Profound Project Knowledgeprojectmanager.org/images/downloads/PDC_2018_Presentations/larry... ·...
Transcript of Profound Project Knowledgeprojectmanager.org/images/downloads/PDC_2018_Presentations/larry... ·...
-
PROFOUND PROJECT KNOWLEDGE
Bringing together the PMI Talent Triangle, changes in the Sixth Edition of the PMBOK Guide, and Edward Demings seminal System of Profound Knowledge, this presentation
will highlight the importance of Leadership, Strategic Project Knowledge, and Team Development using multiple case studies in large, medium, and small projects.
Larry W. Smith
Systems Engineer and Project ConsultantApril 27, 2018
-
Presentation Outline
PMI Talent Triangle and New Adjustments Why?Principles of Profound Knowledge (Deming)
1. Appreciation for a System2. Knowledge about Variation3. Theory of Knowledge Knowledge about Individuals Knowledge about Teams Knowledge about Programs
4. Knowledge of Psychology5. Added: Knowledge of Leadership
Examples of Knowledge CaptureSummary: Reflections on Profound Knowledge
-
PMI Talent Triangle
Why did PMI make the following changes to the PMOBK Guide 6th Edition? Added: Manage Project Knowledge (Executing | Integration Mgmt) Added: Control Resources (Monitoring and Controlling | Resource Mgmt) Added: Implement Risk Responses (Executing | Risk Mgmt) Changed: Control Stakeholder Expectations > Manage Stakeholder Engagement Added: Agile Practice Guide Increased?: Common tools grouped: Data gathering, analysis, representation, etc. (ITTOS 618 > 722)
The description of the areas of competence, in which a project manager can act safely, in order to optimally fulfill his role.
Methodical project management knowledge.
Ability to lead and develop a team and to show a situationally
appropriate behavior in dealing with the various stakeholders.
Strategic knowledge and industry knowledge, which improve the project implementation and promote better corporate results.
Sources: PMIs Pulse of the Profession In-depth Report: Navigating Complexity. (Effective 1 December 2015.) Markus Klein, The Talent Triangle PMI has Changed the Re-certification Modalities, www.ProjectManagement.com/blog-post, Posted 15 Dec 2015.
PM as Business Expert
PM as Thinker and Integrator
PM as Leader
-
14 Key Principles for Management1. Create constancy of purpose toward improvement of product and
service, with the aim to become competitive and to stay in business, and to provide jobs.
2. Adopt the new philosophy. We are in a new economic agemust awaken to the challengelearn responsibilitiestake on leadershipfor change.
3. Cease dependence on inspection to achieve quality.4. End the practice of awarding business on the basis of price tag.
Instead, minimize total cost. relationship(s) of loyalty and trust.5. Improve constantly and forever the system of production and
service... .6. Institute training on the job.7. Institute leadership. The aim of supervision to help people and
machines and gadgets to do a better job. Supervisionin need of overhaul .
William J. Latzko, David M. Saunders, Four Days with Dr. Deming: A Strategy for Modern Methods of Management, 1st Ed., Prentice Hall, February 1995.
-
14 Key Principles for Management8. Drive out fear, so that everyone may work effectively for the company.9. Break down barriers between departments. Peoplemust work as a
team, to foresee problems . 10. Eliminate slogans, exhortations, and targets for the work forceonly
create(s) adversarial relationshipsthe bulk of the causes of low quality/productivity belong to the system .a. Eliminate work standards (quotas) on the factory floor. Substitute
leadership.b. Eliminate management by objective. Eliminate management by
numbers, numerical goals. Substitute leadership.11. Remove barriers that rob the hourly worker of his right to pride of
workmanship. 12. Remove barriers that rob people in management and in engineering of
their right to pride of workmanship.13. Institute a vigorous program of education and self-improvement.14. Put everybody in the company to work to accomplish the
transformation. The transformation is everybodys job.
-
Profound KnowledgeSystem of Profound Knowledge (SoPK) is the culmination of W. Edwards Demings lifelong work.
1. Appreciation for a system Leader should understand the
system thoroughly. To fix or alter must realize: the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.
2. Knowledge about variation Common cause: Within the system structures (often consistent) that can be
predicted. Special cause: Occurs unexpectedly with/without a known change.
3. Theory of knowledge How do we know what we know? Are our facts correct? What other ways should we look at things?
4. Knowledge of psychology How do we best motivate people? How do we best resolve conflicts? In what ways are people and their behaviors predictable and knowable?
-
1. Appreciation for a SystemOrganizations and Projects as Systems
Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systems_theory Adapted from: Dettmer, H. William, Thinking
Processes Workshop, Goal Systems International, 2000.
The goal of systems theory is systematically discovering a system's dynamics, constraints, conditions and elucidating principles (purpose, measure, methods, tools, etc.) that can be discerned and applied to systems at every level of nesting, and in every field for achieving optimized equifinality. [The principle that in open systems a given end state can be reached by many potential means.]
System Goal
NecessaryConditions
Measuresof Success
Whats happening thatwe DONT LIKE with
respect to the benchmarksof our system?
UndesirableEffects[ UDE ]
CauseEffect Cause
CauseEffect
CauseEffect
Cause CauseEffect CauseCauseEffect
RootCause
Cause
CauseEffect
Current RealityTree
(Focusing Tool)
-
Case Study: Common Root Causes
200 Developer personnel assigned to this project do
not have the necessary experience.
205 Developer personnel assigned to this project do
not have the necessary skill.
210 Developer personnel assigned to this project do
not have the necessary training
215 The developert does not have well defined
for this project. correct
processes
235 The developer must rely on the capabilities of
assigned personnel for project success.
225 Developer personnel are not well prepared to
accomplish their assigned project responsibilities.
240 The developer exhibits immature software
development behavior.
220 There are no other qualified sources for providing support to developer personnel
assigned to the project.
A C
230 Senior management does not eliminate the
root causes.
Role: Developer
1. What Profound Knowledge is gained from this view?
2. What would you do with this insight?
3. What might be the results?
-
2. Knowledge about VariationExample: Schedule Predictability and Reliability
Whole Project (t=?)
4.0 7.0
6.0
8.0 8.0
14.0 21.016.0
7.0 15.09.0
2.0 4.03.0
9.0 13.011.0
1.0 11.02.0
4.0 9.0
5.0
0.5 5.04.0
2.0 22.010.0
r1
r1
rx=0
r1
r1
r1 r1
rx=0r1
r1 r1
rx=15
r1 = random number within each activities statistical range for the first iteration
Milestone Y(Hard)
Milestone X(Soft)
t = 5.8
t = 16.5
t = 8.0
t = 9.6
t=3.0
t = 11.0
t = 3.3 t = ??
t = 3.6
t = 5.5
t = 0
t = 0
Monte Carlo Simulation
Setup
-
Monte Carlo Simulation
10
Completion Std Deviation: 3.7d95% Confidence Interval: 0.5dEach bar represents 1d.
Completion Probability Table
Completion Date
3/20/09 4/6/09 4/20/09
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
24
27
30
Sam
ple
Coun
t
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
Cum
ulat
ive
Prob
abili
ty
Date: 3/20/09 12:47:23 PMNumber of Samples: 200Unique ID: 1Name: Sample Project (Risk)
Prob Date Prob Date0.05 3/26/09 0.66 4/7/090.10 3/28/09 0.60 4/7/090.15 4/3/09 0.65 4/10/090.20 4/3/09 0.70 4/10/090.25 4/4/09 0.75 4/11/090.30 4/4/09 0.80 4/11/090.35 4/5/09 0.85 4/12/090.40 4/5/09 0.90 4/13/090.45 4/6/09 0.95 4/14/090.50 4/6/09 1.00 4/20/09
Early Completion
DateExpected
Completion Date
LatestCompletion
Date
Only a 20% probability of completing the
project as expected on 4/3/09
-
Variation by Modeling and SimulationModeling The technique of a building a model of a real or proposed system so that the
behavior of the system under specific conditions may be studied. Simulation The technique of imitating the behavior of some situation or system
(economic, mechanical, etc.) by means of an analogous model, situation, or apparatus, either to gain information more conveniently or to train personnel. (Oxford English Dictionary)
Power of Simulation: Accurate (as possible) depiction of reality to make more accurate
decisions/solutions Systems: Important to understand; complex, meaningfully represent
randomness (reality) Advanced Optimization: Test multiple experiments and behaviors Insightful systems evaluations at real time or compressed time Animation: Visual model for verification and training
-
Current vs Future | Static vs Dynamic Static Current State VSM Boring! Unable to assess, verify, make
adjustments quickly Unable to envision and consider
more useful Future State
Static Future State VSM Thats fine, but Unable to check basic
validity of ideas Buy-in reduced
Versus
-
System Simulation: Profound Knowledge
Refurbishment
Enterprise Aircraft Routed Parts (Back shop)
Wings and Flight Controls
-
Benefits: Modeling and SimulationModeling Ability to consider the future of the future by stepping into the future Highlight potential problems that may occur during the transition from current to
future state Provided a forum for thorough debate and hence a quicker resolution of key
issuesSimulation The technique of imitating the behavior of some situation or system (economic,
mechanical, etc.) by means of an analogous model, situation, or apparatus, either to gain information more conveniently or to train personnel. (Oxford English Dictionary)
Power of Simulation: Accurate (as possible) depiction of reality to make more accurate
decisions/solutions Systems: Important to understand; complex, meaningfully represent randomness
(reality) Advanced Optimization: Test multiple experiments and behaviors Insightful systems evaluations at real time or compressed time Animation: Visual model for verification and training
-
3. Theory of KnowledgeKnowledge of Individuals | Teams | Programs
Core: Importance of understanding how people thinkand actbased on what they believe they know to be true.
