|
If you're looking at tech, you should probably become a Certified Scrum Master. Most places are using some form of Agile which is completely different than the waterfall methods they mostly teach in PMBOK. My only experience with health care is that there were a bunch of health care PMs in my PMP class before the pandemic, so I assume they use waterfall a lot over there. When I took my course the class was more than half commercial and government construction people with most the remaining being in health care, then a few stragglers like me, some college kids and one woman from Disney. The rest of the class was completely confused by everything I did and said about project management.
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2023 06:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 11:29 |
|
|
Bucnasti posted:If you're looking at tech, you should probably become a Certified Scrum Master. Most places are using some form of Agile which is completely different than the waterfall methods they mostly teach in PMBOK. Would you recommend CAM over PSM (also looking at PSM+Kanban)? My current employer isn't going to spring for any training for me, so cost is a factor unfortunately.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2023 06:53
|
|
|
theflyingexecutive posted:Would you recommend CAM over PSM (also looking at PSM+Kanban)? My current employer isn't going to spring for any training for me, so cost is a factor unfortunately. If your plan is to go into tech, PSM is going to be the most valuable. I've never met a CAM by title or certification. Like somebody above said about Pmbok, Scrum is an aspiration and everyone wants to do it but few fully realize it. As for Kanban, I've never gotten formal Kanban training, but I don't see what it adds that Scrum doesn't already cover, and I've never seen a job that was looking for Kanban experience, just Scrum experience.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2023 15:16
|
|
|
Bucnasti posted:If your plan is to go into tech, PSM is going to be the most valuable. I've never met a CAM by title or certification. Good to know! When I wrote "CAM", I jammed CAP and CSM together. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2023 03:22
|
|
|
CAM is a Control Account Manager and is definitely a thing. Depends on the industry for use, I've only seen it on huge billion dollar things.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2023 04:58
|
|
|
Hey I have a risk management question for the thread. How would you rate the severity of the below example? I have a risk that affects the probability of another risk, where the first risk is of low impact but the one it affects is of much higher impact. Here's an example: A $20M aircraft R&D program has these requirements: Maximum weight of radar system: 1000 lbs Max takeoff weight (MTOW) of aircraft: 20,000 lbs Per the contract: The customer will cancel the program at a MTOW of 20,001 lb and will cancel it without a radar system. If we exceed the radar system weight budget, we lose $5k per pound over. (Not a huge impact.) Current facts as of drafting the risks: The current radar system model projects a radar system weight of 1500 lbs with an uncertainty of +/- 10%. It WILL be overweight without mitigating steps. The current projected MTOW with all systems is 19500 with an uncertainty of +/- 25%. It MIGHT be overweight, potentially significantly. As I see it, the program then has these risks: IF the MTOW exceeds 20,000 lbs, THEN the program gets canceled. Base prob: 4 (Very Likely) Base Severity: 4 (Very Likely) IF the radar system exceeds 1000 lbs, THEN it increases the probability the program gets canceled. Base prob: 5 (100% will happen without mitigation) Base severity: (??) IF the radar system exceeds 1000 lbs, THEN the program will lose $5K per pound over. Base prob: 5, base severity: 1 (Low Impact)
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 16:29
|
|
|
IF the MTOW exceeds 20,000 lbs, THEN the program gets canceled. Base prob: 4 (Very Likely) Base Severity: 4 (Very Likely) <----- I would interpret this to mean there is an 80% chance that we can't hit the weight requirement. That seems a bit high on the probability. I'd also make the Sev a 5. IF the radar system exceeds 1000 lbs, THEN it increases the probability the program gets canceled. Base prob: 5 (100% will happen without mitigation) Base severity: (??) <--- I'd set this up as a 'sub-risk' in my deck and the severity would be a 3 if there are other ways to mitigate the first risk. IF the radar system exceeds 1000 lbs, THEN the program will lose $5K per pound over. Base prob: 5, base severity: 1 (Low Impact) This is fine.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 17:21
|
|
|
A risk dependent on another risk gets the worst score of both risks. Radar overweight 5/1. Plane overweight 5/5. I’m not a fan of strict %chance of happening divided by 20 = risk frequency score. I prefer to think of it as “on a scale of 1-5, do we need to mitigate this risk?” Dithering between a 4 or 5 because of uncertainty misses the point that without addressing that particular risk, the project won’t be successful. Dik Hz fucked around with this message at 17:59 on Mar 16, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 17:53
|
|
|
Dik Hz posted:A risk dependent on another risk gets the worst score of both risks. I can't agree on the 4 vs 5. If I present a risk to management as a 5 for the probability that means "it's happening." 1 to 4 are "it might happen."
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 18:05
|
|
|
daslog posted:I can't agree on the 4 vs 5. If I present a risk to management as a 5 for the probability that means "it's happening." 1 to 4 are "it might happen." Initial assessments are there to flag issues and I can’t imagine not implementing risk management for a 4-5 risk. And if you’re doing risk management, all that really matters is the mitigated risk assessment. You also get to go back and revise the risk matrix as you get more information. To try to summarize, we have a risk that has a 50% chance of happening by itself and an upstream risk that has a 100% chance of making the first risk more likely to occur. Whether that is summarized as an initial 4 or 5 is pretty inconsequential. In general, though, you always round up if you’re unsure. If you’re in CYA mode, “I flagged it as a 5 because one component of the risk is certain to occur” is a perfectly valid position to hold.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 19:48
|
|
|
That sounds like you're artificially putting more responsibility on the radar team to cut weight vs the rest of the project. Just because they happen to have a separate line item (that doesn't matter much)
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 20:04
|
|
|
Epitope posted:That sounds like you're artificially putting more responsibility on the radar team to cut weight vs the rest of the project. Just because they happen to have a separate line item (that doesn't matter much)
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 20:45
|
|
|
What's with the hostility dude. Daslog presented a more sophisticated model, you said no use this rule of thumb instead. I'm not questioning whether it's a good rule of thumb generally, or that management is dumb so don't be too sophisticated. In this case it seems the rule of thumb overweight the link between the targets. Maybe weight can be cut elsewhere much cheaper than the radar, such that the penalty is worth it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 22:06
|
|
|
Epitope posted:What's with the hostility dude. Daslog presented a more sophisticated model, you said no use this rule of thumb instead. I'm not questioning whether it's a good rule of thumb generally, or that management is dumb so don't be too sophisticated. In this case it seems the rule of thumb overweight the link between the targets. Maybe weight can be cut elsewhere much cheaper than the radar, such that the penalty is worth it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 22:33
|
|
|
It seems like a 5 of 5 risk is guaranteed to happen and therefore moves from a risk to a known. So if the risk of the plane being overweight is a 5 then you shouldn't continue the project. This is how we do our cost and schedule reserve. If item X happens it cost $100. The chance/risk of it happening is 40%. $100*0.4= $40 added to budgeted contingency. If this item happens it still cost $100 but hopefully other risk items don't happen so ultimately not over budget.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 22:35
|
|
|
Dik Hz posted:OK, so is your risk management strategy for a risk as described by OP any different because you scored the risk 4-5 instead of 5-5? My #1 rule of being a PM: The PM always gets blamed if something goes wrong, so always CYA  My strategy would be the same for either, but I'd be more concerned with the optics. If I was assigned a project with a 5-5 like this one with the consequence being that we lose the contract I would be escalating right to the C-suite with a "WTF are the idiots in scoping and contracts doing sending me a project that we can't possibly do?" because it's my rear end if I don't start making noise immediately.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 22:44
|
|
|
spwrozek posted:It seems like a 5 of 5 risk is guaranteed to happen and therefore moves from a risk to a known. So if the risk of the plane being overweight is a 5 then you shouldn't continue the project.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 00:26
|
|
|
yeah could be. good point.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 01:02
|
|
|
If I'm doing my initial risk identification at the start of the project and I come up with a 5 5 risk score like distance something is very wrong. It's politics I know but what part of being a project manager is knowing how to save your career over the long term.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2023 01:14
|
|
|
Thanks for the replies. These were base estimation numbers made for the purpose of getting buy in from SMEs. My PM origins are aerospace hence this example but the actual real world is litigation where there are conflicting risks in acting AND in not acting, and the risk of action has this situation where one affects the other. Using risk management has helped get buy-in from attorneys on how to proceed despite very strong opinions about proceeding leading to "potential" catastrophes either way. I figure I'll throw my two cents into the ring on 5s as well. 5 severity means a human person is killed, injured or, in legal context, goes to jail. A $20M program cancellation is a 4 severity at a bigish defense company. It's a lot of money but most everyone will still work there. In our context the firm shutting down is probably also a 5, but anything less is a 4. A 5 probability means its GOING to happen. In this example the radar overweight probability is a 5 but the plane overweight is a 4 probability, arguably a 3 depending on context of the other systems and how the MTOW is calculated. Its stillin the DEEP READ PROGRAM KILLER section of the graph. In the end, after reading this thread, the analogous severity to the radar system was the same as the MTOW risk. If the program killer is a 4, then the thing that MIGHT drive the program killer is a 4.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2023 00:01
|
|
|
I’ve always been a fan of if your risk probability is >50% then you make it a reality and file the opportunity. “We are going to lose the contract for being overweight, but we have an opportunity to keep it by actually solving the problem!”
