/index.html
    • A Mindset Shift  Traditional worldview  Emerging worldview  Reductionism, external focus  Holism, internal and external  Singular linear causality  Mutual non-linear causality  Objective reality  Perspectival reality  Determinism  Indeterminism  Survival of the fittest  Adaptive self-organisation  Discreet entity focus  Relationship focus  Either/Or thinking  Polarity thinking  Modern/Classical  Postmodern  Hierarchical levels  Heterarchy within levels  Prediction and control  Understanding and facilitation  Patriarchy  Equality  Logic  Paradox  Physics  Biology  Deterministic equilibrium  Patterns and lifecycles  Top down influenced behaviour  Bottom up emergent behaviour  Focus on Directives  Focus on Feedback  Specialist  Generalist  Assembly  Morphogenisis  Focus on averages  Focus on variations and trends Source: Dent 2001, p8
    • Complex Adaptive Systems  Many interacting time driven agents, system wide emergence, learning and adaptation, self organising.  Rich short-range information exchange, with positive, negative, direct and indirect feedback.  Non-linear cause and effect, open to feeding on and exchanging energy from the environment.  Historical “memory” of the past influences current action and future evolution, seeking advantage for itself.  High energy evolution happens far from equilibrium at “edge of chaos” learning, low energy leads to collapse. Source: Cilliers, 1998.
    • CAS Diagram CAS : Source (22 June 2009) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_adaptive_system
    • Complexity and Management Science  Consistent response against traditional Taylorist command-and-control management practiced today (McMillan, 2008).  A shift from working on (apart from) to working within (a part of) the organisation.  Organisations are change challenged complex adaptive systems (Anderson, 1999).  Applied as models and metaphors for strategic management (Stacey, 2007), change management (McMillan, 2004), learning (Anderson, 1999).
    • Complexity and Project Management  Project management (Ivory and Alderman, 2005, Cooke-Davies et al., 2007, Jaafari, 2003).  Information systems development projects (Benbya and McKelvey, 2006).  Project social capital (Weaver, 2007).  Innovation projects (Harkema, 2003).  Project based organisations (Sato et al., 2004).  Agile methodologies (Meso and Jain, 2006).
    • The project as a Hierarchy
    • To the project as a Network Agent X Legitimate Network Shadow Network L M A O B N C D E R P F Q Project 1 Organisation A G J H S U K I T Project 2 Adapted from Stacey,1996 Organisation B Environment / Landscape
    • Complexity perspective on Change Traditional Dynamical Linear Non-Linear Disruptive Creative Cause and Effect Opportunistic Incremental Revolutionary An Event Continuous Calamitous Turbulent Controllable Uncontrollable Abnormal Normal Predictable Unpredictable Source: McMillan,2004, p67
    • Adaptive Project Management  An interpretation of complexity as applied to projects as Complex Adaptive Systems:  A new model for dynamical adaptive change management.  Participative leadership influence is more effective than the traditional command and control management styles.  Supplemental to (not a replacement of) traditional models.  The balancing act of integrating the Complicated (mechanism) and the Complex (organism) into an outcome.  Spontaneous re-organisation happens at the right conditions. Adapt and evolve the plan (not time) and seek the free order.  Rich interactive environments with communication fuels “edge of chaos” creative and innovative spontaneous events.
    • Value of Complexity thinking?  A new way of understanding the adaptive dynamics of organisations, projects and change.  The promise of emergent order for free.  Innovative change happens at the edge of chaos.  The influence of leadership as a-part-of the system.  Leadership can be formal and also emergent.  Accentuate the importance of memory, start-up rules, diversity and the power of close communication.  Anticipate non-linear unexpected events. Understanding the space between logic and paradox.
    • Resources  Santa Fe Institute: www.santafe.edu  Plexus Institute: www.plexusinstitute.org  Complexity Society: www.complexity-society.com  Emergence Journal: www.emergence.org/ECO_site/web-content/table.html  Ralph Stacey: www.herts.ac.uk/courses/schools-of- study/business/research/complexity-and-management- centre/home.cfm  Book: KAUFFMAN, S. (1995) At Home in the Universe: The Search for Laws of Self-Organization and Complexity, New York, Oxford University Press.
