- Email: [email protected]
The project environment
The project environment G P Gilbert
One major gap in the application of management systems has been seen as considering a project as a machine existing in isolation from its environment. From a discussion of the shortcomings in such an approach and from considering how to avoid them, a number of practical guidelines for action have been developed. Keywords: environment ment, control systems
(working),
project
manage-
During the past 30 years, project management planning and scheduling systems have been devised, based on network analysis and computerized to cope with the vast amount of data associated with increasingly large projects. Typically, the systems are referred to as ‘critical path methods’ (CPMs). The application of these techniques has proved difficult and expensive. The centralized control department had to be enlarged for input data preparation and this sometimes extended to having additional staff in operational units to verify the performance. Even so, where the work-producer’s needs were not met by the system, he could always thwart the reporting requirements. From a management viewpoint, despite an excessive flow of paperwork, it was difficult to get a clear picture of the situation in time to take effective action. The planners tended to portray an overelaborate situation-far more so than could be assimilated by any of the output users. The output was often selected by computer specialists in the absence of clear instructions from management as to what was wanted. It seemed that systems worked against managers, not for them. The difficulties encountered in obtaining status reports were slight compared with those met in analysing the cause of shortfalls and deciding correcEngineering Department, Mobil Services Co Ltd, Mobil House, 54-60 Victoria Street, London SWlE 6QB This paper forms a partial preview of the report of the UK APM Working Party on the Systems Gap, edited by Mr Gilbert
Vol 1 No 2 May 1983
0263-7863/83/020083-05
tive action. Attempting to determine the reasons for malperformance was time-consuming and distracting; it could trigger off an out-of-phase even worse, corrective action which reinforced a disturbing force on the operation. When that happened, the disturbance was recycled, or amplified instead of gradually dissipating. The situation has improved considerably during the past few years. As computers have become smaller, successful applications have become more commoncertainly up to some limited size of system. Yet as more people have gained experience of working (and playing) with them, so computer limitations have become more generally appreciated, and the need for human organizing ability and management intervention has become more apparent. Some of the limitations still encountered in computer applications seem to arise from overlooking the project environment in general and the individual human beings within the environment. Management control systems which assume a project to be mechanistic, complex but predictable in behaviour, and obedient to management instructions, may not be appropriate tools for project managers. More complex control theories do exist but not in any readily-usable form. An alternative approach, that of cybernetics, considers an organization such as a project as a living system that is too complex to understand or control directly and has problems and solutions not anticipated in the project execution plan or administrative procedures. As a project is composed of human beings (some of whom are bound to be more clever in some respects and more perceptive observers of the system than their management) it is expected to work only if the project framework allows it scope for fulfilment of legitimate nonproject objectives .
THE
IMPACT
OF THE
ENVIRONMENT
Most of the project-planning models currently available consider the project as though it was developed in
$03.00 0
1983 Butterworth
& Co (Publishers)
Ltd
83
a vacuum. Such an approach may be necessary for analytical purposes, but is a gross oversimplification. This can be seen by comparing two projects identical in general terms of scope and size but taking place at different times and locations. The end-products would be vastly different, not only as measurable achievements against their predetermined economic and technical criteria, but also in matters such as equipment choices and long-term reliability which might have a more profound effect on overall project profitability. These differences are created by the project environment. The most general use of the term ‘environment’ is in the context of conservation, ecology and safety. Ecology is the study of the relation of living organisms to their environment, and environmental conservation deals both with quality/quantity control of effluents and emissions and with the efficient use of natural resources. Safety includes ecological considerations regarding the public and employees and hazards to property. Technologists are often severely criticized on ecological and safety grounds. These are extremely complex matters to diagnose and on which to form substantial opinions. The term ‘environment’ is used here in its wider, equally emotive sense, presenting ample opportunity to criticize technologists and their project managers. The environment includes all relevant aspects of public affairs, economics and the social scene and relates to people. A project, by definition, sets out to make some change to the environment, usually over a short time period. Hence, it is a mistake for project management to ignore the environment-it is necessary to develop an understanding of it. Understanding can generate respect and appreciation and can lead to constructive working relationships. In a general sense, the environment consists of people inside as well as outside the project; individuals and groups with their own opinions and motivation. It is in this context that the impact of the environment on a project is even more profound. Figure 1 depicts the project in its environment as a series of overlapping circles all of which are largely, but not entirely, contained in the immediate environment, signifying the local community, national government and its agencies. The outer solid-line circle represents the international economic and political environment within which the project exists. Surrounding this is a dotted line, labelled ‘people’ as a reminder that people are everywhere-within the project and in its environment. It should be noted that no more than two of the inner circles have a common overlap. This represents the control interface, across which instructions and reports flow. While such a clean-cut model is necessary to indicate authority and responsibility, it is inefficient as a method of communication and provision of information. Figure 2 shows the same inner circles, but now with each circle having a surrounding ‘information exchange belt’. Through this means, information can flow directly, without the intervention of authority as a filtering ‘post-box’. All people involved in a project need to know what is happening and why; to be able to interpret requirements better and to adapt more readily to 84
People
--.
