One of my biggest issues with the ‘Project Management 2.0′ concept is that it is conceptualized around other ’2.0′ concepts like ‘Web 2.0′ and ‘Enterprise 2.0′; both of which are terms that emphasis and denote a technological dimension relating to human interactions. In that context, and following the same logic, PM 2.0 is meant to be denote the application of ’2.0′ technologies to enhance project management capabilities.

A recent article in the Harvard Business Review analyzed the reasons behind the failure of western Intelligence Services to prevent the recent terror attack on an American Airline. The article states that the whole episode represents a “massive failure of collaboration among intelligence and governmental officials”. The facts known about this terror attack are sufficient to conclude that although there was sufficient information to enable an effective prevention of this incident, it lacked nevertheless the final  touch of connecting all the dots and consolidating the known data into effective management information.

The author of the HBR article concludes that despite the US (and other countries) investing in IT systems aimed at supporting the above detection and alert systems, it lacked nevertheless the investment in cultural change necessary to ensure that information is not only collected but is also shared. This, the author says, is a matter of cultural change, one that will encourage and foster not just collaboration but effective collaboration.

An interesting case study is cited by Professor Morten Hansen from the INSEAD institute, where SONY failed to launch an effective competition against the Apple iPod and, despite having a collective know-how and expertise in all aspects of designing and manufacturing an iTunes-iPod hybrid, “it turned out to be a failure because the individual departments did not work in unison”.

In an earlier post I have stated that ‘a fool with a tool is still a tool‘. The premise of that post was that a tool in the hands of an inexperienced user, will not generate the desired results. The observations cited above add another dimension to this claim. they highlight the point that even when used by experienced users, desired results are still dependent on other organizational factors, primarily based around cultural adaptation.

Print Friendly

4 Comments

  1. Twitter Comment


    Collaboration is an attitude not a a tool [link to post]

    Posted using Chat Catcher

    Reply

  2. Twitter Comment


    Chapeau! RT @manuelvl: RT @gedpro: Collaboration is an attitude not a a tool [link to post]

    Posted using Chat Catcher

    Reply

  3. Twitter Comment


    RT @gedpro: Collaboration is an attitude not a a tool [link to post]

    Posted using Chat Catcher

    Reply

  4. Pingback: uberVU - social comments

  5. Pingback: Shim Marom

  6. Pingback: Shim Marom

  7. Pingback: gedpro

  8. Pingback: Tweets that mention Collaboration is an attitude not a a tool | quantmleap -- Topsy.com

  9. Pingback: Manuel A. Velázquez

  10. Pingback: Jezabel González

  11. Pingback: Shim Marom

  12. Pingback: Shim Marom

  13. Pingback: Shim Marom

  14. Pingback: Serge Guézénoc

  15. Pingback: David BATHIELY

  16. Pingback: Collaboration is an attitude not a a tool « quant.M.leap

  17. Pingback: Christian Hennerfehr

  18. Pingback: Shim Marom

  19. Pingback: Adi Prabowo

  20. Twitter Comment


    RT @shim_marom quantmleap: Collaboration is an attitude not a a tool [link to post] #pmot #ftpm #pm

    Posted using Chat Catcher

    Reply

  21. Pingback: Shim Marom

  22. Pingback: fellowstream

  23. Pingback: Shim Marom

  24. Pingback: Tony Collins

  25. Pingback: Shim Marom

  26. Pingback: Purple Projects

  27. Pingback: Eric D. Brown

  28. Pingback: Thomas Balt

  29. Pingback: Karl Goldfield

  30. Pingback: KommandCore Company

  31. Pingback: Hannes Heckner

  32. Pingback: Shim Marom

  33. Pingback: Jo Ann Sweeney

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

%d bloggers like this: