DTU ProjectLab - User contributions [en-gb]

Talk:Portfolio Management and complexity in organizations

2015-09-29T13:48:27Z

S142899:

--->Answer to the feedback:
[== ALL THE FEEDBACK WILL BE CONSIDERED AND CHANGED AS SOON AS I HAND IN THE ARTICLE FOR ALL THE REVIEWERS! DUE TO UNEXPECTED REASONS I WILLHAVE TO HAND IT IN LATER THAN TODAY--THANK YOU FOR YOUR FEEDBACK! ==]]

Username : Michaelnguyendtu <br>
Review 1: <br>

Hello, as an overall perspective the article is very well written, and you have a great knowledge about the theory. On the other hands you still need the last details as literature, references, figures and layout to make it complete. Good work!
Formal aspects
*The article has an overall good academically sound to it, which makes it pleasant to read!
*Short and precise sentences which makes the article easy to read. Grammar in the article is also very neat!
*The structure is at this point good; however sub headlines in the final version would make it easier to navigate.
* For the layout in the chapter: Goals of Portfolio Management, it would maybe be “easier for the eye” to look at by using line break between the numbers 1-5.
*As this is a draft I am sure that the final version would have figures to illustrate some of the point, if not this could be a consideration.
*Annotated bibliography is at this point missing as you have also stated, important also to remember to attach some description to these.
Content
* The article is less than the required amount of words which makes room for more if you feel something is still missing.
*The “Scope definition” could maybe have a more concrete description what the article exactly is to “discover”?

Group 10: Marazaki Ilektra s142899
Portfolio Management and complexity in organizations

--->Answer to the feedback:
[== ALL THE FEEDBACK WILL BE CONSIDERED AND CHANGED AS SOON AS I HAND IN THE ARTICLE FOR ALL THE REVIEWERS! DUE TO UNEXPECTED REASONS I WILLHAVE TO HAND IT IN LATER THAN TODAY--THANK YOU FOR YOUR FEEDBACK! ==]]

Reviewer 2: s141592

To begin with,in general this article is very clear and every one can understand the purpose of the article without knowing much about Portfolio Management.

Formal aspects:

*This article is free of grammatical errors or spelling errors.
*The most of the sentences are very clear but some of them should be shorter instead of long winded.
*By reading this you can understand the meaning of the article.
*The article is written formal and it follows the wiki standards.

Content aspects:

*I do not think that it is an article is helpful for practitioner because it describes Portfolio Management from a very general view.
*The size of the article is perfect,not too long or too short.Everyone can read it without being board or not understanding.
*Most of the parts are pretty tied together and you can notice the escalation of the parts very clear.
*The summary contains the most of the parts that you will meat in the article.
*The article also provides many sources and several studies and practical cases.
*The article does not contain bibliography.
*I do not think that the article seems to be copy and paste because by reading it you can notice the authors mentality.

Talk:Portfolio Management and complexity in organizations

2015-09-29T13:47:37Z

S142899:

Answer to the feedback:
[== ALL THE FEEDBACK WILL BE CONSIDERED AND CHANGED AS SOON AS I HAND IN THE ARTICLE FOR ALL THE REVIEWERS! DUE TO UNEXPECTED REASONS I WILLHAVE TO HAND IT IN LATER THAN TODAY--THANK YOU FOR YOUR FEEDBACK! ==]]

Username : Michaelnguyendtu <br>
Review 1: <br>

Hello, as an overall perspective the article is very well written, and you have a great knowledge about the theory. On the other hands you still need the last details as literature, references, figures and layout to make it complete. Good work!
Formal aspects
*The article has an overall good academically sound to it, which makes it pleasant to read!
*Short and precise sentences which makes the article easy to read. Grammar in the article is also very neat!
*The structure is at this point good; however sub headlines in the final version would make it easier to navigate.
* For the layout in the chapter: Goals of Portfolio Management, it would maybe be “easier for the eye” to look at by using line break between the numbers 1-5.
*As this is a draft I am sure that the final version would have figures to illustrate some of the point, if not this could be a consideration.
*Annotated bibliography is at this point missing as you have also stated, important also to remember to attach some description to these.
Content
* The article is less than the required amount of words which makes room for more if you feel something is still missing.
*The “Scope definition” could maybe have a more concrete description what the article exactly is to “discover”?

Group 10: Marazaki Ilektra s142899
Portfolio Management and complexity in organizations

Reviewer 2: s141592

Answer to the feedback:
[== ALL THE FEEDBACK WILL BE CONSIDERED AND CHANGED AS SOON AS I HAND IN THE ARTICLE FOR ALL THE REVIEWERS! DUE TO UNEXPECTED REASONS I WILLHAVE TO HAND IT IN LATER THAN TODAY--THANK YOU FOR YOUR FEEDBACK! ==]]

To begin with,in general this article is very clear and every one can understand the purpose of the article without knowing much about Portfolio Management.