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2023 00:53
|
|
|
Crazyweasel posted:I’ve always been a fan of if your risk probability is >50% then you make it a reality and file the opportunity. I can win life by not pilfering a uranium rod in my pants is a dumbass way of turning a risk into an  opportunity .EDIT: Maybe its the mil defense mental framework barking here but opportunities are chances to reduce CPI/SPI below customer expected levels (usually sub 1.0 or at the very least save money/schedule on some subcomponent of the WBS) and likely net some contractual award from it. If your program is CPI 1.25 because of realized risks that you (read: your predecessor) failed to miitigate... successfuly mitigating them to 1.2 doesn't create an opportunity. It means you didnt do your job successfully (perhaps because it was impossible to do so). Opportunities are traceable to exceeding expectations in the contract measurable by CPI/SPI/incentive award realization. Else, they're risks. CarForumPoster fucked around with this message at 02:25 on Mar 18, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2023 02:18
|
|
|
I'm drunk and lollin at "doesnt invoke Nunn–McCurdy" logged as an opportunity.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2023 03:41
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:Thanks for the replies. These were base estimation numbers made for the purpose of getting buy in from SMEs. My PM origins are aerospace hence this example but the actual real world is litigation where there are conflicting risks in acting AND in not acting, and the risk of action has this situation where one affects the other. Using risk management has helped get buy-in from attorneys on how to proceed despite very strong opinions about proceeding leading to "potential" catastrophes either way. Also lol at using a PM’s initial risk assessment matrix in litigation. E: also I will add that getting a project team to dicker on whether something is a 4 or 5 and then coming in with “well actually because of the definition I made up in my head, it’s really a 7” is so perfectly apropos to real life project management than I’m honestly impressed. Dik Hz fucked around with this message at 13:09 on Mar 18, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2023 13:02
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:I can win life by not pilfering a uranium rod in my pants is a dumbass way of turning a risk into an IMO it’s how you show your AOP. If you are more likely than not than to blow your budget because of something, or lose a contract(let’s say an option to move past pre-EMD or something) because you don’t think you can meet spec and you want to highlight the impact, then you force the adjustment into the AOP and make the opportunity to claw it back. I guess this is why I jumped out of Defense before becoming a PM, shell games!!!! Crazyweasel fucked around with this message at 14:04 on Mar 18, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2023 13:56
|
|
|
There exists a sector more corrosive to the soul than sales or academia, middle management
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2023 00:04
|
|
|
Dik Hz posted:If you’re making up your own definitions then sure you can label it whatever you want. None of this accurately describes the purpose or events. I agree with the previous poster who said your comments can seem needlessly hostile. You and Motronic should hang out CarForumPoster fucked around with this message at 18:21 on Mar 19, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2023 18:16
|
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:None of this accurately describes the purpose or events. I agree with the previous poster who said your comments can seem needlessly hostile. You and Motronic should hang out Also I was laughing when I posted that because of how real life it is, as I pointed out. If you thought I was being hostile, it’s because you already didn’t like me or you view people disagreeing with you as hostility. Either way, that’s on you. Also, Motronic seems cool; is that supposed to be an insult?
