Discuss recent trends and methods for managing software-intensive and creative projects undertaken on top of either mass produced or CoPS platforms.

Managing Complex Projects,

Products and Systems (890N1)

15 Credits, M Level

MSc Core/Option Module

Spring Term 2016

 

 

Module outline

 

1 Introduction: Complex Projects, Products and Systems
2 The dynamics of innovation in complex products and systems
3 Project management: critical views
4 Business strategy and project capability
5 Systems integration and competitive advantage
6 Reading week
7 The project-based organisation
8 Managing software-intensive projects
9 Managing knowledge and learning in the project business
10 Delivering integrated solutions for customers
11 Megaprojects and risks
12 Sustainability in the Management of Projects

Aims

Complex, high-technology capital goods play a vital role in the modern economy and are increasingly fundamental to the competitive advantage of firms, industries and countries. This module aims to introduce students to a range of issues concerned with how innovation is managed in the supply of complex products and systems (CoPS). As a high-technology subset of capital goods, CoPS are high-cost, engineering and software-intensive products, systems, networks, infrastructure, constructs and services. Examples include aircraft, aero-engines, IT systems, telecommunication networks, flight simulators, high-speed trains, air traffic control systems, and intelligent buildings.

Because the traditional innovation literature is largely concerned with high-volume consumer products, this module introduces students to the new concepts, frameworks and empirical research required to understand the dynamics of innovation processes in CoPS. In contrast to mass produced consumer goods, CoPS are produced on a project basis as one-offs or in small batches to meet the particular needs of large business or government customers.

Project Management is an important capability for the development and production of CoPS. Also, the project has a predominant role as a coordination mechanism for the development and production of complex goods and services for global competitive markets. Thus, it will be discussed in this module some critical views of the traditional approach to project planning and control, in order to provide students with frameworks, tools and techniques to apply in ‘complex’ projects delivering CoPS. Hence, this module is concerned with managing complex projects, products and systems (CoPPS).

The module will address three central issues:

  • Organizational capabilities: how organizational forms and capabilities in project management, systems integration and software engineering are essential in the design and production of CoPS. Special emphasis will be given to project management capabilities.
  • Models of innovation: how industrial structures, product life cycles and innovation management in CoPS differ from the ‘conventional’ model of innovation often based on the mass production of consumer goods.
  • Firm strategy: how firms are changing their strategic positions, building new service capabilities and creating customer-centric organisations to provide bundles of products and services as integrated solutions to their customers’ needs.

These issues will be addressed from two main perspectives:

  • A management perspective – concerned with the management of projects, organizational forms (functional, matrix and project) and the development of organizational capabilities in CoPS.
  • An innovation perspective – concerned with theoretical and empirical differences between the dynamics of innovation in CoPS and other volume produced products (e.g. commodity goods)

Module material is driven by research conducted in SPRU and CENTRIM (University of Brighton) by the ESRC CoPS Innovation Centre. The module draws upon a range of different disciplines and theoretical perspectives such as innovation studies, project management, history of technology, systems engineering, and the resource-based theory of the firm.

objectives and Learning Outcomes

 

  • Critically evaluate the traditional approach to project management, comparing with complex projects for CoPS delivery;

 

  • Understand how organisational capabilities for CoPS production may differ from those for the production of mass market products and services;

 

  • Identify and understand recent trends and methods for managing software-intensive and creative projects undertaken on top of either mass produced or CoPS platforms;

 

  • Apply tools for thought and action for managing projects in general: ‘simpler’, complex and for the delivery of CoPS.

By the end of the module, the successful student will be able to:

During the module, students will also have opportunities to develop their presentation, individual and team-based skills.

Module Organization

Organization: Module work

The module work is divided into two parts.

The first part involves a presentation every week of key issues addressed by the literature. This will take the form of an introductory lecture made by the module convenor or another specialist researcher who has worked on the topic. The module timetable for weekly presentations (lectures) and readings are included at the end of this document. Further information is available in the module website in Study Direct.

The second part is a seminar every other week. Students will be expected to read and comment on key texts from the reading list and apply these ideas during class exercises which include group work and individual research on projects. In the group work sessions, teams will address specific questions (product profiles, managing technological innovation and learning across sectors) raised by lectures and specific case studies and present back to the class. Exercises and case studies provide an opportunity to practice different management tools, approaches and techniques. The module timetable for seminars (every other week), their topics and methods are included at the end of this document. Further information is available in the module website in Study Direct.

The group work and individual research introduce students to some of the practical issues involved in the management of projects, systems integration and software development. Breaking the group up into teams maximizes interaction and provides an in-depth appreciation of the management tools and techniques involved, with an opportunity to practice them in case study exercises.