Formal aspects:

*This article is free of grammatical errors or spelling errors.
*The most of the sentences are very clear but some of them should be shorter instead of long winded.
*By reading this you can understand the meaning of the article.
*The article is written formal and it follows the wiki standards.

Content aspects:

*I do not think that it is an article is helpful for practitioner because it describes Portfolio Management from a very general view.
*The size of the article is perfect,not too long or too short.Everyone can read it without being board or not understanding.
*Most of the parts are pretty tied together and you can notice the escalation of the parts very clear.
*The summary contains the most of the parts that you will meat in the article.
*The article also provides many sources and several studies and practical cases.
*The article does not contain bibliography.
*I do not think that the article seems to be copy and paste because by reading it you can notice the authors mentality.

Talk:Application of Antifragility in Project Management

2015-09-22T21:35:31Z

S142899:

Josef: Hello, I really like your idea of looking at antifragility and its application in project management. However, I am not entirely sure if your discussion of "simulating failure scenarios" and "upside/downside risks" fits the heading. If you look at our PMI whitepaper, you will find a few categories/principles of Antifragiltiy and their application to project management. Nassim Taleb's book (which I reckon you must read if you were to write about Antifragility) contains many more possible points of "connection". I suggest to take that as a "point of departure", and see what you can apply how to project management.

=Feedback of s141506, Reviewer 2=

== Structure ==

* I didn't find really any grammar mistakes which is good.
* Are the first chapters part of abstract or introduction or what.. You could elaborate little bit more with headings in the start so it would be easier to reader to follow the text.
* In the article there is often mentioned number 1 and then bulletpoints. For example the chapter''' The definition of a good system is '''. Is it suppose be like this and also the other same kind of chapters?
*Maybe samekind conclusion in the end would wrap the text better together. Now it is little bit scattered in different parts.

== Content==

* Having the aviation of one example for antifragility is very good. It gives reader immediately better understanding of the whole consept.
*Pictures are nice looking and simple but still informative. Reader can easily understand what write have wanted to show with the picture.
* Like I wrote in structure that try to use more headings.
* You have used much New York Times articles as reference, it can be quite one-sided.

== Overall==

* Good article about subject that for me personal didn't have much information.

==(S142899_I am not aware of whether I am reviewer ½ or 3)==

*Summary of the references are missing at the end.

A)
*Generally the level of grammar structure is in a good level. Some expression mistakes were found though for example:(….is not in balance with the laws of nature.
….. is fragile, repetition of the word “volatility”)– in the first paragraph expression mistakes
*“The projects of our time are designed for stability and can be defined as highly complex, pursuit of effectivity and interdependency.” missing reference probably
*”For the past 2-3 decades, we have continued the pursuit of efficiency” - who we?
*“What we should do, is build a system that is not fragile to these events.”- comma in the wrong place
B) missing reference to the figure 1 and remember to mention it in the text before the figure
* Why table of context is in the middle of the text?
*Under the paragraph Create Project Portfolios that can Collectively Learn from Others’ Mistakes:
“The definition of a good system is:
"1."
 The amount of errors within the system is small
“remove the number “1”.”
*” Concerning antifragility in management of portfolios, programs and projects. “ is unnecessary”
*In the BMW example insert reference not only to the text but also to the figure 2.
*Under the “Application” paragraph’s I would probably insert also the other examples that you use in the article in order to make this paragraph more concrete.
* find reference for the production of the Lupo mentioned in this paragraph as well.
*The fact that you are using so many quotes adds to the article but you could try to eliminate them into 2-3 max since it reduces reader’s “reading flow” at some point.

C)
*I would recommend to spend a little more time in reviewing the intro and the closing part of the article in order to provide a more solid base for the reader with more details and raping up of the scope of the article
*Adding subheading for example naming the different cases would also add to the context of the article

Talk:Construction modularization from a lean perspective

2015-09-22T21:11:17Z

S142899:

'''LasseHoier87 reviewer 2'''

First impression is good, especially the use of a real life case is nice. The layout is thought through and seems to “guide” the reader through the topic. However, it could be "spiced" a bit up if there were some nice pictures, illustrations or even a video. This would "catch" the reader more i think.

Formal aspects: (Wiki article Peer Review template is used)

*The article is as clearly stated in the article following a “case study”
*No gramma faults or spelling.
*Written in a fine engaging style, The sentence is too long and may be a bit too much direct style. Use more formal style.
*No illustrations at all, you mention a video on youtube why not use that one. Maybe the figures showing the building or similar.
*No figures
*No figures
*No figures
*No figures therefore no copyright issue
*I think the overall wiki formation of the article is fine.

