The value of performance management

Translate Request has too much data
Parameter name: request
Translate Request has too much data
Parameter name: request

Importance in Management

John Kotter describes management as consisting of planning; organising and resourcing; review and control; and communication. All of these activities are heavily influenced and informed by performance management.

Performance management is an absolutely essential business management process and an important tool for people managers to use in meeting their business objectives:

· Organisations are increasingly realising that it is often not the quality of their strategy but their employees' ability to implement it that will make the difference. Bossidy and Charan define this ability to execute as 'the missing link between aspirations and results'.

· In addition, in order to maximise an organisation's potential for achieving its strategy, it is essential that the organisation both creates and develops the capability of its people. Improved business performance can really only be achieved through effective people management.

The purpose of Performance Management is, therefore, to increase the effectiveness of people at work in order to improve business performance.

Achieving this improvement in performance should be the number one priority for any line manager. A manager can achieve high performance much more easily by working through their team, rather than concentrating on their own day-to-day tasks.

By managing their people effectively, managers gain greater productivity from all those in their team. This means less time concentrating on the things that go wrong, and more time on looking ahead to advance their team's capabilities and improve both their own and their team's value to the organisation.

This is why Jack Welch at GE used to spend more than fifty per cent of his time on people issues.

Bureaucracy is History

In practice, many managers concentrate on their own responsibilities and on their own technical / functional expertise, fitting in people management around this. Management becomes an add-on when it should be the central focus of their job.

So why is performance management often pushed to the side in this way?

A common reason seems to be that performance management is often associated with paperwork, bureaucracy and difficult conversations. This is largely due to the way the process has developed over time.

Up until the early 1990s, performance management was seen largely as an appraisal scheme for determining performance related pay increases. People may have used it for setting objectives at the start of the year and were then appraised against their achievement of these objectives at the end of the year. The results of this appraisal would determine pay and promotion.

The whole process would have been fairly static with people only really looking at their objectives at the start or end of the year. Some more enlightened organisations may have had more regular reviews, however, common practice was still rather event driven.

Since there was little ongoing conversation, the end of year rating would often come as a surprise. This would lead onto long debates about evidence, judgement and subjectivity and an overall deterioration in the line manager / employee relationship.

Overall, performance management was rather monolithic, it was owned by HR, viewed as being something you had to do to get paid and certainly not something that was not seen as having real business value.

Requirements for Effectiveness

Performance management is now usually seen as a process, rather than an event, with individuals and line managers much more likely to use the process regularly. When used like this, performance management is much more of a monitoring process that helps individuals and line managers take stock of where they are and plan what they need to do to achieve the right results. Performance management processes are also more likely to be used to engage and enhance individual, team and organisational performance.

This has been helped by a number of things:

· Clarity in performance objectives: whether through the use of scorecards (key performance measures spread over four or more quadrants, for example, people, finance, customer and process) or through Key Performance Indicators, the setting of performance standards is essential. Every member of staff should be clear about their role, what they are expected to do and the level of performance they need to attain. Only when individuals can clearly see how their efforts contribute to the achievement of the organisation's overall objectives can they fully focus on moving the organisation forward. Individuals appreciate this clarity, become more motivated about what they need to do as a result and are encouraged to develop their capability to achieve as much as they can. Any performance management process needs to ensure that this strand is put in place.

· Performance assessment and feedback: naturally enough it is not sufficient just to make it clear to people what they need to do. Effective assessment of performance at regular and appropriate times is also essential. The role of the line manager in this is crucial as they must provide the appropriate guidance, feedback and support to help their staff understand how they are doing; suggest ways of doing things better and to really focus their interactions on increasing effectiveness. Any assessment process must be simple, easy to operate and allow the interactions between the line manager and their reports to be the main focus.

· Joint review: the use of a performance management process is much more about joint responsibility now that it once was. Line managers and individuals have to use the process together, each with their own responsibilities, in order that they get the most out of it. In this respect it is more like a performance contract between the individual and the line manager, with both signing up to helping the other achieve the right results and develop in the right ways.

· The use of multi-rater feedback: multi-rater feedback has become a much more common part of the performance management process. This provides much greater levels of information and objectivity to the review process, enabling individuals to be more open to development opportunities. It also provides upward feedback and as such allows leadership teams to be much more aware of their areas of development.

· Employee engagement: performance management meetings are one of the key 'moments of truth' where a line manager can show appreciation of a person's contribution, identify their career and engagement drivers, and find ways to motivate the individual to perform, grow and stay within the organisation. Even when giving constructive criticism, when done when, performance management meetings should be positive and engaging events.

· The development focus: people have seen that development is an essential element of driving up individual performance. Competence frameworks have often been used to assess the level of capability an individual has and identify where they need development. The individual can then undertake some form of development to reduce their capability gap. This focused development can then be seen to directly help the individual perform better in their role and thus increase their contribution to overall organisational performance.

· Flexible and pragmatic approach: the processes that are used today are much better able to cope with different needs, requirements and abilities. When building performance management processes the accent needs to be on simplicity, usability and flexibility. This ensures that the process can be used, helps individuals understand what they need to do and how they need to do it (i.e., what are the right behaviours they need to demonstrate) and focuses the organisation on a performance culture. Once again the new performance management is not about control it is about enablement and whatever process is designed, this must be its key aim.

· The use of systems and technology: technology can be an enormous help to making a performance process useable and attractive. With the growth of Intranets, a simple solution can be produced that makes the individuals objectives or performance criteria much more accessible. Individuals can be encouraged to look at the system on a more regular basis and see performance management as a continuous process.

· This is not a HR owned process: one of the more potent changes has been that forward thinking HR practitioners have understood that they do not own the performance management process. They need to be responsible for creating, embedding and supporting the process but they do not own it; the business does. If performance management is to be a tool to enhance business performance (through enhancing individuals and their development) then the business needs to own it. HR has used this shift as a means of helping HR business partners achieve their objectives. This is a fundamental change that has helped in the understanding of the value of performance management and has significantly increased its usage.

Line Manager Capability

A critical role here is that the line manager is a 'coach'; someone who helps an individual achieve to their potential and contribute to the overall success of the organisation.

Many performance management processes fall down in this area if the development of the coaching skills is not done and if line mangers are not clear that this is their role.

An emphasis on the education and development of the line manager should therefore be a significant element of any implementation of performance management.

The Business Benefits

When done well, performance management provides substantial benefits to an organisation. These benefits include:

For the organisation:

· Alignment of objectives

· Motivation of employees

· Support for core values

· Improvement in training and development

· Development as a learning organisation

· Focus on continuous improvement

· Basis for career development

· Retention of skilled employees

· Support for culture change.

For line managers:

· Clarification of expected performance and behaviour

· Support for leadership, motivation and team building

· Basis for helping under performers

· May be used to develop or coach individuals

· Improving relationships with team members

· Basis for non-financial reward, including recognition and development.

For individuals:

· Greater clarity of roles and objectives

· Encouragement and support to perform well

· Provision of guidance in developing abilities

· Improving relationship with their line manager

· Clarity over contribution to organisational performance

· An objective and fair basis for assessing performance.

These benefits are significant. In the private sector, a study by Morgan and Schiemann found that organisations using people measures to help manage their business had a five-year return on investment of 146 per cent, compared to 97 per cent in other organisations, and a one-year return on assets of 4.6 per cent compared to 1.9 per cent in other organisations.

In the public sector, effective performance management helps organisations achieve their key performance outcomes, meet the needs of stakeholders and develop operational excellence in providing their services.

Line managers should not view performance management as a chore - it is the key to their own effectiveness and to that of their employing organisations.

It is a sign of the revenue management success.

