Project categorization systems : aligning capability with strategy for better results

171 Pages·2005·3.16 MB·English

by  Lynn Crawford DBA

P
ROJECT
C
ATEGORIZATION
S
YSTEMS
Aligning Capability with Strategy
for Better Results
Dr. Lynn Crawford
University of Technology, Sydney
Dr. J. Brian Hobbs
University of Quebec at Montreal
Dr. J. Rodney Turner
Erasmus University, Rotterdam
ISBN:1-930699-38-7
Publishedby: ProjectManagementInstitute,Inc.
FourCampusBoulevard
NewtownSquare,Pennsylvania19073-3299USA.
Phone:(cid:1)610-356-4600
Fax:(cid:1)610-356-4647
E-mail:[email protected]
Internet:www.pmi.org
©2005ProjectManagementInstitute,Inc.Allrightsreserved.
‘‘PMI’’,thePMIlogo,‘‘PMP’’,thePMPlogo,‘‘PMBOK’’,‘‘Project
ManagementJournal’’,‘‘PMNetwork’’,andthePMITodaylogoare
registeredmarksofProjectManagementInstitute,Inc.Fora
comprehensivelistofPMImarks,contactthePMILegalDepartment.
PMIPublicationswelcomescorrectionsandcommentsonitsbooks.
Pleasefeelfreetosendcommentsontypographical,formatting,orother
errors.Simplymakeacopyoftherelevantpageofthebook,markthe
error,andsenditto:BookEditor,PMIPublications,FourCampus
Boulevard,NewtownSquare,PA19073-3299USA,ore-mail:
[email protected].
PMIbooksareavailableatspecialquantitydiscountstouseaspremiums
andsalespromotions,orforuseincorporatetrainingprograms,aswellas
othereducationalprograms.Formoreinformation,pleasewriteto
BookstoreAdministrator,PMIPublications,FourCampusBoulevard,
NewtownSquare,PA19073-3299USA,ore-mail:[email protected].
Orcontactyourlocalbookstore.
PrintedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica.Nopartofthisworkmaybe
reproducedortransmittedinanyformorbyanymeans,electronic,
manual,photocopying,recording,orbyanyinformationstorageand
retrievalsystem,withoutpriorwrittenpermissionofthepublisher.
ThepaperusedinthisbookcomplieswiththePermanentPaperStandard
issuedbytheNationalInformationStandardsOrganization(Z39.48—1984).
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
iv
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ix
Chapter 1: Introduction 1
What is a project categorization system? 1
The Organization of the Report 3
Chapter 2: The Nature of Categorization 5
Classification versus Categorization 5
Introduction to the Nature of Categorization 6
Principles of Categorization System Design and
Management 7
Limitations 10
Politics of Categorization 11
Categorizing Projects 12
Conclusion 15
Chapter 3: Methodology 17
The Literature Review 17
Focus groups to investigate project categorization systems in
Organizations 17
Web-based questionnaire to validate and expand on results
from the small preliminary sample 19
Development of a preliminary model based on a synthesis of
the results to date 19
Validation of the preliminary model with the organizations
from phase two 19
Analysis of the results, modification of the preliminary model,
and writing of the final report 20
Chapter 4: Presentation of Results 21
Project Categorization Systems are Not Immediately
Visible 21
The Formalization of Project Categorization Systems 24
Purposes and Attributes 26
The Pervasiveness of Project Categorization Systems 27
Attributes used to Sort Projects into Categories 27
Attributes, Labels and Definitions 28
Attributes Not Linked Directly to Purposes 29
v
Construction of Complex Categorization Systems 30
Difficulties with the use of Project Categorization Systems in
Organizations 36
Chapter 5: Presentation of the Model 45
Organizational Purposes Served by Categorization
Systems 45
Variation of Usage with Organizational Context 49
The Attributes used to Categorize Projects 50
Chapter 6: A Guide to the Use of the Model by
Organizations 55
Evaluation and Validation of Project Categorization
Systems 56
Chapter 7: The Use of Project Categorization by Other
Stakeholders 59
The Use of Project Categorization by Project Management
Researchers 59
The Use of Project Categorization by Libraries and
Documentation Centers 60
The Use of Project Categorization by Professional
Associations 60
A Single List of Attributes 60
Differences among Stakeholder Priorities 61
Chapter 8: Discussion and Conclusion 63
Standardized Categories of Projects 63
Implications for Research 64
PMI’s Role in Standardization 65
Project Categorization and Portfolio Management 65
Sorting Things Out 66
Implications for Practitioner Organizations 66
Appendix A: Three Examples of Categorization from Other
Fields 69
The Classification of Knowledge 69
The Categorization of Objects 71
The Categorization of Work 72
Appendix B: Focus Group Protocols 77
Who to Invite 77
Draft Letter of Invitation 78
Objectives 78
How to Set the Scene 78
Questions to Ask 79
How to Record and Share and Use/Analyze Findings 79
vi
Appendix C: Web-Based Questionnaire 81
Appendix D: Protocols for Validating the Project Categorization
System Model 91
Goals of the participating organization: 91
Goals of the research team: 91
Preparation of the validation sessions 91
Validation Protocols 92
Appendix E: Categorization Validation Meeting Question
Sheet 95
Appendix F: Descriptions of the Use of Project Categorization in
Organizations 99
Introduction to the descriptions that are to follow 99
Appendix G: The Detail of the Organizational Purposes
Map 135
Appendix H: The Detail of the Map of Attributes for Building
Project Categorization Systems 147
Bibliography 167
vii
C 1
HAPTER
Introduction
This report is a presentation of the methodology and the results
of an investigation of project categorization1 systems that was
initiatedandsupportedbytheProjectManagementInstitute(PMI).