.
Immediate environment (Local and national
Outer environment international factors
Figure 1. The project and its erwironment
changes; and to be alert for undesirable or unacceptable trends. Problems arise if information so obtained is misused for control purposes. The environmental problems for project management may be grouped as: a ignoring the environment or assuming that it cannot be predicted or influenced, e adopting an oversimplified model, e attempting to impose a rigid detailed control.
People
Immediate environment ,.A “““WI
d fll,lCS,
Outer environment international factors
Figure 2. &formation environment
exchange
belts in the project
Project management
A POSITIVE APPROACH TO ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS The environment is complex and changing, and it is impossible to define precisely or to predict its impact in control terms. It will neither go away if ignored, nor be passive: it is no respecter of authority or feelings and it is definitely not computer-friendly. However, an interactive relationship is possible between the project manager and the environment. The project manager can anticipate environmental problems and so minimize their effect, and can even lobby and persuade people to adopt a positive attitude to his project. It is essential to develop an awareness of and sensitivity to the political and environmental situation, and then to use imagination, judgement and persistence in selecting and following up specific issues. First, the manager has to appreciate what aspects of the environment are relevant to the project. This is not easy, because the significance of various factors varies considerably from project to project. Research and investigation will be required but there are no clearly established written guidelines to compare with a standard checklist. It is necessary to develop a social awareness, rather than consider only the technology, and this emphasizes the need to stand back occasionally from technical matters and to view the situation as a whole. However engrossing the immediate tasks, they can often be tackled better by maintaining a balanced perspective. Secondly, the manager must be alert to changes and trends; the situation is never static. Apart from the environment/project interrelationship which itself induces change, the expectations of both the public in general, and those more directly involved in the project can have a profound effect on their behaviour. Trends and expectations may not have been reflected at the time by legislation on, for example, worker participation and the working environment, but their consequences on the outcome of the project cannot be overlooked with impunity. It is necessary not merely to understand the environment. More positive results can be obtained by attempting to influence and change it. Employee relations can, to some extent, influence the immediate and local environment. Effective communications can avoid misunderstandings in such vital matters as worker participation, or involvement in planning, and working conditions. Trends and expectations, sometimes based on precedents arrived at by default or by lack of adequate information, can lead to very exacting legislation.
THE PROJECT
CONTROL MODEL
Despite attention to environmental considerations, some problems will arise as the project develops due to external disturbances. Being random and unpredictthese problems are difficult to build into able, deterministic techniques such as CPM, which assumes a rigid numerical information/decision theory. Figure 3 is a typical diagram of project work flow showing the planning and control functions, and the feedback needed to adjust the plan in the light of results achieved. The danger with such an oversimplified
Vol 1 No 2 May 1983
Task definition
/ Figure 3. The project control cycle with feedback loop model is to make no attempt to analyse why the plan went astray, except in terms of the assumed planning and control functions; the behaviour of the system itself and the effect of the environment are often ignored. Although it would be misleading to consider management in general, and project management in particular, as essentially scientific, it may be of interest to consider the scientific method of formulating rules of behaviour and correlating cause and effect. The scientific method is to observe a system and its behaviour; to attempt to explain the behaviour in the simplest possible cause-and-effect terms; to experiment in order to test the rules so deduced by comparing actual outcomes from specified causes with those predicted by the rules; and to repeat the process until consistently good correlation is obtained between expected results and actual observations. A problem for scientists is to devise experiments that do not cause side-effects, or variations in behaviour for reasons beyond the immediate purpose of the test, including extraneous environmental changes. How can this method be applied to project management? Time does not usually allow for prolonged observation, or experimentation, and the project cannot be isolated from its environment. Nevertheless, some if not all of the above steps are often gone through; sometimes intuitively or informally . Consider a typical project. The situation is perceived and conceptualized as a simplified model; the management role is to direct the system towards the management objective, and some control action may be initiated. By the time this action takes effect, however, the situation may be changed for other reasons; the perceived results will not then correspond to those intended. After some delay in order to verify the next step is to correct the the observations, deviation by adjusting the control action and seeing what effect this has. This still ignores the environment and the system itself, however. In all probability the results will continue to be unacceptable, because the behavioural model is too simple. In these circumstances, a new model must be devised to enable control to be exercised. The sequence described above includes the three modes of conventional control theory: feedforward, feedback and adaptive. Figure 4 is a modification of Figure 3, showing the adaptive mode and a remodelling of the control function. In theory, it would be necessary to design an elaborate mathematical model of the entire project
85
Adaptive
control link
Task
Information
Information
definition
Results
I
J
control model 4
Feedforward
E”v;;:r;“t’
link
disturbances I
I
Figure 4. The project control cycle with feedforward and adaptive links and its environment. In practice, this is not possible. Some small elements of the system may be modelled in simple terms, but the approach becomes unwieldy and misleading when applied to larger components and the overall project. It then becomes necessary to consider different control techniques. MANAGEMENT
CONTROL
TECHNIQUES
The techniques which apply to control and communications are grouped together as cybernetics. A basic concept of cybernetics is that there exists a natural law in the way control must operate, whether the system controlled is animate or inanimate, physical or biological, social or economic. Management cybernetics is the application of cybernetic concepts to the control of large, complex and probabilistic systems which occur in government and industry. The cybernetic school views control as a matter of guidance and modulation, rather than forceful direction. It is most successful if applied by self-regulating, self-adapting subunits which, if properly motivated and guided, prove more successful than subordinated systems. The central control must then be considered. is effective only in terms of: giving general guidance and direction initially, ensuring a timely flow of decisions and information, setting performance standards and providing guidance in achieving these, setting reporting/alarm parameters, coordinating interface activities, initiating minor stabilizing control action when adverse trends warrant, taking direct action only in abnormal situations. Cybernetic concepts have become more easily applicable with the development of localized mini- and microcomputers. Chemical process, aerospace and aircraft control systems have been devised on the basis of ‘distributed intelligence’, and additional possibly smaller-scale applications will develop at an increasing rate. A typical modern system for a large complex may comprise a modular system with a number of local microprocessors each controlling a part of the overall process. Management information on significant con-
trol parameters and out-of-limit alarm conditions is available to the central operator, in the form of coordinated and easily-read displays and records of alarm conditions and their trends, to help him make correct decisions. Early corrective action is therefore facilitated. The local controller is assumed to be sufficiently intelligent to maintain a predetermined plan, but the supervisor can intervene whenever he considers this to be advisable. A hierarchy of control is also possible, with the supervisor’s manager having a similar facility. A similar application to project management would be desirable. It is worth considering further the significance of ‘self-regulating and self-adapting’. In a truly cybernetic system, adjustments can be made in order to further the subunit’s objectives, even if the prevailing conditions were never anticipated when the system was designed. A classical example of this is the human body’s control of blood temperature over a wide and possibly artificial range of external conditions. In project-management terms, this concept and that of ‘distributed intelligence’ suggest that if the subunit’s objectives can be aligned to some extent with project and if the subunits are allowed to requirements, exercise some self-control, then centralized ‘control’ should become more effective. It is not necessary for senior management to attempt to investigate in detail the reasons for isolated deviations in performance. Care must be taken in any such analysis to avoid distracting first-line supervision from today’s and tomorrow’s tasks in order to produce an historical account of yesterday’s problems which at best sheds little light on the real issues, and at worst reinforces a cyclic or resonant disturbance. However, trends and spread within the subgroup should be highlighted and first-line supervisors encouraged to take any necessary and available corrective action without senior management involvement. Having outlined in general terms a cybernetic approach to project management control, many details need developing for each particular application and these cannot be generalized. However, problems in application for management, programme designers, planners and work-producers can be reduced if the implications of the cybernetic concept of selfregulating, self-adapting subunits are fully considered and accepted.