Translate Request has too much data
Parameter name: request
Translate Request has too much data
Parameter name: request

Nitty-gritty of Revenue Management

Revenue management first noticed and accepted by the airline industry. Many travel and hospitality companies have been focused to the "adapt or perish" hymn while moving towards revenue management. Today, revenue management processes and systems are implemented in number of industries, including manufacturing, advertising, energy, hi-tech, telecommunications, car rental, cruise line, railroad and retail. In the future, companies that ignore revenue management will be at a serious disadvantage.

Actually, revenue management is the concept of adopting the number of implementation of emerging and changing business strategy to revenue management, where you can generate additional revenue from 3% to 8 % and it resulting in possible profit increment of 50% to 100%.

Revenue Management is the application of exercised strategy that estimates consumer behavior at the micromarket level and make the most of product availability and price to maximize revenue growth. Revenue Management is about optimizes revenue from offered business.

Revenue Management is a solid management science that utilizes statistical and mathematical concepts, based on operations research and management science methodology and tools in changing marketing environment to provide information to:

. Precisely review prospecting consumer behavior under dynamically changing market environment

. Establish the most effective way to price and assign inventory to reach and every prospecting consumer, each and every day, formulate real-time modification as market conditions change, with the consumer in real-time

. Convey this information immediately to distribution and sale outlets which deal with the consumer in real-time

. Work as a decision-support reserve for marketing and operational purpose, containing but not restricted to: pricing, product development, advertising, sales, scheduling, distribution, human resource utilization and capacity planning.

Businesses worldwide are going under remarkable pressure by having giant capital investments occupied to their capacity/resources up to bottom line and to optimizing and recovered revenues from their fragile capacity, products and/or services. So, what can be done to execute RM effectively is very important.

How to reduce the execution pains and optimize the benefits?

In fast changing supply and demand circumstances, how do you handle your resources and price your products and services? The challenges are find out the following:

. How do you predict requirement for distinct products and services?

. How do you assign and set aside the capacity/resources for high revenue/profit customers and products?

. How do you optimize capacity employing as well as revenue realization?

. How do you rework capacity/resource allocations set up on demand on a customary basis to optimize revenues?

. How do you maximize overbooking to lessen service failures costs?

. How do you distinguish product arrangement to maximize revenues?

. How do you chase surplus capacity and propose discounts at the right time to speed up demand without mitigate revenues.

. At what time you change capacity/resources to compete long-term supply and demand?

Adopting the right method of revenue management

From a CEO's point of view, revenue management is serious as it allows companies to successfully direct the challenges of supply, demand and other issues. Revenue management is a course of action and method brings in to order a company, provides it a strategic benefit over the competition by allows the company to sell the "right product to the right customer, at the right price, at the right time." Revenue management strategies stable the tradeoffs amid revenues, capacity utilization and service failures. Revenue management has been shown in many purposes to offer strategic, competitive and financial rewards.

Revenue management systems and processes can provide marvelous strategic return. By implementing revenue management systems and processes, American Airlines observed more than a billion dollars in incremental annual revenues after airline deregulation.

Though RM concept is very simple but execution of revenue management systems has kept very difficult. The availability of current RM system are either in-house or vendor-related and are very costly and time intensive to put into practice and very complex to use in which they upset the processes and people during and after execution.

Unluckily, revenue management execution and applicability have not been focused appropriately and stay behind with two of the biggest obstruction for companies to entirely assign to and profit from such systems. Many users of current systems have objection about the "black box" method used in applying compound revenue management prediction and maximization models. There are many revenue management models available like hybrid class of revenue management, advanced pros revenue management system, Navitaire's Revenue Management System, Portal's Revenue Management System etc to achieve the additional revenue and are vary depending upon the industry in which it is applied. Before implementing a revenue management system any organization must study whether the methods can be useful in their business and the necessity in which, it can push further to develop.

Reducing the Execution Pain

So how do you reduce the pain related with revenue management execution and applicability? Here are some implications:

Open Systems (Internet, Intranet or LAN client/server platform): Companies should force collectively made to order Internet / Wireless application standards, protocols and platforms. By applying software and using open standards investment in IT infrastructure, it can be maintained and comprehended for long periods of time. Revenue management software should harmonize a company's accessible investment in the infrastructure. By leveraging accessible software/hardware/networking infrastructure, companies can reducing the cost of execution and prevent training or failure costs.

Framework flexibility: Components-based and completely integrated revenue management software solutions should be chosen and it should available with existing database and Web/application servers of software built on a flexible framework and can be easily integrated. To apply revenue management systems it should avoid monolithic proprietary systems that propose very little flexibility for ad-hoc decision support or future improvement and software that does not combine with the bequest systems well.

Execution of Phase: Revenue management includes composite estimation and maximization models. When executing such systems today, benefits cannot be completely grasped until all models are entirely incorporated. This could get cost of millions of dollars and more time. Companies should evade ideas that need two to three years and multi-million dollars. A phased approach that gives entry to essential revenue management metrics should be adopted. Although optimization models will be required to maximize supply and demand or maximize resource allotment, the real emphasis in first phase should be to make out and collect the precise data, obtain users comfortable with RM metrics, and apply and make small adjustment of forecasting models until adequate historical data is pull together. This will reducing predicting fault and set up self-assurance in predicting models to lead better RM applicability. Maximizing models should be executing in second phase or soon after. Revenue management systems and processes should address business problems and give activity that generates a path for maximization twelve months after implementing first phase.

Front-End Platform (as opposed to back-end transaction processing platform): In general extremely automated and closely integrated with reservation or transaction systems of companies executes revenue management system at a large. The systems are operating in the back-end and compel extremely practiced analysts to control and manage this method. An easy to use front-end to the compound revenue

management system can develop analyst productivity and get better results. Revenue management systems should agree to users to make what-if analysis to study the influence of parameter or input changes on the prediction and maximization model yield. It should be in such a manner it create any type of ad hoc report as users reflect and analyze.

Time & Cost: Cost of revenue management systems is generally $1 million to $3 million and takes more than two years to put into practice. Companies should look at low-cost, high-value substitute and choose solutions with lessen inadequacies in designing, developing and executing revenue management software. By offering resources to high-priority matter and functionality and by claiming on reducing avoidable functionality and consulting actions, costs and execution time can be considerably lessen.

Demand forecasting and pricing: Demand forecasting is the key tool from which all other revenue management subject goes around. While implementing revenue management systems some times an Achilles heel appears so CEOs should look to demand forecasting and consider that point too. Without precise demand forecasting there will be no optimization of resource provision to products/customers completed. It also include the question, what prices should be specified to which customers through which channels for all products? (Including group, corporate, incentive, Internet.). For example, various demand forecasting methods are used in revenue management in cargo industry are, booking profiles, moving average models, exponential smoothing models (with seasonality and/or trend effects), causal (regression) models, auto-regressive time series models, kalman filters, neural nets, adaptive forecasting models etc.

Automation of Revenue Management:

Automating the method to take out, transform and load data into revenue management data warehouse, run statistical and mathematical models on a periodic basis, and provide easy interfaces to execute the operation are necessary for considerably improve analyst productivity and business performance.

Inventory Control and Sales Management:

The sales strength is also a user of information from a revenue management system. Whether it is computerize inventory control or relationship-based sales, companies recognize noteworthy progress in revenues if appropriate RM ideology is incorporated at all sales levels. The buy-in from sales management and cooperation in set up procedure to pursue RM techniques and in generating corresponding incentives plan is serious for long-term success.

Apart from the above the following points and analytical procedures are also to be considered.

The Revenue Management Lifecycle

Revenue management is a lifecycle of course of action to create, confine, and accumulate revenue for each customer. It has become a significant element of the enterprise. The Revenue management lifecycle also covers a continuing process of examines, appraise, and maximize each phase of the lifecycle.

Revenue Capture

Revenue capture optimizes market share by means of rival pricing models and flexible balance and credit control to allow any service for any subscriber.

Revenue Analysis

On the total revenue management lifecycle revenue analysis is considered and to recognize the revenue relationships with customers and partners it builds up satisfaction. Revenue analysis guarantees all transactions are carrying out with the fullest viable control, integrity, and completeness. It gives real-time verification, reporting, analysis, and control of all procedures and actions which assist optimize revenue and minimize loss linked with fraud and revenue leakage.

Profits of implementing Revenue Management and its future

Companies that want to accomplish something, not just to survive, must put into practice strategic technologies that permit them to constantly alter to vibrant and real-time supply and demand circumstances. Although airlines initiate and exhibit revenue management, it is showing to be a very efficient cutthroat tool in many industries. Unlike other technology vogue, revenue management is extremely rooted in management science and information technology and above all, brings discipline to an organization.

Today, many manufacturers and service providers are facing the problems of revenue generation due to intense competition, margins are shrinking more and more, customer loyalty is spoiling gradually and segregation is critical. More than ever before, industry toppers require reacting rapidly to varying market conditions and shifting customer necessities. To meet these threats, global leaders are heavily shifting

towards revenue management solutions that facilitate them to increase an in depth understanding of the services that customer's value and how they can be brought for maximum profit.

Because creating revenue and optimizing profit are greatest in mind for service providers, they should depend on revenue management solutions to allow them to react to new market opportunities and squeeze the competition by attracting the customer, introducing new services, and in the end driving value to the bottom line. End-to-end management of customer revenue across offerings, channels and geographies are achieved only through revenue management.

The future of revenue management was aptly explained in The Wall Street Journal as follows: "Re-engineering has run its course. You manage your quality totally. Where do you turn for future gains? Perhaps to the marketplace, with 'revenue management.'... Now with computing costs plunging, revenue management is poised to explode."

Super-cool Manager concepts

Translate Request has too much data
Parameter name: request
Translate Request has too much data
Parameter name: request

"Manage from the bottom up; not just from the top down; this creates personal commitment and accountability."

- Bryce's Law

INTRODUCTION

A couple of months ago we started a free service to analyze a person's style of management. Through our "Bryce Management Analysis," a manager answers a series of questions (30 in all) and, based on his responses, we produce a report which assesses his style of management as well as other attributes.

The data collected from these surveys has confirmed a lot of my suspicions; that companies are regressing back to a Theory X form of management. Over the last twenty years we have witnessed a dramatic swing from a Theory Y or Z form of management, back to Theory X. Whereas workers used to be empowered to make decisions and tackle assignments (a la Theory Y or Z), managers today tend to micromanage every action or decision in their department. Workers are told what to do, how to do it, and when it has to be done, with little regard for their input. We see this not only in the corporate world, but in nonprofit organizations as well. The result is that organizations today are run by control freaks who would be more content working with robots as opposed to human beings. This mentality has resulted in an apathetic workforce that doesn't trust management. It also breeds contempt and disloyalty for management, as well as making for some excellent fodder for such things as Dilbert and NBC's hit comedy, "The Office."

Although there are instances where a Theory X form of management can work effectively, it nonetheless represents a top-down unidirectional "master-slave" relationship. Theory X can work well in certain crisis situations, such as "crunch-time" projects, but it is hardly conducive for a normal mode of operation in today's society. Let me be clear on this, under a Theory X form of management, project planning, estimating, scheduling, reporting and control is performed top-down. Instead, a bi-directional approach is recommended which is a critical aspect of the Mini-Project Manager concept.

THE CONCEPT

The Mini-Project Manager (MPM) concept is based on our experiences in several I.T. shops over a number of years and was first described in the Project Management activities of our "PRIDE" methodologies dating back to 1971. Unlike Theory X, the MPM concept seeks to empower workers and make them more responsible for their actions. It promotes more management and less supervision. Actually, under the MPM concept, the individual is expected to act professionally and supervise themselves.

There are still some top-down activities to be performed by management, such as project planning where projects are defined and prioritized. Further, managers select and allocate human resources to participate in project assignments. It also includes establishing project Work Breakdown Structures (WBS; e.g., phases, activities, tasks) and precedent relationships between such structures. Here, the manager relies on such things as Skills Inventories, Resource Allocations, Calendars, and Priority Modeling tools.

After projects are assigned, workers estimate the amount of effort needed to perform the work. This is a critical aspect of the MPM concept and is typically not found in today's Theory X environments. Here, the worker is asked, "What do you think?" But understand this, the worker's estimate is an expression of his personal commitment to the work involved. If the manager does not agree with the estimate, he may ask the worker to rationalize his estimate. If the manager is unhappy with the answer, he may elect to give the assignment to someone else (perhaps another employee or a contractor). Nonetheless, the estimate is an expression of commitment by the person.

Based on the estimate, the manager then calculates the project schedule. Whereas the worker developed the estimate, the manager computes the schedule. Here, the manager considers the project's WBS and precedent relationships. More mportantly, the manager considers the Indirect and Unavailable time affecting the worker. This means the MPM concept does not subscribe to the "Man Hour" approach to project estimating and scheduling. I have discussed the differences in the use of time in many other articles, but in a nutshell we view time as:

AVAILABLE TIME - this is the time workers are available to perform work; e.g., Monday through Friday, 9:00am - 5:00pm.

UNAVAILABLE TIME - this is the time when workers are not available for work; e.g., weekends, holidays, vacations, and planned absences.

Available Time is subdivided into two categories:

DIRECT TIME - representing the time when workers are performing their project assignments and, as such, estimates are expressed in Direct Time.

INDIRECT TIME - interferences which keep workers from performing their project assignments. For example, meetings, training classes, reviewing publications, telephone calls and e-mail, surfing the Internet, and breaks.

The relationship between Direct and Indirect Time is referred to as "Effectiveness Rate" which is an analysis of a worker's availability to perform project work. For example, the average office worker is typically 70% effective, meaning in an eight hour day a worker spends approximately five hours on direct assignments and three on indirects. Effectiveness Rate is by no means a measurement of efficiency. For example, a highly skilled veteran worker may have a lower effectiveness rate than a novice worker with less skills who has a higher effectiveness rate; yet, the veteran worker can probably complete an assignment faster than the novice. It just means the novice can manage his time better than the veteran worker. Again, what we are seeing is the individual worker being personally responsible for supervising his own time. Interestingly, a manager typically has a low effectiveness rate as he typically has a lot of indirect activities occupying his time. For example, it is not unusual to find managers with a 20-30% effectiveness rate.

Returning to scheduling, the manager uses the worker's effectiveness rate when calculating project schedules. If the worker's estimate is such that it greatly impacts the schedule, the manager may consider alternatives, such as influencing the worker's indirect time (eliminating interferences) and unavailable time (work overtime or on weekends, possibly cancel vacations, etc.).

This brings up another important aspect of the MPM concept, the manager is responsible for controlling the work environment. In addition to the physical aspects of the job such as the venue and tools to be made available to the worker, it also includes managing Indirect Time. For example, if a worker is working on a project assignment on the critical path, the manager may elect to excuse the worker from meetings and training so that he can concentrate on the project assignment. Whereas the individual worker is concerned with managing his Direct Time, the manager controls the Indirect Time. It is important to understand that nobody can be 100% effective; for nothing else, we as human beings need breaks so that we can refocus our attention on our work.

The "Effectiveness Rate" technique serves two purposes: it builds reality into a project schedule, and; it provides a convenient mechanism for a manager to control the work environment. For example, a manager may decide to send someone to a training class to develop their skills (representing Indirect Time). By doing so, he is weighing the impact of this decision against the worker's current assignments.