Organization: Lectures and Reading

Information about the lectures and readings is provided in the attached lists. The reading list includes: required texts which students must read to understand the subject of the lecture. Students are encouraged to read as much of the recommended readings as possible in order to gain a full understanding of the underlying theoretical and practical issues related to innovation management in CoPS and project management.

Assessment

Students may receive informal assessment on their seminar presentations and workshop exercises. Formal assessment is made on the basis of a term paper (please check requirements and deadline in Study Direct and Sussex Direct).

BMEc MSc Courses: Spring Core/Option Module 2016

MANAGING COMPLEX PROJECTS, PRODUCTS AND SYSTEMS

LECTURES – Reading List

 

WEEK

 

REQUIRED READINGS

 

RECOMMENDED READINGS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1

 

Davies, A. and Hobday, M. (2005). The Business of Projects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chapter 1.

 

Kerzner, H. (2013) Project Management: a Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling. 11th Edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Chapters 1 and 2.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hobday, M., Rush, H. and Tidd, J. (2000), ‘Innovation in complex products and systems’, editorial, Research Policy, ‘Special Issue: Innovation in Complex Products and Systems’, 29, 793-804.

 

Miller, R., Hobday, M., Leroux-Demers, T. & Olleros, X. (1995), ‘Innovation in complex system industries: the case of flight simulators’, Industrial and Corporate Change, Vol. 4, No. 2, 363-400.

 

Acha, V., Davies, A., Hobday, M. and Salter, A. J. (2004), ’Exploring the capital goods economy: complex product systems in the UK’, Industrial and Corporate Change, Vol. 13, No. 3, 505-529.

 

Crawford, L. and Pollack, J. (2007), ‘How generic are project management knowledge and practice?’, Project Management Journal, Vol. 38, No. 1, 87-96.

 

Thomas, J. and Mullaly, M. (2007), ‘Understanding the Value of Project Management: First Steps on an International Investigation in Search of Value’, Project Management Journal, Vol. 38, No. 3, 74-89.

 

Floricel, S., Michela, J. L. and Piperca, S. (2016), ‘Complexity, uncertainty-reduction strategies, and project performance’, International Journal of Project Management, in Press, available online 8 January 2016.

 

 

 

 

 

2

 

Davies, A and Hobday, M. (2005). The Business of Projects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chapter 2.

 

 

Gann, D. and Salter, A. (2000), ‘Innovation in project-based, service-enhanced firms: the construction of complex products and systems’, Research Policy, ‘Special Issue: Innovation in Complex Products and Systems’, 29, 955-972.

 

Keegan, A. and Turner, J.R. (2002), ‘The management of innovation in project-based firms’, Long Range Planning, 35, 367-388.

 

 

 

 

3

 

 

 

 

 

Shenhar, A., Dvir, D. (2007). Reinventing Project Management: Diamond Approach to Successful Growth and Innovation. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Chapters 1 to 7.

 

 

 

 

 

Shenhar, A., Dvir, D. et al. (2005). ‘Toward a NASA-Specific Project Management Framework’, Engineering Management Journal, Vol. 17, No. 4, 8-16.

 

Cicmil, S. and D.E. Hodgson (2006). ‘New possibilities for project management theory: a critical engagement’, Project Management Journal, Vol. 37 No.3, 111-122.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Shenhar, A.J and Dvir, D. (1996), ‘Toward a typological theory of project management’, Research Policy, Vol.25, No. 4, 607-632.

 

Williams, T. M. (1999), ‘The need for new paradigms for complex projects’, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 17, No. 5, 269-273.

 

 

Cicmil, S., Williams, T., Thomas, J. and Hodgson, D. (2006), ‘Rethinking Project Management: Researching the Actuality of Projects’, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 24, No. 8, 675-686.

 

Andersen, E. S. (1996), ‘Warning: activity planning is hazardous to your project’s health!’, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 14, No.2, 89-94.

 

Chatzoglou, P.D. and Macaulay, L.A. (1996). ‘A review of existing models for project planning and estimation and the need for a new approach’, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 14, No. 3, 173-183.

 

Morris, P.W.G. (1994), chapter 8 ‘The Management of Projects: the new model’, pp272 in The Management of Projects, Thomas Telford, London.

 

Matta, N. E. and Ashkenas, R.N. (2003), ‘Why good projects fail anyway’, Harvard Business Review, September 2003, Vol. 81, No. 9, 109-114.

