|
|
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| = Program Management in Civil Engineering =
| | #REDIRECT [[Program_Management_in_Civil_Engineering]] |
| ''(Under Construction)''
| |
| | |
| == See also ==
| |
| * [[Project Execution]]
| |
| * [[Project Development]]
| |
| * [[Project Definition]]
| |
| * [[Project Life Cycle and Phase Models]]
| |
| * [[Project Delivery Methods]]
| |
| * [[Civil Engineering Projects]]
| |
| * [[Project Management]]
| |
| | |
| == Basic Considerations ==
| |
| Program Management has emerged as a distinct discipline from the maturing of the project management discipline in the late 1990s. It progressively developed as project management was applied to more complex projects, the management of strategic objectives, or multiple interrelated endeavors to produce strategic benefits. It is now generally agreed that programs are a significant undertaking consisting of multiple actions spanning multiple business areas and that they are generally complex.<ref>Thiry, Michel. ''Program management''. Ashgate Publishing Ltd, 2010.</ref>
| |
| | |
| Program management deals in both high ambiguity and uncertainty and requires a high degree of organizational maturity.<ref>Thiry, Michel. "'''Program management: a strategic decision management process." The Wiley guide to project, program, and portfolio management''' (2004): 113-143.</ref>
| |
| | |
| == Semantic, Epistemic, and Logical Frameworks ==
| |
| The semantic, epistemic, and logical frameworks for the concept of program management for executing civil engineering projects have multiple issues arising largely from interchangeable usages and lack of definition between civil engineering programs, projects, and portfolios.
| |
| | |
| Traditionally, most organizations undertake projects as part of their work. These projects are often treated as separate entities, independent from each other. Civil engineers in this aspirational vision, however, practice in mature organizations that use programs to execute projects to deliver intended benefits.
| |
| | |
| Programs can either be:
| |
| * '''Vision-led''' – driven by strategy and organizational mission.
| |
| * '''Emergent''' – representing an expedient or convenient grouping of existing projects.
| |
| | |
| === Semantic Framework ===
| |
| No significant semantic issues were identified for this topic. However, Grasso (CMAA discussion) argues that a prevalent misconception equates program management with project-level delivery methods.<ref>Grasso, Barton. "Benchmarking the Management of Construction Programs." (2007).</ref>
| |
| | |
| === Epistemic Framework ===
| |
| Frameworks exist for distinguishing different types of civil engineering knowledge, related disciplines, knowledge components, and architecture. The hierarchical structure of civil engineering knowledge defines how it is developed and applied.
| |
| | |
| Key differences:
| |
| * **Taxonomies** – Classification systems without hierarchical structure, useful mainly for formal education.
| |
| * **Ontologies** – Study of the essential properties and relationships that define a discipline.
| |
| | |
| Civil engineers construct ontologies to control complexity, organize data, and sequence critical decisions, allowing them to demonstrate mastery in project execution and delivery.
| |
| | |
| === Logical Framework ===
| |
| Key concepts:
| |
| 1. A program starts with more than one project.
| |
| 2. Projects must be related to achieve net positive benefits.
| |
| 3. Program-level controls must improve performance beyond stand-alone project management.
| |
| 4. Programs may include ancillary elements outside the scope of discrete projects.
| |
| | |
| == Practice Frameworks in Program Management ==
| |
| Four components essential to the practice of program management:
| |
| 1. Decision management
| |
| 2. Program governance
| |
| 3. Stakeholder management
| |
| 4. Benefits management
| |
| | |
| These components are interconnected: stakeholders’ needs drive benefits, governance structures support them, and decision management ensures alignment with strategic goals.
| |
| | |
| Programs, like projects, have life cycles:
| |
| * **Formulation**
| |
| * **Organization**
| |
| * **Deployment**
| |
| * **Appraisal**
| |
| * **Dissolution**
| |
| | |
| === PMI Definition of Program Management ===
| |
| PMI defines program management as:
| |
| :''"The centralized, coordinated management of a program to achieve the program’s strategic objectives and benefits."''<ref>The standard for program management. PMI, 2006.</ref>
| |
| | |
| ==== Program Management Rationale ====
| |
| Modern project management emerged in the mid-20th century, and at that time, the terms ''project'' and ''program management'' were used interchangeably. Over time, it became evident that managing multiple projects was more complex than managing a single project or a portfolio of projects.
| |
| | |
| Program management integrates the management of multiple related projects and activities, ensuring performance that wouldn't be possible if projects were managed separately.<ref>Lycett, Mark, et al. "Program management: a critical review." International Journal of Project Management 22.4 (2004): 289-299.</ref>
| |
| | |
| === CMAA Definition of Program Management ===
| |
| CMAA (2006) defines program management as:
| |
| :''"The practice of professional construction management applied to a capital improvement program of one or more projects from inception to completion."''
| |
| Comprehensive construction management services integrate different facets of the construction process, including planning, design, procurement, construction, and activation.<ref>CMAA, 2006.</ref>
| |
| | |
| === ISO and ASCE Definitions of Program Management ===
| |
| (Commentary to be added.)
| |
| | |
| == Legislative and Regulatory Frameworks for Program Management ==
| |
| Managing for results and using empirical data to guide public managers' decision-making has shaped most discussions on program management in public and non-profit agencies since the 1990s.<ref>Newcomer, Kathryn E. "How does program performance assessment affect program management in the federal government?" Public Performance & Management Review 30.3 (2007): 332-350.</ref>
| |
| | |
| == Further Guidance ==
| |
| (Commentary to be added.)
| |
| | |
| == Working Definition of the Term ==
| |
| :''"Program Management is the centralized, coordinated management of a set of projects to achieve stated objectives and benefits. It deals with high ambiguity and uncertainty and requires a high degree of organizational maturity. Programs manage project execution and delivery within a management framework of lifecycles and phases with milestone events termed 'kill points' or 'off-ramps' where program management determines whether the project continues."''
| |
|
| |
| == Limitations of the Definition ==
| |
| (Commentary to be added.)
| |
| | |
| == Beneficial Outcomes ==
| |
| (Commentary to be added.)
| |
| | |
| == Notes ==
| |
| 1. Pellegrinelli, Sergio. "Program management: organizing project-based change." ''International Journal of Project Management'' 15.3 (1997): 141-149. [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0263786396000634 Link]
| |
| 2. Pellegrinelli and Bowman advocate the program approach to managing interdependence between projects and adapting to strategic implementation.<ref>Pellegrinelli, Sergio, and Clifford Bowman. "The strategy process and the impact of evolving programs." ''Strategic Management Journal'' 15.3 (1994): 141-149.</ref>
| |
| | |
| == References ==
| |
| <references />
| |