Content aspects:

*For practitioners it is a relevant article, because the topic is very relevant .
*It is not specific related to PPPM. However, the idea lean and critical path is used in project management and scheduling.
*The length of the article is fine. I don’t think it should be longer, but maybe a bit more in the “Preface” and maybe it is too basic.
*I think the overall red thread is fine and the article seems coherent.
*The starting summary is good and works fine, but I think the “preface” and “abstact” could be merged together and be more precise in terms of starting the “red thread”.
*The reference is missing.
*I find it hard to say which material has been used. There should be a clear list of reference and link into the text.
*There is no section “annotated bibliography”.
*As far as I noticed, there were no link to other APPPM wiki article. But links to websites, that is fine.
*Own opinion is clearly stated in “ reflections on practice of modularization in the construction sector”
*There is no reason to think there is any type of plagiarism

----
[[
(S142899_I am not aware of whether I am reviewer ½ or 3)

References are missing summary at the end.

A) Not many grammatical or spelling mistakes!

* BSB term should be explained before used in the ABSTRACT PARAGRAPH
* I would suggest in general to create less complex and smaller sentences throughout the article in order to avoid confusion for the reader
* Under Board Sustainable Building Co.Ltd paragraph there is a space mistake “ The2008..” and use past tense as well.
* Also the numbering can become simpler not 1…..1….2….1 but instead.1……1.1….2…….2.1
* Reference at the end of TH30 HOTEL, Modular Constructions impact on critical path, paragraph is missing?
* In the paragraphs under BSB's prefabrication technology reference is missing
* In lean Construction paragraph double “. . “ error and gap after “.” Exist also in the second paragraph. Also reference is missing.
* Under BCB projects analyzed from a lean perspective paragraph data is rmentioned without reference.
* “Broad Organization” in paragraph Reflections on practice of modularization in the construction sector could be with small letters

B)
*Preface and Abstract probably should be in one paragraph
*Logical paragraph flow without overlapping.
*I would create a paragraph that incorporates the paragraphs: 3 Broad Group,4 Broad Sustainable Building Co. Ltd., 5 T30 Hotel
and name it “case T30 description”

C)
*Congrats on summing up info and referring on them in Board Group paragraph.
Especially the summing up paragraph illustrates a critical support of the theory in combination of this case study.
*I would add the “T30 HOTEL CASE STUDY” in the title of the article probably]]

Talk:Construction modularization from a lean perspective

2015-09-22T21:02:51Z

S142899:

'''LasseHoier87 reviewer 2'''

First impression is good, especially the use of a real life case is nice. The layout is thought through and seems to “guide” the reader through the topic. However, it could be "spiced" a bit up if there were some nice pictures, illustrations or even a video. This would "catch" the reader more i think.

Formal aspects: (Wiki article Peer Review template is used)

*The article is as clearly stated in the article following a “case study”
*No gramma faults or spelling.
*Written in a fine engaging style, The sentence is too long and may be a bit too much direct style. Use more formal style.
*No illustrations at all, you mention a video on youtube why not use that one. Maybe the figures showing the building or similar.
*No figures
*No figures
*No figures
*No figures therefore no copyright issue
*I think the overall wiki formation of the article is fine.

Content aspects:

*For practitioners it is a relevant article, because the topic is very relevant .
*It is not specific related to PPPM. However, the idea lean and critical path is used in project management and scheduling.
*The length of the article is fine. I don’t think it should be longer, but maybe a bit more in the “Preface” and maybe it is too basic.
*I think the overall red thread is fine and the article seems coherent.
*The starting summary is good and works fine, but I think the “preface” and “abstact” could be merged together and be more precise in terms of starting the “red thread”.
*The reference is missing.
*I find it hard to say which material has been used. There should be a clear list of reference and link into the text.
*There is no section “annotated bibliography”.
*As far as I noticed, there were no link to other APPPM wiki article. But links to websites, that is fine.
*Own opinion is clearly stated in “ reflections on practice of modularization in the construction sector”
*There is no reason to think there is any type of plagiarism

----
[[
(S142899_I am not aware of whether I am reviewer ½ or 3)
References are missing summary at the end.
A) Not many grammatical or spelling mistakes!
1. BSB term should be explained before used in the ABSTRACT PARAGRAPH
2.I would suggest in general to create less complex and smaller sentences throughout the article in order to avoid confusion for the reader
3. Under Board Sustainable Building Co.Ltd paragraph there is a space mistake “ The2008..” and use past tense as well.
4.Also the numbering can become simpler not 1…..1….2….1 but instead.1……1.1….2…….2.1
5. Reference at the end of TH30 HOTEL, Modular Constructions impact on critical path, paragraph is missing?
6 . In the paragraphs under BSB's prefabrication technology reference is missing
7. In lean Construction paragraph double “. . “ error and gap after “.” Exist also in the second paragraph. Also reference is missing.
8. Under BCB projects analyzed from a lean perspective paragraph data is rmentioned without reference.
9. “Broad Organization” in paragraph Reflections on practice of modularization in the construction sector could be with small letters
B)
1.Preface and Abstract probably should be in one paragraph
2.Logical paragraph flow without overlapping.
3.I would create a paragraph that incorporates the paragraphs: 3 Broad Group,4 Broad Sustainable Building Co. Ltd., 5 T30 Hotel
and name it “case T30 description”
C)
1.Congrats on summing up info and referring on them in Board Group paragraph.
Especially the summing up paragraph illustrates a critical support of the theory in combination of this case study.
2. I would add the “T30 HOTEL CASE STUDY” in the title of the article probably]]

