Agile for Project Managers

Indelicato, Greg

doi:10.1002/pmj.21569

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…the ideas in RPM thinking, which in fact might have the implication that RPM thinking has had a greater impact on practice than what is currently recognized and described (Svejvig and Andersen, 2015) where one of the potential candidates is focus on value (Office of Government Commerce, 2010; Laursen and Svejvig, 2016). Finally, lean thinking has its roots in the manufacturing industry and at the shop floor (Hines, 2004), but traveled into project management (Nekoufar and Karim, 2011), and agile methods were developed for software development and IT-projects, but have spread to non IT-projects due to their success (Serrador and Pinto, 2015;Conforto et al, 2014) where some of the more significant signposts are "PRINCE2 Agile" (Axelos, 2015) and becoming a "PMI Agile Certified Practitioner" (Project Management Institute, 2015) although the adoption by traditional project management has been slow (Indelicato, 2016). This indicates how global ideas and local implementations travel and translate between industries, project types and beyond with paths as bottom-up, sideways and top-down.…”

Section: Implications and Conclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Danish agenda for rethinking project management

Svejvig

Grex

2016

IJMPB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to analyze the similarities and differences between the Danish Rethinking Project Management initiative named Project Half Double (PHD) and the rethinking project management (RPM) research stream. The paper furthermore discusses how PHD and RPM can inspire each other in research and practice.Design/methodology/approach -This is an empirical paper based on collaborative research between industry and researchers. PHD has developed principles and practices driven by industry consisting of 10 leading stars and the impact, leadership and flow (ILF) method. The 10 leading stars and ILF method are compared to RPM research. The comparative analysis is then used in a broader discussion about how the researchdriven RPM initiative can enrich the industry-driven PHD initiative and vice versa depicted in a theoretical understanding of translations between global ideas and local implementations.Findings -RPM and PHD share a focus on value creation, social processes, learning and complexity while PHD also focuses on lean thinking, agile thinking, front-end loading and leadership, which are largely topics beyond the RPM research stream.Originality/value -The paper presents how stakeholders from Danish industry interpret the actuality in projects and how they want to move forward with a radically different project paradigm. This is expressed in the 10 leading stars and ILF method, which is compared and contrasted to the existing RPM literature providing a foundation for further development of both rethinking project management and Project Half Double.

show abstract