Project Management Methodologies

Introduction 

Project management has emerged as an important discipline of study in virtually all parts of the world. Project managers are today charged with developing innovative solutions and ensuring their successful implementation in a manner that allows the organization to retain a competitive advantage in the market. Nonetheless, despite efforts at developing the science of project management, a considerable number of projects end up in failure. To successfully implement projects, project managers have to embrace creativity and innovation to respond to fast-changing circumstances adequately. This change is especially pronounced in the field of information technology. A review of project management literature reveals that a number of project management methodologies have been developed to enhance evidence-based decision making and, therefore, improve the likelihood of success. The task of the project manager is thus to identify the relative merits of each methodology and choose the one that best advances their goals and objectives. 

Review 

Project management as a practice is an old phenomenon. The Egyptians had practiced it long before the Roman Era (Baptista, Santos, & Páscoa, 2016). It was, however, not until the twentieth century that models of project management came to receive specific attention amongst practitioners and academics (Prabhakar, 2008). Indeed, this focus coincided with increased organizational sophistication whether it is performance functions, organizational structure, organizational responsibility, and delegation or decision making processes. The advent of multinationals across the world has only led to more complex project management methodologies (Baig, 2016) . This is especially important since project management techniques are not static; they are complex ongoing practices that respond to shifts. 

Project management methodology can be seen as an evolving tool for communicating and sharing learned best practices in project management with the view of providing project managers with guidelines for delivering better and more consistent project results (Spundak, 2014) . They also offer a shared language and framework of describing projects, programs and project management practice (Karamitsos, Apostolopoulos, & Bugami, 2010). In a nutshell, therefore, these methodologies offer project managers a way of leveraging and sharing their lessons, experience, and best practices. 

The term project management methodology, points out Josler and Burger (2005), is made up of three distinct parts: Project, project management, and methodology. Understanding these parts is crucial to understanding the term. A project, notes Prabhakar (2008), is a provisional effort undertaken to form a product, service or attain a result. The temporary nature of a project is important to underscore since projects have a start and a conclusion date. The project comes to an end only at the point of completion (when objectives have been met) or due to premature termination. The ‘temporariness’ of a project, therefore, does not denote a short cycle but rather the fact that it will be completed with a particular space of time. 

Project management, therefore, is the process of ensuring people have the right capabilities, shared goals and values, developing appropriate structures, and ensuring training and development to respond to changes in the course of project implementation (Project Manager Institute-PMI, 2013). PMBOK defines project management as the application of skill, tool, technique, and knowledge to project activities to attain project requirements (2013). The act of managing a project is, therefore, what is referred to as project management. It incorporates knowledge, skill, tools, activities, and techniques necessary to reach project goals. 

The third element is that of methodology. It refers to a set of principles and guidelines tailored and applied to a particular circumstance. A methodology could take the form of templates, checklists, forms or specific approaches that are employed in the course of the project cycle. For a methodology to be useful, it must address the breakdown of the project into small constitutive units, the purpose, objectives, and deliverables of the projects. In addition, it must address the various inputs of the project, instructions on how each activity is to handled, who are the necessary participants of the project, and the materials beneficial to a project. Lastly, it must take into account the quality concerns, the estimated timing of the activity, and the governance issues that impact the project including applicable approvals (Spalek, 2014). 

As the discipline of project management grew in the 20 th century, so did researchers sought to improve project management methodologies. It is a growth embodied by the formation of the Project Management Institute (PMI) in 1969 as an association for project management professionals across the world. It’s ‘The Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK),’ is now in its fourth edition and remains a leading guide on project management standards for practitioners across the world. Though the PBOK guide is in itself not a methodology, it remains an important guide on several aspects of good methodologies such as on project scope, project cost, quality, integration, project communications, project risks, human resources, and procurement (Baig, 2016). These aspects are examined subsequently though it is important to underscore that the guide recommends that projects have life cycles that entail initiation, planning, execution, control, and closing (Project Manager Institute-PMI, 2013) . Some of the notable project management methodologies include Waterfall, System Development Life Cycle (SDLC), Prince 2, Six Sigma , and Agile. These are examined presently. 

