Experiences with project and process management

Project managers elaborated on the relationship between project and process management in their projects. Several factors that can influence this relationship are discussed and the respondents elabo- rated on how they connect project and process management.

6.4.1 Share of project and process management

The hypothesis that both project and process management are required to successfully complete complex spatial development projects is confirmed by all respondents. Project managers acknowledge that project and process management belong together.

A large majority of 80% of the respondents stated that the quantitative share of process management is declining during the project and that at the same time the share of project management is increas- ing. However, process management does not disappear completely; many respondents confirm that also during the realisation phase a small amount of process managements remains needed.

The importance of a management approach for the project as a whole is not always in conformity with the share of the same management approach in the activities of the senior project manager. This can be clarified based on the role of the respondents. Three respondents mentioned that on the basis of their role as facilitator/mediator process management remains leading in their personal interventions during the complete project. In these cases for the complete project the role of project management is still growing, but these project management tasks are delegated to other managers or organiza- tions.

6.4.2 Relationship between project and process management over time

The second topic discussed during the interviews is the development of the relationship between pro- ject and process management over time. This discussion was opened by showing the five graphics de- scribed in paragraph 5.2, which all represent a possible relationship over time. After a brief explana- tion of these models, respondents are asked to reply. Is the proportion of project management process and equal throughout the entire project, or is this relationship capricious? Does the share of project management slowly grows over a project or is there a big step from process to project man- agement? The respondents are challenged to argue on these graphics and questions or to add a per- sonal drawing to the five proposed relationships. Many respondents found the charts a challenging way to look at their work as project manager. Often they recognized aspects of the presented graphs, but the respondents also suggested several adaptations or made their own chart. The three most nominated models are discussed in this section.

Capricious relationship

The relationship between project and process management is seen as capricious by a majority of 55% of the respondents. Among the interviewed managers this is by far the best valued representation of the relationship over time. A capricious relationship means that the amounts of project and process management are continuously changing. However, in combination with this capricious relationship, in the long term these respondents do experience an increasing share of project management in pro- jects. The capricious nature of the relationship is reflected by the fact that the increasing share of pro- ject management is interrupted by a temporary renewed attention for the process. This is visualized in figure 6-1.

Notable elements in the graph are the peaks in the share of process management. These peaks reflect a switch between a project and a process management approach. There are two main reasons that can give rise to the peaks in the proportion of process management.

“We streven er wel naar om het proces af te bouwen maar de wereld om ons heen staat niet stil. Er zijn veel externe invloeden die vragen om een nieuwe procesaanpak”

Figure 6-1: Relationship between project and process management as described by majority of respondents

1 First, a peak can indicate the moment of an important decision. In the phase previous of decision making process management plays an important role. Together with stakeholders discussions take place to increase support for a specific choice. This causes a peak in the share of process manage- ment. After the decision is made, specific issues are settled and can be transferred from the proc- ess-oriented approach to the project management approach. This explains why the graph shows a valley after the decision has been made.

2 A second explanation for the peaks in the graph is the emergence of unexpected issues. There are many issues that can require additional process management, for example deteriorating relation- ships with stakeholders, construction problems or relevant legislative changes. As a consequence plans need to be adjusted or new discussions with stakeholders have to take place. If the issue is solved, project management again obtains greater prominence and the graph changes again from a peak to a valley.

Although the majority of the project managers considers this graph as the best representation of real- ity, comments can be posted on the realism of this relationship over time. The choice of this model may partly stem from the desire of project managers to reduce the share of process management dur- ing the project. A share of process management that remains high, or even increases, towards the end of the project may indeed be interpreted as a failure of the project manager to control his project.

Dominant process-oriented approach

Six respondents, all discussing extremely large projects or multi-projects, recognize a dominant proc- ess management approach with several smaller sub-projects as part of the overall process.

In these projects the project manager has a coordinating role to take care of better alignment be- tween all subprojects. This task requires mainly process management. The implementation of the sub- projects is carried out under the responsibility of individual project offices, which take care of the pro- ject management.

Some of these respondents emphasize that the sub-projects tend to get larger if the overall process nears completion. This is explained by the fact that first small and simple measures are implemented. If these first sub-projects are successfully implemented, the implementation is scaled up and subpro- jects increase in size. This is visualized in figure 6-2.

Figure 6-2: Relationship with dominant process approach in combination with sub-projects

Box 6-1: Example project with dominant process approach: De Groote Wielen

Also a remark should be made on the interpretation that project managers give to this model. If the “blocks” with project management reflect a sub-project, does this mean that these subprojects are conducted entirely without process management? Or should the project management blocks actually be seen as separate projects in which both project and process management are required? The inter- views suggest that this is at least partially true. Although a part of the process management is only required at the scale of the overall project, project managers indicate that also in the subprojects a limited amount of process management remains needed.

Structured stepwise approach

Four respondents, which are all manager of an infrastructure project, recognize a stepwise relation- ship from mainly process management to mainly project management. They argue that this stepwise relationship is depended on tendering procedures which include specific moments when processes have to be finished and subjects are fixed in a project approach. These respondents stated that almost no scope changes are possible after tendering, while a discussable scope is seen as a vital element of process management. This relationship is shown in figure 6-3.

