Commentary: This is a continuation of the earlier Part 1 which focused on an overarching model that drew upon green initiatives to form a model that initiated a movement towards the generation of natural resources and recovery of the lands desolated or desertified. Part 2 is to discuss project leadership, implementation, and economic carrying capacities as well as capabilities.
Humanitarian Projects built from a Standard Model Part II
By
JT Bogden, PMP
The model presented in Part 1 results in a mega-project. A formal definition of mega-projects does not exist among scholars but the United States government defines mega-projects as major infrastructure projects exceeding $500US million or projects that attract a high level of public or political attention due to impacts on the community, environment, or budgets (Li, Yanfei, and Chaosheng, 2009). Mega-projects are managed differently than the classic PMI project. The difference stems from the scope and complexity of the project as well as a fair amount of political injects are found in mega-projects that are not ordinarily found in smaller projects. Mega-projects require early and broader planning and programs emplaced that detail relationships and policies. Often supply chain design requires the leveling of the playing field in order to prevent dominant actors from controlling the project and allow for problem resolution among competitive supply chain actors. The mega-projects are componentized into smaller more manageable elemental projects. Project schedules are subject to cash flows since funding comes in cycles based on bonds and governmental block allocations (Operating Target Funds) rather than the PMI method of Earn Value Management, EVM, and sunk labor cost. Although, EVM may be applied in the elemental projects. Some elemental projects may already exist or otherwise meld into the overarching model resulting in adaptation of the model to each circumstance. The post Project Complexity Perplexes Procurement discusses the framework necessary to resolve many of the project challenges.
Economic Carrying Capacities and Capabilities of the Land
Carrying capacity is defined as the volumetric ability of a specified plot of land to support an ecological balance of life as determined by food and water requirements. The measure is often expressed as the maximum number of creatures that an area of land can support. Capability is the ability to produce food and water on the land based on; topography, soil composition, and climate. For example, steep and roughed topographies may produce a lot of water runoff and land for grazing animals. Whereas, plains may puddle water and produce crops. Thus, the capabilities to produce food and water vary. Unless humans intervene and modify or enhance the land's capabilities the carrying capacity is limited.
Basic methods of modifying and enhancing the land's capability include natural processes that improve soil fertility, creation of irrigation as well as water resources. Advanced methods of modifying and enhancing the capabilities include hydroponics, fish farming towers, and introducing synthetics to retain water or increase fertility. The primary objective of this project and associated projects is to increase the carrying capacity and improve the capability of the land. This is achieved by improving the quality of soil fertility and freshwater using more natural and synthetic approaches. By increasing the capability of the land, in a capital economy of private land ownership, the wealth extraction increases significantly. In socialized economies, the land is considered dead capital and at an estimated $9.3 trillion globally (Coffman, 2010, p. 59.). The potential to increase individual wealth and improve lives is considerable.
Energy extraction via wind, solar, and hydroelectric is necessary to artificially stimulate the natural systems where they would otherwise marginally perform. Energy injection begins the cycle of improving the capabilities and capacity of the land. Overall, the model is a supervised process that adds economic value and can be throttled or managed. As the land's carrying capacity and capabilities increase, economic value can be extracted which in turn increases the quality of life.&
Most projects are small or very small. Project leadership under these conditions amounts to personality management which can be a challenge in its own rite. Project leadership on mega-projects involves a broader effort establishing programmatic methods of handling the political issues, supply chain innovation, quality standards, and conflict resolution procedures at a minimum. Often on mega-projects, there are many civil and contractual issues that need to be addressed and mitigated ahead of time rather than litigated after the fact. Program management is the approach commonly used to gain control of an operation.
 |
| Figure 1: The Mega Project |
PMI defines program management as a project of projects which is a myopic and inaccurate description of program management as most operations managers would view the practice. A more accurate description of program management in the operations management realm is to reverse the terms calling the effort a management program. Management programs organize aspects of an operation into policies, responsibilities, and duties that are written into a document. Often management programs detail procedures, training requirements or qualifications, and provide forms or access to systems. A strong leader will foresee, organize, and communicate the management programs to all project actors early in the process. Another aspect of management programs is that they often have performance metrics and in many cases are funded using a variety of methods. These methods include block funding, zero-based budgeting, and a series of grants and recoupments throughout the tax cycle. Management of the funding, including payment cycles, claims processes, and other financials requires controls to prevent over-spending and minimize fraud.
Comment: A scrupulous vendor I had to deal with once. This vendor learned to leverage poor processes and lack of communication in the organization for his benefit by double shipping items. One item would be sent to the loading docks and the other item would be shipped to the front desk. Once signed, the organization owned the item. He then plays stupid but insisted on payment. For my project, I set up a process in which I signed for all inbounds and questioned items mixed in with my orders effectively stopping the double shipments. However, that vendor attempted to get back and reported the organization for software licensing violations after observing several installs of software application that we were recently looking to purchase in volume. I received a letter from an attorney firm essentially seeking to settle for the licensing violations under the threat of further legal action. I had my ducks-in-a-row and responded with an enclosure from a software vendor that we were evaluating the software in question with the vendor's permission. I never heard from the attorney firm again and released the scrupulous vendor from all obligations terminating services. Following these incidents, I began to put together a management program to address other areas that had risks associated with them. Once published, everyone understood the processes and procedures such that I could monitor and manage accountability as well as reduce conflicts and resolve issues more quickly.
Project leadership in a large scale project such as this humanitarian model requires overarching efforts to organize the elemental projects, establishing the processes and procedures that are unique to mega-projects, as well as setting goals and objectives are part of the effort. A greater challenge is to foresee the projects
Mega-Project implementation is more complex than a simple or small project. Mega-projects are typically composed of numerous projects varying in complexity and scope. Management programs layer over top and across the entire project. Procurement and supply chains can become complex and wrought with legal challenges as vendors, suppliers, and contractors make claims, challenge contract awards, and demand payments under review for quality and performance issues.
References
Coffman, M Ph.D. (2010). Rescuing a broken America: why America is deeply divided. (1st ED). Morgan James Publishing: NY.
Diamond, J. (2005). Collapse: how societies choose to fail or succeed. (1st ED). Viking Adult, United States.
Li, Z., Yanfei, X., & Chaosheng, C. (2009). Understanding the value of project management from a stakeholder's perspective: Case study of mega-project management. Project Management Journal, 40(1), 99-109. DOI:10.1002/pmj.20099
No comments:
Post a Comment