Talk:PRINCE2 - For successful Project Management

2015-09-22T20:30:45Z

S142899: Created page with "[[(S142899_I am not aware of whether I am reviewer ½ or 3) In general this is a good article with minor improvements needed. A) 1. Introduction: Clear description of the prin..."

[[(S142899_I am not aware of whether I am reviewer ½ or 3)
In general this is a good article with minor improvements needed.
A)
1. Introduction: Clear description of the prince2 method. The word “right” is purposely mentioned 3 times in the same sentence. Is this acceptable? Grammatically I could not identify any obvious error at the introduction.
2.Probably, the use of commas (,) will help the reader to read the text easier.
In the PRINCIPLES paragraph, in the last sentence capitals after commas could be changed into small letters.
3.In the CONTINUED BUSINESS JUSTIFICATION paragraph the words: Business Case, start with capital letters. I would recommend to switch in small letters.
In the same paragraph, check if reference is missing.
4.In the paragraph LEARN FROMEXPERIENCE, overlapping of the “ lessons learned” meaning exists.(probably reform it in a more concrete way)
5.References for tables are missing
6.In paragraph “Manage by exception” : Refer the references for the four managing levels
7.Focus on Products paragraph according to prince 2 ( reference missing).
8.In the themes paragraph, I would firstly introduce the themes and then I would explain the strength of Prince2.
9.In the PROCESSES Paragraph, when referring to processes use “…” instead of capital letter in each word.
10.Also reference for the figure 2 and table 3 are missing.
11.At the last paragraph, the expression “That is,…” Could be changed in order to ensure a more scientific way of expression.

B. The paragraph PROJECTS IN A PROGRAMME ENVIRONMENT might be evaluated again if it should be fitted in this order on not. Perhaps, it seems too generic and does not follow the flow of the other paragraphs.

c. The article seems convincing enough. Changes are mentioned above in order to create a more solid outcome. Extra information in the THEMES paragraphs could probably be added. (not necessary though)]]

Portfolio Management and complexity in organizations

2015-09-22T10:02:50Z

S142899: Created page with "==Introduction== Complexity management is a business methodology that deals with the analysis and optimization of complexity in enterprises. Effects of complexity pertain to a..."

==Introduction==
Complexity management is a business methodology that deals with the analysis and optimization of complexity in enterprises. Effects of complexity pertain to all business processes along the value chain and hence complexity management requires a holistic approach. Effective complexity management is based on four pillars: a sound strategy, alignment with the overall company strategy, transparency over all costs and values of complexity, an approach which identifies the optimization benefits, related measures and management of the trade-offs between the total value chain functions, and finally ensurement of the sustainable infrastructure such as IT tools, incentives and processes.
Generally, complexity management in product development is considered as the management of products variants.
Many organizations tend to use differentiation of products, processes or services as the key enabler to outperform competitors. However, despite the obvious business rationale behind differentiation, only few firms are truly able to cope with the increasing complexity that comes with increased differentiation. A vital question in the product innovation battleground is, "How should corporations most effectively invest their R&D and new product development resources?" That is what portfolio management is all about: resource allocation to achieve corporate product innovation objectives.

==Scope Definition==

Companies struggle with the sub-optimization and changes among their projects, even if various normative instructions and good practices have been introduced for project portfolio management.There are many different approaches with no easy answers. However, it is a problem that every company addresses to produce and maintain leading edge products. Portfolio management for new products is a dynamic decision process wherein the list of active new products and R&D projects is constantly revised. In this process, new projects are evaluated, selected, and prioritized. Existing projects may be accelerated, killed, or de-prioritized and resources are allocated (or reallocated) to the active projects.Building a complex portfolio of products can be beneficial for young firms due to increased sales growth and competitiveness. Yet, the benefits from product portfolio complexity (PPC) are often outweighed by rising costs, leading to an inverted U-shaped relationship between PPC and performance. Recent research has called for an increased understanding of how firms are able to better manage higher levels of PPC