 

Royer, I. (2003), ‘Why bad projects are so hard to kill’, Harvard Business Review, February 2003, Vol. 81, No. 2, 48-56.

 

 

 

4

 

 

 

Davies, A. and Hobday, M. (2005). The Business of Projects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chapter 3.

 

 

Morris, P., Jamieson, A. (2005), ‘Moving from Corporate Strategy to Project Strategy’. Project Management Journal, Vol. 36, No 4, 5 – 18.

Artto, K., Kujala, J., Dietrich, P., Martinsuo, M. (2008), ‘What is Project Strategy?’ International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 26, Issue 1, 4-12.

Brady, T., Davies, A. (2014), ‘Managing Structural and Dynamic Complexity: A Tale of Two Projects’, Project Management Journal, Vol. 45, Issue 4, 21-38.

Maylor, H., Turner, N., Murray-Webster, R. (2015), ‘”It worked for manufacturing…!”: Operations strategy in project-based operations’, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 33, Issue 1, 103-115.

Davies, A., Brady, T. (2016), ‘Explicating the dynamics of project capabilities’, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 34, Issue 2, 314-327.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5

 

Davies, A and Hobday, M. (2005). The Business of Projects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chapter 4.

 

Prencipe, A., Davies, A., and Hobday, M. (2003). The Business of Systems Integration. Oxford University Press. Chapters 1 and 16.

 

 

 

 

 

Brusoni, S. and Prencipe, A. (2001), ‘Unpacking the Black Box of Modularity: Technology, Products and Organisation, Industrial and Corporate Change, Vol. 10, No. 1, 179-205.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chesbrough, H. (2003), ‘Towards a Dynamics of Modularity: A Cyclical Model of Technical Advance’, chapter 10 pp174-198, Prencipe, A. et al. (eds), The Business of Systems Integration, Oxford University Press.

 

Davies, A., Gann, D., Douglas, T. (2009). ‘Innovation in Megaprojects: Systems Integration at London Heathrow Terminal 5’, California Management Review, Vol. 51, No. 2, 101-125.

 

 

6 Reading week Reading week
 

 

 

 

7

Davies, A and Hobday, M. (2005). The Business of Projects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chapter 5.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Galbraith, J. R. (1971), ‘Matrix organization designs: How to combine functional and project forms’, Business Horizons, February, 29-40.

Middleton, C.J. (1967), ‘How to Set Up a Project Organization’, Harvard Business Review, March-April 1967, 73-82.

Szulanski, G. and Winter, S. (2002) ‘Getting it Right the Second Time’, Harvard Business Review, January, 62-69.

 

 

8

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Davies, A and Hobday, M. (2005). The Business of Projects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chapter 6.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Boehm, B.W. and Ross, R., (1989), ‘Theory-W Software Project Management: Principles and Examples’, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 15, No. 7, July, 902-916.

 

Boehm, B. (1996), ‘Anchoring the Software Process’, IEEE Software, July, 73-82.

 

Konrad, M., Chrissis, M. B., Ferguson, J., Garcia, S., Hefley, B., Kitson, D., Paulk, M. (1996), ‘Capability Maturity ModelingSM at the SEI’, Software Process: Improvement and Practice, Vol. 2, Issue 1, 21-34.

 

Sauer, C. and Reich, B.H. (2009), ‘Rethinking IT Project Management: Evidence of a new mindset and its implications’, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 27, No. 2, 182-193.

 

 

 

 

9

 

 

 

 

Davies, A and Hobday, M. (2005). The Business of Projects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chapter 7.

 

Brady, T. and Davies, A. (2004). ‘Building project capabilities: from exploratory to exploitative learning’, Organization Studies, 26 (9), 1601-1621.

 

 

Davies, A. and Brady, T. (2000), ‘Organisational Capabilities and Learning in Complex Product Systems: Towards Repeatable Solutions’, Research Policy, ‘Special Issue: Innovation in Complex Products and Systems’, 29, 931-953.

 

Prencipe, A. and Tell, F. (2001), ‘Inter-project learning: Processes and outcomes of knowledge codification in project-based firms’, Research Policy, 30, 1373-1394.

 

Keegan, A. and Turner, J.R. (2001), ‘Quantity versus quality in project-based learning practices’, Management Learning, 32 (1), 77-98.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10

 

 

 

 

Davies, A and Hobday, M. (2005). The Business of Projects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chapter 8.

 

 

 

Wise, R. and Baumgartner, P. (1999) ‘Go Downstream: The New Profit Imperative in Manufacturing’, Harvard Business Review, pp133-141 September-October 1999.

