Effectiveness of group and individual decision making in project management
project代写 The study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of group as well as individual decision making in the project management.
The study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of group as well as individual decision making in the project management. In order to manage the projects effectively, the project managers should take high level decision by adopting appropriate analogue and digital devices. These tools promote the decision making process to facilitate the future of the project.
Through a proper decision making process, the risks can be mitigated and can execute a reality check to control a specific situation. The study has evaluated the corporate governance for project management. After the assessment four factors have proved to be important principles for corporate management.
These four components are directing the portfolio, sponsoring the project, ability to manage project and disclosure as well as reporting. It is also observed that group decision making is more effective than individual decision making if it can follow some specific techniques, namely, brainstorming, dialectic inquiry and nominal group technique.
The concept of project management is considered as an essential process for the project managers through which the perception and knowledge level of the project managers can be augmented. Project management can help the managers to take high level decision by adopting appropriate analogue and digital devices.
These tools promote the decision making process to facilitate the future of the project. The decision making tools are common and principally based on the rational thinking of the decision making authorities. Time, cost and opportunity are considered as the most significant barriers in adopting the appropriate decisions in the project management process (Wastell, 1999).
These three constraints should create negative impact on the project management process. Therefore, the projects managers need to take appropriate decisions regarding the project after controlling these constraints. Through a proper decision making process, the risks can be mitigated and can execute a reality check to control a specific situation. In this background, the present research study intends to evaluate the effectiveness of group as well as individual decision making in the project management.
The principle objective of an effective decision making process is to formulate a rationale decision. Rational decision making implies a propensity that is appropriate to the existing objectives inside the given conditions and requirements. The notion of project administration is based on the reasonability of choices and here is the place it is essential . For the project manager to have a procedure which empowers him and his group choose objectively about various parts of the undertaking.
Decision making can drive the success of a project. The decisions should be made regarding the requirements, choice of resources and design criteria. Thus decision making process can be considered as the critical success factor for managing a project effectively. There are three essential approaches to decision making in project management, namely, by power, by majority, and by accord.
Trade off, argument avoidance and self-assurance, dialogue, argument and help are procedures utilized as a part of the basic decision making procedure (Hastie & Kameda, 2005). The specialty of decision making procedure requires the real use of these in a methodology that relies upon the necessities of the circumstance. There is no outright one most ideal way.
Accord decisions are those made when everybody in the gathering consents to a solitary result. project代写
The result may not be the widely adored choice but rather everybody concurs that it fulfills the target. Agreement choices emerge out of discourse and verbal confrontation that draws in individuals with unique thoughts, common objectives and limitations.
They concentrate on a choice that fulfills their normal goal within the barriers (Roch, 2007). Agreement infers receptiveness and an eagerness to relinquish connection to one’s own particular thought and acknowledge the thoughts of others with objectivity. When this is absent, there can be an agreement around an ineffectual choice.
Majority decisions are those made when more than a large segment of the members are agreeable to a result. In the domain of project management, there is an issue with the majority regulations. The majority rules leaves a minority that may not be adequately become tied up with the choice to rouse their earnest attempts to complete it.
there is practically no relationship between the number of individuals for an idea and the value of the idea. There are numerous cases supporting a thought that ends up being really repulsive, even after a little minority made a point to demonstrate its shortcomings and offer more powerful options (Elenbass, 2000).
Power decisions are made in light of the force of an individual or little gathering. The power figure can settle on the decision since he or she has the power. Power decisions can run the extent from excellent to awful, contingent upon the insight and ability of the individual. Restlessness, egoistic mind, dreadful and unintelligent authority will settle on decisions that are far less successful than the choice of any of their subordinates.
Very much educated, instinctive and smart power figures can settle on exceptionally compelling choices (Association for Project Management, 2011). They frequently keep down on their choices to take into consideration some level of open communication by subordinates and to gather the data required to settle on the right choice.
The governance in project management concerns those territories of corporate governance that are particularly identified with project exercises. With the help of an effective corporate governance structure in project management, an organization’s objective can be appropriately aligned with its project portfolio. Administration of project management additionally underpins the methods by which the board and other significant trade partners, pertinent, important, reliable and effective information.
Figure 1: Corporate governance of project management project代写
(Association for Project Management, 2011)
Figure 1 project代写
illustrates that the governance of project management is the subset of the corporate governance. Four basic components of the governance of project management can be identified. These four components are directing the portfolio, sponsoring the project, ability to manage project and disclosure as well as reporting. On the basis of these four aspects, the major principles of corporate governance can be discussed s follows:
1.The board should be responsible for overall governance of the project management
2.All the rules and responsibilities related to the project management should be clearly defined.
3.An appropriate method has to be implemented to optimally utilize the resources during the entire project life cycle.
4.All the projects should have an approved and predefined plan through which the business cases including the cost structure and benefits can be assessed. All the decisions and plans taken by the authorities should be recorded and conversed.
5.The members included in the authorization body should have adequate representation, proficiency, power and resources so that members can take appropriate decisions.
6.Project management cases are upheld by pertinent and reasonable data that gives a strong premise to settling on authorization choices(O’Brochta, 2002).
7.The board or its assigned operators should choose when free assessment of projects. On the other hand project administration frameworks are required and execute such affirmation.
8.There should be characterized criteria for reporting project status and for the acceleration of dangers and issues to the levels required by the association.
According to different literature studies, five factors are crucial to drive the success of the project management. These five factors are strong involvement of the project managers, improved management support system . Concise and clear statement of requirements, appropriate planning process and achievable expectation. To understand the success of a project management, the case of EC Harris International Ltd can be considered (APM, 2012).
This organization is involved into the management of interior design, structuring furniture, fittings and the installation of equipments and machineries. It has launched Al Wahda Master Development project which is a popular commercial shopping center. It also involved into the consultancy activity about cost structure. EC International has incorporated a detailed and structured process with the help of a project management gateway approach. This involves the checking of design and assessing the verification process.
It also ensures the sign off frequency by the employers at different phases. project代写
EC International has adopted positive and effective steps to enhance the project management process. It has conducted various value engineering workshops and risk management sessions. Effective decision making process in respect to each step has ultimately driven the success of the project run by EC International.
The organization has established the largest hotel in the Abu Dhabi with a vibrant shopping mall. This has increased the return on investment further for the company. It also provides support to the micro management process of contractors to facilitate the project management process and mitigate the challenges of adverse market condition of 2008.
Secondly the case of Brighouse and Sowerby Bridge Pool and Fitness Centre can be considered. project代写
Since 1913, the company offers the services by constructing the swimming pool for the public. However, from 2006, the organization experiences obstacles in terms of natural and operational life cycle (APM, 2011).
To improve this situation, Calderdale Council has taken strong decision to launch a project s that new facilities can be initiated in each corner of the town. The new facilities have been incorporating by using the funds obtained from the sale of Leeds / Bradford airport. The total cost has counted at £6.5m. The appointment of Turner & Townsend has enabled the project team to quickly take the decision regarding the finding structure.
They have understood the problem of lack of fund to meet the requirements. With the help of Turner & Townsend, the project team is able to generate an additional investment of £4.5m. Turner & Townsend has focused on the importance of strategic brief as a major driving force of project management. It also takes crucial decisions regarding the design process which make the project really successful.
Several researchers have suggested that often the projects failed on account of lack of senior management, ambiguous project objectives, scope creep, gaps in communication, poor decision making ability and poor visibility of the project.
In this context, the case of British petroleum (BP) can be considered. It is a oil and gas company mainly involved into the examination, construction, refining, distribution and advertising of the hydrocarbon products. BP faced a significant problem in 2010 on account of an explosion occurred in the deep water horizon project (Achenbach, 2011).
Due to this explosion project代写
Excessive oil spills occur and it becomes one of the worst oil disasters in the present world. The incident has taken the lies of 11 workers and accumulation of rig over 30 miles area (Shankleman, 2011). To tackle this situation, BP took three months tie span to stop the flow of oil into the ocean.
