#pm_ngt-008 Traditional pm disappoints because it is biased to a supplier’s world-view

#pm_ngt-008 – Traditional project management guidance has been written by suppliers for suppliers. Even when claiming to be written from the customer’s perspective (PRINCE2®) the mindset is so ingrained that the author’s words and concepts cannot escape their heritage*.

When  existing guidance is widely recognised as having a bias to the supplier side (which is right and fair just incomplete and often misrepresented) then addressing a bias to the customer side will also progress in the way that is needed to improve wide-scale success in the coping with project based change (#pbc).

#pm_ngt’s New generation thinking is wholly grounded in evaluation of uncertain rewards versus inescapable costs, wholly grounded in the uncertainties of evolving ideas and a constantly changing patchwork of influences and wholly grounded in the long tail of benefits development, stabilization and harvesting as part of managing a portfolio of different types of capital.

[ *As one example from many possible illustrations of unappreciated bias is the 2009 P2 manual’s explicit separation of the accountability for benefits from ultimate handling of risk – a psychological nonsense that is plain wrong: with out both sides of the certainty of investment cost versus uncertainty of reward being in the head of the bill payer there can never be sound risk handling. The emotional strength of regret and self-interest prevents it.]


Our training and mentoring in #pm_ngt explain the structured steps needed to operate in every organisation with emphasis on the flexibility that is always required. #pm_ngt always matches “what” with “how” and describes the matched tools and techniques that are relevant2reality™ across the end2end™ timeline and top2bottom™ span of change that runs from board-room2boiler-room and back again.


No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.