The role of project management in a fast response organization

Abstract

Abstract In response to fundamental competitive changes in the 1990's, organizations are being redesigned to provide faster responses. Timeliness has become the major competitive objective, while low unit costs and high quality are crucial constraints. To understand the role that project management plays with respect to timeliness, it is useful to observe how two different organizational reaction levels characterize fast response organizations (FRO's). The first reaction level of FRO's is tactical and internal. The emphasis on process-orientation means a just-in-time focus for minimum work-in-process, coordinated vendor deliveries, near-zero defectives, fast repair, appropriate preventive maintenance, rapid changeovers, minimum lead times, and efforts to achieve continuous, value-added production of goods and services. The tactical aspects of FRO's have been covered in the literature. The second action level of FRO's is strategic. Strategies create markets and are technology-driven. The development of new products and processes requires project management methods that are competitive, i.e., fast to learn about and respond to market oppurtunities and emerging technological developments. Since the 1950's, traditional project management methods have emphasized project time reduction, as well as controls for time and costs. This paper explores two new project management approaches that are being used by industry to translate innovative ideas rapidly into better processes, goods and services. The first approach, as in rugby, has many players working together in a fully-coordinated team effort. The goal is to reduce the project development time. This is done by restructuring team assignments so that (within practical limits) everyone knows a great deal about the status of the entire project. Since many stages can be worked on at the same time, we call this simultaneous management of project stages. For this case, milestone triggers are generally not heeded, and there are broad team responsibilities for coordinating project stages. The second approach uses continuous project management, in contrast to single-product project management. With single-product development (such as producing one new car) there is a start-up time, and an ending time that signals the project's termination. Continuous project management, on the other hand, takes the form of an on-going effort to manage a stream of multiple new products (such as the development of a succession of new cars). Teams are permanently assigned to project development activities. Often the goals are targeted incremental improvements, but they also can be directed toward significant “breakthrough” versions to radically alter a previous product design. Since project teams are permanently engaged, there is no project termination, which is why this approach is often called “on- going project management”. The system has a memory for ideas with potential utility that had to be shelved the first time around because they did not fit the schedule and/or match the prior goals. The capacity to reexamine and learn from prior project steps that were taken is very important.