During this time frame, almost 210,000 gallons of hydro chemical has been leaked almost regularly in the Gulf Ocean. It causes damage to the environment (Goldenburg, 2010). As a result, BP had to pay a cot for cleaning up the environment. This project has mainly failed due to lack of ability to take timely decisions and weak management structure.
Another case of the Millennium Dome can also be considered. project代写
Millennium Dome is a Dome shaped mammoth framework, established in the Greenwich peninsula located in south east London (The Observer, 2007). This is mainly made for the celebration purpose. Though the project has been completed within stipulated time but gradually the number of visitors started to fall extensively.
The project has faced significant challenges in terms of financial shortage. To tackle this situation it has changes a number of key personnel have been changed so that appropriate decision can be taken. The major problem lies in the planning process and decision making process. As the objective was unclear, the management personnel fail to undertake appropriate decisions.
The decision was also not good in terms of special characteristics so that new visitors can be attracted (The Observer, 2007). Moreover, the lack of contingency plan was another major reason for failure of the project. Poor contingency decision and planning has made them unable to meet expectation.
Group decision making is a sort of participatory procedure in which numerous people act by assessing the issues or circumstances, consider and assess elective game-plans, and select from among the options an answer or arrangements. The number of individuals required in group decision making changes significantly, however normally counts from two to seven.
The people in a group might be demographically comparable or entirely assorted. The decision making groups might be generally casual in nature, or formally assigned and accused of a particular objective. The nature and arrangement of groups, their size, demographic features, structure, and reason, all influence their working to some extent.
Group decision making ought to be recognized from the ideas of groups, collaboration, and self-guided groups (Mohammed & Ringseis, 2001). The premise for the qualification is by all accounts that groups’ demonstration accomplishes more noteworthy collaboration of exertion. A number of methods can be used by the groups to make decisions. Some of the important methods are conceptualizing, dialetical request, usual group procedure, and the delphi method.
Conceptualizing includes bunch individuals verbally suggesting thoughts or actions. The generation of new ideas is typically moderately unstructured. The current circumstance is depicted in as much detail as vital so that group individuals have a complete comprehension of the issue. The gathering pioneer or facilitator then requests thoughts from all individuals from the group.
Generally, the group pioneer or facilitator will record the thoughts introduced on a flip diagram or marker board. The “era of choices” stage is unmistakably separated from the “option assessment” stage, as gathering individuals are not permitted to assess recommendations until the sum total of what thoughts have been introduced (Peterson, 1999).
Once the thoughts of the gathering individuals have been depleted project代写
The group individuals then start the way toward assessing the utility of the distinctive proposals displayed. Conceptualizing is a helpful means by which to produce choices, yet does not offer much in the method for procedure for the assessment of options or the choice of a proposed game-plan.
One of the troubles with conceptualizing is that in spite of the disallowance against judging thoughts until all gathering individuals have had their say, a few people are reluctant to propose thoughts since they fear the judgment or disparagement of other gathering individuals. Lately, some basic leadership bunches have used electronic conceptualizing .
Which permits group individuals to propose options by method for email or another electronic means, for example, an internet posting board or discourse room (Lam & Schaubroeck, 2000). Individuals could possibly offer their thoughts namelessly, which ought to improve the probability that people will offer extraordinary and inventive thoughts without apprehension of the unforgiving judgment of others.
Dialetical request is a cooperative choice making method that focuses on guaranteeing full thought of choices. Basically, it includes partitioning the gathering into restricting sides, which wrangle about the points of interest and detriments of proposed arrangements or choices. A comparable cooperative choice making strategy, demon’s promotion, requires that one individual from the gathering highlight the potential issues with a proposed choice. Both of these systems are intended to attempt and ensure that the gathering considers every conceivable implication of its choice (Shankleman, 2011).
The ostensible gathering method is an organized basic leadership process in which group individuals are required to make a thorough list out of their thoughts or proposed choices in composing. The gathering individuals as a rule record their thoughts secretly. Once completed, every gathering part is asked, to give one thing from their list until all thoughts or choices have been freely recorded on a flip outline or marker board.
More often than not, at this phase of the procedure verbal trades are restricted to demands for illumination—no assessment or feedback of recorded thoughts is allowed (Babock, 2004). When all recommendations are recorded openly, the gathering takes part in a talk of the recorded choices, which closes in some type of positioning or rating all together of inclination. Similarly as with conceptualizing, the denial against censuring proposition as they are displayed is intended to conquer people’s hesitance to share their thoughts.
The Delphi procedure is a collective decision making process that can be utilized by basic leadership members when the individuals are in various physical areas. The people in the Delphi ” group ” are typically chosen in view of the particular information or mastery of the issue they have. In the Delphi strategy, every group is asked to freely give thoughts, input, and/or elective answers for the choice issue in progressive stages (Wright & Goodwin, 2002).
These sources of info might be given in an assortment of routes, for example, email, fax, or online in a talk room or electronic notice board. After every phase simultaneously, other group individuals make inquiries and options are positioned or evaluated in some design. After an uncertain number of rounds, the gathering in the end lands at an agreement choice on the best strategy.
Project managers can follow a number of ways to make correct decisions regarding the project management. Often the managers find a trade off situation between time and quality. Therefore, effective decisions should be made to promote risk mitigation process and control the situation. Six indicators can be recognized as important to consider at prior. These six factors are time, cost, quality, risk, scope and resources.
Any project manager should explain that scope creep is inescapable. Be that as it may, the procedures for dealing with that creep ought to guarantee that the extent up to which the project managers is in control of the extension and any alterations to it, anticipate system can be acclimated to consolidate the change (Simons, Pelled, & Smith, 1999).
Considering an example of a specific scenario in which a project manager is··· project代写
Considering an example of a specific scenario in which a project manager is responsible to deal with a task to convey another model Porsche. The venture is in progress, the outline is set up, assembling is in advancement and all of a sudden the planner lets the manager know that he should change the configuration to consolidate new government wellbeing enactment.
Corresponding to change management, a change control note is issued sketching out the adjustment in detail, work bundles are revised, item depictions are re-imagined, expenses are fused into the change, quality confirmation and checks are corrected properly and an ideal opportunity to finish the construct is altered.
The project board approves the plan, administration is kept up and hence the venture of that project manager has another benchmark to further work. Thus it is understood that cost, time and quality are actually affected, but these are concurred impacts, not questions (Nelson & Quick, 2000).
To deal with a task effectively the project manager should distinguish the risks associated with it at an opportune time in the arranging stages. The project manager should recognize these risks as well as decide the move to be made ought to a risks happen and turn into an issue. Let us inspect the same situation for the Porsche.
At the time of analyzing risks, the project managers will ideally have recognized through experience that administration security enactment is continually advancing and that any new enactment could affect the outline of the vehicle. In this situation the risk has two countermeasures in light of the expense of the danger getting to be reality and this decides the move to be made.
So the project managers will have an unmistakable order if this risk turn into an issue and is enabled to take a speedy, restorative and definitive choice. This issue again shows itself in cost, time and quality yet they are concurred impacts, not questions and will be secured by the resilience levels and possibilities adjusted to the task (Thomas-Hunt & Phillips, 2004).
Therefore, an appropriate, propelled and have clear goals empower the project to proceed without issue.
Below mentioned steps can be followed to undertake an effective decision in project management process:
Managing the direction: The Project managers ought to guarantee that the projects and ventures are accurately adjusted to the association’s prime goals.
Significance –The Project managers ought to address real open doors, conditions or difficulties that stand up to the association(van Knippenberg, Dreu, & Homan, 2004).
1.Accuracy – The Group ought to plan its project and significant components, including setting a sensible level of exertion, to meet the particular corporate destinations.
2.Accomplishment of results – The Group ought to decide to what degree the objectives and targets of the Group are being figured it out.
3.Acknowledgment – The Group ought to decide to what degree the Group’s expected “clients” are judging the outcomes as being acceptable.
4.Expenses and Productivity – The Group ought to confirm to what degree there is a change in corporate efficiency and yield at decreased exertion and lower cost as an aftereffect of the Group’s work (van de Ven & Delbecq, 1974).
5.Financial aspect: The Group ought to keep up representing the work-in-advancement and the resources being enhanced under the Group’s obligations.
6.Working Environment – The Group ought to intermittently look at the change in the environment for the client/workers as reflected by their appropriation of the items and administrations coming about because of the Group’s obligations.
From the above study it is clear that decision making process is a crucial aspect in the project management. Group decision making process is considered to be more effective compared to individual decision making. Therefore, prime concentration is required to assess the development and training of the groups.
In order to make effective and efficient decisions, it is imperative to consider six crucial parameters, namely, time, cost, quality, risk, scope and resources. The identification and assessment of these factors can help the project managers to make effective decisions after formulating strategies and managing the risks.
Achenbach, J. (2011). BP’s cost cuts contributed to oil spill disaster, federal probe finds. The Washington Post .
APM. (2011). Community Project of the Year 2011 Brighouse and Sowerby Bridge Pool and Fitness Centre,Turner & Townsend. APM Project Management Awards.
APM. (2012). Overseas Project of the Year 2012 Al Wahda Master Development, Abu Dhabi EC Harris International Ltd. APM Project Management Awards.
Association for Project Management. (2011). Directing Change A guide to governance of project management. Association for Project Management.
Babock, P. (2004). Shedding light on knowledge management. HR Magazine , 47–50.
Elenbass, B. (2000). Staging a Project – Are You Setting Your Project Up for Success? Proceedings of the Project Management Institute Annual Seminars & Symposiums. Houston.
Goldenburg, S. (2010). BP oil spill blamed on management and communications failures. The Guardian .
Hastie, R., & Kameda, T. (2005). The robust beauty of majority rules in group decisions. Psychological Review , 112, 494–508.
Lam, S. S., & Schaubroeck, J. (2000). Improving group decisions by better pooling information: A comparative advantage of group decision support systems. Journal of Applied Psychology , 85, 565–573.
Mohammed, S., & Ringseis, E. (2001). Cognitive diversity and consensus in group decision making: The role of inputs, processes, and outcomes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes , 85, 310–335.
Nelson, D., & Quick, J. (2000). Organizational Behavior ( 3rd ed. ed.). Australia: Southwestern College Publishing.
O’Brochta, M. (2002). Project Success – What Are the Criteria and Whose Opinion Counts? Proceedings of the Project Management Institute Annual Seminars & Symposiums. San Antonio.
Peterson, R. (1999). Can you have too much of a good thing? The limits of voice for improving satisfaction with leaders. Personality and Social Psychology , 25, 313–324.
Roch, S. G. (2007). Why convene rater teams: An investigation of the benfits of anticipated discussion, consensus, and rater motivation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes , 104, 14–29.
Shankleman, J. (2011). BP oil spill caused by management failure, says White House commission. White House commission .
Simons, T., Pelled, L. H., & Smith, K. A. (1999). Making use of difference: Diversity, debate, decision comprehensiveness in top management teams. Academy of Management Journal , 42, 662–673.
The Observer. (2007). Stephen Bayley on the rebirth of the Millennium Dome. The Observer .
Thomas-Hunt, M., & Phillips, K. (2004). When What You Know is Not Enough: Expertise and Gender Dynamics in Task Groups. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin , 1585–1598.
van de Ven, A., & Delbecq, A. (1974). The Effectiveness of Nominal, Delphi, and Interacting Group Decision-Making Processes. Academy of Management Journal , 17, 147–178.
van Knippenberg, D., Dreu, C. D., & Homan, A. (2004). Work Group Diversity and Group Performance: An Integrative Model and Research Agenda. Journal of Applied Psychology , 89, 1008–1022.
Wastell, D. G. (1999). Learning Dysfunctions in Information Systems Development; Overcoming the Social Defenses With Transitional Objects. MIS Quarterly , 23 (4), 581.
Wright, G., & Goodwin, P. (2002). Eliminating a framing bias by using simple instructions to “think harder” and respondents with managerial experience: Comment on “breaking the frame. Strategic Management Journal , 23, 1059–1067.