==Goals of Portfolio Management==

While the portfolio methods vary greatly from company to company, the common denominator across firms are the goals executives are trying to achieve. According to 'best-practice' research by Dr. Cooper and Dr. Edgett, five main goals dominate the thinking of successful firms:
1. Value Maximization
Allocate resources to maximize the value of the portfolio via a number of key objectives such as profitability, ROI, and acceptable risk. A variety of methods are used to achieve this maximization goal, ranging from financial methods to scoring models.
2. Balance
Achieve a desired balance of projects via a number of parameters: risk versus return; short-term versus long-term; and across various markets, business arenas and technologies. Typical methods used to reveal balance include bubble diagrams, histograms and pie charts.
3. Business Strategy Alignment
Ensure that the portfolio of projects reflects the company’s product innovation strategy and that the breakdown of spending aligns with the company’s strategic priorities. The three main approaches are: top-down (strategic buckets); bottom-up (effective gatekeeping and decision criteria) and top-down and bottom-up (strategic check).
4. Pipeline Balance
Obtain the right number of projects to achieve the best balance between the pipeline resource demands and the resources available. The goal is to avoid pipeline gridlock (too many projects with too few resources) at any given time. A typical approach is to use a rank ordered priority list or a resource supply and demand assessment.
5. Sufficiency
Ensure the revenue (or profit) goals set out in the product innovation strategy are achievable given the projects currently underway. Typically this is conducted via a financial analysis of the pipeline’s potential future value.

==Benefits of Portfolio Management==

When implemented properly and conducted on a regular basis, Portfolio Management is a high impact, high value activity:

• Maximizes the return on your product innovation investments
• Maintains your competitive position
• Achieves efficient and effective allocation of scarce resources
• Forges a link between project selection and business strategy
• Achieves focus
• Communicates priorities
• Achieves balance
• Enables objective project selection

==Output of Complexity Management==

‘Complexity’ by itself does not exist, as it is merely the result of an expected outcome given a certain input. We therefore proposed to define complexity as: the results of the relation between invested organizational resources and received benefits for these investments. Furthermore, even though many consider complexity to be a negative phenomenon, it is not by definition undesirable, as certain levels of complexity may actually add some sort of value to an organization. We therefore focused on reducing ‘bad’ (i.e., non-value-adding) complexity, while allowing for ‘good’ (value-adding) complexity to exist within the organization.

==Cost and Value matrix==
High added value GOOD (Maintain) OVERCOMPLEX (Simplify) Low added value UNDERVALUED (Scale-up) BAD (Avoid) Low level of added complexity High level of added complexity Figure 3 – the nature of complexity Each quadrant encompasses organizational functions, processes and/or products that include a specific level of complexity and adds value to the organization. Each of the
quadrants is briefly discussed. GOOD; a low level of added complexity that indeed yields high added value for the organization is most favourable, and organizations should strive to keep their functions, processes and/or products in this quadrant. UNDERVALUED; functions, processes and/or products with a low level of added complexity that only yields a limited level of added value to the organization should be scaled-up to achieve a high(er) level of added value without gaining complexity. OVERCOMPLEX; functions, processes and/or products that deliver significant added value to the organization with a high level of added complexity should be simplified to reduce complexity without comprising on the level of added value. BAD; a combination of low added value and high complexity is highly unfavorable and should be avoided by organizations whenever possible.

==Anlysis of Complexity==
Complexity is often driven by redundant variety – i.e. variation in the product portfolio that does not add value to the business. Basically, to analyze the complexity we need to ask ourselves two simple questions:
• Do we offer the right product?
• Do we provide these products in the most efficient way?
Unfortunately, the answers to those questions are not that simple. The first question requires substantial market knowledge, analyses, statistics, and – very importantly – a well-defined strategy. The key to answering the second question is to consider the “fit” between the product design, the market demand, and the value chain. Product committees and project managers engaged in decision making are often burdened by the fact that a lack of overview is often a loyal companion to complexity. Thus, decision makers are forced to base their decisions on a patchwork of details without the big picture because they are not able to establish the overview required to do the job successfully.

==Asset in businesses==

An obvious task when trying to answer the two questions above is to try to establish an overview of the assets in the existing business. There is a series of different ways to gain such an overview. Several studies and practical cases from industry indicate that visual models can be a strong means to achieve an overview that can support decision making. In these models we try to capture the essence of the business from four important viewpoints:
1. The Customer Viewpoint
Seeing the product portfolio from a customer perspective helps us when looking for redundancy and for the importance of various product variants and properties in the product range.
2. The Functional Viewpoint
Studying how the various customer demands have been turned into design concepts, and how these different concepts are different and alike. We often find differences on a conceptual level pointing towards similar customer specifications, i.e. the situation in which two different design principles fulfill the same purpose. Such a situation often leads to a lot of redundant variety throughout the organization, because the variation starts on a relatively high level and migrates down through the design and propagates to the production and procurement departments.
3. The Part Viewpoint
The part view is a detailed low level analysis of all the parts, bits and pieces in the product range. Often, we find different components such as screws, gaskets, O-rings etc. that are different for no reasons other than the fact that two different engineers looked at two different pages in the components catalog.
4. The Supply Chain & Process Viewpoint
Taking the viewpoint of the value creation makes it possible to see when the variation and complexity starts to explode throughout the supply chain. Some product designs entail a high variety early in the supply chain. For instance a few design changes can turn out to make it possible to swap two processes and thereby reducing variation in items in stock or perhaps even remove a stock completely.

