Work preferences of project and program managers, change managers, and project team members

the importance of knowing the difference

Abstract

  This paper outlines a process using the Work Preference Indicator (Gilbert, Sohi & McEachern, 2008) to help identify potential organizational change managers, project managers, and team members. Purpose: Improve the probability of successful outcomes of programs and projects requiring significant organizational change. Content: (1) Portfolio management and best practices; (2) Work Preference Indicator dimensions; (3) Selection of project managers and change managers; and (4) Case studies in the identification of organizational change managers. Conclusions: (1) It is frequently the case that the implementation of strategic initiatives involves significant organizational change; (2) The adoption of best practices almost always involves significant organizational change; and (3) The Work Preference Indicator can be used to improve program and project success through the identification of organizational change managers, project managers, and team members whose work preferences are aligned with their roles in initiatives requiring significant organizational change.

Introduction

A majority of organizational change projects fail. It is frequently the case that organizational change projects are handed over to project managers; however, as this paper will argue, project managers may not necessarily be good organizational change managers as measured by a Work Preference Indicator (WPI) instrument. Further, it will be argued that we need change managers with appropriate WPI characteristics to manage organizational change projects or find and train project managers who have the right preferences and use them to manage such projects. Strategic Portfolio Management presupposes a set of best practices (Garfein, 2009). Successful application of best practices (Cabanis-Brewin & Pennypacker, 2006) in organizations where there is significant requirement for change may require both a project manager and an organizational change manager (Nahmias & Crawford, 2008). There may be a meaningful difference between a person's skills and his or her work preferences (a person may be competent at something but prefer not doing it). The Work Preference Indicator (Gilbert, Sohi & McEachern, 2008) is a scientifically based instrument that measures an individual's work preferences. Work preferences are an important component in selection of the best person for a job. Work preferences can be used to help identify individuals who are more likely to be successful as organizational change managers.

There is a high failure rate for organizational change projects, with only 44% of change projects coming close to achieving their goals (Accountancy, 2003). We will outline how we have used the WPI to begin a discussion with project personnel about their work preferences and how these preferences fit in with their role in the project. We will suggest a method for identification of those individuals best suited to lead organizational change programs and projects.
On average, companies achieve only 56% of their intended strategy, leaving 44% unrealized (Cabanis-Brewin & Pennypacker, 2006). A significant expansion in strategic throughput frequently involves organizational change initiatives (Garfein, 2008, 2009). Organizational change initiatives are more difficult to effectively manage than most managers realize (Nahmias & Crawford, 2008). Organizational change causes people to do their jobs in a different way. A number of pitfalls are associated with managing organizational change initiatives using only a project management approach (Pellegrinelli, 2006).

Research Questions – What are the differences between the work preferences of

images Project managers

images Organizational change managers

images Project team members

What are the implications of these differences for project team effectiveness working on initiatives requiring significant organizational change?

Methodology – This paper outlines how Work Preference Indicator (WPI, Gilbert, 2006) was used to classify the subjects taking the WPI using a framework developed by (Naimas & Crawford, 2008) to identify project managers, organizational change managers, and project team members.

Population – The WPI has been taken by several hundred project managers and master's degree students who attended a PMI Congress, a PMI workshop, or a university master's class led by one of the authors.

Practical Implications – Organizational change initiatives are more likely to be successful if the work preferences of the team members are considered. Understanding work preferences leads to a work environment that enables employees to be more productive.

What the Existing Research Tells Us

Best Practices for Aligning Projects to Corporate Strategy

Strategic planning becomes meaningless in the absence of a way to execute the planned strategies. In 2005, Cabanis-Brewin & Pennypacker surveyed 84 leading companies using identified “best practices” (Cabanis-Brewin & Pennypacker, 2006).

Strategic Portfolio Management Model

The Strategic Portfolio Management Model has four parts (Exhibit1).

First, on the left side, strategic portfolio objectives generally vary significantly between organizations. Those shown here are typical of large global enterprises.

Second, Portfolios have venues through which strategic objectives are achieved.

Third, effective portfolio management requires a near-real-time, closed-loop, feedback system that begins with strategy that is translated into initiatives, which in turn are divided into programs and projects — this closed-loop process provides timely metrics to assure the executive leadership team that strategy is being executed to plan.

Observation One: It is almost always the case that the implementation of strategic initiatives involves significant organizational change.