Agile 

The Agile methodological framework is quite common in the field of information technology and more so in software development. Research shows that as of August 2009, nearly 35% of IT professionals had adopted the agile framework (Spundak, 2014). The agile framework emerged as a result of challenges in the Software industry as the internet and computer processing came of age. Software developers found it increasingly difficult to create sustainable software applications due to the high number of glitches that software applications suffered in varying microcomputer environments or after upgrades to operating systems. This difficulty prompted a team of engineers to band together as the 20 th century came to a close to form the Agile Alliance. The well-known agile manifesto was developed in which advocates of lightweight formula of software development created a methodology that has come to be known as Agile Project Management (Baptista, Santos, & Páscoa, 2016). 

The alliance set forth a number of fundamentals that captured the essential qualities of this project management methodology. First, the method placed more emphasis on individuals and interactions than on processes and tools (Spundak, 2014). This means that investment in a competent team of people that undertake the project is crucially important to producing the best product. The tools and processes employed are useless in the absence of a robust team that works cooperatively. Second, the agile framework recommends working software over comprehensive documentation (Spundak, 2014). Traditionally, documenting a process has been at the core of project management techniques. This has eaten into attention, time and resources. Proponents of the agile approach, therefore, suggested to software developers that spending time on the software as opposed to giving exhaustive explanations about its working is more important (Spalek, 2014). This can be compared to walking on the road in a bid to find ones way home as opposed to spending time recording routes on a paper. 

Third, the agile approach urges customer collaboration as opposed to contract negotiation. In many projects, customers are internal, but in the case of software industry projects, customers are primarily external (Hedman & Lind, 2009). Consequently, this approach recommends that customers are consulted to determine whether the product being delivered is the right one. Lastly, this methodological approach puts a strong emphasis on adjusting to changes as opposed to adhering to prior plans (Spundak, 2014). The key principle is that adhering to plans does not engender the best outcomes especially in light of constant shifts in the industry, the market or with would-be customers. There is, it is argued, more value in adaptive rather than reactionary responses to customer demands, changing economic environments or shifting government policy. Concentration on a plan fails to offer this adaptation advantage. 

Agile project management offers several insights for managers seeking to maintain a competitive advantage in the marketplace. Arguably, the most important thing is that the technology and business worlds have become a turbulent place with uncertainties bringing about high-speed changes. This uncertainty demands that project managers become innovative in constantly adopting novel solutions that align to changing customer demands (Spalek, 2014). Some industry players have, however, insisted that the agile approach seeks not just to raise consciousness to the speed of change and the need to respond accordingly but also seeks to ensure quality standards are maintained in the process of change (Spundak, 2014). The agile approach is also significant for placing people at the center of project management. This is a far cry from when processes and structures were deemed more important and people concerns left to the periphery of considerations. To this end, their expertise, amiability, talent, and interaction are considered important to successful project outcomes (Baptista, Santos, & Páscoa, 2016). This enables project managers to create effective and reliable teams, which translate to better quality products and reductions on time consumption. In a nutshell, the agile methodology is concerned with creating proper teams and getting tasks done within the context of rapidly changing environments. 

Prince 2 

Prince2 is an acronym for Projects in Controlled Environments. It is a project management methodology initially developed in 1989 for information technology projects of the UK government though its use has now cascaded to both private and public sectors (Jamali & Oveisi, 2016). It is a structured approach to project management that centers on eight key techniques for the control and administration of a project. These include 

Startup 

Within Prince2 project management methodology, starting a project is the initial step. The startup phase entails selecting a project and the team to implement it (Jamali & Oveisi, 2016). Once a project mandate has been acquired, the selection of team members can begin. This phase is important in clearly outlining the project purpose and results and in getting the right team ready, all of which are preliminary steps that powerfully impact success prospects 

Directing the Project 

This is the set of activities between the start and closure of a project. While a project board is typically in charge of this exercise, it is the project manager that is involved in its nuances and informs the board on the more general aspects. Progressive monitoring, setting time frames, and approving the start of various phases are some of the key activities at this level (Jamali & Oveisi, 2016). It is the phase that ensures an organized start and closure of the project. 

Initiating a Project 

The third phase of Prince2 approach is initiating the project. It is a process that starts with the presentation of a project initiation document (PID), which details the project plan and costs. Key components include the project’s key performance indicators, project constraints, potential options, risks, benefits analysis as well as project milestones (Jamali & Oveisi, 2016). In this phase, there is limited room for questioning by the upper management staff. It seeks to ensure previous planning stages are thorough and addresses the potential questions that may emerge in the course of implementation. 

Controlling a Milestone 

In this phase, the project is broken into controllable yet practical stages that can be monitored. It is one of Prince2’s defining characteristics that distinguish it from other project management methodologies. According to Hinde, stage control entails completed work packages, authorizing work packages, reviewing work and stage package status, examining risks involved, and undertaking remedial actions where necessary(2012). 

Managing Productivity Delivery 

This fifth stage of Prince2 entails ensuring successful at every stage. According to Hinde, it entails accepting work package, executing, and delivering on the package (2012). A work package is simply the work agreed upon within a team led by a team manager. Subsequently, regular reports are issued to ensure work packages are in harmony with cost and time considerations (Karamitsos, Apostolopoulos, & Bugami, 2010). 

Managing Stage Boundaries 

This sixth stage seeks to ensure there is a smooth transition from one stage to another. It is crucially important that the work package of a stage is duly completed and stakeholders satisfied before the transition to the next stage (Jamali & Oveisi, 2016). Approvals by senior management are often necessary before transitions are made. 

Planning 

In this seventh stage of Prince2 methodology, a checklist of deliverables is reassessed, and risks in the plan examined. It is a repeatable procedure that ensures continuity. 

Closing a Project 

This is the last and final stage of Prince2 project management methodology. No substantial activity is undertaken since the chief task is to affirm that the intended goals have been achieved. In certain projects, it is the phase that marks the transfer of ownership from the project team to operators (Hedman & Lind, 2009). 

The project management methodology that is Prince2 has sizable value in that it offers a comprehensive project management strategy that helps in all project areas with an emphasis on cost-effectiveness and quality. 

Six Sigma 

This project management methodology was developed by the telecommunication company Motorola, Inc. in the 1990s. Its popularity amongst industry players is primarily based on its noted ability to help companies build competitive advantage. The six sigma model has the objectives of helping companies yield productivity, gain higher operating income, defeat reduction, improve customer satisfaction levels, beat the competition, produce continuous improvements, target Six Sigma Standards, and gain market share (Baig, 2016). Six Sigma has undergone a number of adjustments over the years though it remains a fairly systematic technique (DeMast & Lokkerbol, 2012). Six Sigma has several methodologies whereby the focus is given to DMAIC methodology, which stands for define, measure, analyze, improve, and control. 

Define 

This initial component of Six Sigma DMAIC methodology demands that project teams clearly define the project based on customer requirements and expectations and clearly define boundaries (DeMast & Lokkerbol, 2012). Clear identification of objectives is important for boundary determination. 

Measure 

The requirement here is to develop a plan of collecting data and comparing that data to set objectives to identify deficiencies and shortfalls with the view of establishing the current position, 

Analyze 

Entails identifying discrepancies and deficiencies as well as opportunities for the future. It is an opportunity to find where things are but more importantly why they are proceeding in such a manner. 

Improve 

Improvement processes are based on the project manager’s analysis of the project. They seek to incorporate additional insights or offer innovative alternatives (Baig, 2016). Since improving the quality of a product, service or outcome is the overall goal of a project, this is one of the most critical stages in Six Sigma project management (DeMast & Lokkerbol, 2012). 

Control 

This last component aims to ensure that variations are adequately managed to ensure expectations are met. Effective control demand recalibration of systems and structures to ensure hitches are identified and sustainability concerns are addressed. The Six Sigma methodology is relatively simple and eliminates needless and time-consuming steps in project management (Spalek, 2014). This explains its pervasiveness in the financial, construction, engineering, research, and health industries. 

Systems Development Life Cycle (SDLC)/ Application Development Life Cycle 

Computer information systems have brought novel dynamics in the workplace including new ways of information storage. Databases and servers have replaced traditional storage systems and, therefore, presented new frontiers for professionals in project management. Systems development cycle emerged out of a need to define needs, develop solutions, and build on these solutions (Baptista, Santos, & Páscoa, 2016). By emerging out of the information systems field, systems development cycle has had a significant bearing on project management methodologies. Seven phases are followed in this model: Problem identification and planning, systems analysis and requirements, systems design, realization, integration and testing, implementation and maintenance (Karamitsos, Apostolopoulos, & Bugami, 2010). 

Waterfall Method 

The water model, which is also called the waterfall systems development life cycle, is one of the oldest development life cycles and one of the most widely used. Compared to other systems development life cycle, the waterfall model is quite easy, consisting of five phases: system conceptualization, analysis, design, coding, and testing (Hedman & Lind, 2009). 

System conceptualization 

At this level, all business process aspects are examined with the view of establishing which components work together (Casterem, 2017). It is primarily viewed as the planning stage where a problem is identified, and a solution demanded. 

Systems Analysis 

The system team examines all the requirements necessary for the creation of the system. Considerable communication is necessary at this level between the client and the project team to establish the exact nature of the need. It is often referred simply as analysis since it entails collection of data from all relevant sources (Project Manager Institute-PMI, 2013). 

Systems Design 

It is the third stage of the Waterfall model that entails a complete assessment of a system’s physical and logical designs. It entails concentration of needed data into the system and creation of an interface. It is based on what information is intended to be in the system and how the application will be built (Casterem, 2017). Special emphasis is put on how the system will look like. 

Coding 

At this Waterfall stage, the software system is created. All the design elements of the system are examined and executed (Casterem, 2017). It is also known as the realization phase since it entails the solution that has been identified, developed, and installed (Hedman & Lind, 2009) . 

Testing 

It is the last stage of the Waterfall approach. Efficiency and effectiveness concerns are addressed through testing. The aim is to ensure the originally proposed design is what has been created with all the performance expectations. To other researchers, it is known as the use and maintenance phase since its entails replacement of the old system and its maintenance for continued operation (Casterem, 2017). 

Conclusion 

A careful review of the literature on project management methodologies reveals that they were developed to address concerns in specific industries such as information technology, the government or financial sector. Nonetheless, these methodologies have wide application beyond a single area of practice. The cross-cutting thread is that these methodologies seek to enhance output quality while addressing efficiency and effectiveness consideration with the overall goal being project success. In this paper, four project management methodologies have been examined. The Agile approach was developed in the software industry to address glitches with software applications and has now found wide applicability even in the financial sector. The value of this methodology is found in its attention to change, team quality, and overall product quality. The prince2 approach has a long-standing and, therefore, has undergone various revisions in different industries. Its accessible nature confers significant benefits even to the relatively unsophisticated project manager. The paper proceeds to examine Six Sigma, System Development Life Cycle, and Waterfall project management methodologies. To choose a methodology, however, project managers need to take a keen focus on the realities of their organization. For instance, an organization with a large group of needs will typically require a larger methodology. 

References 

Baig, M. U. (2016). Evaluation of project management methodologies in the light of Lean Six Sigma. Research Gate , https://www.researchgate.net/publication/311323556_EVALUATION_OF_PROJECT_MANAGEMENT_METHODOLOGIES_IN_THE_LIGHT_OF_LEAN_SIX_SIGMA_AND_ITS_EFFECTIVENESS_ON_IT. 

Baptista, A., Santos, F., & Páscoa, J. (2016). Project management methodologies as main tool for current challenges in global economy driving historical changes.Nadja Sändig. Journal of Advanced Management Science, 4 (2). 

Casterem, W. V. (2017). The waterfall model and the agile methodologies: A comparison by project characteristics - short. Open Universiteit Nederland . 

DeMast, J., & Lokkerbol, J. (2012). An analysis of Six Sigma DMAIC method from the perspective of problem solving. International Journal of Production Economics, 139 (2). 

Hedman, J., & Lind, M. (2009). Is there only one system development life cycle? Information Systems Development , 105-116. 

Hinde, D. (2012). PRINCE2 Study guide. Sybex: Alameda, California . 

Jamali, G., & Oveisi, M. (2016). A Study on project management based on PMBOK and PRINCE2. Modern Applied Science, 10 (6). 

Karamitsos, I., Apostolopoulos, C., & Bugami, M. (2010). Benefits management process complements other project management methodologies. Journal of Software Engineering and Application (JSEA), 3 (9), 839-844. 

Prabhakar, G. P. (2008). Projects and their management: A literature review. International Journal of Business and Management , 3-9. 

Project Manager Institute-PMI. (2013). Guide to the project management body of knowledge. Project Manager Institute, Newtown Square P. A . 

Spalek, S. (2014). Success factors in project management. Literature review. Proceedings of 8th International Technology, Education and Development Conference , 4428-4835. 

Spundak, M. (2014). Mixed agile/traditional project management methodology – Reality or illusion? Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences .