PMBOK® version 6 was released recently and one of the big areas of change is that it has incorporates more guidance about Agile. Does PMBOK version 6 go far enough to integrate Agile? I think that the release of PMBOK version 6 and The Agile Practice Guide is a huge step forward and is a noble attempt to create a more integrated approach for integrating Agile and traditional plan-driven project management. However, the full integration of Agile and traditional project management requires some very major shifts in thinking and it even involves something as fundamental as adopting a much broader definition of what “project management” is.
I don’t think that simply adding some words about Agile to PMBOK is going to be sufficient to bring about the kind of shift in thinking that I think is needed.
What is “Project Management?
The crux of the problem is that for many years the essence of what “project management” is has been centered on some very well-established stereotypes of what “project management is that are based on achieving predictability and repeatability as shown below:
That’s the primary way people have thought about what “project management” is since the 1950’s and 1960’s. A successful project manager is one who could plan and manage a project to meet budgeted cost and schedule goals and that obviously requires an emphasis on planning and control.
The way to achieve predictability and repeatability has been to have a detailed and well-though-out plan and then control any changes to that plan.
Many people loosely refer to this approach as “Waterfall” because, in many cases, it has been implemented by using a sequential phase-gate process. However, I don’t believe that description is entirely accurate and I prefer to refer to it in more general terms as “traditional, plan-driven project management”. (PMI has started using the term “predictive” to describe this kind of project management approach because the emphasis is on predictability).
What’s Wrong With That Definition?
In the 1950’s and 1960’s that approach worked well and it was particularly in high demand for large, complex defense programs that were well-noted for cost and schedule overruns. At that time, the primary goal was to achieve predictability. In fact, that approach has been so prevalent that it has essentially defined what “project management” is since that time and many project managers don’t see any other way to do project management.
The problem with that approach is it only works well in environments that have a fairly low level of uncertainty where it is possible to develop a fairly detailed plan prior to the start of the project.
In today’s world, there are several major factors driving change:
- The environment we live in has a much higher level of uncertainty associated with it which makes it very difficult, if not impossible to develop detailed plans prior to the start of a project in many situations
- Solutions are more complex and are much more difficult to design and optimize
- Competitive pressures demand high levels of creativity and innovation in spite of the level of uncertainty in the environment. Producing high-value business results is more important than predictability in many cases.
This new environment demands a very different kind of project model that looks more like this:
Think of a typical new product today like the next generation of the iPhone. Do you think that a traditional plan-driven approach to project management with an emphasis on predictability, planning, and control would work well to develop that kind of product?
How Are These Two Approaches Different?
The differences in how these two approaches have been defined and implemented in actual practice are very significant:
|Traditional Plan-driven Approach||Agile
|Based on what is called a “Defined Process Control Model” which means that the process is well-defined and is not expected to change over the course of the project.
It is also repeatable and consistent across similar projects.
|Based on what is called an “Empirical Process Control Model“. The word “empirical” means “based on observation”.
That means an adaptive approach where both the product that is being developed and the process to create that product are continuously modified as necessary based on observation as the project is in progress.
|The emphasis of is on planning and control to achieve predictability over project costs and schedules||The emphasis is on using an adaptive approach to maximize business results in an uncertain environment|
|Project management functions are typically implemented by someone with clearly-defined responsibility for that role called a “Project Manager”||The functions that might normally be performed by a “Project Manager” at the team level have typically been distributed among other roles|
|Relies on detailed process guidance such as PMBOK on almost every possible aspect of managing the project||Based on some fairly simple and succinct principles and values (Agile Manifesto)|
|Typically uses a well-defined methodology||Typically based on Scrum which is really more of a framework than a prescriptive methodology|
|Implementation||Following a well-defined plan and process are typically important||Reliant on the judgement, intelligence, and skill of the people doing the project to fit an adaptive approach to the nature of the project|
Is the Agile approach shown above in the right-hand column not “project management? A lot of people would not recognize it as “project management” because it doesn’t fit with many of the well-defined stereotypes of what “project management” is. I contend that it is just a different kind of “project management” that will cause us to broaden our thinking about what “project management” is.
“Project Management” should not be limited to a particular methodology. A project manager should be capable of delivering results using whatever methodology is most appropriate to achieve those results.
Is One Approach Better Than the Other?
There are a lot of Agile enthusiasts out there who will advocate that Agile is a better approach for almost any problem you might have.
My opinion is that saying “Agile is better than Waterfall” is like saying “A car is better than a boat” – they both have advantages and disadvantages depending on the environment that you’re in.
- An Agile approach works best in situations that have a relatively high level of uncertainty where creativity and innovation to find an appropriate solution are more important than predictability. For example, if you were to set out to find a cure for cancer, it would be ridiculous to try to develop a detailed upfront plan for that effort.
- A traditional plan-driven approach works well in situations that have a relatively low level of uncertainty and where predictability, planning, and control is important. For example, if you were building a bridge across a river, it would be equally ridiculous to say “We’ll build the first span of the bridge, see how that comes out , and then we’ll decide how to build the remaining spans.
Are These Two Approaches Mutually-Exclusive?
A lot of people have the mistaken belief that there is a binary and mutually-exclusive choice between “Agile” and “Waterfall”:
- There has been a lot of polarization between the Agile and project management communities for a long time and many people in these two communities have seen these two approaches in conflict with each other
- PMI has treated these two areas as separate and independent domains of knowledge for a long time with little or no integration between the two
It takes a higher level of skill and sophistication to see these two approaches in a fresh new perspective as complementary to each other rather than competitive and to learn how to blend the them together in the right proportions to fit any given situation but it definitely can be done.
Does PMBOK version 6 go far enough to integrate Agile?
I have ordered a final copy of PMBOK Version 6 and haven’t actually seen it yet; however, I have seen early preview editions and I think I understand where it is trying to go. I have several concerns:
- As I’ve mentioned, I think that there is a huge and fundamental shift in thinking that is needed to rethink what “project management” is. I’m not sure that simply adding some words about Agile to PMBOK is going to help people make that shift in thinking to see “project management” in a fundamentally and radically different perspective.
- The whole concept of PMBOK does not seem to be very consistent with an Agile approach:
- Agile is based on some very simple and succinct principles and values and relies very heavily on the training and skill of the people performing the process to interpret those principles and values in the context of a project
- The latest version of PMBOK is over 700 pages long – it’s supposed to be a “guide” but it seems to try to provide a detailed checklist of things to consider for almost any conceivable project management situation
Putting those two things together is like trying to mix oil and vinegar – they just don’t blend together very well and attempting to blend the two approaches at that level doesn’t seem to make much sense to me.
What is the Solution?
This is definitely a challenging problem. It’s sort of like trying to get Christians and Muslims to agree on a unified view of religion. They both believe in God but they have very different ways of worshiping that we’re not likely to change. A similar thing could be said about Agile and traditional plan-driven project management – they both have a common goal of delivering business results but the way each approach goes about doing it is very different.
There are two significant components of the solution to this problem:
- Developing an Integrated View of Project Management – Somehow, we have to create a much more unified view of what “project management” is that fully embraces Agile as well as traditional plan-driven project management. However, modifying PMBOK to totally integrate Agile would be like trying to modify the Koran to totally integrate a view of Christianity into it. It just wouldn’t work at all. If you were to set out to create a unified view of religion, that approach would be ridiculous. A better approach would be to cross-reference the Bible and the Koran to identify areas of similarity and then create an over-arching guide to blend the two approaches together to create a unified view of religion.
I believe that is essentially what PMI has attempted to do with The Agile Practice Guide which I discussed in a separate article. For a long time, PMI has treated Agile and traditional plan-driven project management as separate and independent domains of knowledge with little or no integration between the two areas. The new Agile Practice Guide attempts to bridge that gap and show a more integrated approach to those two areas. I think that is the only reasonable strategy that makes sense.
- Develop a New Breed of Agile Project Managers – This “raises the bar” significantly for the whole project management profession. In my Agile Project Management books, I have often used the analogy of a project manager as a “cook” versus a project manager as a “chef” that was originally developed by Bob Wysocki:
- A good “cook” may have the ability to create some very good meals, but those dishes may be limited to a repertoire of standard dishes, and his/her knowledge of how to prepare those meals may be primarily based on following some predefined recipes out of a cookbook
- A “chef,” on the other hand, typically has a far greater ability to prepare a much broader range of more sophisticated dishes using much more exotic ingredients in some cases. His/her knowledge of how to prepare those meals is not limited to predefined recipes, and in many cases, a chef will create entirely new and innovative recipes for a given situation. The best chefs are not limited to a single cuisine and are capable of combining dishes from entirely different kinds of cuisine
I think that sums up the transformation that needs to take place – Agile “raises the bar for the project management profession significantly and what we need to develop are more project managers who are “chefs” rather than “cooks”. PMBOK is based on a “cookbook” approach to project management and attempting to blend an “Agile” cookbook with PMBOK is not going to make it much better.
This is exactly the challenge that the Agile Project Management training I’ve developed is designed to address.