Theorganizationofboththeresearchprojectandthepresentreport
was designed to answer the following questions:
1. Whatcanbedrawnfromthephilosophyofscienceliterature
andfromexamplesofcategorizationinotherfieldsthatcould
be useful in the study of project categorization systems?
2. Howhasthesubjectbeentreatedinprojectmanagementliter-
ature?
3. How do practitioner organizations categorize projects?
4. What purposes does project categorization serve in:
a. Practitioner organizations?
b. The project management research community?
c. The Project Management Institute?
The primary focus of this research project has been the study of
projectcategorizationsystemsastheyareusedinpractitionerorgani-
zations.
What is a Project Categorization System?
If you work in an organization that manages many projects and
someone asks you to describe the organization’s project work, how
would you respond? Would you describe each project separately?
No, of course not. You would identify the ‘‘types of projects’’ your
1Theterms‘‘classification’’and‘‘categorization’’areveryoftenusedinterchangeably.
Theterm‘‘categorization’’hasbeenusedinthisdocumentforthereasonexplained
atthebeginningofChapter2.
1
organization does. You would use names to identify the types of
projects.Insodoing,youwoulduseanexplicitorimplicitcategoriza-
tion system to describe the organization’s portfolio of projects. In
ordertomakesenseoftheorganization’swork,themembersofthe
organization use systems of labels for naming their projects. When
they use different labels, they are attempting to communicate the
perceived differences among the various projects.
This system of labels can be viewed in different ways. If the
project categorizationsystem isviewed aspart ofan organizational
languagefortalkingaboutprojects,thenthephenomenacanbeseen
from an interpretive perspective. The language develops over time
and is shared by a community of organizational members. People
invent,adopt,andadaptanduselabelstodescribetheorganization’s
projectsastheyperceivethem.Theutilizedlabelsbecomethefilter
through which the projects are seen and discussed. Over time, the
system of labels becomes ‘‘naturalized,’’ that is, the organizational
members use the labels without questioning. The labels’ very exis-
tencecanbecomeinvisibletothosewholiveintheculture,asthey
become taken for granted. In many of the organizations studied
duringthisresearch,thepeopledidnotsee,atfirst,thattheirorgani-
zation had a system for categorizing projects. However, after a few
examples were given of what such a system might include, they
were able to describe their organization’s system in detail.
Onlygroupsofprojectswithanamearediscussedintheconver-
sations within the organization. Other possible groups of projects
are not discussed and may even be difficult to perceive. From the
point of view of the everyday workings of the organization, it is as
if they did not exist. From a phenomenological point of view, the
groupings only exist because people can see them and talk about
them.
For all of the people participatingin this study, the projects are
seenasobjectivelyhavingthecharacteristicsthatthelabelsidentify
and bring to our attention. The groupings are also seen as existing
inobjectiveexternalreality.Thisis verymuchapositivistpointof
view.Butevenfromapositivistpointofview,thechoiceofgroupings
issomewhatarbitrary,forprojectshaveaverylargenumberofchar-
acteristics or attributes that could be used alone or in combination
to identify almost innumerable groupings. However, organizations
useonlyasmallsetofallthepossiblelabelsforgroupinganddescrib-
ing their projects. This choice of names brings certain groups and
features to the forefront and ignores others. Therefore, even from a
positivist perspective, there is a question of choice among a large
number of possible categorization systems.
2
In the organizations that participated in this study, systems for
categorizing projects were mostly seen as products of the organiza-
tions’history.Thiswasparticularlytrueinorganizationswherethe
systemhadbeeninplaceforsometimeandwasseenasafunctional
partofitsoperatingsystem.Aprojectcategorizationsystemisthus
seen as specific to an organization, its context, and its history.
Likealanguage,anorganization’ssystemoflabelsfordescribing
itsprojectsisdynamic.Insomeverydynamiccontexts,suchasthe
telecom industryin recentyears, languageevolves quitequickly to
capture new realities, new understandings, and new meanings. In
other,morestablecontexts,thesystemoflabelschangesveryslowly.
Some labels come from outside an organization, from the profes-
sionalfieldorindustryinwhichtheorganizationoperates.Insome
cases,projectcategoriesareseenasauthoritativeandexternaltothe
organization. They have been standardized in much the same way
thatadictionaryauthoritativelypresentsacceptedwords,meanings,
and usages.
The study of an organization’s project categorization system,
therefore, consists of identifying the labels that are used to name
groups of projects, and the usage that is made of these groupings.
This is what was done during the empirical investigation of the
researchproject.Duringthisinvestigation,noorganizationwithan
appreciablenumberofprojectswasfoundthatdidnothaveasystem
for categorizing its projects, whether it was formal or informal.
Organization of the Report
Followingtheintroduction,thisreportisorganizedintosevenmore
chapters.Thesecondchapterdiscussesthenatureofcategorization
in general, including the implications and potential consequences
ofcategorization,aswellasprojectcategorizationsystemsproposed
withinprojectmanagementpracticeandliterature.Thisisfollowed,
in the thirdchapter, by a presentation ofthe research methodology
thatwasusedforthisstudy.Thefourthchapterpresentsanoverview
oftheresearchresults,whilethefifthchapterpresentsanddiscusses
themodelthatwasdevelopedduringthisproject.Thesixthchapter
featuresadiscussionoftheuseofthemodelinorganizations,while
Chapter 7 presents a discussion of the use of project categorization
(andofthemodel)byotherstakeholders.Chapter8,thefinalchapter,
identifies the implications of this study for researchers, for prac-
titioner organizations, and for PMI.
Theobjectiveinwritingthisreporthasbeentopresentfindings
inawaythatwillappealtoboththepractitionerandresearchcom-
munities. The content of the report’s main body has been chosen
with the practitioner in mind. Additional information that would
3
be of greater interest to theresearch community has been included
intheappendices.Theseincludeexamplesofcategorizationsystems
fromotherfields,alongwithadetailedpresentationofthemethodol-
ogy,includingapresentationoftheresearchinstruments(i.e.,focus
groupprotocols,validationprotocols,andquestionnaire).Examples
oftheuseofprojectcategorizationinorganizationsarealsopresented
in the appendices. These examples may be of interest to both the
practitioner and research audiences.
4
C 2
HAPTER
The Nature of
Categorization
Classification versus Categorization
Forthemajorityofauthors,aswellasthoseemployingtherhetoric
ofthetopic,classificationandcategorizationaremoreoftenthan
notusedinterchangeably(Jacob,1991,p.77).Eveninmajordictionar-
ies such as the Oxford English Dictionary, the Merriam-Webster
Dictionary, and the Macquarie Dictionary, one term is often used
to define the other:
Classify: to assign to a category (Merriam-Webster Diction-
ary,2003)
Categorize: to place in a category or categories; to classify
(OxfordEnglishDictionary,2003)
However,writerssuchasJacob(1991)haveastricterinterpretation
and draw distinctions between the terms:
Classificationentailsaone-for-oneslottingofobjects,events,
orproperties,basedupontheapperceptionofacoreofneces-
sary and sufficient characteristics, into mutually exclusive
classeswithinthehierarchicalstructureimposedbyanarbi-
trary and predetermined ordering of reality. Categorization,
ontheotherhand,referstotheprocessofdividingtheworld
ofexperienceintogroups–orcategories–whosemembersbear
someperceivedrelationofsimilaritytoeachother.Incontrast
totheprocessofclassification,theprocessofcategorization
entails neither that membership within a category is deter-
minedbytheapprehensionofasetofdefinitivecharacteristics
5