Social project management focuses on small, agile teams that collaborate online. It emphasizes rapid iteration, minimal planning, and responding quickly to feedback, making it well-suited to smaller projects. In contrast, traditional "project management 1.0" takes a large-scale, top-down approach which often fails due to rigid processes and tools that don't align with how people actually work. While social projects can also fail for reasons like a flawed idea or incorrect implementation, their smaller scale means failures have less impact and teams can learn and move on faster.

1. social project management everything small is big again

2. so, social project management huh!

3. what's the fuss about?

4. the 'social' revolution

5. changing the way we do many things

6. a new way of 'doing' projects..

7. well, not really, new

8. it's just that they're being taken A LOT more seriously these days

9. limited planning no documentation diy (small teams)

10. multiple skillsets small budget release asap

11. what was once a 'hack' is now an accepted methology

12. so, social project management

13. what does it look like?

14. small teams

15. smart, motivated people

16. limited planning

17. a clear vision

18. minimal scope

19. small projects

20. multi-skilled teams

21. fast pace

22. rapid release

23. alpha, beta

24. feedback

25. responsiveness

26. iteration

27. is this really so new?

28. there are not-so-new alternatives

29. agile

30. individuals and interaction over processes and tools working sofware over comprehensive documentation customer collaboration over contract negotiation respond to change over following a plan while there is value in the items on the right , we value the items on the left more agile software development

31. shorter development cycles, iteration, end user involvement, multi-disciplinary teams

32. compare and contrast with 'project management 1.0'

33. large scale projects

34. top down

35. centralised control

36. authoritarian environment

37. implied structure

38. limited communication to team and end users

39. over complex tools

40. rigidity of tools

41. local access to information

42. gantt charts

43. managed with a guesstimation paradigm

44. many stakeholders

45. escalating requirements

46. complex dependencies

47. risk registers

48. mammoth teams

49. scary and crazy budgets

50. horizon and beyond timelines

51. expected failure

52. why do these projects fail?

53. first, do they fail?

54. oracle, peoplesoft, sap, accenture, ibm global services

55. the 1.0 'large scale', top down project approach fails spectaculary all the time

56. except they don't *officially* fail. because we update the gantt chart as we go. we move the goal posts

57. but why?

59. traditional project managment doesn't match the way we work

60. that said

61. social project management projects *also* fail all the time

62. for different reasons

63. usually because it just wasn't such a great idea

64. or the implementation was completely wrong

65. or the audience doesn't exist yet.

66. but it doesn't matter

67. because they're smaller and faster with less investment

68. dust off, learn from the mistakes and move on

69. ok, so what's all this *social* stuff got to do with it?

70. Project Manager Client Development Analyst Design Senior Dev Dev Dev Dev Stake-holder UX Consultant UI Designer Stake-holder Stake-holder Stake-holder Test Lead Test Tester Tester

71. new toys

73. tasks, milestones, documents , meetings, wiki, chat, bug tracking

74. 100% securely online, 24/7/365

75. encouraging and promoting faster time to market

76. through online social collaboration

77. contact adapted from the original by lisa reichelt (lisa.reichelt@gmail.com) w: turinproject.com t: @turinproject.com fb: bit.ly/turinprojectfacebook