    • References (1)  ANDERSON, P. (1999) Complexity theory and organization science. Organization Science, 10, 216-232.  BENBYA, H. & MCKELVEY, B. (2006) Toward a complexity theory of information systems development. Information Technology and People, 19, 12-34.  BLAKE, I. & BUSH, C. (2009) Project Managing Change : practical tools and techniques to make change happen, Harlow, Pearson Education.  CILLIERS, P. (1998) Complexity and postmodernism: Understanding complex systems, London and New York, Routledge.  COOKE-DAVIES, T., CICMIL, S., CRAWFORD, L. & RICHARDSON, K. (2007) We're not in Kansas anymore, Toto: Mapping the strange landscape of complexity theory, and its relationship to project management. Project Management Journal, 38.  DENT, E. B. (1999) Complexity science: a worldview shift. Emergence, 1, 5-19.  DIAMOND, J. (2005) Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed, New York, Viking Penguin.  DOOLEY, K. J. (2004) Complexity science models of organizational change. IN POOLE, S. & VAN DE VEN, A. (Eds.) Handbook of organizational change and development. Oxford, Oxford University Press.  GLEICK, J. (2000) Faster: The Acceleration of Just About Everything London, Abacus.  HARKEMA, S. (2003) A complex adaptive perspective on learning within innovation projects. The Learning Organisation, 10, 340- 346.  HOLLAND, J. (1998) Emergence from Chaos to Order, New York, Oxford University Press.  IVORY, C. & ALDERMAN, N. (2005) Can Project Management Learn anything From Studies of Failure in Complex Systems? Project Management Journal, 36, 5-16.  JAAFARI, A. (2003) Project management in the age of complexity and change. Project Management Journal, 34, 47-57.  JOHNSON, S. (2001) Emergence: The connected lives of ants, brains, cities and software, London, Penguin Books.  JOHNSON, N. (2007) Two's Company, Three is Complexity : A simple guide to the Science of all Sciences, Oxford, Oneworld Publications.
    • References (2)  KAUFMAN, S. A. (1993) The Sciences of Complexity and "Origins of Order". IN BROCKMAN, J. (Ed.) Creativity - The Reality Club 4. New York, Touchstone.  MCMILLAN, E. (2004) Complexity, Organizations and Change, London, Routledge.  MCMILLAN, E. (2008) Complexity, Management and the Dynamics of Change - Challenges for practice, London, Routledge.  MESO, P. & JAIN, R. (2006) Agile software development: Adaptive systems principles and best practices. Information Systems Management, 23, 19-30.  NAISBITT, J. (1982) Megatrends: Ten New Directions Transforming Our Lives, New York, Warner Books.  PASCALE, R., MILLEMANN, M. & GIOJA, L. (2000) Surfing the edge of chaos : the laws of nature and the new laws of business, New York, Crown Business.  SATO, C. E. Y., DERGINT, D. E. A. & HATAKEYAMA, K. (2004) Project-Based Organizations as Complex Adaptive Systems. Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology Symposium. Portland State Univeristy, Portland OR, USA, LACTEC Institute of Technology for Development, Brazil.  STACEY, R.(1996) Complexity and creativity in organizations, San Francisco, Berrett-Koehler Publishers Inc.  STACEY, R. (2002), Strategic management and organisational dynamics: the challenge of complexity. 3rd ed. Prentice Hall, Harlow  STACEY, R. (2007) Strategic management and organisational dynamics: The challenge of complexity to ways of thinking about organisations, 5th e. Harlow, Essex, Pearson Education Limited.  TAYLOR, F., W. (1911) Principles of Scientific Management, New York, Harper & Bros.  WEAVER, P. (2007) A Simple View of 'Complexity' in Project Management. WPM Week. Singapore.