Fourth, on the far right side of the exhibit, best practices are employed for aligning projects with corporate strategy to closing the gap between strategy and results. Best practices are divided into eight categories (Cabanis-Brewin & Pennypacker, 2009), as listed below:

  1. Governance
  2. Strategy Management
  3. Portfolio Management
  4. Program and Project Management
  5. Organization Structure
  6. Information Technology
  7. People Management
  8. Corporate Culture

Observation Two: The adoption of best practices almost always involves significant organizational change.

Strategic Portfolio Management Model (Garfein, 2009)

Exhibit 1– Strategic Portfolio Management Model (Garfein, 2009).

It is almost always the case that organizational change is required when implementing strategic initiatives. There are two questions: (1) What is the degree of organizational change that is required, and (2), who should manage that change — a project manager or change manager?

Taking a project-based view is often too restrictive (Pellegrinnelli & Parrington, 2008). Typically, project managers seek to impose degrees of order, control, stability, and predictability that are untenable in initiatives requiring substantial organizational change. A number of pitfalls have been identified, which are associated with taking a project-based view as shown in Exhibit 2 (Pellegrinnelli & Parrington, 2008).

Pitfalls associated with taking a project-based view of initiatives requiring substantial organizational change

Exhibit 2 –Pitfalls associated with taking a project-based view of initiatives requiring substantial organizational change.

Project Manager or Change Manager: Who Should be Managing Change?

A survey of 134 project professionals from all project sectors around the world confirms high failure rates for organizational change projects, with only 44% of change projects coming close to achieving their goals (Accountancy, 2003). Based on the pitfalls described above (Pellegrinnelli & Parrington, 2008), it is clear there are potential flaws in having project managers who are promoted to the role of program manager run organizational change projects (Nahmias & Crawford, 2008).

In practice, the role of change manager has emerged from different disciplinary backgrounds than those of project and program managers. The change manager is responsible for the management of change, with a focus on the human side of the change. In practice, this is an emerging role with responsibility for the management of any type of organizational change (Nahmias & Crawford, 2008). Exhibit 3 suggests a process model wherein a project is just a project if it does not require organizational/behavioral change. In this case, a project management focus is appropriate. If, on the other hand, there is a requirement for organizational and behavioral change, the remainder of the model (steps three through eight) comes into play. Refer to Nahmias & Crawford, 2008 for a detailed description of the steps in this model.

Suggested process model for project managers and change managers involvement in organizational change (Nahmias & Crawford, 2008)

Exhibit 3 – Suggested process model for project managers and change managers involvement in organizational change (Nahmias & Crawford, 2008).

The literature and actual case studies identify the similarities and differences between project managers (PM), program managers (PG), and change managers (CM) as shown in Exhibit 4, which was developed from Tables 1 and 2 in Nahmias and Crawford, 2008.

Similarities and differences between project, program, and change manager competencies in the literature and case studies (Nahmias & Crawford, 2008)

Exhibit 4 – Similarities and differences between project, program, and change manager competencies in the literature and case studies (Nahmias & Crawford, 2008).

Nahmias and Crawford suggested a framework to assist in making decisions about the circumstances in which to consider a project manager, a change manager, or both. Exhibit 4 above describes their similarities and differences. A high degree of behavioral change in a weak supportive culture and leadership will require more intensive change management activities, highlighting the need for a designated change manager. At the other end of the spectrum, if there is little behavioral change required and there is a strong supportive culture and leadership, then change may be effectively managed by a project manager with some change management skills.

Analysis of the fit of program managers as organizational change managers is beyond the scope of this paper. Suffice it is to say it is frequently the case that program managers are selected from the pool of project managers and therefore may be subject to some of the same pitfalls that have been identified by Pellegrinnelli & Parrington (2008) and are associated with adopting a project-based perspective.

As will be discussed in detail later in this paper, an analysis of Work Preference Indicator reports from the sample population indicates that only between 5% and 10% of the population studied possess both the project manager and change manager skills.

Suggested Matrix for Engagement of Project (PM) and/or Change Managers (CM)

Suggested decision matrix for the engagement of project managers and change managers

Exhibit 5 – Suggested decision matrix for the engagement of project managers and change managers.

Summary of Work Preference Indicator Dimensions

“The Work Preference Indicator is a scientifically-based instrument that measures an individual's job task preferences (Gilbert et al., 2008). It assesses a person's relative strength or preference with 17 separate measures. These measures encompass three major areas, which include: Achievement, Relationship, and Analytic Orientation. The measures were empirically derived and have been replicated as both valid and reliable in two separate studies with over 1,000 subjects in each study [Exhibits 6 and 7].”

“Based on the combination of individual scores on these measures, each individual is classed as one of six major types. Each individual receives feedback that includes both a personalized written report as well as a “scorecard” that compares the individual's scores with the overall database derived by Gilbert (2006) that represents the larger U.S. population of employees. Approximately 8 pages of individualized interpretive feedback are provided to each individual.” (Gilbert, 2006)

Constructs Included in the Work Preference Indicator

Learning Styles and Work Styles included in the Work Preference Indicator

Exhibit 6 – Learning Styles and Work Styles included in the Work Preference Indicator.

Source: The above has been extensively quoted from Gilbert, Sohi, & McEachern (2008).

“This tool is based on interest, work values, personality temperament, and learning theory, that interrelates work preference with job performance. People tend to learn better and perform better when they are engaged in doing what interests them. This tool pinpoints and profiles what types of work and work environments an individual tends to like and dislike. It highlights their competitive advantages and aids in the identification of contributions the individual can make to the work environment. This tool is be used for team building, mentoring and employee development. It is used to aid in finding the best fit between employee interests and the actual work needing performed.” (Gilbert, 2006)

Work Interests and Personality Temperament included in the Work Preference Indicator

Exhibit 7 – Work Interests and Personality Temperament included in the Work Preference Indicator.

Source: The above has been extensively quoted from Gilbert, Sohi, & McEachern (2008).

WPI Grand Types

The 17 measures assessed by the WPI are combined to create six Grand Types. At this point in our research, we have found no dominant Grand Type that is common to individuals who possess both change manager and project manager work preferences (Exhibit 8).

WPI Grand Types and their characteristics. (Gilbert, 2006)

Exhibit 8 – WPI Grand Types and their characteristics. (Gilbert, 2006)

Organizational Change Projects are Different

It is likely that if the individual or team responsible for the change has come from a technical background or even a project management background, they would have technical skills and project management skills but not necessarily the skills to implement organizational change (Pellegrinelli, 2002). Project management techniques are not always conducive to achieving organizational change (Pellegrinelli & Partington, 2006).

Criteria for the Classification of CMs, PMs, and TMs

The criteria for classification of CMs, PMs, and TMs are shown in Exhibit 9. These change manager (CM), thresholds were driven by the high level of skill required to successfully drive organizational change. Thus, a CM had to score higher than 75 on the WPI in the three measures indicative of CM work preferences (achieve results, explore ideas, and flexibility). The project manager threshold was set lower at 50. See Exhibit 11 later in this paper for a list of the seven project manager (PM) work preferences and the seven team member (TM) work preferences.

Thresholds for determining work preference alignment in the domains of project management and change management

Exhibit 9 – Thresholds for determining work preference alignment in the domains of project management and change management.

When an individual scored over 75 in CM and over 50 in TM, he or she was considered to have both change manager and project manager work preferences. As stated earlier, these individuals represented between 5% and 10% of the population surveyed. As shown earlier in the top right-hand quadrant of Exhibit 5, “Suggested decision matrix for engagement of project managers and change managers,” the authors recommend that strategic initiatives, which by their nature are complex and require significant organizational change have both a CM and a PM. It may be the case that the job is too big for one individual; simply put, the CM figures out what to do and the PM determines how to achieve the desired results.

Mapping of Change Manager Characteristics to Work Preferences

The unique change manager competencies identified by Nahmias and Crawford (Exhibit 10) correlated with three WPI measures: Achieve Results, Flexibility and Explore Ideas.

Mapping of the Nahmias and Crawford change management characteristics to the Gilbert WPI

Exhibit 10 – Mapping of the Nahmias and Crawford change management characteristics to the Gilbert WPI.

Exhibits 11 and 12 illustrate how the 17 work preference indicators are categorized by CM, PM, and TM, based on the research of Nahmias and Crawford (2008). Exhibits 13 and 14 illustrate the work preferences of a specific individual herein, referred to only as “Participant 105.”

The 17 WPI preferences mapped to CM, PM, and TM competencies

Exhibit 11– The 17 WPI preferences mapped to CM, PM, and TM competencies.

The 17 WPI preferences mapped to CM, PM, and TM competencies

Exhibit 12 – The 17 WPI preferences mapped to CM, PM, and TM competencies.

Participant 105 work preferences. This individual scored above the threshold to be classified as both a CM (84%) and a PM (54%). Interviews with and observations of Participant 105 confirm the accuracy of the work preferences shown in the above exhibit

Exhibit 13 – Participant 105 work preferences. This individual scored above the threshold to be classified as both a CM (84%) and a PM (54%). Interviews with and observations of Participant 105 confirm the accuracy of the work preferences shown in the above exhibit.

Work preferences of Participant 105

Exhibit 14 – Work preferences of Participant 105.

Our interviews with and observations of Participant 105 confirmed the low work preferences in the areas of mechanical interests (0%), working with data (4%), written material (7%), and task specificity (22%). The overall conclusion regarding Participant 105 was that this individual was an outstanding change manager (actually observed in practice over a period of months); a good project manager, and a good team member, but didn't particularly like to work with data, written material, and has a very low interest in mechanical things.

WPI Major Factors

There are three overall measures, which are comprised of statements from the 17 preferences described above. They are Achievement, Relationship and Technical Oriented. Individuals with work preferences of both a CM and a PM score highest in Achievement Oriented. TMs (obsolete term “ team players”) score lowest in Relationship Oriented. TMs score highest in Technical Oriented.

Achievement Oriented

Exhibit 15 – Achievement Oriented:

Note: In the following graphics the term “Team Player” is used instead of the more recent and preferred term “Team Member”.

Individuals who have both change manager and project work preferences score significantly higher in “Achievement Oriented.”

These employee types prefer to experience high job satisfaction at work.

They seek to be key players in organizations where they themselves are instrumental in contributing to the success of the organization.

They value self-reliance and self-direction.

They are company-oriented employees who seek success for both the company and themselves.

Above all, career accomplishment is what lights this type of employee's fire.

Conclusion: individuals who have both change manager and project manager capabilities score highest in Achievement Oriented.

Relationship Oriented

Exhibit 16 – Relationship Oriented

Note: In the following graphics the term “Team Player” is used instead of the more recent and preferred term “Team Member”.

Team players are less interested in relationship orientation.

These employee types prefer to work effectively with others.

They seek to achieve through teamwork and mutual supportive behavior with their colleagues.

It is important for them to be well liked and to work well with others on the job.

They seek to be of assistance to those with whom they work on a personal and professional basis.

Team members are less relationship oriented.

Conclusion: Team members are less Relationship Oriented than project managers and change managers.

Technical Oriented

Exhibit 17 – Technical Oriented

Note: In the following graphics the term “Team Player” is used instead of the more recent and preferred term “Team Member”.

These types of employees prefer to work with things and data.

They seek to work with inanimate, physical, more logical, and rational aspects within the organization.

They like to learn how things work, fix things, and perform analytical work.

Conclusion: Project managers have a higher Technical Oriented.

Three Brief Case Studies Demonstrating PM/CM Differential Examples

Case Study One: Washington, DC Workshop

Four change managers identified by the WPI out of a population of 41 workshop participants

Exhibit 18 – Four change managers identified by the WPI out of a population of 41 workshop participants.

Case Study One: A workshop was conducted in Washington, DC titled, Expanding Strategic Throughput to Close the Gap between Strategy and Results. Forty-one of the participants took the WPI prior to the start of the workshop. Four out of the 41 met the criteria for organizational change manager (Exhibit 18). Three of the four also scored over 50% (the lower limit) as project managers. Two were male and two were female. As these four individuals registered at the beginning of the workshop, they were asked if they would mind sitting in the front row, which they all agreed to do, with the understanding that we would be discussing with them work experience as it might relate to organizational change. All four agreed to participate in a dialogue with the instructor. The result was that all four individuals had significant organizational change experience and responsibilities. An interesting side note was that, John who scored only 25% in the project manager work preferences confirmed that, in fact, he doesn't like performing many of the project manager's functions, such as scheduling, working with data, and task specificity. It's also noteworthy that John's Grand Type was Goal Oriented Thinker – A Team Strategist, which was descriptive of his actual work preferences.