==Linking the Views==
Getting an overview from these different viewpoints often gives hints on complexity reductions on a relatively low level. However, once you start to link the different viewpoints, you get a strong tool to identify greater improvement potentials. You can start to answer the two questions above, and really begin to understand why you have a complex portfolio and where to do something about it.
Later, when rationalizing the products it is important not to have a single-product focus. This will at best only lead to incremental improvements not nearly enough to secure successful implementation of any of the above mentioned later initiatives. The complexity analysis is a strong foundation for a multi-product initiative across a whole product range.
Rationalization of the product portfolio
Companies burdened by complexity are often tempted by initiatives such as lean production, just-in-time, build-to-order, etc. Unfortunately, many companies look intensely at their processes without addressing the product design. If the product portfolio is burdened by wasteful complexity, you will not get the full potential of the process improvements. An important first step before engaging in an implementation of process improvement initiatives such as lean should be to rationalize the product portfolio.
Thus, a first step in a lean process should not only be to make value stream maps and flow charts, but to also understand the product portfolio in depth, and get to know the strengths and weaknesses in order to address the complexity issues before changing the processes in the company.
We have developed a methodology to addresses each type of complexity, but we found that addressing the root cause of the problem many times requires tackling issues outside of the scope initially anticipated.

==Complexity Reduction Related topics Description Methodology==

The complexity in a big organization emanates mainly from the "nodes"–or the points where business units, functions, geographies and management layers cross. Nodal complexity of this sort hamstrings many companies–every one of these interactions adds cost and confusion, draining the focus and energy of senior executives and good managers.
Traditional approaches to reducing structural costs and increasing efficiency usually fail to address nodal complexity. But there’s a bright side to this picture as well: An attack on nodal complexity–because it simultaneously affects all the elements that intersect at that node–has a large multiplier effect on business performance. In fact, in our experience, reducing complexity at the nodes creates between three and four times as much value as the traditional approaches to right-sizing and functional excellence.
Complexity Reduction Related topics Description Methodology
• Business Process Reengineering
• Decision Rights Tools
• Focused Strategy
• Repeatable Models
• Spans and Layers Complexity Reduction
helps companies simplify their strategy, organization, products, processes and information technology.

Reduction in any of these areas opens up opportunities for simplification in others. Unwieldy complexity often results from business expansions or bureaucracies that unnecessarily complicate a company’s operating model, leading to sluggish growth, higher costs and poor returns. Complexity Reduction finds in- flection points where products or services fully meet customer needs at the lowest costs. By streamlining product lines, for example, companies may be able to simplify organization structures and decision making to serve their core customers better while also reducing demands on business processes and information systems.

==Complexity reduction requirements==

Complexity Reduction requires managers to:
• Understand the sources of complexity and examine trade-offs between operations and variety or customization for customers
• Identify opportunities to simplify products, organization structures, business processes and information systems to save costs while strengthening core capabilities and increasing the focus on customers
• Take steps to stem the return of complexity by reexamining the hurdle rates for new products and other expansion activities
• Simplify decision making by clarifying roles and processes Complexity Reduction helps reveal hidden costs and allows companies to determine which products are making money, what customers really value and which organizational or process bottlenecks are getting in the way of effective actions, setting the stage for greater growth and increased profits.
Common uses Selected references Companies typically use Complexity Reduction to: • Identify and strengthen core capabilities
• Build the business around customer needs
• Create a disciplined approach to releasing new products or services and trimming those that customers no longer value
• Design an organizational structure to support critical decisions
• Maximize process efficiency
• Align information systems with business objectives

==Conclusion==

Portfolio management processes can be successfully developed to help executives in their attempts to obtain better results from scarce R&D dollars, achieve the balance needed between short term pressures and the future, longer term, needs of the organization and to ensure that R&D efforts are being directed towards helping the organization achieve its strategic objectives.In this process five forms of complexity have been emcpimyered that are highly interrelated: strategy, customer, product, organization and process, including IT. Most clients engage us to address the single most visible symptom of complexity; for example, fixing rampant SKU proliferation that is wreaking havoc in the supply chain and the sales channel, or streamlining an excessively complex process that is hampering their time to market.

*References are missing and will be added

Articles Fall Term 2015

2015-09-22T10:01:42Z

S142899:

Please complete this table with your name, user name and the title of your article.

To create more lines in the table click '''Edit''' and use the following code to create more lines in the table and replace the example text with your own information:

<pre style="white-space: pre-wrap;
white-space: -moz-pre-wrap;
white-space: -pre-wrap;
white-space: -o-pre-wrap;
word-wrap: break-word;">
|Group Number
|Last Name
|First Name
|Username
|Link to Article
|-

Create a direct link by making square brackets around the title [[Title]] (Case sensitive)

The straight lines ( | ) create columns and the straight line with a dash ( |- ) creates a new row in the table.
( |} ) is only used at the very end to finish the coding for the table.
</pre>

=Overview of 2015 Wiki Articles=

{| class="wikitable sortable"
|+Fall 2015 Wiki Articles
|-
!Group Number
!Last Name
!First Name
!User Name
!Link to article
|-
|Group 1
|Nguyen
|Michael
|Michaelnguyendtu
|[[Leading an offshore team]]
|-
|Group 12
|Gkatzalas
|Nikolaos
|s141569
|[[The Gantt chart and the usage nowadays]]
|-
|Group 6
|Lymperis
|Konstantinos
|s142330
|[[Risk Management in Oil and Gas Industry]]
|-
|Group 3
|Filis
|Charalampos
|Ch.filis
|[[Project Risk Management and Project Risk Management Processes]]
|-
|Group 11
|Larsen
|Leonora
|s112910
|[[Gantt Charts as a Tool for Project Management]]
|-
|Group 10
|Sala Vilar
|Lluís Ròmul
|s141586
|[[Portfolio Management in a Startup]]
|-
|Group 14
|Pitsavas
|Konstantinos
|Konspits
|[[Modularisation: A modern process for project management]]
|-
|Group 2
|Kampianakis
|Andreas
|s150912
|[[Financial Portfolio Optimization Methods]]'''
|-
|Group 13
|Penzes
|Balint
|s141943
|[[Product development and portfolio management processes at LEGO]]
|-
|Group 6
|Hozmache
|Mihaela
|s146898
|[[PRINCE2 - For successful Project Management]]'''
|-
|Group 14
|Le Corre
|Damien
|Damien
|[[Game theory in project management]]'''
|-
|Group 14
|Bertrand
|Fabien
|150477
|[[Multi project management]]'''
|-
|Group 9
|Cassel
|Sara
|Sarac
|[[The benefits of systems engineering]]'''
|-
|Group 13
|Sergi
|Gibaja Musachs
|S141926
|[[Rapid Application Development in Extreme Project Management]]'''
|-
|Group 14
|Poza
|María
|s150793
|[[Integrated Cost and Schedule Control]]'''
|-
|Group 6
|Kulikova
|Nataliia
|s140767
|[[SCRUM Method]]
|-
|Group 4
|Pekala
|Adam
|Adam.pekala
|[[Critical Path Method in Construction Industry]]
|-
|Group 10
|Garnotel
|Gaëtan
|gaetangarnotel
|[[V-Model]]
|-
|Group 4
|Ghanizada
|Naweed
|S103745
|[[PRINCE2, A Project Management Methodology]]
|-
|Group 1
|Jacobsen
|Martin
|MistaJacob
|[[Mindfulness and Cognitive Biases in Project Management]]
|-
|Group 6
|Ferraresi
|Fabrizio
|S150905
|[[Projects in Controlled Environments, a process-based approach for project management]]
|-
|Group 5
|Tanghus
|Bjarke
|S113815
|[[Location Based Scheduling]]
|-
|Group 9
|Højgaard Hindhede
|Daniel
|S143352
|[[Construction modularization from a lean perspective]]
|-
|Group 10
|Gayot
|Charles-Henri
|s141074
|[[Responsibility Assignment Matrix (RACI Matrix)]]
|-
|Group 12
|Thorp Sørensen
|Anders
|s103183
|[[The Gantt Chart]]
|-
|Group 3
|Makris
|Dimitrios
|Dimak
|[[Benchmarking in Project Management]]
|-
|Group 7
|Greiling
|Lea
|Lea
|[[Lean in Project Management]]
|-
|Group 8
|Latorre Duque
|Ana
|Ana
| [[Modularity and Black-Boxing]]
|-
|Group 7
|Almanzi
|Stefano
|S141530
|[[ Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)]]
|-
|Group 12
|Montagner
|Giacomo
|S150821
|[[Scrum Methodology in Agile Software Development]]
|-
|Group 14
|Ruiz Muñoz
|Gustavo Adolfo
|S121408
| [[Lean 6 Sigma in project management]]
|-
|Group 3
|Kalmus
|Thomas
|S141938
| [[Program evaluation and review technique (PERT) ]]
|-
|Group 12
|Gudmundsson
|Arnar Gauti
|S141543
|[[Management of risk]]
|-
|Group 5
|Jacobsen