GUIDELINES
FOR
ACTION
The above discussion leads to a number of guidelines for coping with the project environment. An early key activity in any project is to prepare an implementation plan. This defines the project objectives, priorities and philosophies and provides a basic reference and briefing document for all who will ultimately be involved in the project implementation. Part of the plan must comprehend environmental considerations and should include the following aspects: decide on which aspects (such as cultural and political) local knowledge is necessary and specialized advice may be helpful, prepare a broad-brush project implementation
Project
Management
plan, making some basic assumptions on environmental considerations, allow sufficient time for discussions to test initial assumptions and to reconcile conflicting views and objectives of participating organizations and individuals, be prepared to revise the original concepts if necessary, and develop a more detailed implementation plan, record the plan, and the agreement to it of the participants. This procedure will not eliminate environmental problems for project management, but it will reduce their incidence and prevent their arising by default. Project control cannot be considered as a simple feedback loop. From a strictly theoretical viewpoint, feedforward and adaptive control both require elaborate mathematical models, but this is impractical in a management situation. Each manager has to make the time and the effort for a systematic analysis and recording of problematic project situations as perceived, actions contemplated and taken, and the observed results-in effect, compiling his own databank of case-studies in project development from which future models can be considered for appropriate control modes. Management control techniques must recognize the potential conflict situation in the project environment and be adapted to the particular circumstances. The following guidelines are suggested. There must be some common element in the objectives and aspirations of individuals and subunits which can be related to the project objectives including the time schedule. This may be a financial incentive, professionalism, job satisfaction or some other motive. These elements must be identified and reinforced, contractually and in terms of organization and behaviour. The work content must be clearly established, explained and detailed in time for all concerned to understand and assimilate it before work is due to start. Subsequent changes must be minimized or introduced carefully, as their effect can be to disrupt completely an orderly routine which most people find conducive to their long-term effectiveness. The scheduling and reporting system must be accepted as worthwhile and having something to offer to all parties, as it will otherwise fall into disrepute and be ignored or even sabotaged. This aspect needs
Vol 1 No 2 May 1983
development and follow-up by management, but can be eased if the previous two requirements have been dealt with resolutely. When a computerized system is being applied, care must be taken in the selection of both the software and computer hardware, in terms of adaptability to the concepts and scheduling parameters outlined earlier and of capacity. Emphasis must be given to reporting needs at various levels with exceptions, trends and variances highlighted.
CONCLUSION Some of the environmental factors that affect the success of a project-management system have been considered, and practical guidelines to coping with the project environment have been outlined.
BIBLIOGRAPHY Beer, S The heart of enterprise Wiley (1979) Hoskins,
J Article in The Times (16 February
1983)
Huot, J C Cybernetics failure in large projects American
Association of Cost Engineers (1978) Vervalin, C H ‘Remember the basics’ Hydrocarbon Processing (December 1981)
Gerald Gilbert has had more than 30 years experience in the petroleum and industrial gas industries, with particular emphasis on the technical aspects of process plants and equipment and the . _ management of capital projects. Since Auril 1970 he has been with Mobil Services Co Ltd, working in the UK, France, Italy and Norway, with responsibility for procurement, cost control and planning, as well as general project management. His work covers ah phases of offshore and refinery projects from initial scoping studies to acceptance of the completed project. Prior to 1970 he worked at the British Oxygen Co and Caltex.
