Project Management Office - Typology and Benefits

• Autorzy: Velimir Tasic

Warianty tytułu

Biuro projektów - typologia i korzyści tworzenia

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

This paper formulates a research approach based on the experience of practitioners with more than fifteen years of project management (PM) experience. The author explores the created assumptions of a project management office (PMO), which underlie this research, and provides a research literature review of specific PM research originating from this perspective. The author concludes by summarizing the findings of expert interviews and providing questions into the way ahead of future research. In this way, attention is refocused on PMO learned lessons, context-dependent judgment, situational ethics and reflexivity which enables PM stakeholders to see how the relations function in the context of PMO typology and benefits.(original abstract)

W artykule zaprezentowane zostało podejście badawcze wynikające z ponad piętnastoletnich doświadczeń zarządzania projektami (Project Management PM) Autor prezentuje założenia dla tworzenia biura zarządzania projektem (PMO), które leżą u podstaw tego podejścia. W artykule dokonano przeglądu literatury poświęconej prezentacji badań dotyczących istoty tworzenia PMO w procesie zarządzania projektami. W podsumowaniu artykułu autor przedstawia wnioski dotyczące opinii ekspertów na temat typologii oraz korzyści wynikających z tworzenia biur zarządzania projektami.(abstrakt oryginalny)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Project management; Project management office

PL

Zarządzanie projektem; Biuro zarządzania projektami

• Czasopismo: Informatyka Ekonomiczna / Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny we Wrocławiu
• Rocznik: 2014
• Numer: nr 1 (31)
• Strony: 173--182

Twórcy

autor

Velimir Tasic

• University of Warsaw, Poland

Bibliografia

• Andersen E.S., 2006, Toward a project management theory for renewal projects, "Project Management Journal", vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 15-30.
• Aubry M., Hobbs B., Müller R., Blomquist T., 2010, Identifying forces driving PMO changes, "Project Management Journal", vol. 41, pp. 30-45.
• Aubry M., Hobbs B., Thuillier D., 2007, A new framework for understanding organisational project management through the PMO, "International Journal of Project Management", vol. 25, Issue 4, May 2007, pp. 328-336.
• Aubry M., Hobbs B., Thuillier D., 2009, The contribution of the project management office to organizational performance, "International Journal of Managing Projects in Business", vol. 2, Issue 1, pp. 141-148.
• Aubry M., Müller R., Hobbs B., Blomquist T., 2010, Project management offices in transition, International Journal of Project Management, vol. 28, Issue 8, pp. 766-778.
• Crawford L., 2006, Developing organizational project management capability: Theory and practice, "Project Management Journal", vol. 37(3), pp. 74-86.
• Crawford L.H., 2010, Deconstructing the PMO, http://www.economia.uniroma2.it/euram/pa per_view.php?id=1541p=10, Paper presented at the EURAM 2010, Rome (4.10.2014).
• Curlee W., 2008, Modern virtual project management: The effects of a centralized and decentralized project management office, "Project Management Journal" vol. 39: S83-S96.
• Desouza K.C., Evaristo J.R., 2006, Project management offices: A case of knowledge-based archetypes, "International Journal of Information Management", vol. 26, I. 5, pp. 414-423.
• Hill G.M., 2004, Evolving the project management office: A competency continuum, "Information Systems Management", 21(4), pp. 45-51.
• Hobbs B., Aubry M., 2007, A multiphase research program investigating project management offices (PMOs): The results of phase 1, "Project Management Journal", vol. 38(1), pp. 74-86.
• Hobbs B., Aubry M., 2008, An empirically grounded search for a typology of project management offices, "Project Management Journal", vol. 39: S69-S82.
• Hobbs B., Aubry M., 2010, The project management office or PMO: A quest for understanding, Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
• Hobbs B., Aubry M., Thuillier D., 2008, The project management office as an organisational innovation, "International Journal of Project Management", vol. 26, Issue 5, pp. 547-555.
• Hurt M., Thomas J.L., 2009, Building value through sustainable project management offices, "Project Management Journal", vol. 40(1), pp. 55-72.
• Jamieson A., Morris P.W.G., 2007, Moving From Corporate Strategy to Project Strategy, in The Wiley Guide to Managing Projects, eds. P.W.G. Morris, J.K. Pinto, John Wiley Sons, Inc., Hoboken, NJ, USA.
• Karrbom Gustavsson T., Hallin A., 2014, Rethinking dichotomization: A critical perspective on the use of "hard" and "soft" in project management research, "International Journal of Project Management", vol. 32, Issue 4, pp. 568-577.
• Maylor H., 2006, Special Issue on rethinking project management (EPSRC network 2004-2006), "International Journal of Project Management", vol. 24, Issue 8, pp. 635-637.
• Mintzberg H., 1979, The structuring of organizations: A synthesis of the research, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice Hall.
• Müller R., Glückler J., Aubry M., 2013, A Relational Typology of Project Management Offices, "Project Management Journal", vol. 44, pp. 59-76.
• Müller R., Glückler J., Aubry M., Shao J., 2013, Project Management Knowledge Flows in Networks of Project Managers and Project Management Offices: A Case Study in the Pharmaceutical Industry, "Project Management Journal", vol. 44, pp. 4-19.
• Pellegrinelli S., Garagna L., 2009, Towards a conceptualisation of PMOs as agents and subjects of change and renewal, "International Journal of Project Management", vol. 27, Issue 7, pp. 649-656.
• Pemsel S., Wiewiora A., 2013, Project management office a knowledge broker in project-based organisations, "International Journal of Project Management", vol. 31, Issue 1, pp. 31-42.
• PMI, 2012, WHITE PAPER, The Project Management Office, In Sync with Strategy. Project Management Institute (i. The State of the PMO 2010, PM Solutions. Results based on more than 290 respondents from around the world and across a variety of industries, including PMO leaders, team members, project and program managers. ii. 2011 Pulse of the Profession, Project Management Institute. Results based on a survey of more than 1,000 PMI members and credential holders. iii. The Global State of the PMO: Its Value, Effectiveness and Role as the Hub of Training, ESI, March 2011. Results based on a survey of more than 3,700 respondents from around the world. iv. The State of the PMO in 2011, Forrester Research. Results based on an online survey of 693 PMO leaders conducted from April to May 2011 in conjunction with PMI's Program Management Office Community of Practice).
• Project Management Institute (PMI), (2013). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide)-Fifth Edition, p.11.
• Rose K.H., 2012, Identifying the Forces Driving Frequent Change in PMOs, "Project Management Journal", vol. 43, pp. 103.
• Unger B.N., Gemünden H.G., Aubry M., 2012, The three roles of a project portfolio management office: Their impact on portfolio management execution and success, "International Journal of Project Management", vol. 30, Issue 5, pp. 608-620.
• Van de Ven A.H., 2007, Engaged scholarship: Creating knowledge for science and practice, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
• Xiaoyi Dai Ch., Wells W.G., 2004, An exploration of project management office features and their relationship to project performance, "International Journal of Project Management", vol. 22, Issue 7, pp. 523-532.
• DM (2014) - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/typology (4.17.2014).
• OD (2014) - http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/typology (4.17.2014).
• DR (2014) - http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Simplicity?s=t (4.17.2014).

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.15611/ie.2014.1.14