1. What do we know that isnt so? 2. How can we avoid the mistakes we are in danger of making in our thinking? 3. How can we improve the learning process?4. How does the source of an idea affect my evaluation of the idea?5. Are my judgments clouded by unimportant factors?
Other Issues: Confirmation Bias: Seize on what evidence we believe, like, or supports us; reject
or ignore evidence that does not support us
Experiment: Plan-Do-Check-Act Prediction: Learn more from thinking deeply about system, etc. (Risk Analysis) Misunderstandings and Misinterpretations
Value Judgments: Operational definitions and dataReference: John Hunter, Theory of Knowledge, W. Edwards Deming Institute Blog, December 12 2012.
-
Knowledge of IndividualsStrengthsFinders (Gallop,)
JH1. Futuristic2. Strategic3. Ideation4. Significance5. Learner6. Intellection7. Input8. Competition9. Command10. Restorative11. Relator12. Achiever13. Focus14. Analytical15. Individualization16. Adaptability17. Communication18. Connectedness19. Activator20. Arranger21. Deliberative22. Woo23. Belief24. Positivity25. Responsibility26. Self-Assurance27. Maximizer28. Includer29. Harmony30. Discipline31. Developer32. Context33. Empathy34. Consistency
RS1. Learner2. Responsibility3. Ideation4. Analytical5. Relator6. Strategic7. Achiever8. Includer9. Connectedness10. Futuristic11. Belief12. Deliberative13. Individualization14. Developer15. Maximizer16. Restorative17. Arranger18. Harmony19. Intellection20. Input21. Focus22. Positivity23. Competition24. Discipline25. Context26. Significance27. Empathy28. Communication29. Activator30. Self-Assurance31. Consistency32. Adaptability33. Command34. Woo
JF1. Learner2. Connectedness3. Responsibility4. Relator5. Intellection6. Discipline7. Individualization8. Analytical9. Belief10. Input11. Consistency12. Developer13. Arranger14. Empathy15. Adaptability16. Futuristic17. Self-Assurance18. Harmony19. Ideation20. Deliberative21. Focus22. Achiever23. Communication24. Restorative25. Significance26. Positivity27. Context28. Competition29. Includer30. Maximizer31. Woo32. Command33. Strategic34. Activator
KM1. Woo2. Positivity3. Communication4. Connectedness5. Context6. Input7. Empathy8. Developer9. Individualization10. Includer11. Ideation12. Belief13. Maximizer14. Intellection15. Self-Assurance16. Adaptability17. Strategic18. Learner19. Arranger20. Harmony21. Activator22. Consistency23. Relator24. Analytical25. Discipline26. Significance27. Focus28. Command29. Responsibility30. Achiever31. Competition32. Futuristic33. Restorative34. Deliberative
KS1. Restorative2. Empathy3. Responsibility4. Belief5. Arranger6. Deliberative7. Context8. Consistency9. Discipline10. Harmony11. Adaptability12. Relator13. Connectedness14. Futuristic15. Self-Assurance16. Includer17. Significance18. Focus19. Intellection20. Developer21. Learner22. Input23. Maximizer24. Positivity25. Communication26. Woo27. Achiever28. Activator29. Command30. Competition31. Strategic32. Ideation33. Analytical34. Individualization
-
Knowledge of IndividualsMyers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) Indices
Source of Energy
Data Gathering
Decision Making
Lifestyle or Orientation
Attitude
Attitude
Irrational Function
Rational Function
Extraversion Introversion
INtuitionSensing
Thinking Feeling
Judging Perceiving
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and MBTI and are registered trademarks of Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc., Palo Alto, CA 94303.
-
Knowledge of Individuals (on Teams) Case Study: MBTI Preferences
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and MBTI and are registered trademarks of Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc., Palo Alto, CA 94303.The Type Table is copyrighted by Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc., Palo Alto, CA 94303.
ISTJ Contracts Manager (F) Team Lead (F) Programmer-Technician (M)
ISFJ INFJ
Hardware Support (M) Systems Analyst (M)
INTJ
Project Manager (M) Quality Assurance (M) Systems Analyst (M)
ISTP ISFP INFP INTP
Programmer-Technician (M)
ESTP Programmer-Technician (F)
ESFP ENFP ENTP
Programmer-Technician (M)
ESTJ
Senior Project Manager (M) Programmer-Technician (M)
ESFJ ENFJ ENTJ
Team Lead (M) Programmer-Technician (M) Systems Analyst (M)
Team Size: 16 members Group Type: INTJ
ISTJ
Contracts Manager (F)
Team Lead (F)
Programmer-Technician (M)
ISFJ
INFJ
Hardware Support (M)
Systems Analyst (M)
INTJ
Project Manager (M)
Quality Assurance (M)
Systems Analyst (M)
ISTP
ISFP
INFP
INTP
Programmer-Technician (M)
ESTP
Programmer-Technician (F)
ESFP
ENFP
ENTP
Programmer-Technician (M)
ESTJ
Senior Project Manager (M)
Programmer-Technician (M)
ESFJ
ENFJ
ENTJ
Team Lead (M)
Programmer-Technician (M)
Systems Analyst (M)
-
Knowledge of Teams
Source: David Sibbet and Allan Drexler, Graphic Guide to Team Performance, Grove Consultants International, San Francisco, CA, 1994.
Drexler-Sibbet Team PerformanceModel
-
Knowledge of Teams (of Individuals)
Source: David Sibbet and Allan Drexler, Graphic Guide to Team Performance, Grove Consultants International, San Francisco, CA, 1994.
Drexler-Sibbet Team PerformanceModel
-
Knowledge of ProgramsCase Study: Program Risk Assessment
Team Sprint Burn down Chart for Sprint 3
Hows the Product Development
going?
Why such a high level of exposure?
How are we going to get insight and
explain this?
-
Knowledge of ProgramsCase Study: Program Risk Assessment
Minimal Low Medium High Very High
(Negligible) (Marginal) (Moderate) (SignificantCritical)
(CatastrophicGrievious)
TimeframeProbability
Very High 100% 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0(Very Likely) 90% 0.9 1.8 2.7 3.6 4.5 5.4 6.3 7.2 8.1 9.0
High 80% 0.8 1.6 2.4 3.2 4.0 4.8 5.6 6.4 7.2 8.0 Imminent(Likely) 70% 0.7 1.4 2.1 2.8 3.5 4.2 4.9 5.6 6.3 7.0 Near-term
Medium 60% 0.6 1.2 1.8 2.4 3.0 3.6 4.2 4.8 5.4 6.0 Mid-term(Probable) 50% 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Far-term
Low 40% 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.4 2.8 3.2 3.6 4.0 Very-far(Possible) 30% 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.4 2.7 3.0
Minimal 20% 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0(Improbable) 10% 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Impact
Red [A] Greater than or equal to 6.0 Shown in "orange"
Yellow [B] Greater than 2.0 and less than 6.0 (if greater than 4.0 complete a mitigation plan)Green [C] Greater than 0.1 and less than 2.0
10 86 4
2
-
Knowledge of ProgramsRisk Assessment: Results for Open Discussion
Risk ID
Condition Consequence CurrentProbability (Likelihood)
CurrentImpact
(Severity)
Risk Rating
(Current)
Action to Mitigate POC RiskCategory
MitigationDue
$ Context and Notes
C014 If funding is not received with enough lead time to allow for contract/mod award before current funding runs out;
Then the schedule will be delayed and key individuals will be lost requiring effort to be spent on the hiring and assimilation processes.
90% 10 9.0 In the short term, work to resolve the immediate funding shortfall. Note: [] is working at the [] level both [] to provide funding in increments until [] isestablished in PB.
Funding The [] funding is expiring; requires external funding to continue product development. [] limited to [] or less. To meet schedule deadlines the [] must be mitigated first.
C015 If operational requirements continue to change with only partial agreement by key signatories;
Then the delivery date will continue to be delayed.
90% 9 8.1 Create a [] where any proposed changes must go through the [ ] and be agreed upon by the [] before a [] will be considered.
Requirements
Similar to E005. The [] requirements were finalized []. However, only one of the three key signatures are present.
E001 If the [] product development and testing team does not include a Subject Matter Expert (SME) from each service or using community;
Then the user interface will not be validated, operational usability will not be acceptable, [] will not recommend it and [ ] will be suspect as a beneficial tool,
80% 10 8.0 Place Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) on the development team as soon as possible. [] to request [] via [].
Resources [] has requested a []multiple times at the [] Meetings for participation in [].A SME has not yet been provided.
E010 If a 24/7Help Desk is not available for the user community (whether the user understands the product and its purpose or not);
Then [] the user community will increase until the product is not considered worthwhile.
80% 10 8.0 Coordinate a Help Desk requirement with the funding sponsor and the user community.
Support The level of sophistication of the user must be taken into account in a critical system.
-
4. Knowledge of PsychologySomething Deeper than Behavior
BEHAVIORS
Responsive Wayout of the box
Resistant Wayin the box
PERSON OBJECT
Way of Being
Arbinger Institute, Leadership and Self-Deception: Getting Out of the Box, 2nd ed., Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Jan 2010. Diagram used by permission (page 36).
InfluenceWhatever I do on the surface, people respond to who I am being when
I am doing it.Way be being
determines influence.
(The Choice, 5, ArbingerInstitute)
-
Knowledge of PsychologyInfluencing Relationships
What kind of influence am I likely to have on someone Im seeing as:
a Vehicle?
an Obstacle?
an Irrelevancy?
-
5. Knowledge of LeadershipCharacteristics of an Admired Leader
James Kouzes and Barry Posner, The Leadership Challenge: How to Make Extraordinary Things Happen in Organizations, Jossey-Bass, 4th Ed., August 2008.
-
5. Knowledge of Leadership
James Kouzes and Barry Posner, The Leadership Challenge: How to Make Extraordinary Things Happen in Organizations, Jossey-Bass, 4th Ed., August 2008.
Model the Way Clarify values by finding your voice and affirming shared values Set the example by aligning actions with shared values
Inspire a Shared Vision Envision the future by imagining exciting and ennobling possibilities Enlist others in a common vision by appealing to shared aspirations
Challenge the Process Search for opportunities; seizing initiative; looking for innovative ways to improve Experiment, take risks, consistently generating small wins, learning from experience
Enable Others to Act Foster collaboration by building trust and facilitating relationships Strengthen others by increasing self-determination and developing competence
Encourage the Heart Recognize contributions by showing appreciation for individual excellence Celebrate the values and victories by creating a spirit of community
Leadership Practices
-
5. Knowledge of LeadershipLeadership Practice Inventory (LPI) - SELF
Group 17:23 participants
Where are their strengths?
Where are their opportunities?
Model the Way
Inspire aShared Vision
Challenge the Process
EnableOthers to Act
Encouragethe Heart
1 7.83 2 6.74 3 7.30 4 8.39 5 8.436 6.87 7 5.78 8 7.52 9 7.52 10 7.3911 8.39 12 6.26 13 6.74 14 8.78 15 7.0016 6.91 17 5.43 18 6.74 19 7.70 20 7.5221 7.17 22 7.43 23 7.17 24 8.04 25 7.1726 6.87 27 7.43 28 7.17 29 7.52 30 8.52Tot 44.04 Tot 39.09 Tot 42.65 Tot 47.96 Tot 46.04
7.34 6.51 7.11 7.99 7.67High 8.78 Low 5.43
Model the Way
Inspire aShared Vision
Challenge the Process
EnableOthers to Act
Encouragethe Heart
1 8.21 2 6.88 3 7.46 4 8.36 5 8.356 6.89 7 5.96 8 7.06 9 7.79 10 7.7111 8.71 12 6.20 13 6.54 14 8.94 15 6.9716 6.20 17 5.97 18 6.86 19 7.89 20 7.4721 6.91 22 7.19 23 6.95 24 8.27 25 7.0226 7.50 27 7.67 28 7.34 29 7.83 30 8.14Tot 44.42 Tot 39.89 Tot 42.21 Tot 49.09 Tot 45.67
7.40 6.65 7.04 8.18 7.61High 8.94 Low 5.96
Cumulative Total:20 Groups
328 participants
Where do they need coaching?
