Profound Project Knowledgeprojectmanager.org/images/downloads/PDC_2018_Presentations/larry... ·...

31
PROFOUND PROJECT KNOWLEDGE Bringing together the PMI® Talent Triangle, changes in the Sixth Edition of the PMBOK® Guide, and Edward Deming’s 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 Consultant April 27, 2018

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