Just as planning is critical to project management, so is the delegation process of choosing who gets to drive day-to-day initiative activities critical to execution management. Politics, personal agendas, and bureaucratic shenanigans almost always feature prominently during delegation processes.
Collaborate: Handling contingency
Of course, the delegation process isn't the only thing that never goes as planned. The unforeseen makes strange bedfellows every day. How those bedfellows collaborate with each other in the face of uncertainty is a major determinant of initiative success.
Project management describes an idealized relationship between resources and results; occasionally, it even describes an idealized view of how resources are transformed into results. Collaborating is the means by which a team tracks the state of work, senses problems, communicates progress among members, and integrates knowledge and creativity into its flow of activity.
Through collaboration, a team sustains focus, structure, and progress. Collaboration relies on a combination of incentives to drive performance. Sometimes these incentives are monetary: performance bonuses, for instance. In IT, the "geek factor" is a big incentive: learning and using new technologies. More often, pride, criticism, leadership, and other hard-to-commensurate human things are what sustains collaboration -- and initiative execution.
Govern: Track and adapt
A friend of mine devoted nine years of her life to becoming a doctor, and after she was done went into philosophy. "Medicine is great, except for the patients," was her explanation. Good for her future patients.
The same can be said about a lot of projects: They'd go great if it weren't for the people responsible for getting things done. At some point in every initiative (at all points, the more cynical among us might argue), external factors, such as career plans (for an individual contributor) or the profit motive (for third-party contributor), become issues that must be anticipated and solved.
Project management provides facilities for reporting on relatively static elements such as budgets, schedules, and goals. It also provides the means of periodically adjusting these three elements, as conditions warrant, and publishing the adjustments. Governing is the means by which: a) we ensure that we're actually achieving the results we want out of a team, and b) minimizing dependencies on any one resource (e.g., a third-party service firm).
Put another way, governance is the means by which the firm makes sure that its whole is greater than the sum of its parts, and that the parts don't go off pursuing their own personal or profit objectives.
翻译为中文！谢谢
第1个回答 2007-05-25
正计划对项目管理至关重要, 如此是选择谁的代表团过程得到驾驶每日主动的活动重要到施行管理。政治、个人议程, 和官僚shenanigans 突出地几乎总以为特色在代表团过程期间。 合作: 处理意外情况 当然, 代表团过程isn't 从未去根据计划的唯一的事。未预见到的牌子奇怪的同床者每天。怎么那些同床者合作互相在不确定性面前是主动的成功一个主要定列式。 项目管理描述一个被理想化的关系在资源和结果之间; 偶尔地, 它甚而描述一个被理想化的看法怎样资源被变换成结果。合作是队跟踪工作状态, 感觉问题, 通信进展在成员之中, 和集成知识和创造性活动它的流程的手段。 通过合作, 队承受焦点, 构造, 和进步。合作依靠刺激的组合驾驶表现。有时这些刺激金钱: 表现奖金, 例如。在它, "geek factor" 是一个大刺激: 学会和使用新技术。经常, 自豪感、批评、领导, 和其它坚硬对比照人的事是什么承受合作-- 和主动的施行。 治理: 跟踪和适应 我的朋友致力了九年她的生活于成为医生, 和在她做了之后进入哲学。"Medicine 是伟大的, 除了患者, " 是她的解释。好为她的未来患者。 同样可能说关于很多项目: They'd 是伟大如果它weren't 为人民负责任对得到事做。在每主动性(在所有点, 玩事不恭在我们之中威力争论), 外在因素, 譬如事业计划(为一个单独贡献者) 或谋利动机(为第三方贡献者), 必须被期望和被解决的成为的问题。 项目管理为报告提供设施在相对地静态元素譬如预算、日程表, 和目标。它并且提供阶段性地调整这些三个元素手段, 如同情况保证, 和出版调整。治理是的手段: a) 我们保证,we're 实际上达到我们要在队外面的结果, 并且b) 使减到最小的附庸在任一一种资源(即,一个第三方服务企业) 。 投入其它方式, 统治是企业确信的手段, 它整体大于它的部分的总和, 并且零件don't 去追求他们自己的个人或赢利宗旨。
