PMI, in their Policy Governance Manual, states "Project Management is a Profession".Max Wideman, in his outstanding Comparative Glossary of Common Project Management Terms lists some 15+ definitions for the word "Project"and another 8 or so for Project Management. Bill Zwerman, Janet Thomas et al in their recent book "Professionalization of Project Management: Mapping the Past to Explore the Future" states "to date, it has been impossible to obtain a consensus on the definition and scope of project management".
By any definition, all one has to do is look in any history book to see examples of project management in action- The taming of fire; Inventing the wheel; Constructing the Pyramids or the Great Wall of China; Discovering the Americas; Building the Panama Canal; Putting a Man on the Moon; The Seven Wonders of the Ancient or Modern World; Hardly an example of significance that has occurred over the past 10,000 or more years cannot be considered indisputably as a "Project".
And yet, hardly a day passes where there are not horror stories of projects gone bad, whether they be space shuttles crashing, buildings crumbling, 200 million USD software projects being written off, or wars being won but peace being lost.
So why is something so innate to human kind proving so elusive to define and causing so much confusion? Why is it that despite project management being at the core of our development as a "civilized society", we still, after 10,000 years of "trying to get it right", experience failures from our project delivery systems of 20%, 30%, 40% or more? How much longer can we tolerate this apparent "trial and error"approach to Project Management? If we have been unable to master this obvious life skill over the past 10,000 years, what can we possibly do today to make it better for tomorrow?
Could it be that we are asking the wrong questions? Are we looking at the "elephant"of Project Management as 7 Blind Men?
One possible approach would be to recognize or accept that Project Management does not lend itself well to the classical Positivist or Newtonian world view (Scientific Method) where a linear cause and effect relationship exists. It is this author's opinion, based on 40 years experience, most projects exist in some state of marginally controlled chaos, often described in militaristic terms as "the fog of war". If the reader is willing to accept the description of Project Management as being chaotic, the argument against applying the scientific method can be supported. James Gleik, writing for the Santa Fe Institute, observed "where chaos begins, classical science stops". All which indicates more than likely we are on the wrong path in assuming that a linear process approach to project management is going to work. So if Newtonian determinism won't work, what will?
Despite Project Management having been around for 10,000 years or more, little or nothing "new"has been discovered in the past 20 years. Yet still our project delivery systems are failing to produce what stakeholder desire. Now is the time to step back and take a look at our perceptions and perspective. Something is radically wrong, and this author proposes the next step we need to look to for solutions will come from the world of Complex Adaptive/Dynamic Systems (CAS) (1), for that truly seems to be what Project Management is.
Read Paul Giammalvo's full text on "What is Project Management?"
Reference 1 : Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS) - The Santa Fe Institute is devoted to:
"creating a new kind of scientific research community, one emphasizing multidisciplinary collaboration in pursuit of understanding the common themes that arise in natural, artificial, and social systems. This unique scientific enterprise attempts to uncover the mechanisms that underlie the deep simplicity present in our complex world."