As workers perform their project tasks, they report their use of time (representing another "bottom-up" characteristic of the MPM concept). In addition to reporting time against assignment, workers are asked to appraise the amount of time remaining on a Direct assignment (not Indirects). This is referred to as "Estimate to Do" which is substantially different than the "Percent Complete" technique whereby workers are asked where they stand on an assignment. The problem here is that workers become "90% complete" yet never seem to be able to complete the last 10%. Under the "Estimate to Do" approach, the worker estimates the amount of time to complete a task. To illustrate how this works, let's assume a worker estimates 30 hours to perform a task. During the week, he works 15 hours on the task. He is then asked how much time remains on it. Maybe its simply 15 hours (whereby the worker was correct on his estimate) or perhaps he determines the task is more difficult than he anticipated and 25 hours remain (15 hours performed + 25 hours "to do" = 50); conversely, perhaps he found that the task was easier than imagined and only 5 hours remain (15 hours performed + 5 hours "to do" = 20). Either way, this will affect project schedules and the manager must then consider the repercussions and take the necessary actions. "Estimate to Do" is another example of where the individual worker is asked, "What do you think?"

Although the reporting of time can be performed in any time cycle, we recommend a weekly posting. This can be performed either with Project Management software or using a manual system involving Time Distribution Worksheets. Either way, it is important for the manager to review each worker's distribution of time (including Direct, Indirect, and Unavailable time) and their effectiveness rate for the week. This review should not be considered frivolous as the manager should carefully scrutinize the worker's Direct and Indirect time as they might impact project schedules.

A good Project Management system should have the ability to "roll-up" time reports into departmental summaries for analysis by the manager. For example, a departmental effectiveness rate can be calculated thereby providing the manager with a means to study which workers are working above or below the departmental average. Again, you are cautioned that this is not an efficiency rating and workers should not necessarily be competing over who has the highest effectiveness rate. Accurate time reporting is required to make this work properly.

Both the individual and departmental effectiveness rates should be plotted on line graphs to allow the manager to study trends, as well as determining averages over a period of time; e.g., three months (quarterly) or annually.

IMPLEMENTATION

Implementing the MPM concept requires a good Project Management system (either automated or manual) and a good attitude by all of the participants involved, both managers and workers alike. Some people resist the concept as it forces accountability. Now, instead of the manager making an estimate, the worker is charged with this task, something that doesn't sit well with some people who shirk responsibility. Further, some Theory X managers falsely see it as a threat to their control and authority. However, most people welcome the MPM concept as it represents more freedom and empowerment. This helps promote project ownership by the workers as they now feel their input is heard by management, which leads to improved corporate loyalty, trust, harmony, and teamwork.

By encouraging worker participation in Project Management, they tend to act more professionally and responsibly in project activities. Interestingly, as workers are given more freedom, they are forced to become more disciplined and accountable at the same time.

CONCLUSION

It was back in 1982 when Dr. William Ouchi wrote his popular book, "Theory Z," describing Japanese management practices empowering workers. And it was in 1986 when President Ronald Reagan advised, "Surround yourself with the best people you can find, delegate authority, and don't interfere." Keep in mind, this was twenty years ago. A lot has happened in the last twenty years; the Baby Boomers have been succeeded by Generation X, who is also being succeeded by Generations Y and Z. In the process, socioeconomic conditions have changed as well as the management landscape. Frankly, I think a lot of the management practices of today are dehumanizing. There is little concern for the people side of management, only numbers and technology. Its no small wonder that workers are becoming more socially dysfunctional.

To change this, I recommend that managers manage more and supervise less. And this is the heart of the Mini-Project Manager concept.

Manage the employee wrote.

Translate Request has too much data
Parameter name: request
Translate Request has too much data
Parameter name: request

The Problem

Enlightened organizations throughout the world are embracing the concept of total quality management (TQM), but at a time when many organizations ask their employees to "do it right the first time to improve productivity" the application of TQM to writing is overlooked. In fact, memos, letters, reports, instructions, proposals, and the many other forms of writing tasks in organizations are not done right the first time. Often, the third or fourth revision is still not "right."

The average professional employee (those with a college degree) spends 10 to 12 hours a week writing documents beyond the time spent on email. According to a survey by Boeing Aircraft, two-thirds of all memos and letters produced by employees and used by managers to make decisions required revision because the original was not clear. Most managers list good writing ability among the top three traits most desired in an employee without realizing that bad writing is a management problem, not an employee problem.

If, as managers believe, an employee who cannot write is a problem, then a good writing training program, of which there are many available to corporations, should fix that problem. It does not. Millions of dollars are spent by organizations on training programs thought to help their college-graduate employees write better. It doesn't work because training employees to write without also training their managers is wasted money.

"Well, I don't agree with that," managers sometimes snap at me when I am hired to consult with them to solve problems they are having with bad writing among their subordinates. They continue, "People with college degrees should be able to write excellently. But I have to rewrite all their stuff because they can't do it right the first time." When a writing project doesn't turn out right the first time blame is focused on the writer, and so begins a series of revision back-and-fourths that cost valuable professional time, and a great deal of money. And irritate managers.

Myths about Writing

There is a mythology in organizations about writing. Here are a few of the more prominent ones:

1. Managers have no responsibility for what is being written between the time they delegate the task and the time they see the result.

2. Part of a manager's role is to edit everything written by subordinates.

3. Everyone should write on a computer.

4. The English rules never change.

5. Engineers can't write.

None of the above myths have any foundation in fact. As for number 5, I hear

the same thing said of computer programmers, geologists, physicists - almost any professional! Nonsense!

Observations about Writing in Organizations

Following are a few observations about the causes of writing failure in organizations gained from12 years as a writing consultant to a Fortune 500 clientele.

1. Employee writing cannot be improved without changing the culture of the organization first. The "culture" of an organization is the sum of all socially transmitted beliefs, myths, and all other products of human work and thought. Culture is passed down from one generation of employees to the next, including the mismanagement of the writing process.

An example of this was the corporation that hired me to improve their proposal writing efforts. Many organizations depend on competitive proposals - bids - to keep their business going. There are both commercial proposals, and proposals for the defense industry. I worked almost exclusively for defense contractors. One Fortune 500 client I worked with had lost 32 bids in a row. Employee strength dropped from 2,000 to 400. I was hired to teach people how to write winning proposals. From the 1960's to the 1980's proposal writing remained about the same, but in the 1980's the style of proposals changed, and the organization wished to change to the new style. They spent thousands of dollars on training. It didn't work because of a guardian of corporate culture, a senior manager, took it upon himself to rewrite every "new" proposal back to the style of the 1960's. The last time I checked, they were still losing.

Another example of the importance of organizational culture was the Space Station proposal to NASA by McDonnell Douglas. A colleague and I were hired for two weeks to train 176 engineers and others how to write well so a nine-volume proposal would sound and look alike throughout. It was apparent within the first hour that the company had no coherent process for managing the writing of the many departments involved. Worse, the strategy for winning the bid that had to be integrated into every section was going to be lost after Volume One because there was no knowledge of what it was below the management level.

On our recommendation, McDonnell Douglas made a courageous decision to change the corporate culture about the way writing was managed, and we spent the next two weeks training 176 people to manage the process. This was 2 years before NASA issued the Request for Proposal (RFP). A year later I was asked to return and to oversee a "trial run." The company took all 176 people off their jobs for two weeks to actually write a mock-up proposal. From that experience, every department and every writer had an opportunity to make the process work. McDonnell Douglas won the bid for $9 billion.

2. Managers do not manage the "process" of writing because they think of writing as an "it." We hear managers say, "I needed it yesterday." or "I need it as soon as possible." They perceive writing as an object.

Problems that arise from the it orientation include 1) shallow insight, 2) compromised thinking and reasoning, 3) lack of logical connections between ideas, 4) abortive or omitted collaboration with others, and 5) time-consuming rewriting and editing by managers to correct the shortcomings that arise from these weaknesses. Writing is a process, and processes need to be managed!

3. True delegation of accountability and ownership rarely occurs. When a manager delegates a writing task with the intention of editing it after it comes back, responsibility and ownership of the work stays with the manager. Many managers believe part of their job is to act as editor-in-chief, and they squander huge amounts of their expensive company time doing the job of secretaries or company editors.