87
One major gap in the application of management systems has been seen as considering a project as a machine existing in isolation from its environment. From a discussion of the shortcomings in such an approach and from considering how to avoid them, a number of practical guidelines for action have been developed. Keywords: environment ment, control systems
(working),
project
manage-
During the past 30 years, project management planning and scheduling systems have been devised, based on network analysis and computerized to cope with the vast amount of data associated with increasingly large projects. Typically, the systems are referred to as ‘critical path methods’ (CPMs). The application of these techniques has proved difficult and expensive. The centralized control department had to be enlarged for input data preparation and this sometimes extended to having additional staff in operational units to verify the performance. Even so, where the work-producer’s needs were not met by the system, he could always thwart the reporting requirements. From a management viewpoint, despite an excessive flow of paperwork, it was difficult to get a clear picture of the situation in time to take effective action. The planners tended to portray an overelaborate situation-far more so than could be assimilated by any of the output users. The output was often selected by computer specialists in the absence of clear instructions from management as to what was wanted. It seemed that systems worked against managers, not for them. The difficulties encountered in obtaining status reports were slight compared with those met in analysing the cause of shortfalls and deciding correcEngineering Department, Mobil Services Co Ltd, Mobil House, 54-60 Victoria Street, London SWlE 6QB This paper forms a partial preview of the report of the UK APM Working Party on the Systems Gap, edited by Mr Gilbert
Vol 1 No 2 May 1983
0263-7863/83/020083-05
tive action. Attempting to determine the reasons for malperformance was time-consuming and distracting; it could trigger off an out-of-phase even worse, corrective action which reinforced a disturbing force on the operation. When that happened, the disturbance was recycled, or amplified instead of gradually dissipating. The situation has improved considerably during the past few years. As computers have become smaller, successful applications have become more commoncertainly up to some limited size of system. Yet as more people have gained experience of working (and playing) with them, so computer limitations have become more generally appreciated, and the need for human organizing ability and management intervention has become more apparent. Some of the limitations still encountered in computer applications seem to arise from overlooking the project environment in general and the individual human beings within the environment. Management control systems which assume a project to be mechanistic, complex but predictable in behaviour, and obedient to management instructions, may not be appropriate tools for project managers. More complex control theories do exist but not in any readily-usable form. An alternative approach, that of cybernetics, considers an organization such as a project as a living system that is too complex to understand or control directly and has problems and solutions not anticipated in the project execution plan or administrative procedures. As a project is composed of human beings (some of whom are bound to be more clever in some respects and more perceptive observers of the system than their management) it is expected to work only if the project framework allows it scope for fulfilment of legitimate nonproject objectives .
THE
IMPACT
OF THE
ENVIRONMENT
Most of the project-planning models currently available consider the project as though it was developed in
$03.00 0
1983 Butterworth
& Co (Publishers)
Ltd
83
a vacuum. Such an approach may be necessary for analytical purposes, but is a gross oversimplification. This can be seen by comparing two projects identical in general terms of scope and size but taking place at different times and locations. The end-products would be vastly different, not only as measurable achievements against their predetermined economic and technical criteria, but also in matters such as equipment choices and long-term reliability which might have a more profound effect on overall project profitability. These differences are created by the project environment. The most general use of the term ‘environment’ is in the context of conservation, ecology and safety. Ecology is the study of the relation of living organisms to their environment, and environmental conservation deals both with quality/quantity control of effluents and emissions and with the efficient use of natural resources. Safety includes ecological considerations regarding the public and employees and hazards to property. Technologists are often severely criticized on ecological and safety grounds. These are extremely complex matters to diagnose and on which to form substantial opinions. The term ‘environment’ is used here in its wider, equally emotive sense, presenting ample opportunity to criticize technologists and their project managers. The environment includes all relevant aspects of public affairs, economics and the social scene and relates to people. A project, by definition, sets out to make some change to the environment, usually over a short time period. Hence, it is a mistake for project management to ignore the environment-it is necessary to develop an understanding of it. Understanding can generate respect and appreciation and can lead to constructive working relationships. In a general sense, the environment consists of people inside as well as outside the project; individuals and groups with their own opinions and motivation. It is in this context that the impact of the environment on a project is even more profound. Figure 1 depicts the project in its environment as a series of overlapping circles all of which are largely, but not entirely, contained in the immediate environment, signifying the local community, national government and its agencies. The outer solid-line circle represents the international economic and political environment within which the project exists. Surrounding this is a dotted line, labelled ‘people’ as a reminder that people are everywhere-within the project and in its environment. It should be noted that no more than two of the inner circles have a common overlap. This represents the control interface, across which instructions and reports flow. While such a clean-cut model is necessary to indicate authority and responsibility, it is inefficient as a method of communication and provision of information. Figure 2 shows the same inner circles, but now with each circle having a surrounding ‘information exchange belt’. Through this means, information can flow directly, without the intervention of authority as a filtering ‘post-box’. All people involved in a project need to know what is happening and why; to be able to interpret requirements better and to adapt more readily to 84
People
--.