|Ian Thobias
|S113735
|[[Story Points Estimation]]
|-
|Group 11
|Boesgaard
|Katrine
|KB1991
|[[Gantt Chart]]
|-
|Group 5
|Sorth-Olsen
|Rasmus
|Sorth90
|[[Lean as a project management tool]]
|-
|Group 13
|Salling
|Stephanie
|StephSalling
|[[E. Pihl & Søn A/S from a management perspective]]
|-
|Group 6
|Ruina
|Jessica Linda
|Jejenji
|[[Scheduling techniques in Project Management]]
|-
|Group 4
|Gjerstrup
|Jacob
|s113440
|[[Fault tree analysis]]
|-
|Group 11
|Lynge
|Jane
|s997303
|[[Theory of Constraint]]
|-
|Group 8
|Palmerini
|Alessandro
|alex161
|[[Effective Communication in Project Management]]
|-
|Group 2
|Tvedt
|Ida Marie
|IMT
|[[Risk Profile in Turnkey Projects]]
|-
|Group 2
|Søndenaa
|Mathilde Hanssen
|s150621
|[[Critical chain project management (CCPM)]]
|-
|Group 9
|Helassalo
|Antti
|s141506
|[[Development phase of idea to project]]
|-
|Group 9
|Thorning-Schmidt
|Nanna
|Nannats
|[[Earned Value Management]]
|-
|Group 10
|Bureika
|Edvinas
|s141931
|[[Communication in Project Management]]
|-
|Group 1
|Rasmussen
|Marie-Louise
|DI2009
|[[Cross cultural teamwork]]
|-
|Group
|Lara Hoces
|Fernando
|s131882
|[[The Oticon Case: the Spaghetti organisation]]
|-
|Group 13
|Christos
|Stamatis
|S145170
|[[Olympic Games London 2012: When the client strives for innovation (The London model)]]'''
|-
|Group 5
|Moe
|Elizabeth Lindhard
|113129
|[[Contracting as a PM]]
|-
|Group 3
|Lessis
|Vasileios
|lessisv
|[[Rational Unified Process (RUP)]]
|-
|Group 8
|Klibo Buur
|Christian
|Buurbuur
|[[Project Execution Model (PEM)]]
|-
|Group 8
|Bachmann
|Thomas
|s117318
|[[Lean Tools in Project Management]]
|-
|Group 11
|Vilar Bustos
|Alberto
|s142581
|[[Minimizing Risk and Uncertainties in Construction Projects]]
|-
|Group 1
|Trap Wiegandt
|Sissel
|s112195
|[[The Critical Path Method (CPM)]]
|-
|Group 2
|Christensen
|Britt Marie Lekven
|brittmch
|[[Lean in building and construction industry]]
|-
|Group 5
|Vestergaard Andersen
|Andreas
|AndreasAndersen
|[[Management of Project Change ]]
|-
|Group 7
|Ann-Elise
|Gustavsen
|Alise
|[[Stakeholder Analysis and Matrices ]]
|-
|Group 2
|Krogh
|Daniel
|DanielKrogh
|[[Managing Uncertainty and Risk on the Project]]
|-
|Group 7
|Fabio
|Labrini
|s142911
|[[Critical Chain Project Management to cope with uncertainty]]
|-
|Group 1
|Viig
|Oliver Johannes
|s102935
|[[BIM as a project management tool on construction projects]]
|-
|Group 8
|Federico
|Sbernini
|s141573
|[[The Failure Mode and effects analysis (FMEA) in product development projects]]
|-
|Group 12
|Augustin
|Bouet
|s142823
|[[Metra Potential Method]]
|-
|Group 7
|Eva Schultz
|Hansen
|s112960
|[[A method to analyze visualizations in project management as boundary objects]]
|-
|Group 13
|Otiv
|Peter
|s145166
|[[Project Financing Initiative]]
|-
|Group 4
|Juhasz
|Bianka Zsuzsanna
|Biankajuh
|[[Changing conversations based on the Stacey matrix]]
|-
|Group 3
|Rodrigues
|Rafael
|s150931
|[[Six Sigma and PMBOK]]
|-
|Group 9
|Søren
|Thomsen
|s140046
|[[Organisational resilience with mindfulness]]
|-
|Group 8
|Schrøder
|Niklas
|Faker
|[[Theory of Constraints]]
|-
|Group 11
|Herreros
|Maria
|s142597
|[[Early warning signals in project management]]
|-
|Group 3
|Larsen
|Martin T
|s103128
|[[Risk Identification]]
|-
|Group 9
|Hoier
|Lasse Rasmus
|Lassehoier87
|[[Application of Antifragility in Project Management]]
|-
|Group 4
|Shapel
|Sarah Groot
|s152093
|[[Leadership styles]]
|-
|Group 4
|Hammer
|Jonas
|s113665
|[[The best milestone plan is simple but with depths!]]
|-
|Group 2
|Flataukan
|Camilla
|s150801
|[[Risk Profile in General Contracting]]
|-
|Group 10
|Marazaki
|Ilektra
|s142899
|[[Portfolio Management and complexity in organizations]]
|-

|}

Articles Fall Term 2015

2015-09-22T09:29:51Z

S142899: