In the early 1990’s the internet existed. It was the name of the association and magazine for the INTERnational NETwork of project managers. Now we know the internet to be something completely different.

Then, a project was defined as something with a beginning a middle and an end. Analogously the approach was akin to painting-by-numbers once you knew what was to be done and how it was to be done then simply hand out the pots of paint each colour to a different role and voila! I famously split the audience and began a ‘bun-fight’ amongst the audience, half agreeing with me and the other half opposed, when, at a conference in Trondhiem, I announced that my research suggested that not all projects had a beginning, middle and end. And then I introduced them to new types such as going on a Quest (where the goal was clear but there was little clarity on methods) but it could still be executed, making a Movie which was the converse of that and being lost in the Fog, my favourite, where the goal and method (and sometimes event eh reason) couldn’t be clarified and yet something had to be done!

And the world has moved on. By the turn of the century in most industries and sectors (even the public sector) the pace and scale (usually global) of change were overtaking the ability of organisations to learn and change. There was a flourishing of my more open project types and yet the response was more painting-by-numbers Prince certification and the growth of the ‘risk industry’ as a way to square the circle of ambiguity. By the end of the noughties these approaches were being supplanted by lean, extreme and agile approaches with exciting brand names which promised to respond to the actual challenges of our real new world. But remember never to let a slogan, catchy title or phrase replace your critical thinking. The new breed still rely on the ‘Archimedean ‘Give me a place to stand I shall move the world’ and Cartesian, linear approach where the process and planning is more important the n the human emotion, engagment and leadership. But there is no place to stand! As the twentyteens take hold, clients morph into multiple stakeholders, projects into change programmes, the global challenges of; sustainability, financial stability and peace will only delivered through effective project and change management and yet still three quarters of projects don’t work or don’t work properly. The world cannot afford this level of waste. And we must ask why if our managers are so professional and our approaches correct there is this level of carnage – this would be intolerable for a surgeon or even the manufacture of a car.
I believe that the reason is that again the world has moved on. Project Management. You can only manage what is there to manage, people resources, plans. When people are affected by change the real story becomes more about the people and less about the things or software being created. In a new world which is complex fast changing and uncertain management has no significant role. Foresight wins. Leadership trumps. This means that the habits and intuition our professional project manager shave honed over the decades will be wrong. The language used in the community will be like talking about cars as horseless carriages a nod to a horse which is no longer relevant or required.

Four years ago a client of mine charged me to see if I could ensure 100% perfect projects. I laughed at the idea. My response was instinctive. Even for me, a well practiced ‘agent provocateur’ and slayer of sacred cows, the idea of “perfect projects” in today’s world seemed preposterous!. But he was right and nine months later I’d developed a set of behaviours, thinking, cultural changes which brought the goal much closer. Much more closely aligned to harnessing extra sensory perception or premonition, projecting into the future, but none of the concepts frame works behaviour or tools m had anything to do with management.
So project management is dead! Long live...