Project Execution

As people learn about something, they presume they actually know and understand the subject and apply their knowledge to new situations. In reading Pell’s article, I was stuck by his description of the ‘top thinkers in project management today’ (Pells, 2010). The arrogance apparent in his comments about the characteristics of these ‘top thinkers’ was apparent. It would seem that determining the top thinkers in a group to be akin to determining the most beautiful person in a group. It is in the eye of the beholder and as such, is an opinion not based on any sort of analysis of facts. It certainly seemed like Mr. Pell was unhappy with his (and others) lack of inclusion. Pells makes his point regarding arrogance and brings up very real issues with arrogance in project management and organizations. To paraphrase Pells, arrogance in a project manager (or an organization) can bring about such negative issues as: undervaluing expertise and experience, encouraging inappropriate shortcuts, and thus increasing risks. When planning a project, the organization and the project manager need to be careful and plan and monitor projects carefully and analytically in order to avoid arrogance (Pells 2010). The problem of project manager arrogance is a very human one. As people learn about something, they presume they actually know and understand the subject and apply their knowledge to new situations, sometimes well and sometimes poorly. In order to minimize the poor application of that knowledge, as pointed out by Krock (2010), managers cannot be right every time on every subject and they need to recognize this and make decisions based on sound, rational analysis and not rely

Here the writer introduces the reader to the situation to set the stage for his premise or thesis statement. Knowledge of the reading is presented followed by the writer’s comprehension of what the reading is about. Application of the understanding of the material is shown to prepare for the analysis and then the premise is broken down into parts and reviewed. Finally, the analysis is synthesized into a drawn conclusion from the analysis. But this is just an opinion unless it (the conclusion) is tested. This is called evaluation, using a different perspective from that used in the analysis to validate that the conclusion drawn by the writer from the analysis is supported by a different source reference or example.

on their ‘instinct’, or snap judgments because those judgments can be based on their own emotional response to the subject at hand and not sound, rational analysis.

References

Pells, D. (2010). The dangers of arrogance in project management. PM World Today.

August, 2010 (Vol. XII, Issue VIII). Retrieved August 6, 2010 from

http://www.pmworldtoday.net

Krock, E. (August 16, 2010) Product Management tips and best practices: humility, agile

product and project management blog web site Retrieved on February 10, 2011 from

http://www.voximate.com/blog/article/89/product-management-tips-best-practices-

humility/