Case Study Two: University Masterclass

University masterclass, n of 33 Grand Type distribution

Exhibit 19 – University masterclass, n of 33 Grand Type distribution

University masterclass, n of 33 CM, PM, TM distribution

Exhibit 20 – University masterclass, n of 33 CM, PM, TM distribution

The students took the WPI several weeks before the start of the masterclass. The masterclass spanned five days, eight hours per day. The curriculum of the masterclass was built around a global case study of a new aircraft company, using advanced, composite materials for the aircraft structure. The case study encompassed engineering design, manufacturing, sales, marketing, flight test, training, and support.

Throughout the five days of the masterclass, there were numerous presentations by the six teams. Prior to the start of the class, the six students with the highest organizational change manager scores (Exhibits 19, 20, and 21) were selected as initiative team leaders reporting to the CEO of the company. One of the authors (Garfein) carried out the functions of the CEO. This gave the two authors an opportunity to observe the six students in terms of the three WPI preference indicators of organizational change: Achieve Results (RSLT), Explore Ideas (IDEA), and Flexibility (FLEX). The authors’ observations of these initiative team leaders tended to confirm that they had exceptional organizational change capabilities.

Sample WPI results from four University masterclass students. Students A, B, and C scored over 75% CM and over 50% in PM work preferences, which identified them as having both CM and PM skills. Student D was two points below of the CM threshold and scored low in PM at 22% plus had a low of score 4% in “Relationship Oriented: Work Well with Others.”

Exhibit 21 - Sample WPI results from four University masterclass students. Students A, B, and C scored over 75% CM and over 50% in PM work preferences, which identified them as having both CM and PM skills. Student D was two points below of the CM threshold and scored low in PM at 22% plus had a low of score 4% in “Relationship Oriented: Work Well with Others.”

Note, in the right-hand column of Exhibit 21, only two of the six initiative team leaders had the same Grand Type. This tends to indicate that ability to lead organizational change may be independent of Grand Type. This hypothesis will be further explored through additional research of the entire population who has taken the WPI under the auspices of the authors of this paper.

Case Study Three: Analysis of 40,000 WPI Respondents and Their Academic Majors

“The attached table [Exhibit 22] connects the high (top 95%) and low (bottom 5%) Work Preference Indicator scores of bachelor seeking students with their college majors. Those in the high category represent “key dimensions,” which are associated with the major—key work preference areas. This information may be of value to students who have not decided on their academic major (lower division, undeclared majors?). Many college students select their major based on external contextual influences such as family, sociocultural identities, early role models, previous work experience, or the like. At times, the academic career they choose may not be the one for which they have the best fit. When in the wrong field of study, students are less satisfied and perform less effectively than when in a field of study for which they are better suited. We think that possibly by availing lower division students to this information, it may help them find the ‘right seat on the right bus’ academically and, by doing so, influence student satisfaction and retention.” (Gilbert, 2011; Gilbert, 2011 Personal communication)

Source: Preliminary research by G. Ron Gilbert (2011),
excerpted from email from G. Ron Gilbert, 12 July 2011,
used with permission.

The core hypothesis of this paper is that three work preferences out of the 17 measures on the WPI help identify individuals who are suited to fill the role of organizational change manager, and those preferences are:

  • Achieve Results (RSLT)
  • Explore Ideas (IDEA)
  • Flexibility (FLEX)

According to an unpublished 2011 work in progress by G. Ron Gilbert, students in only one major, out of the 33 academic majors listed in the table that follows, exhibited all three traits: RSLT, IDEA, and FLEX (they scored higher than 95% of students majoring in other subjects (significance = <.05). That major is Intelligence Studies.

Students in only one major, out of the 33 academic majors listed in the two tables that follow, exhibited all three traits, RSLT, IDEA, and FLEX (they scored higher than 95% of students majoring in other subjects (significance = &lt;.05). That major is Intelligence Studies

Exhibit 22A – Students in only one major, out of the 33 academic majors listed in the two tables that follow, exhibited all three traits, RSLT, IDEA, and FLEX (they scored higher than 95% of students majoring in other subjects (significance = <.05). That major is Intelligence Studies.

College students majoring in Management and Program Acquisition while having a high work preference for achieving results on the job, have a low work preference in flexibility

Exhibit 22B – College students majoring in Management and Program Acquisition while having a high work preference for achieving results on the job, have a low work preference in flexibility.

Four majors had low scores in two of the three organizational change leadership indicators as measured by scoring lower than 5 percent of students majoring in other subjects (significance =&lt;.05). Those majors are: 1) Child and Family Development, 2) English, 3) Public Health and 4) Sports and Health Sciences

Exhibit 22C – Four majors had low scores in two of the three organizational change leadership indicators as measured by scoring lower than 5 percent of students majoring in other subjects (significance =<.05). Those majors are: 1) Child and Family Development, 2) English, 3) Public Health and 4) Sports and Health Sciences.

Exhibit 22A, 22B, 22C - Work Preference Indicator scores of bachelor's seeking students with their college majors.

Source: An unpublished work-in-progress by G. Ron Gilbert, © 2011.

*Those in this academic major scored higher than 95% of students majoring in other subjects (significance = <.05)

**Those in this academic major scored lower than 5% of students majoring in other subjects (significance =<.05)

Note A. Intelligence Studies includes military intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the National Security Agency, and so forth. These are people, who are pretty freewheeling, working on unusual projects. They are a bit more introverted, not wanting to work to go up the career ladder, and have less people skills!! They are real entrepreneurial detectives who work alone in messy work environments, are extremely dedicated to the mission, and are a bit anti-social!!! They like projects, but may not like to lead projects with a lot of people! (Gilbert, 2011, 13 July Personal communication )

Future Research

The next phase of this research is to conduct in-depth interviews with those individuals who scored high in CM, the measures associated with effective organizational change management.

  • Develop hypothesis for testing
  • Design pilot survey
  • Analyze results of pilot survey
  • Revise survey based on pilot results
  • Email survey to all individuals who've taken the WPI in workshops and classes
  • Analyze results
  • Author research paper
  • Submit for publication

Accountancy (2003). New business: Most change management projects fail. Accountancy, 26.

Cabanis-Brewin, J., & Pennypacker, J. S., (2006). Best practices for aligning projects to corporate strategy, PMI Global Congress, Project Management Institute. Seattle, Washington

Garfein, S. J., (2008), Strategic Portfolio Management – The Key to the Executive Suite, PMI Global Congress, St. Julian, Malta.

Garfein, S. J., (2008), Strategic Portfolio Management: Closing the Gap between Strategy and Results, PMI Project Management Conference, Athens, Greece.

Garfein, S. J., (2008), On Becoming a C-Level Executive and Developing Breakthrough Strategies, Proceedings of the PMI Global Congress, Sydney, Australia.

Garfein, S. J., (2007), Executive Guide to Strategic Portfolio Management: Roadmap for Closing the Gap between Strategy and Results, Proceedings of the PMI Global Congress, Atlanta, Georgia.

Garfein, S. J., (2007), The New PMI Global Standard for Portfolio Management: An Executive Perspective, Proceedings of the PMI Global Congress, Budapest, Hungary.

Garfein, S. J., (2006), Strategic Portfolio Management at Hydromax: Closing the Gap between Strategy and Results – A Case Study, Proceedings of the PMI Global Congress, Seattle, Washington

Garfein, S. J., (2009), Closing the Gap between Strategy and Results: Expanding Strategic Throughput, PMI Asia Pacific Congress, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

Gilbert, G. R. (2006). Work Preference Indicator Instrument. Port St. Lucie, FL: GilbertEMS, LLC Retrieved from http://www.gilbertems.com/product_wpi.php

Gilbert, G.R. (2011) Personal Communication via email July 12.

Gilbert, G. R., Burnett, M., & Leartsurawat, W. (2009). The psychological work preferences of business students, Journal of Career Assessment, Vol. 18, No. 2. (Gilbert, Burnett, and Leartsurawat, 2009)

Gilbert, G. R., Sohi, R. S., & McEachern, A. G. (2008). Measuring work preferences: A multidimensional tool to enhance career self management, Career Development International. January, (13), 56-78. Used with permission of the lead author.

Nahmias, A. H., & Crawford, L. (2008). Project manager or change manager? Who should be managing organizational change? Research Paper, Project Management Institute, © 2008 Project Management Institute.

Pellegrinelli, S., & Partington, D. (2006). Pitfalls in taking a project-based view of programmes. PMI Global Conference, Madrid, Spain.

This material has been reproduced with the permission of the copyright owner. Unauthorized reproduction of this material is strictly prohibited. For permission to reproduce this material, please contact PMI or any listed author.

© 2011, Stephen Garfein, Shankar Sankaran
Originally published as a part of 2011 PMI Global Congress – Dallas, TX

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Publishing or acceptance of an advertisement is neither a guarantee nor endorsement of the advertiser's product or service. View advertising policy.