.
Immediate environment (Local and national
Outer environment international factors
Figure 1. The project and its erwironment
changes; and to be alert for undesirable or unacceptable trends. Problems arise if information so obtained is misused for control purposes. The environmental problems for project management may be grouped as: a ignoring the environment or assuming that it cannot be predicted or influenced, e adopting an oversimplified model, e attempting to impose a rigid detailed control.
People
Immediate environment ,.A “““WI
d fll,lCS,
Outer environment international factors
Figure 2. &formation environment
exchange
belts in the project
Project management
A POSITIVE APPROACH TO ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS The environment is complex and changing, and it is impossible to define precisely or to predict its impact in control terms. It will neither go away if ignored, nor be passive: it is no respecter of authority or feelings and it is definitely not computer-friendly. However, an interactive relationship is possible between the project manager and the environment. The project manager can anticipate environmental problems and so minimize their effect, and can even lobby and persuade people to adopt a positive attitude to his project. It is essential to develop an awareness of and sensitivity to the political and environmental situation, and then to use imagination, judgement and persistence in selecting and following up specific issues. First, the manager has to appreciate what aspects of the environment are relevant to the project. This is not easy, because the significance of various factors varies considerably from project to project. Research and investigation will be required but there are no clearly established written guidelines to compare with a standard checklist. It is necessary to develop a social awareness, rather than consider only the technology, and this emphasizes the need to stand back occasionally from technical matters and to view the situation as a whole. However engrossing the immediate tasks, they can often be tackled better by maintaining a balanced perspective. Secondly, the manager must be alert to changes and trends; the situation is never static. Apart from the environment/project interrelationship which itself induces change, the expectations of both the public in general, and those more directly involved in the project can have a profound effect on their behaviour. Trends and expectations may not have been reflected at the time by legislation on, for example, worker participation and the working environment, but their consequences on the outcome of the project cannot be overlooked with impunity. It is necessary not merely to understand the environment. More positive results can be obtained by attempting to influence and change it. Employee relations can, to some extent, influence the immediate and local environment. Effective communications can avoid misunderstandings in such vital matters as worker participation, or involvement in planning, and working conditions. Trends and expectations, sometimes based on precedents arrived at by default or by lack of adequate information, can lead to very exacting legislation.
THE PROJECT
CONTROL MODEL
Despite attention to environmental considerations, some problems will arise as the project develops due to external disturbances. Being random and unpredictthese problems are difficult to build into able, deterministic techniques such as CPM, which assumes a rigid numerical information/decision theory. Figure 3 is a typical diagram of project work flow showing the planning and control functions, and the feedback needed to adjust the plan in the light of results achieved. The danger with such an oversimplified
Vol 1 No 2 May 1983
Task definition
/ Figure 3. The project control cycle with feedback loop model is to make no attempt to analyse why the plan went astray, except in terms of the assumed planning and control functions; the behaviour of the system itself and the effect of the environment are often ignored. Although it would be misleading to consider management in general, and project management in particular, as essentially scientific, it may be of interest to consider the scientific method of formulating rules of behaviour and correlating cause and effect. The scientific method is to observe a system and its behaviour; to attempt to explain the behaviour in the simplest possible cause-and-effect terms; to experiment in order to test the rules so deduced by comparing actual outcomes from specified causes with those predicted by the rules; and to repeat the process until consistently good correlation is obtained between expected results and actual observations. A problem for scientists is to devise experiments that do not cause side-effects, or variations in behaviour for reasons beyond the immediate purpose of the test, including extraneous environmental changes. How can this method be applied to project management? Time does not usually allow for prolonged observation, or experimentation, and the project cannot be isolated from its environment. Nevertheless, some if not all of the above steps are often gone through; sometimes intuitively or informally . Consider a typical project. The situation is perceived and conceptualized as a simplified model; the management role is to direct the system towards the management objective, and some control action may be initiated. By the time this action takes effect, however, the situation may be changed for other reasons; the perceived results will not then correspond to those intended. After some delay in order to verify the next step is to correct the the observations, deviation by adjusting the control action and seeing what effect this has. This still ignores the environment and the system itself, however. In all probability the results will continue to be unacceptable, because the behavioural model is too simple. In these circumstances, a new model must be devised to enable control to be exercised. The sequence described above includes the three modes of conventional control theory: feedforward, feedback and adaptive. Figure 4 is a modification of Figure 3, showing the adaptive mode and a remodelling of the control function. In theory, it would be necessary to design an elaborate mathematical model of the entire project
85
Adaptive
control link
Task
Information
Information
definition
Results
I
J
control model 4
Feedforward
E”v;;:r;“t’
link
disturbances I
I
Figure 4. The project control cycle with feedforward and adaptive links and its environment. In practice, this is not possible. Some small elements of the system may be modelled in simple terms, but the approach becomes unwieldy and misleading when applied to larger components and the overall project. It then becomes necessary to consider different control techniques. MANAGEMENT
CONTROL
TECHNIQUES
The techniques which apply to control and communications are grouped together as cybernetics. A basic concept of cybernetics is that there exists a natural law in the way control must operate, whether the system controlled is animate or inanimate, physical or biological, social or economic. Management cybernetics is the application of cybernetic concepts to the control of large, complex and probabilistic systems which occur in government and industry. The cybernetic school views control as a matter of guidance and modulation, rather than forceful direction. It is most successful if applied by self-regulating, self-adapting subunits which, if properly motivated and guided, prove more successful than subordinated systems. The central control must then be considered. is effective only in terms of: giving general guidance and direction initially, ensuring a timely flow of decisions and information, setting performance standards and providing guidance in achieving these, setting reporting/alarm parameters, coordinating interface activities, initiating minor stabilizing control action when adverse trends warrant, taking direct action only in abnormal situations. Cybernetic concepts have become more easily applicable with the development of localized mini- and microcomputers. Chemical process, aerospace and aircraft control systems have been devised on the basis of ‘distributed intelligence’, and additional possibly smaller-scale applications will develop at an increasing rate. A typical modern system for a large complex may comprise a modular system with a number of local microprocessors each controlling a part of the overall process. Management information on significant con-
trol parameters and out-of-limit alarm conditions is available to the central operator, in the form of coordinated and easily-read displays and records of alarm conditions and their trends, to help him make correct decisions. Early corrective action is therefore facilitated. The local controller is assumed to be sufficiently intelligent to maintain a predetermined plan, but the supervisor can intervene whenever he considers this to be advisable. A hierarchy of control is also possible, with the supervisor’s manager having a similar facility. A similar application to project management would be desirable. It is worth considering further the significance of ‘self-regulating and self-adapting’. In a truly cybernetic system, adjustments can be made in order to further the subunit’s objectives, even if the prevailing conditions were never anticipated when the system was designed. A classical example of this is the human body’s control of blood temperature over a wide and possibly artificial range of external conditions. In project-management terms, this concept and that of ‘distributed intelligence’ suggest that if the subunit’s objectives can be aligned to some extent with project and if the subunits are allowed to requirements, exercise some self-control, then centralized ‘control’ should become more effective. It is not necessary for senior management to attempt to investigate in detail the reasons for isolated deviations in performance. Care must be taken in any such analysis to avoid distracting first-line supervision from today’s and tomorrow’s tasks in order to produce an historical account of yesterday’s problems which at best sheds little light on the real issues, and at worst reinforces a cyclic or resonant disturbance. However, trends and spread within the subgroup should be highlighted and first-line supervisors encouraged to take any necessary and available corrective action without senior management involvement. Having outlined in general terms a cybernetic approach to project management control, many details need developing for each particular application and these cannot be generalized. However, problems in application for management, programme designers, planners and work-producers can be reduced if the implications of the cybernetic concept of selfregulating, self-adapting subunits are fully considered and accepted.
GUIDELINES
FOR
ACTION
The above discussion leads to a number of guidelines for coping with the project environment. An early key activity in any project is to prepare an implementation plan. This defines the project objectives, priorities and philosophies and provides a basic reference and briefing document for all who will ultimately be involved in the project implementation. Part of the plan must comprehend environmental considerations and should include the following aspects: decide on which aspects (such as cultural and political) local knowledge is necessary and specialized advice may be helpful, prepare a broad-brush project implementation
Project
Management
plan, making some basic assumptions on environmental considerations, allow sufficient time for discussions to test initial assumptions and to reconcile conflicting views and objectives of participating organizations and individuals, be prepared to revise the original concepts if necessary, and develop a more detailed implementation plan, record the plan, and the agreement to it of the participants. This procedure will not eliminate environmental problems for project management, but it will reduce their incidence and prevent their arising by default. Project control cannot be considered as a simple feedback loop. From a strictly theoretical viewpoint, feedforward and adaptive control both require elaborate mathematical models, but this is impractical in a management situation. Each manager has to make the time and the effort for a systematic analysis and recording of problematic project situations as perceived, actions contemplated and taken, and the observed results-in effect, compiling his own databank of case-studies in project development from which future models can be considered for appropriate control modes. Management control techniques must recognize the potential conflict situation in the project environment and be adapted to the particular circumstances. The following guidelines are suggested. There must be some common element in the objectives and aspirations of individuals and subunits which can be related to the project objectives including the time schedule. This may be a financial incentive, professionalism, job satisfaction or some other motive. These elements must be identified and reinforced, contractually and in terms of organization and behaviour. The work content must be clearly established, explained and detailed in time for all concerned to understand and assimilate it before work is due to start. Subsequent changes must be minimized or introduced carefully, as their effect can be to disrupt completely an orderly routine which most people find conducive to their long-term effectiveness. The scheduling and reporting system must be accepted as worthwhile and having something to offer to all parties, as it will otherwise fall into disrepute and be ignored or even sabotaged. This aspect needs
Vol 1 No 2 May 1983
development and follow-up by management, but can be eased if the previous two requirements have been dealt with resolutely. When a computerized system is being applied, care must be taken in the selection of both the software and computer hardware, in terms of adaptability to the concepts and scheduling parameters outlined earlier and of capacity. Emphasis must be given to reporting needs at various levels with exceptions, trends and variances highlighted.
CONCLUSION Some of the environmental factors that affect the success of a project-management system have been considered, and practical guidelines to coping with the project environment have been outlined.
BIBLIOGRAPHY Beer, S The heart of enterprise Wiley (1979) Hoskins,
J Article in The Times (16 February
1983)
Huot, J C Cybernetics failure in large projects American
Association of Cost Engineers (1978) Vervalin, C H ‘Remember the basics’ Hydrocarbon Processing (December 1981)
Gerald Gilbert has had more than 30 years experience in the petroleum and industrial gas industries, with particular emphasis on the technical aspects of process plants and equipment and the . _ management of capital projects. Since Auril 1970 he has been with Mobil Services Co Ltd, working in the UK, France, Italy and Norway, with responsibility for procurement, cost control and planning, as well as general project management. His work covers ah phases of offshore and refinery projects from initial scoping studies to acceptance of the completed project. Prior to 1970 he worked at the British Oxygen Co and Caltex.
87