A comprehensive process-oriented approach containing project management blocks is appointed by managers from several large urban development projects. One of them, project manager of a large housing development, explains that main aspect of his work is to provide the coordination between the many sub-projects of the development. He is also the link between politics and the project. As a result, his work is characterized by a process-oriented focus while the project man- agement tasks are delegated to the managers of the subprojects.

“Bij gebiedsontwikkeling zie ik een continu proces met in deelprojecten een rol voor projectmana- gement. Het is belangrijk om deze blokken projectmanagement in diverse maten weer te geven. Bij de aanleg van Vinex locaties ben je na 8 jaar in een fase dat veel deelprojecten in uitvoering zijn en dan worden de blokken projectmanagement steeds groter en zwaarder”

Figure 6-3: Stepwise transition from mainly process management to mainly project management

Also related to this graph it can be questioned whether it is a desired or a real relationship between project and process management. The interviews give indications that despite a tendering procedure sometimes a high degree of process management remains necessary in late project phases. For exam- ple because an unpredictable environment can still not be controlled and because adjustments in the contract are required. However, by contrast project managers also indicated that clear capturing of made agreements can help to reduce complexity and uncertainty. If this succeeds the necessary share of process management is effectively reduced.

Box 6-2: Example project with stepwise approach

Linear transition from project to process

Only three respondents experience a linear transition from mainly project management to mainly process management, as shown in figure 5-3. Although many others confirm that this is a reasonable theory and a relationship worth pursuing, most respondents emphasize that this is also an illusion. The project environment includes too many dynamic and uncertain events which makes it impossible to attain this linear relationship.

A project manager, responsible for the realisation of a infrastructure project, perceives a stepwise transition from mainly process management to mainly process management. He explains that in- frastructure projects are characterized by a limited amount of milestones, such as the determina- tion of the exact route (Dutch: tracébesluit) or the start of the tendering procedure. At these mo- ments many details of the project are set and afterwards implemented by a project-oriented management approach.

Also some other project managers of infrastructure projects experienced this gradual develop- ment of their management approach.

Factors influencing relationship between project and process

Many respondents emphasized that the relationship between project and process management is not only depended on the time but also on characteristics of the project. The project characteristics that are seen as influential on this relationship are:

 The complexity of the project scope. In a technical more complex project, more interdependencies between project parts exist and it is expected that more unexpected events happen. As a conse- quence the relationship between project and process management is more capricious.

 The complexity of the project environment. Among others Peer Rooijmans, project director RijnGouwelijn, stated that if a project is implemented “in the middle of society” and more interde- pendent stakeholders are involved, the relationship between project and process is more capri- cious.

 The behaviour and habits of project partners. Project partners can have a focus on either process of project management. For example, if all project partners are project-oriented and accustomed to work in a straight line from A to B, then the project can lose control of the process. If complica- tions emerge, such as an obstructive stakeholder, the project partners might find it difficult to deal with this problem.

 The behaviour and habits of the project manager. Also project managers can be more specialized in either project or process management. Managers can get nervous of a capricious relationship be- tween project and process because it can be difficult to control. Other project managers feel com- fortable with this relationship because they realize, as Stef Fleischeuer stated, that “flexibility helps to reach the finish line”.

6.4.3 Remarks on the appliance of project and process management Definitions of project and process management

Some respondents made a personal remark on the definitions of project and process management. Four respondents mentioned that it is important that process management should not be non- committal. They stress that open-ended processes should be avoided and that processes need to have a clear direction. In contrast to this opinion, three other respondents emphasized that process man- agement should be more open and in that in practice process management is too often applied on a project-oriented way and that this is harming the success of the process. These comments show that different perceptions of process management do exist.

Two respondents said it is important to complement the overview of management approaches with program management. One of them argued that especially in large projects it is relevant to consider project and process management in combination with program management. This is a useful addition “De verhouding tussen project- en procesmanagement hangt niet alleen samen met de tijd, de complexiteit en je tegenspelers bij de partners in het project spelen ook een grote rol”

“Bij procesmanagement zie ik te vaak een brede definitie, een te faciliterende insteek waarbij we wel zien wat haalbaar is. Maar bij goed procesmanagement weet je wel waar je heen wilt”

to the used theoretical framework. However, within the scope of this study there are no possibilities for further investigation to the role of program management.

The role of the project organization

Respondents explained that the success of combining project and process management is depended on the project organization and the people working in this organization. The structure and capacity of the organization should be adapted based on the amount of project-oriented or process-oriented work. In particular, the successful application of process management and operating in a complex en- vironment requires high personal skills. Diversified team with both process-oriented and project- oriented managers can stimulate and strengthen the combination of project and process manage- ment.

Respondents also confirmed that combining project and process management remains a challenge for them. One of them proposed the dilemma what approach should dominate in times of crisis. Based on his experience in infrastructure project he is convinced that during crisis the project managers should let process management prevail. Other project managers argued that in a moment of crisis decisive project management is appropriate.