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2023 11:17
|
|
|
Sheeeeit, just got word a MSP contract I’ve been PM’ing under is about to get terminated. Recently, I’ve been doing sdlc for data science & tooling for a big shop. Closer to program management, since the responsibility also involved strategic architecture to tie in a bunch of systems etc So I was wondering, 1) what titles should I be searching for besides PM, TPM? 2) any off beat places to search for PM roles? 3) is cramming for the PMP in 8 weeks with a dedicated 30 hours enough to give myself any sort of good odds?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2023 23:25
|
|
|
no lube so what posted:Sheeeeit, just got word a MSP contract I’ve been PM’ing under is about to get terminated. Technical Program Manager, LinkedIn, don't get a PMP, emphasize data science experience, get that bag
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2023 16:37
|
|
|
The current PMP exam is really easy if you actually have a PM background and do some prep for it so 30 hours would do it. It only has a reputation for being hard due to a combination of what it used to be and the fact that a lot of people who try and take it don’t actually have PM experience and try to get it just to get through resume filters.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2023 19:41
|
|
|
Thoguh posted:The current PMP exam is really easy if you actually have a PM background and do some prep for it so 30 hours would do it. It only has a reputation for being hard due to a combination of what it used to be and the fact that a lot of people who try and take it don’t actually have PM experience and try to get it just to get through resume filters. I took it....12+ years ago (I think it was 2011) and didn't find it too hard. I know they changed format sometime after that...did it get easier?
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2023 20:00
|
|
|
lament.cfg posted:Technical Program Manager, LinkedIn, don't get a PMP, emphasize data science experience, get that bag updating my LinkedIn. For my current role I could put down PM, TPM, or scrummaster. What’s the best way to sell myself? I have been at the current role a year and a half. I haven’t updated linkedin since I started. Previously I was a manufacturing TPM for 5 years. More systems and physical tooling. I will emphasis leading data science team (DS/DE/SWE/sys architect)
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2023 20:55
|
|
|
What project management software have you used and what were their pros and cons? My organisation doesn't currently use any but it's becoming increasingly evident (at least to me) that Excel just doesn't cut it when managing ever larger and more time-constrained engineering consulting projects across multiple department boundaries.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2023 17:57
|
|
|
Are you looking for yourself or for company-wide use?
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2023 18:05
|
|
|
Maera Sior posted:Are you looking for yourself or for company-wide use? Preferably company-wide, but I will settle for adoption in our 800 strong division in exchange for not resigning and letting my business area finally implode on itself. Obviously software won't magically fix things around here on its own, so what kind of training program would you recommend to get the basics of project management drilled into hapless engineers promoted into project management in an engineering consulting business?
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2023 20:31
|
|
|
Jasper Tin Neck posted:Preferably company-wide, but I will settle for adoption in our 800 strong division in exchange for not resigning and letting my business area finally implode on itself. Your doomed. Engineers that can do Project Management are also known as Unicorns or CTOs.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2023 20:48
|
|
|
daslog posted:Your doomed. Engineers that can do Project Management are also known as Unicorns or CTOs. I know, but I'm not entirely convinced engineers can't either learn to do project management or learn to hire people who can. The reason I haven't quit my position as the load bearing SME is because the entire industry is pretty dire in this respect. I don't think my demands are even that unreasonable: I just want my projects to have work breakdown structures, schedules and a task list so that we can hand out tasks and follow progress without multiple weekly 2-hour all hands meetings.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2023 21:23
|
|
|
Jasper Tin Neck posted:I know, but I'm not entirely convinced engineers can't either learn to do project management or learn to hire people who can. The reason I haven't quit my position as the load bearing SME is because the entire industry is pretty dire in this respect. I took Google's project management course, which is geared towards software engineers for the obvious reason. It's pretty fast to breeze through if you have any experience in watching projects come together. Without an understanding of why a process should be followed, any attempt at enforcing new software is doomed to fail.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2023 22:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 11:29 |
|
|
Maera Sior posted:I took Google's project management course, which is geared towards software engineers for the obvious reason. It's pretty fast to breeze through if you have any experience in watching projects come together. Maera Sior posted:Without an understanding of why a process should be followed, any attempt at enforcing new software is doomed to fail. Tell me about it. We tried to use Wrike in a big project we did in partnership with a few other companies. It failed miserably because the project managers had no idea how to define deliverables, nor did they think to involve SMEs in defining them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2023 23:47
|
|