 

 

Davies, A. (2004), ‘Moving base into high-value integrated solutions: a value stream approach’, Industrial and Corporate Change, Vol. 13, No. 5, 727-756.

 

Brady, T., Davies, A., Gann, D. M. (2005), ‘Creating value by delivering integrated solutions’, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 23, Issue 5, 360-365.

 

Davies, A., Brady, T. and Hobday, M. (2006), ‘Charting a path toward integrated solutions’, MIT Sloan Management Review, Spring 2006, Vol. 47, No. 3: 39

 

Davies, A. Brady, T. and Hobday, M. (2007), ‘Organizing for Solutions: Systems seller vs. systems integrator’, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 36, Issue 2, 183-193

 

Galbraith, J. R. (2002), ‘Organising to Deliver Solutions’. Organizational Dynamics, 31 (2), 194-207.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

11

 

Flyvbjerg, B., Bruzelius, N., Rothengatter, W. (2003). Megaprojects and Risks: An anatomy of ambition. Cambridge University Press. Chapter 1.

 

Bruzelius, N., Flyvbjerg, B., Rothengatter, W. (2002). ‘Big decisions, big risks. Improving accountability in mega projects’, Transport Policy, Vol. 9, Issue 2, 143-154.

 

 

 

Van Marrewijk, A., Clegg, S.R., Pitsis, T.S., Veenswijk, M. (2008). ‘Managing public-private megaprojects: Paradoxes, complexity and project design’, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 26, Issue 6, 591-600.

 

Van Marrewijk, A. (2007). ‘Managing project culture: The case of Environ Megaproject’, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 25, Issue 3, 290-299.

 

Miller, R., Hobbs, B. (2005). ‘Governance Regimes for Large Complex Projects’, Project Management Journal, Vol. 36, No. 3, 42-50.

 

Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). ‘From Nobel Prize to Project Management: Getting Risks Right’, Project Management Journal, Vol. 37, No. 3, 5-15.

 

Gil, N., Miozzo, M., Massini, S. (2012) ‘The Innovation Potential of New Infrastructure Development: An Empirical Study of Heathrow Airport’s T5 Project’, Research Policy, Vol. 41, No. 2, 452-466.

 

Brady, T., Davies, A. (2010), ‘From hero to hubris – Reconsidering the project management of Heathrow’s Terminal 5’, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 28, Issue 2, 151-157.

 

Brady, T., Davies, A., Nightingale, P. (2012) “Dealing with uncertainty in complex projects: revisiting Klein and Meckling”, International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, Vol. 5 Issue 4, 718 – 736

 

Patanakul, P., Kwak, Y. H., Zwikael, O., Liu, M. (2016), ‘What impacts the performance of large-scale government projects?’, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 34, Issue 3, 452-466.

12 TBD TBD

 

SEMINARS

Seminar session Week Topic* Method Refer to lecture topic of week
1 2 or 3 Identifying and characterising Complex Products and Systems Group presentation + Q&A 1
2 4 or 5 Critical analysis of complex projects Group presentation + Q&A 3
3 7 or 8 Challenges of Systems Integration in project environment Video + discussion 5
4 9 or 10 Managing complex systems integration and software project Role play 5 and 8
5 11 or 12 Coursework Discussion Refer to coursework brief and marking criteria

 

* Topic of the seminar follows the lecture

Writing well and avoiding academic misconduct
Plagiarism, collusion, and cheating in exams are all forms of academic misconduct which the University takes very seriously.

Every year, some students commit academic misconduct unintentionally because they did not know what was expected of them. The consequences for committing academic misconduct can be severe, so it is important that you familiarise yourself with what it is and how to avoid it.

The University’s S3 guide to study skills gives advice on writing well, including hints and tips on how to avoid making serious mistakes. You will also find helpful guides to referencing properly and improving your critical writing skills. Make use of the resources there.

If you are dealing with difficult circumstances, such as illness or bereavement, do not try to rush your work or hand in something which may be in breach of the rules. Instead you should seek confidential advice from the Student Life Centre. The full University rules on academic misconduct are set out in the Examination and Assessment Regulations Handbook.

Place a similar order with us or any form of academic custom essays related subject and it will be delivered within its deadline. All assignments are written from scratch based on the instructions which you will provide to ensure it is original and not plagiarized. Kindly use the calculator below to get your order cost; Do not hesitate to contact our support staff if you need any clarifications.

Type of paper Academic level Subject area
Number of pages Paper urgency Cost per page:
 Total:

Whatever level of paper you need – college, university, research paper, term paper or just a high school paper, you can safely place an order.

Page Navigation