Pure project and process management

7.2.1 Pure project management interventions

Pure project management interventions are interventions that completely match the definition of project management as used in this report.

First this means that there is a definite or demarcated scope that should be realized. In line with this the interviews show that in most situations where project management interventions are applied the uncertainty in goals is absent or low. The project managers apply project management if they have a clear view of their goals. This does not always mean that the end product of the project is completely defined; goal of the interventions can also be the delivery of an interim product. In addition to this, pure project management interventions are observed more often in the realization phase since then more information about goals and methodology of the project is available.

Second pure project management steers on control of the project parameters time, money and qual- ity. In line with this all the observed project management interventions show positive effects on the quality or scope of the project. Besides these positive effects on scope control, project-oriented inter- ventions also show better result related to planning than process management interventions. Almost half of the project management interventions increases the speed of the project, while less than a quarter of the process-oriented interventions has this effect.

Third pure project management aims at structured accomplishment of the scope. Therefore project management is suited to situations without or with low interdependence complexity. In the current network society the absence of interdependencies is rare. Situations without interdependence com- plexity are mainly observed within the project organization where the existence of hierarchic relations makes it possible “to control” the environment and enforce structured implementation. This explains why the observed pure project management interventions are mainly applied for organizational is- sues, such as the establishment and change of the organizational structure. This is also the case with the example in box 7-1.

Requirements for success

 The project manager has a clear vision of the desired scope and this scope is accepted by the in- volved stakeholders.

 The project manager has power to control the realisation of this scope within time and budget.  The context is stable preventing that the scope and power position of the manager will be dam-

Box 7-1: Example pure project management intervention

Explanation

The success of project management is based on reducing the complexity of projects and structured problem solving. In simple and hierarchical situations this is an effective management approach. Dis- advantage is that by structuring and splitting up the project is becomes more difficult to react on vari- ous opinions or unexpected events.

For the management of spatial development this means that project managers in today's society have to look carefully in which situations the use of pure project management is still possible.

7.2.2 Pure process management interventions

Pure process management interventions are interventions that completely match with the definition of process management as used in this report.

First this means that the scope of the project is still dynamic and discussable. Therefore process man- agement interventions are suitable for the planning phase of projects. During the planning phase most times both the uncertainty in goals and the uncertainty in methods are high. The project man- ager than needs to cooperate with other stakeholders to determine a scope of the project which has broad support. During the realisation phase the uncertainty of goals is often lower, but uncertainty of methods might still be present in a significant number of situations. In those cases process manage- ment interventions can be applied to determine a method of realisation which is supported by the stakeholders.

Second pure process management steers on increasing the support, acceptation or feasibility of a pro- ject. Therefore process management interventions are often applied as response to a lack of support or a poor relationship between stakeholders. This is useful because process management interven- tions achieve better results on these parameters than project management interventions. An example of an intervention aimed at increasing support is regular consultation with residents, as described in box 7-2.

 Issue: A large road construction project is moving from the planning phase to the realisation phase but the project organization is not yet equipped for this assignment. Neither size nor qualities in the project organization are sufficient to deal with this challenge.

 Objective: Develop a project organization matching the scope of the project.

 Intervention: The project director analysed the required structure and capacities to success- fully manage the realisation of this project. On the basis of this analysis he decided to restruc- ture the organization in conformity with the requirements and draw on the necessary people.  Result: The intervention had huge impact on the organization. After the intervention the new

project structure is ready and the organization can start managing the realisation of the pro- ject. The new structure and better equipped organization has positive effects on the control of scope, the budget and control of planning.

 Context: The implementation of this intervention was possible because the project manager had the specific mandate to restructure the organization. On the basis of his mandate, the re- lations within the organization are hierarchical and his is able to enforce this intervention. Be- sides the absence of interdependence complexity, also the goals of the project are clear.

Third pure process management aims at collective enabling of the scope. In line with this process management is applicable in network environments with high interdependence complexity. This in- terdependence complexity is mainly present in the social dimension, which means that different stakeholders are interdependent and need cooperate to reach their goals.

Box 7-2: Example of pure process management intervention

Requirements for success

 The involved stakeholders still have to determine the exact problem or desired scope of the pro- ject.

 Broad support and feasibility are crucial to make realization of the project possible.

 Unexpected events can influence the problem characteristics and/or the feasibility of the desired scope.

Explanation

The success of process management is based on the ability to cope with complexity and collaboration. In uncertain environments and confronted with interdependent stakeholders this is necessary in order not to get bogged down in fixed structures. However, the search for togetherness and the openness to new developments can be detrimental to the decisiveness and the delivery of concrete products. For the management of spatial development projects this means that process management has be- come an indispensable element in realizing projects. However, managers should be keeping a sharp eye that sufficient incentives guarantee that still progress is made and that the process contains ade- quate substance.

 Quote: “Het is heel belangrijk dat het project voor de bewoners een menselijk gezicht heeft”  Issue: A municipality is developing a new urban area on the border of the city. The develop-

ment is accompanied with several problems. Based on the misfortunate past, many residents distrust the municipality. A new appointed project manager expects that this distrust may give rise to objections and delays of the project.

 Objective: The project manager wants to remove this distrust and build a good relationship with the stakeholders, especially with the residents.

 Intervention: The project manager decided to meet representatives of the residents, united in a village council, at least every six weeks. The project manager invested in this relation and campaigned for a more open approach to this people.

 Result: As a result of the meetings more support is created for the development and the pre- sent distrust is largely removed. Finally the relationship improved to such extent that, at the request of the residents, the frequency of the consultation could be reduced.

 Context: The project was already moving to the realisation phase and goals and methods were already partly determined. In these situations it may be tempting to use mainly project- oriented interventions. However, residents have an important position in the area and play a role in the development. This is an example of the still existing interdependence complexity. To maintain support it is important to continue making use of process-oriented interventions.