Managers who edit have the illusion that they are doing important and useful work. But their problem is not bad writing from subordinates. It is bad delegation.

When I ask writers in the ranks how writing assignments are delegated to them, this is what I hear:

My manager, on her way out the door, throws stuff on my desk and says, "Take care of this."

My manager believes in progressive revelation. Every time I give him a revision, he reveals more information about the project that I should have had in the first place.

My manager communicates writing assignments on post-it notes.

With managers like these, employees adopt a foxhole mentality. They say

to me, "I just throw some words together and send it in. Why bother making it good. It's just going to be changed anyway." So much for ownership.

4. Managers do not think to negotiate the time it takes to write a document when they delegate the task. A computer programmer asked me how to write faster. "My manager wants me to completely rewrite these 50 pages by Friday. Meantime, I'm supposed to get all my regular work done on time. I'll be working overtime with no pay to get it all done."

When a manager does not consider the amount of time it takes for writing to

get done, writing becomes an unplanned activity sandwiched between ongoing daily duties, meetings, phone calls, email, and a variety of other interruptions. And unplanned activities lower productivity and profitability.

5. Managers are insensitive to the need of writers have for uninterrupted time. Writing is difficult intellectual work. It requires concentration. But interruptions in many organizations are epidemic. They are frequent, uncontrolled, and tolerated.

Overcoming inertia to start writing is hard. Interruptions cause the writer to stop, and afterward, the writer must collect their thoughts, reread what they just wrote, and overcome inertia again. Interruptions can change a 15-minute writing job to a 2-hour marathon of stop-and-start effort.

I was recently working with six managers as they wrote a proposal that was critical to the company's survival. The room was quiet as they were working on how to word their win strategy. A secretary entered the room and interrupted one of the managers with a question about scheduling a not very important meeting. Everyone in the room stopped writing to listen. When the secretary left, the group turned back to their writing. Some began rereading what they had just written. Some stared off into space. Two tinkered with paper clips. Haltingly, they resumed writing. Twenty-five minutes were wasted.

Think of the ramifications for people who work in cubicles!

The Solution

Writing has both an internal and an external manifestation. The internal manifestation is the complex, problem-solving, reiterative process of the writer. The external manifestation is what the manager sees happening. Good managers put steps in place to improve both the internal and external process of writing.

Package the Assignment

Enlightened managers prepare a writing assignment before they delegate. They 1) establish the standards that will be used to review the completed document, and 2) provide the needed tools.

Writers can not read minds. If standards are only in the mind of the manager, the first draft will be changed as the manager applies those standards. Standards are style guides, such as APA or Chicago. English is changing faster now than at any time since the 17th Century, and the "rules," or standards that were taught in the classroom 20 years ago may not apply today. Managers provide writers with tools such as recent-edition dictionaries because meaning, spelling, and technical use of many words is changing. For example, nouns and adjectives are being changed into verbs. A perfect example from an Environmental Impact Statement, "We will tier to the Forest Plan," or "Got milk?"

Some people write better in longhand. Some like laptops, and some like the PC. If a writer does best in longhand, the manager should provide the writer with the ability to translate the longhand to the computer, such as a secretary, or copytalk.com. Secretaries are few and far between in modern organizations as managers increasingly expect their employees to do their own secretarial work. But is there anything more pathetic than watching a professional type on a $10 thousand computer with two fingers? A simple keyboarding course would solve the problem.

A quiet place to work is a tool. One strategy is to set aside "quiet time" one morning or afternoon each week during which noise and interruptions are discouraged. Traffic in hallways and between cubicles is curtailed, phone calls are rerouted to message centers, and visitors are asked to wait or come back later.

Finally, the manager creates an assignment sheet that contains specific directions and standards for the task such as 1) purpose of the assignment, 2) audience, 3) scope, 4) format, and 5) deadline. "I needed it yesterday," and "I need it as soon as possible" are not deadlines. Such evasive directions signal a lack of planning, lack of respect, and lack of knowledge about the writing process. A deadline is a day and a time, "I need it by 8 a.m. Tuesday". A reason helps, "I have a 10 a.m. meeting and I need to look it over before I go."

Touch Base as Writing Progresses

Some writers gather the wrong information because they misunderstand the assignment. Some gather too much, some too little. Some discover information that changes the nature of the assignment, as well as the deadline.

The time to adjust the assignment is before it deviates into unacceptable territory.

A simple phone call, a quick meeting, or a short email can inform the manager of any potential problems; in fact, a verbal exchange of ideas helps both the manager and the employee clarify content, as does a review of brainstorming notes, sketches, or new information.

Teach a Time-Efficient Writing Technique

Writers everywhere say to me, "I have to make the first sentence perfect before I write the second sentence, and the first paragraph perfect before I can write the next one." Ouch! Micro editing as the mind is trying to put thoughts together is a vice. It comes from the micro editing that goes on in school when students try to shorten the time required to write a paper by both writing and editing at the same time. In fact, they are two different tasks. Micro editing appears first in English classes where writing habits are formed, and appears next in department where the manager waits for it to appear and then tears it apart.

Sad to say, but many English teachers, and many managers and employees are stuck in the past. When English teachers give students a writing project, they never teach their students how to get ideas out of their heads and down on paper in an efficient manner. In the 1980's the firm I worked for was the first consultant organization in the United States to teach a rapid writing technique to employees in business, industry, and government organizations. I was one of four consultants traveling 48 weeks a year all over the United States and to some foreign countries to teach people how to write quickly and effectively. When I left, the organization had 60 consultants doing the same thing, which is an indication of the recognized need for more efficient writing in organizations everywhere.

"What makes you think you know anything about how I can write better," is a challenge I heard frequently as I challenged the habits and behaviors of employees and their managers. "I've been writing the same way since seventh grade and it's working just fine." Okay, but during WWII the US Army hired the finest English teachers they could find to come up with a technique they could teach recruits in 6 weeks of basic training that would result in fast, efficient writing. Armies run on writing, and personnel were taking hours to turn out documents that should have taken minutes. The result was a technique for rapid writing and editing that was ignored outside the military until the company I worked for adopted it for organizations in general.

I once taught 2,000 engineers at Northup Aviation a 2-day rapid writing course. It took me one year. Most of them were very receptive, but I heard from class after class the same complaint, "This is all very interesting, but you need to be training my managers because they make me do things their way, not the right way." Corporate culture invalidated the training program because managers thought their employees needed the training, not themselves.

Managers need to recognize that writing problems begin with them, and although they teach their staff members rapid writing and editing techniques, they are part of the problem and need to be part of the solution.

Manage Time-Efficient Editing

English teachers and other engaged in teaching writing fail to teach people a strategy of attack for editing documents. Most people adopt some kind of a strategy, such as the micro editing writer mentioned above. Others concentrate on punctuation, spelling, and grammar because experience has taught them that those things will determine acceptance or failure of their document. They leave everything else virtually untouched.

What is universally forgotten is that reading is a visual process, and that people read a page from left to right and from top to bottom. They start reading at the first sentence of the first paragraph. If they do not find information that is important to them by the second sentence, most of them skip to the first sentence of the second paragraph. If they again cannot find a key idea immediately, most skip to the bottom of the page, or turn the page and try again. I am not talking about fiction writing. I am talking about technical writing.

"Wait a minute," people will say. "I have to put down all the facts before I get to the conclusion. And paragraphs have no less than five sentences." Oh my. There go those pesky seventh-grade teachers again.

With the way people really read a document in mind, it is clear that the most important ideas need to be up and left on the page, at the top of the page, at the beginning of paragraphs, and in headings and other devices that make the key ideas stand out. The body of the text may be technically perfect, but if the main ideas are buried, the writing will fail to communicate with the hurried reader, and people in organizations do not have time on their hands and are not reading for pleasure!

Finally, peer review, if introduced well and managed well, can save a manager time, but the ground rules must be clearly set to protect writers from overzealous critique and irrelevant micro editing. Lastly, managers frequently do not think to provide positive rewards for good writing. Such rewards are energizing, motivating, and encourage writers to continuously improve. A simple "Good job!" can go a very long way to improve morale and productivity.

Summary

When managers pre-package the assignment, delegate carefully, teach their employees how to write and edit quickly and effectively, they have little to do when the documents reach them except sign and send. Writers have ownership and accountability. They take pride in their work.

Writing should be recognized as a process, and managers should be as interested in managing the writing tasks of their employees as they are managing the annual budget. Ineffective writing among employees has to be cured from the top down, not from the bottom up. Bad writing is a management problem, and only management can affect a permanent, workable solution.

Copyright 2007

Retail operations-effective branch manager support and guidance

Error in deserializing body of reply message for operation 'Translate'. The maximum string content length quota (8192) has been exceeded while reading XML data. This quota may be increased by changing the MaxStringContentLength property on the XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas object used when creating the XML reader. Line 2, position 8780.

???—?????????????—??—???? '??????????? ' ???????????????—??????????????????????????????????????????????????—??—?????????????????????—????—????????????????????????

???????????????????????????—??—????????????????????????????? '??????????????????

?? - ????????????????????—??—?????????????????????????????????????????—?????under-performer ?????????????????????—? ??—??—???????????????????????

????????—???????????????????????????????????????'?????????????????????????????—??—??????????????????????????????????????????????????

????????????????? - ?????????????????????????????—??—???????????????????????????????

?? - ?????—??—????????-??????????????????????????????????????????????????—???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

??????????????????????????????????????????????????

??—??—??????????????????—??? - ???????—??—????—?????????????????????????—??—?????????????—??—?????—????????????????????—?????????????????????????????????????—??—????????????—?????????????????????????????????'' ????????????????—??—??????????—??????—??????????????????????????????????????—??????????????????????????????????????????????????—???????—?????????????—??????????????????????????????????????????????????

?????????????? - ??????????????????????????????????????????—??—???????—?????????????????????????????????????????????????????

??????????????????????????? un-????????????????????????????????????????????????????? · ??—??—???????????

????????—??????—?
????—??—????????—?????—?????????????????????—??????????????????Un-complicate ?????????????????????????????????????—??—?????????? · ??—??—????—??—??????????????????—??—???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

???????????? ??—??— '????????—??—????????????????? ??—??—???????????????????????????????????????????????????????—??—??????? (?????)????????????—??????????????????????????

??????????????

????? - ????????—??—????????????????—???????????????????—??—????—??????—?????????????????????????—??—???? · ??—??—?????????????????????????'?????????—???????????????????????????????
??????????????? .

???????????

????—??—?????????????????????????????????

* ????????????????????? · ??—??—???????

??? ??—??—??????????????—?????????????????

??? ??—??—???????????????????????????????????

?????—??—??????????????—??—?????????—? ?—? ???—?????????????????????????????????????—??—?????????????????????

?????? · ??—??—????????????????????????—??????????????????? · ??—??—??'?' ??????????? ??—??—???????????????????

????????????

?????????????? · ??—??—?????????? '?' ???????????????????????????—???????????????????????????????????????—?????????????????? · ??—??—??? '??' ????????????????????????—????????????????????????????????????????????????????

?????????????????? ??—??—??????—??—???????????????? · ??—??—??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????—???????????????????—??—??

???????? · ??—??—???—?????????????—?????????????????????????????

??????

????????? ???????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????????

????????????????????? · ??—??—???????????????? ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????—???????????????????—??—????????????????????????????????????????????????????(??????)

?????????????????????—????????—??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? · ??—??—??????????????????????(?????)

?????

????? '???????????—??????????????????????????????????????????' ??? · ??—??—??????(?????)????????—??—??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? '?' ???????????????????????

1 ???????????????????????????????—??—?????????????—??—??????????????????????????????????

?????—??—??????????—????????—??—????? ??—??—??—???????????????—????????????? ??—??—????—??????????????????????????? ??—??—????—???????????????????????????????

??????

???????—???????????????????????????????????????—???????????????????????????????????—??—?????????????? ??—??—????????????

?????????? · ??—??—?????????????????????????????????????????????????? · ??—??—?????—?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????—???????????????????????????? 1 ????????—????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????—????????

The importance of the review end of project and project management.

Translate Request has too much data
Parameter name: request
Translate Request has too much data
Parameter name: request

Description

The well known English phrase "last but not least" could not better describe how important the project closeout phase is. Being the very last part of the project life-cycle it is often ignored even by large organizations, especially when they operate in multi-project environments. They tend to jump from one project to another and rush into finishing each project because time is pressing and resources are costly. Then projects keep failing and organizations take no corrective actions, simply because they do not have the time to think about what went wrong and what should be fixed next time. Lessons learned can be discussed at project reviews as part of the closeout phase. Closure also deals with the final details of the project and provides a normal ending for all procedures, including the delivery of the final product. This paper identifies the reasons that closeout is neglected, analyzes the best practices that could enhance its position within the business environment and suggest additional steps for a complete project closeout through continuous improvement.

Project managers often know when to finish a projects but they forget how to do it. They are so eager to complete a project that they hardly miss the completion indicators. "Ideally, the project ends when the project goal has been achieved and is ready to hand over to customer" (Wellace et. al, 2004, p156). In times of big booms and bubbles, senior management could order the immediate termination of costly projects. A characteristic example of that is Bangkok's over investment in construction of sky-scrapers, where most of them left abandoned without finishing the last floors due to enormous costs (Tvede, 2001, p267). Projects heavily attached to time can be terminated before normal finishing point if they miss a critical deadline, such as an invitation to tender. Kerzner (2001, p594) adds some behavioural reasons for early termination such as "poor morale, human relations or labour productivity". The violent nature of early termination is also known as 'killing a project' because it "involves serious career and economic consequences" (Futrel, Shafer D & Shafer L, 2002, 1078). Killing a project can be a difficult decision since emotional issues create pride within an organization and a fear of being viewed as quitters blurs managerial decisions (Heerkens, 2002, p229).

Recognition

The most direct reason that Project Closeout phase is neglected is lack of resources, time and budget. Even though most of project-based organizations have a review process formally planned, most of the times "given the pressure of work, project team member found themselves being assigned to new projects as soon as a current project is completed" (Newell, 2004). Moreover, the senior management often considers the cost of project closeout unnecessary. Sowards (2005) implies this added cost as an effort "in planning, holding and documenting effective post project reviews". He draws a parallel between reviews and investments because both require a start-up expenditure but they can also pay dividends in the future.

Human nature avoids accountability for serious defects. Therefore, members of project teams and especially the project manager who has the overall responsibility, will unsurprisingly avoid such a critique of their work if they can. As Kerzner (2001, p110) observe, "documenting successes is easy. Documenting mistakes is more troublesome because people do not want their names attached to mistakes for fear of retribution". Thomset (2002, p260) compares project reviews with the 'witch hunts' saying that they can be "one of the most political and cynical of all organizational practices where the victims (the project manager and the team) are blamed by senior management". While he identifies top management as the main responsible party for a failure, Murray (2001) suggest that the project manager "must accept ultimate responsibility, regardless of the factors involved". A fair-minded stance on these different viewpoints would evoke that the purpose of the project review is not to find a scapegoat but to learn from the mistakes. After all, "the only true project failures are those from which nothing is learned" (Kerzner, 2004, p303).

Analysis

When the project is finished, the closeout phase must be implemented as planned. "A general rule is that project closing should take no more than 2% of the total effort required for the project" (Crawford, 2002, p163). The project management literature has many different sets of actions for the last phase of the project life cycle. Maylor (2005, p345) groups the necessary activities into a six step procedure, which can differ depending on the size and the scope of the project:

1. Completion

First of all, the project manager must ensure the project is 100% complete. Young (2003, p256) noticed that in the closeout phase "it is quite common to find a number of outstanding minor tasks from early key stages still unfinished. They are not critical and have not impeded progress, yet they must be completed". Furthermore, some projects need continuing service and support even after they are finished, such as IT projects. While it is helpful when this demand is part of the original statement of requirements, it is often part of the contract closeout. Rosenau and Githens (2005, p300) suggest that "the contractor should view continuing service and support as an opportunity and not merely as an obligation" since they can both learn from each other by exchanging ideas.

2. Documentation

Mooz et. al (2003, p160) defines documentation as "any text or pictorial information that describe project deliverables". The importance of documentation is emphasized by Pinkerton (2003, p329) who notes that "it is imperative that everything learned during the project, from conception through initial operations, should be captured and become an asset". A detailed documentation will allow future changes to be made without extraordinary effort since all the aspects of the project are written down. Documentation is the key for well-organized change of the project owner, i.e. for a new investor that takes over the project after it is finished. Lecky-Thompson (2005, p26) makes a distinction between the documentation requirements of the internal and the external clients since the external party usually needs the documents for audit purposes only. Despite the uninteresting nature of documenting historical data, the person responsible for this task must engage actively with his assignment.

3. Project Systems Closure

All project systems must close down at the closeout phase. This includes the financial systems, i.e. all payments must be completed to external suppliers or providers and all work orders must terminate (Department of Veterans Affairs, 2004, p13). "In closing project files, the project manager should bring records up to date and make sure all original documents are in the project files and at one location" (Arora, 1995). Maylor (2005, 347) suggest that "a formal notice of closure should be issued to inform other staff and support systems that there are no further activities to be carried out or charges to be made". As a result, unnecessary charges can be avoided by unauthorized expenditure and clients will understand that they can not receive additional services at no cost.

4. Project Reviews

The project review comes usually comes after all the project systems are closed. It is a bridge that connects two projects that come one after another. Project reviews transfer not only tangible knowledge such as numerical data of cost and time but also the tacit knowledge which is hard to document. 'Know-how' and more important 'know-why' are passed on to future projects in order to eliminate the need for project managers to 'invent the wheel' from scratch every time they start a new project. The reuse of existing tools and experience can be expanded to different project teams of the same organization in order to enhance project results (Bucero, 2005). Reviews have a holistic nature which investigate the impact of the project on the environment as a whole. Audits can also be helpful but they are focused on the internal of the organization. Planning the reviews should include the appropriate time and place for the workshops and most important the people that will be invited. Choosing the right people for the review will enhance the value of the meeting and help the learning process while having an objective critique not only by the team members but also from a neutral external auditor. The outcome of this review should be a final report which will be presented to the senior management and the project sponsor. Whitten (2003) also notices that "often just preparing a review presentation forces a project team to think through and solve many of the problems publicly exposing the state of their work".

5. Disband the project team

Before reallocating the staff amongst other resources, closeout phase provides an excellent opportunity to assess the effort, the commitment and the results of each team member individually. Extra-ordinary performance should be complemented in public and symbolic rewards could be granted for innovation and creativity (Gannon, 1994). This process can be vital for team satisfaction and can improve commitment for future projects (Reed, 2001). Reviewing a project can be in the form of a reflective process, as illustrated in the next figure, where project managers "record and critically reflect upon their own work with the aim of improving their management skills and performance" (Loo, 2002). It can also be applied in problematic project teams in order to identify the roots of possible conflicts and bring them into an open discussion.

Ignoring the established point of view of disbanding the project team as soon as possible to avoid unnecessary overheads, Meredith and Mandel (2003, p660) imply that it's best to wait as much as you can for two main reasons. First it helps to minimize the frustration that might generate a team member's reassignment with unfavourable prospects. Second it keeps the interest and the professionalism of the team members high as it is common ground that during the closing stages, some slacking is likely to appear.

6. Stakeholder satisfaction

PMI's PMBoK (2004, p102) defines that "actions and activities are necessary to confirm that the project has met all the sponsor, customer and other stakeholders' requirements". Such actions can be a final presentation of the project review which includes all the important information that should be published to the stakeholders. This information can include a timeline showing the progress of the project from the beginning until the end, the milestones that were met or missed, the problems encountered and a brief financial presentation. A well prepared presentation which is focused on the strong aspects of the projects can cover some flaws from the stakeholders and make a failure look like an unexpected success.

Next Steps

Even when the client accepts the delivery of the final product or service with a formal sign-off (Dvir, 2005), the closeout phase should not be seen as an effort to get rid of a project. Instead, the key issue in this phase is "finding follow-up business development potential from the project deliverable" (Barkley & Saylor, 2001, p214). Thus, the project can produce valuable customer partnerships that will expand the business opportunities of the organization. Being the last phase, the project closeout plays a crucial role in sponsor satisfaction since it is a common ground that the last impression is the one that eventually stays in people's mind.

Continuous improvement is a notion that we often hear the last decade and review workshops should be involved in it. The idea behind this theory is that companies have to find new ways to sustain their competitive advantage in order to be amongst the market leaders. To do so, they must have a well-structured approach to organizational learning which in project-based corporations is materialized in the project review. Garratt (1987 in Kempster, 2005) highlighted the significance of organizational learning saying that "it is not a luxury, it is how organizations discover their future". Linking organizational learning with Kerzner's (2001, p111) five factors for continuous improvement we can a define a structured approach for understanding projects.

This approach can be implemented in the closeout phase, with systematic reviews for each of the above factors. Doing so, project closure could receive the attention it deserves and be a truly powerful method for continuous improvement within an organization. Finally, project closeout phase should be linked with PMI's Organizational Project Management Maturity (OPM3) model where the lessons learned from one project are extremely valuable to other projects of the same program in order to achieve the highest project management maturity height.

References

1. A Guide to Project Management Body of Knowledge, 2004, 3rd Edition, Project Management Institute, USA, p102

2. Arora M, 1995, Project management: One step beyond, Civil Engineering, 65, 10, [Electronic], pp 66-68

3. Barkley & Saylor, 2001, Customer-Driven Project Management, McGraw-Hill Professional, USA, p214

4. Bucero A, 2005, Project Know-How, PM Network, May 2005 issue, [Electronic], pp 20-22

5. Crawford K, 2002, The Strategic Project Office, Marcel Dekker, USA, p163

6. Department of Veteran Affairs, 2004, Project Management Guide, Office of Information and Technology - USA Government, p13

7. Dvir D, 2005, Transferring projects to their final users: The effect of planning and preparations for commissioning on project success, International Journal of Project Management vol. 23, [Electronic], pp 257-265

8. Futrel R, Shafer D & Shafer L, 2002, Quality Software Project Management, Prentice Hall PTR, USA, p1078

9. Gannon, 1994, Project Management: an approach to accomplishing things, Records Management Quarterly, Vol. 28, Issue 3, [Electronic], pp 3-12

10. Heerkens G, 2002, Project Management, McGraw-Hill, USA, p229

11. Kempster S, 2005, The Need for Change, MSc in Project Management: Change Management module, Lancaster University, [Electronic], slide 16

12. Kerzner H, 2004, Advanced Project Management: Best Practices on Implementation, 2nd Edition, Wiley and Sons, p303

13. Kerzner H, 2001, Project Management - A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling and Controlling, 7th Edition, John Wiley & Sons, New York, p594

14. Kerzner H, 2001, Strategic Planning For Project Management Using A Project Management Maturity Model, Wiley and Sons, pp 110-111

15. Lecky-Thompson G, 2005, Corporate Software Project Management, Charles River Media, USA, p26

16. Loo R, 2002, Journaling: A learning tool for project management training and team-building, Project Management Journal; Dec 2002 issue, vol. 33, no. 4, [Electronic], pp 61-66

17. Maylor H, 2005, Project Management, Third Edition with CD Microsoft Project, Prentice Hall, UK, p345

18. Mooz H, Forsberg K & Cotterman H, 2003, Communicating Project Management: The Integrated Vocabulary of Project Management and Systems Engineering, John Wiley and Sons, USA, p160

19. Murray J, 2001, Recognizing the responsibility of a failed information technology project as a shared failure, Information Systems Management, Vol. 18, Issue 2, [Electronic], pp 25-29

20. Newell S, 2004, Enhancing Cross-Project Learning, Engineering Management Journal, Vol. 16, No.1, [Electronic], pp 12-20

21. Organizational Project Management Maturity (OPM3): Knowledge Foundation, 2003, 3rd Edition, Project Management Institute, USA

22. Pinkerton J, 2003, Project Management, McGraw-Hill, p329

23. Reed B, 2001, Making things happen (better) with project management, May/Jun 2001 issue, 21, 3, [Electronic], pp 42-46

24. Rosenau & Githens, 2005, Successful Project Management, 4th Edition, Wiley and Sons, USA, p300

25. Sowards D, 2005, The value of post project reviews, Contractor, 52, 8, [Electronic], p35

26. Thomset R, 2002, Radical Project Management, Prentice Hall PTR, USA, p260

27. Whitten N, 2003, From Good to Great, PM Network, October 2003 issue, [Electronic]

28. Young, 2003, The Handbook of Project Management: A Practical Guide to Effective Policies and Procedures, 2nd Edition, Kogan Page, UK, p256

Factors you cannot control the development of chaos theory: management system

Project management system failure can explain the conflict management from lack of project details something superficial. However, this error often have deep roots. Mastering the management system implementation up to recognize first this uncontrollable factors, is difficult. This factor is simply known as "chaos" chaos theory. Chaos theory core of 21 century could be considered. Manage according to Wheatley (1992) "the specific structure shoehorning" chaos control organization is bound to fail to try and. Controlled chaos this rigid (Stewart, 1995) that might limit really to create the illusion of Administration collects the information. According to McNamara (1999), the event recognizes seldom controlled chaos theory. Is system, such as the management of these and more complex as more and more volatile or cataclysmic events received.

It is one of how to plan for such disorders in managing crisis management. Alternatives to back hitting crisis management continues critical internal processes and the chaos to achieve the desired result. Take time for Manager emergency: response management required next step most do not. Efficiency and timeliness of the key in the world, this step is often overlooked is the beginning. Recognizes the importance of managing crisis management it is fully implemented that can ever be, interfere with the efficiency of chaos, progress and management system will continue.

Definition and chaos estimation

Name of the field General's complexity theory, chaotic behavior (Rosenhead, 1998) of is a specific mode. In turbulence to explain chaos theory behavior soon becomes erratic it (Wikipedia, 2005). Chaos theory is to break down management system? Even though it's decisions are not eligible for all information (Hertz, 2001) by recognizes that there needs to be done. Complete missing ideals in order is always one-variable part of our human nature is unknown. Accident, as well as in uncontrolled ways like chaos, energy release (Blockley, 1998) is.

Project management system of dynamic systems, them over time, changes to predict is difficult in nature and are considered. They will change, but is usually identifiable, underlying predictability is. This is a chaos comes into play. System behavior is placed two zones, one, again, initial state of the system and two, here are some little activity further diverge (Rosenhead, 1998) to can return lead zone of instability, stable zone.

Calculation of chaos

For the level of randomness of chaos and forecast are unfathomable. To 'managing these disorders ', looking for enough equations for wasted and wishes to fulfill part of the quest Gabriel (1996) State. Chaos to calculate however, believe that some researchers. In the confusing business world, nature, project administrators to calculate extent affect the chaos, trying to contrast of chaos in nature is imitation measurable ways to project. The following formula to calculate the project constraints.

Dynamics = D + * P+b * R+c * D * d * P * R+e * R * D+f * D * P * R.

D directive, P = prerequisites, R = resources & f in a constraint.

Though Bertelsen and Koskela (2003) the chaos (in extra large small) to system size estimated aside postulate is to predict the response to its functions and the specific problem is too complex.

Business is why do very badly.

Pace of today's enterprise and innovation to accelerate pace of impossible. Sometimes project timeline is written ago all tasks begin to fully resources put behind the project schedule has been found. Is this more and more fast paced system "breeding ground" chaos management system (York, 2003) is.

This breeding ground is to create that affect how project managers to manage complexity. Business project management system of one-week project-many last year over more than there. Conditions are constantly changing, you must change for flexible even goals and objectives. Objectives and the need is, however, is for project flexibility key positive long-term results.

To manage the chaos method

To manage the chaos of the first line of Defense is good management team and project managers better. Bertelsen & seeking the easiest factor to change the organization according to Koskela (2003), you can manage the mess. Project dynamics and the stress of uncertainty facing organizations and processes. A manager at the end, you must always have a contingency plan and of be able to issue a warning track, and a key element of both. High potential for confusion by organizing the learning organization to successful management (Bertelsen & Koskela, 2003) is.

System is so complex and dynamic, the link between cause and effect on condition prediction of future deliverable sets the ripple effect of rendering that can is very sensitive. To adapt the management technologies, timelines, scope, cost, and staff, always a change within your organization, you must. Holds the same project manager. They fail if you do not have flexibility to adapt to the mess management system. Be seen as the necessary venture capital project manager: always looks for new ideas.

Most management systems, including a detailed plan, and it more so than. According to McNamara to work through the backward organizational systems to do this is the best way. This process generates the right output and what input process (McNamara, 1999) that must be carried out to will help to show. Is the person to realize that there is need to change to accommodate good project managers plan frequently to changes. Next crisis management plan is a good manager can avoid such accidents, scope creep and cost overruns.
Is another tool can mess project manager to manage and successfully managing complex systems. According to the number group is and some other tools.

1. Work breakdown structure (WBS)-development or production of hardware, software, support, to break on the product or service elements, and scope are associated with.
Example WBS

2. Program evaluation and review (PERT)-model helps project managers to define the critical path by using randomized tasks,
PERT chart example

3. Implementation schedule (GANTT)-graphical representation for the duration of a task over time.

Gantt chart example

4. Enneagram-originally for personality mapping tool can find order in chaos by identifying patterns in your organization's underlying. Administrators can map project management system provides reliable results to predict certain results. Enneagram's chaos (Fowlke & Fowlke, 1997) provides a structured view to see the order of between.
Examples of the Enneagram

Conclusion

Individual adaptation to changes in the environment can be a good project manager is one of those, as well as to manage their specialty is. Trends in this industry is a forward thinking company that seen in the 21st century, and "management objectives" or "empowering knowledge workers" at least is known. Management and knowledge (Stewart, 1995) of unfortunately rather than development has focused on the accounting for the missing value paradigm for most enterprises.

Key features of the project manager recognizes the strengths of the employees individually, individual and team tasks his group empower is. To allow that creatively and flexibly, with quick responding to events, and that a positive new project manager must (yolk 2003). Organizations that embrace failure and chaos (Stewart, 1995) of must be seen at the end. Perhaps capacity empowerment management of both individuals and teams face of dramatically changing environment, stay nimble combined with better overall organizational chaos challenge you can manage in the 21st century.

Reference

Bertlesen, Sven; Koskela, Lauri. "Avoidance and management chaos project. "http://strobos.cee.vt.edu/IGLC11/PDF%20Files/03.pdf >.

Blockley, David. Leaning disabilities managing contingencies and crisis management June 1998: 147 176.

Freedman, David. In chaos theory. October 1998, co., Ltd.: 50-60's.