Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
275281, 1999
# 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd and IPMA. All rights reserved
Printed in Great Britain
0263-7863/99 $20.00 + 0.00
PII: S0263-7863(98)00041-6
Daniels College of Business, Information Technology and Electronic Commerce Department, 2020 S. Race
Street, University of Denver, Denver, Colorado, USA
Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam School of Management, P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR Rotterdam,
The Netherlands
Traditionally, project management has focused on the management of projects on a single location either within one organization or among two or more organizations. Recently, however,
emerging trends are changing the way projects are organized and managed, creating new challenges in project management research and practice. This paper has two objectives. First, it proposes a classication of project management types based on the number of projects and sites
involved and investigate the consequences of such schema. Second, the evolution of projects
across three levels is discussed. # 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd and IPMA. All rights reserved
Keywords: Multiple projects, project management, distributed projects, program management, programme management
Introduction
A number of business and technical forces are changing the fundamentals of project management as it
had been developed over the past decades. First,
advanced
Information
and
Communication
Technologies (ICT) enable cooperation in a distributed
mode. Technologies like groupware and videoconferencing are increasingly becoming feasible for organizations to use in international projects.1 Second,
globalization of markets and competition necessitate
integration of global managerial and business processes in corporations.2 This corporate integration is
achieved by people working from geographically distributed sites in a given project.3 Corporations expect
organizational teams to cooperate on an international
scale, dealing with business problems with a global
impact.4 Third, organizations are increasingly adopting
a strategy of global sourcing, not only in innovative
sectors like microelectronics and the semi-conductor
industry, but also in the area of nancial and business
services as well as manufacturing and engineering operations. As these strategies require intensive cooperation between the organizations involved in these
exchanges, projects including professionals from mul-
276
and the natural tendency to have more projects concurrently, although these projects are still single in
nature and in dierent sites. This could be the case for
a construction company that is building two sites in
dierent cities or even countries. Starting at project
form 5, let us suppose a situation where a company is
working on two sites with one project per site. Any
possible change path would imply moving to multiple
projects in at least one of those sites. Some of those
projects could be relatively independent (57) making
the transition easier. In this case, the organization
needs to improve their know-how on prioritization
among projects on the same site, and problems with
resource sharing start to appear. The 53 change path
involves more complexity. Each project is now done in
several sites, and the problem is less of prioritization
but more of scheduling resource sharing and coordination across several sites, a dierent skill than the
one involved in evolutionary path 57. Finally, path
54 is the most complex to acquire know-how. It has
the same issues as path 53 but adds the problem of
how to manage the local interdependencies across the
shared discrete locations between the two projects.
The development of world cars, or automobiles that
are produced by subsidiaries of the same multinational
company in almost the same form in many countries,
is an example of a 54 path. Until 10 to 15 years ago,
cars were developed in one given country, and after
being in production for some time, machinery was
exported and production of essentially the same car
(although adapted to local conditions) would start.
Therefore, they were multiple traditional projects (5).
Then both GM and Ford started their `world car' project, where many subsidiaries were given the opportunity to participate in the design of the caror in fact,
a family of cars, if we consider the dierent body
models that could share the same platform.25 Some of
these teams were working on more than one of those
projects, since these families shared most components
and manufacturing issues. By the same token, the procurement for parts to be used in those cars is done
worldwide, potentially looking for more than one supplier for each given part, to be used in more than one
production plant.
Another example of the center pattern is a Total
Quality Management (TQM) project or program.
Often, such projects start at corporate headquarters
from multinationals (1). However, in order to ensure
worldwide consistency and competitive impact, such
quality improvement programs are implemented in
geographically distributed regional headquarters or
subsidiaries.26 Hence, as a spin-o from the headquarter-concept, multiple TQM projects are initiated
reecting the evolution pattern 15. A number of trajectories becomes then feasible. For example, project
teams starting at regional headquarters (5) progressively include members from local subsidiaries (153
or 154). In addition, regional headquarters may implement TQM by starting on their location quality
improvement programs to enhance simultaneously the
quality of business processes, products and departments (path 157).
280
Conclusions
The contribution of this paper centers on a proposed
categorization of project management that goes
beyond the standard categorization of single and multiple project management. It becomes clear that for
each dierent category a whole dierent set of problems and potential project management techniques
may apply.
In particular, the existence of distributed projects is
described and due to their importance and expected
future predominance, we make the case that it is relevant to understand the problems and possible solutions associated with them. As with any other
projects, there are benets and costs to distributed projects. We discussed in this paper some of the reasons
why distributed projects make sense as well as some of
its main diculties. Research as well as practical
questions linked with this categorization are also
described.
References
1. Manheim, M., Integrating global organizations through task/
team support systems. In Global Networks: Computers and
International Communication, ed L. M. Harasim. The MIT
Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1993.
2. Nohria, N. and Ghoshal, S., The Dierentiated Network.
Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1997.
3. Hamlin, C., Team building a global team at Apple Computer.
Employment Relations Today, 1994, 00, 5562.
4. Bergstrom, R. Y., Global issues demand taking teams global.
Automotive Production, 1996, 00, 6061.
5. Chiesa, V., Globalizing R&D around centres of excellence.
Long Range Planning, 1995, 28(6), 1928.
6. Kuemmerle, W., Building eective R&D capabilities abroad.
Harvard Business Review, 1997, 00, 6170.
7. Grant, R. M., Prospering in dynamically-competitive environments: organizational capability as knowledge integration.
Organization Science, 1996, 7(4), 375387.
281