Where do they need leadership?
-
Examples of Knowledge CaptureAssessment: Goals, Cause-Effect, Priorities, Metrics, etc.
Large Team Multiple Supervisors Multiple Team Leads Critical Product
Medium Team Support Services Known challenges (Morale, Training) New Leadership
Small Team New Team Establishing a new Program Management Office (PMO) Unproven approach for support
Really Small Team Software Support Complex System Move to Agile, Scrum, Reporting
-
[Profound] Summary: ReflectionsWhat are we to do with our Profound Project Knowledge ?
Something Useful It is a waste unless we take action Can also be put towards lame and harmful means
Opportunities Abound Individuals | Teams | Projects | Systems | Customers
Teams What small adjustment would help us team better? What would help us be profoundly better?
Questions to Ask What new information will help us do [ ] better? If we discovered how to do [ ], what would that mean? If we understood [ ], how would we adjust? What is our core conflict? What is our core constraint?
What would be really profound for us? Hold a discussion Consider the experiment StartTry it out
-
References Arbinger Institute, Leadership and Self-Deception: Getting Out of the Box, 2nd ed., Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Jan 2010. Bennis, Warren, Managing People is Like Herding Cats, Executive Excellence Publishing, Provo, UT., 1999. Block, Peter. Stewardship. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc., San Francisco. 1993.Dettmer, H. William. Breaking Constraints to World-Class Performance. ASQ Quality Press. Milwaukee, WI. 1997.Dettmer, H. William. Goldratts Theory of Constraints: A Systems Approach to Continuous Improvement. ASQ Quality
Press. Milwaukee, WI. 1997.Deming, W. Edwards, Out of the Crisis, 1st Ed., MIT Press, August 2000. Goldratt, Eliyahu M. and Cox, Jeff. The Goal: A Process of Ongoing Improvement. North River Press. Great Barrington,
MA. 1992. James Kouzes and Barry Posner, The Leadership Challenge: How to Make Extraordinary Things Happen in Organizations,
Jossey-Bass, 4th Ed., August 2008.Myers, Isabel Briggs and McCaulley, Mary H. et.al. 1998. MBTI Manual: A Guide to the Development and use of the
Myers Brigg Type Indicator, 3rd Edition. Consulting Psychologist Press, Palo Alto, CA. Schein, Edgar H., Organizational Culture and Leadership, Jossey-Bass, 1992 Scheinkopf, Lisa J. Thinking for a Change: Putting the TOC Thinking Processes to Use. CRC Press LLC. Boca Raton, FL,
1999. Senge, Peter M. The Fifth Discipline. Currency Doubleday. New York. 1990. Sibbet, David and Drexler, Allan, Graphic Guide to Team Performance, Grove Consultants International, San Francisco,
CA, 1994. Smith, Larry W. The Effect of Project Managers Personality Profiles on Projects. Project Management Institute (PMI)
2001 Symposium. Nashville, TN. November. 2001. Smith, Larry W. The Oft-Forgotten Process of Building Project Teams. Software Technology Conference (STC) 2001.
Salt Lake City, UT. May 2001. Smith, Larry W. Accelerating Project and Process Improvement using Advanced Software Simulation Technology: From
the Office to the Enterprise Software. Systems and Software Technology Conference (SSTC) 2010. Salt Lake City, UT. May 2010.William J. Latzko, David M. Saunders, Four Days with Dr. Deming: A Strategy for Modern Methods of Management, 1st
Ed., Prentice Hall, February 1995.
Profound Project KnowledgePresentation OutlinePMI Talent Triangle14 Key Principles for Management14 Key Principles for ManagementProfound Knowledge1. Appreciation for a SystemCase Study: Common Root Causes2. Knowledge about VariationMonte Carlo SimulationVariation by Modeling and SimulationCurrent vs Future | Static vs Dynamic System Simulation: Profound KnowledgeBenefits: Modeling and Simulation3. Theory of KnowledgeKnowledge of IndividualsKnowledge of IndividualsKnowledge of Individuals (on Teams) Knowledge of TeamsKnowledge of Teams (of Individuals)Knowledge of ProgramsKnowledge of ProgramsKnowledge of Programs4. Knowledge of PsychologyKnowledge of Psychology5. Knowledge of Leadership5. Knowledge of Leadership5. Knowledge of LeadershipExamples of Knowledge Capture[Profound] Summary: ReflectionsReferences