The Triple Constraint in Project Management - Revision history

S141886: /* Annotated Bibliography */

2019-03-04T15:46:01Z

Annotated Bibliography

@@ Line 48: / Line 48: @@
 ==Annotated Bibliography==
-.
+[1] Pretorius, J. H. C., Van Wyngaard, C. J. and Pretorius, L. Theory of the triple constraint– a conceptual review.IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering andEngineering Management, 13:1991–1997, 2012.
 ==References==
   <references />

S141886: /* Conclusion */

2019-03-04T15:37:21Z

Conclusion

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:37, 4 March 2019
Line 45:		Line 45:

	==Conclusion==		==Conclusion==
	There does not seem to be a clear agreement whether scope or quality should be the third constraint in the model. The traditionally thought of a Triple constraint model is constantly challenged and accused for being inflexible, too simple and not useful to measure success as a project manager. Even though others are more positive many would like to modify the model. What is not negotiable is that the project manager will have to balance between different constraints during the project life cycle and the constraints will affect each other due to the interdependence of the constraints.		There does not seem to be a clear agreement whether scope or quality should be the third constraint in the model. Which constraint to chose as the third could very well depend on the type of project and the complexity of the project The traditionally thought of a Triple constraint model is constantly challenged and accused for being inflexible, too simple and not useful to measure success as a project manager. Even though others are more positive many would like to modify the model. What is not negotiable is that the project manager will have to balance between different constraints during the project life cycle and the constraints will affect each other due to the interdependence of the constraints.



	==Annotated Bibliography==		==Annotated Bibliography==

S141886: /* Limitations */

2019-03-04T15:36:16Z

Limitations

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:36, 4 March 2019
Line 42:		Line 42:
	The Triple Constraint model has been widely used since the 1950s and the application and limitations have been discussed extensively. Back in 1999 Atkinson criticized the model of being too locked and not being able to follow the ongoing development of the project management phenomenon <ref name="Atkinson"/>. He believed the problem back then was that while project management evolved in many areas the success criteria remained unchanged because of the close relation to the project definition. He considered the possibility of why projects fail as a result of the success being measured by a limited set of criteria to match which he claimed to be "two best guesses and a phenomena". He suggested a new model "The Square Route" to understand success criteria which he believed to be a better and more balanced and realistic indication of success <ref name="Atkinson"/>. The "Square Route" includes success criteria which benefit the organization and stakeholder community such as improved efficiency and effectiveness and satisfied users personal development and so forth. But is it in fact necessary to extend the Triplet Constraint to all these sub categories? It would be possible to regard all these additional success parameters as a part of the defined quality/scope constraint. Maybe it is just a matter of how specific you are about your quality and scope constraints as a project manager and how much you listen to and involve your stakeholders when constraining the project and measure success using the Triplet Constraint model. It might also depend on the type of project, it could be that some types of projects are better suited for the TripletConstraint model than others.		The Triple Constraint model has been widely used since the 1950s and the application and limitations have been discussed extensively. Back in 1999 Atkinson criticized the model of being too locked and not being able to follow the ongoing development of the project management phenomenon <ref name="Atkinson"/>. He believed the problem back then was that while project management evolved in many areas the success criteria remained unchanged because of the close relation to the project definition. He considered the possibility of why projects fail as a result of the success being measured by a limited set of criteria to match which he claimed to be "two best guesses and a phenomena". He suggested a new model "The Square Route" to understand success criteria which he believed to be a better and more balanced and realistic indication of success <ref name="Atkinson"/>. The "Square Route" includes success criteria which benefit the organization and stakeholder community such as improved efficiency and effectiveness and satisfied users personal development and so forth. But is it in fact necessary to extend the Triplet Constraint to all these sub categories? It would be possible to regard all these additional success parameters as a part of the defined quality/scope constraint. Maybe it is just a matter of how specific you are about your quality and scope constraints as a project manager and how much you listen to and involve your stakeholders when constraining the project and measure success using the Triplet Constraint model. It might also depend on the type of project, it could be that some types of projects are better suited for the TripletConstraint model than others.

	Today we have a definition of a project in the ISO 21500 which does not directly contain the the criteria of time, cost and quality and yet the model is still debated <ref name="ISO"/>. In line with Atkinson it is often claimed that the model is way too simple as a measure of project success and that it is neglecting other important constraints and that the model is not aligned with the actual lived experience of projects <ref name="VanDerHoorn"> Van Der Hoorn, B., Whitty, S.J. ''Signs to dogma: A Heideggerian view of how artefacts distort the project world'' International Journal of Project Management, 33:1206–1219, (2015). </ref>. It is stated that the Triple Constraint model simplifies the challenges and difficulties that will occur and will need to be addressed during a project. Van Der Hoorn & Whitty (2015) claims it can be critical for inexperienced project managers to use the triple constraint model because the focus will be to manage time, cost and scope/quality and everything else will be neglected which they consider as simple thinking <ref name="VanDerHoorn"/>. When it becomes to simple it is easy to forget the complexity of a project and the higher purpose. Even though Van Wyngaard et al. (2012) in general seem positive about the triple constraint model a modification to the model is still proposed <ref name="VanWyngaard"/>. The "TRIJECT" model is proposed to support/consolidate the Triplet Constraint model and connect it to the higher purpose of the project which is claimed to be missing in the traditional Triple Constraint model as also Van Der Hoorn & Whitty (2015) claims <ref name="VanDerHoorn"/>. The "TRIJECT" model forms a continuous cycle which represent the ongoing process that runs when a change is introduced to the system <ref name="VanWyngaard"/>. But is the simplicity exactly what makes the triplet constraint useful? The broad categories of time, cost and scope/quality can basically contain everything you could imagine as a success criteria which you could argue is actually a very flexible model. It is just a matter of how specific you define you project. The risk is of course if you are a inexperienced project manager it can be hard to keep track of all these sub categories of success criteria which implies in the broad categories of time, cost and scope/quality. As mentioned earlier the Triple Constraint model is useful to understand how the trade-off mechanism ~~work~~ but it can not be used to actual determine success which you also have to keep in mind when using the model. The PMBOK guide describe the projects managers role as someone who has the ability to develop and manage scope, schedules and budgets so maybe it is not that important whether we use one model or the other as long as we remember the interdependence between the constraints <ref name="PMBOK"/>.		Today we have a definition of a project in the ISO 21500 which does not directly contain the the criteria of time, cost and quality and yet the model is still debated <ref name="ISO"/>. In line with Atkinson it is often claimed that the model is way too simple as a measure of project success and that it is neglecting other important constraints and that the model is not aligned with the actual lived experience of projects <ref name="VanDerHoorn"> Van Der Hoorn, B., Whitty, S.J. ''Signs to dogma: A Heideggerian view of how artefacts distort the project world'' International Journal of Project Management, 33:1206–1219, (2015). </ref>. It is stated that the Triple Constraint model simplifies the challenges and difficulties that will occur and will need to be addressed during a project. Van Der Hoorn & Whitty (2015) claims it can be critical for inexperienced project managers to use the triple constraint model because the focus will be to manage time, cost and scope/quality and everything else will be neglected which they consider as simple thinking <ref name="VanDerHoorn"/>. When it becomes to simple it is easy to forget the complexity of a project and the higher purpose. Even though Van Wyngaard et al. (2012) in general seem positive about the triple constraint model a modification to the model is still proposed <ref name="VanWyngaard"/>. The "TRIJECT" model is proposed to support/consolidate the Triplet Constraint model and connect it to the higher purpose of the project which is claimed to be missing in the traditional Triple Constraint model as also Van Der Hoorn & Whitty (2015) claims <ref name="VanDerHoorn"/>. The "TRIJECT" model forms a continuous cycle which represent the ongoing process that runs when a change is introduced to the system <ref name="VanWyngaard"/>. But is the simplicity exactly what makes the triplet constraint useful? The broad categories of time, cost and scope/quality can basically contain everything you could imagine as a success criteria which you could argue is actually a very flexible model. It is just a matter of how specific you define you project. The risk is of course if you are an inexperienced project manager it can be hard to keep track of all these sub categories of success criteria which implies in the broad categories of time, cost and scope/quality. As mentioned earlier the Triple Constraint model is useful to understand how the trade-off mechanism works but it can not be used to actual determine success which you also have to keep in mind when using the model. The PMBOK guide describe the projects managers role as someone who has the ability to develop and manage scope, schedules and budgets so maybe it is not that important whether we use one model or the other as long as we remember the interdependence between the constraints <ref name="PMBOK"/>.

	==Conclusion==		==Conclusion==

S141886: /* Limitations */

2019-03-04T15:35:09Z

Limitations

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:35, 4 March 2019
Line 40:		Line 40:

	==Limitations==		==Limitations==
	The Triple Constraint model has been widely used since the 1950s and the application and limitations have been discussed extensively. Back in 1999 Atkinson criticized the model of being too locked and not being able to follow the ongoing development of the project management phenomenon <ref name="Atkinson"/>. He believed the problem back then was that while project management evolved in many areas the success criteria remained unchanged because of the close relation to the project definition. He considered the possibility of why projects fail as a result of the success being measured by a limited set of criteria to match which he claimed to be "two best guesses and a phenomena". He suggested a new model "The Square Route" to understand success criteria which he believed to be a better and more balanced and realistic indication of success <ref name="Atkinson"/>. ~~In the~~ "Square Route" ~~is including~~ success criteria which benefit the organization and stakeholder community such as improved efficiency and effectiveness and satisfied users personal development and so forth. But is it in fact necessary to extend the Triplet Constraint to all these sub categories? It would be possible to regard all these additional success parameters as a part of the defined quality/scope constraint. Maybe it is just a matter of how specific you are about your quality and scope constraints as a project manager and how much you listen to and involve your stakeholders when constraining the project and measure success using the Triplet Constraint model.		The Triple Constraint model has been widely used since the 1950s and the application and limitations have been discussed extensively. Back in 1999 Atkinson criticized the model of being too locked and not being able to follow the ongoing development of the project management phenomenon <ref name="Atkinson"/>. He believed the problem back then was that while project management evolved in many areas the success criteria remained unchanged because of the close relation to the project definition. He considered the possibility of why projects fail as a result of the success being measured by a limited set of criteria to match which he claimed to be "two best guesses and a phenomena". He suggested a new model "The Square Route" to understand success criteria which he believed to be a better and more balanced and realistic indication of success <ref name="Atkinson"/>. The "Square Route" includes success criteria which benefit the organization and stakeholder community such as improved efficiency and effectiveness and satisfied users personal development and so forth. But is it in fact necessary to extend the Triplet Constraint to all these sub categories? It would be possible to regard all these additional success parameters as a part of the defined quality/scope constraint. Maybe it is just a matter of how specific you are about your quality and scope constraints as a project manager and how much you listen to and involve your stakeholders when constraining the project and measure success using the Triplet Constraint model. It might also depend on the type of project, it could be that some types of projects are better suited for the TripletConstraint model than others.

	Today we have a definition of a project in the ISO 21500 which does not directly contain the the criteria of time, cost and quality and yet the model is still debated <ref name="ISO"/>. In line with Atkinson it is often claimed that the model is way too simple as a measure of project success and that it is neglecting other important constraints and that the model is not aligned with the actual lived experience of projects <ref name="VanDerHoorn"> Van Der Hoorn, B., Whitty, S.J. ''Signs to dogma: A Heideggerian view of how artefacts distort the project world'' International Journal of Project Management, 33:1206–1219, (2015). </ref>. It is stated that the Triple Constraint model simplifies the challenges and difficulties that will occur and will need to be addressed during a project. Van Der Hoorn & Whitty (2015) claims it can be critical for inexperienced project managers to use the triple constraint model because the focus will be to manage time, cost and scope/quality and everything else will be neglected which they consider as simple thinking <ref name="VanDerHoorn"/>. When it becomes to simple it is easy to forget the complexity of a project and the higher purpose. Even though Van Wyngaard et al. (2012) in general seem positive about the triple constraint model a modification to the model is still proposed <ref name="VanWyngaard"/>. The "TRIJECT" model is proposed to support/consolidate the Triplet Constraint model and connect it to the higher purpose of the project which is claimed to be missing in the traditional Triple Constraint model as also Van Der Hoorn & Whitty (2015) claims <ref name="VanDerHoorn"/>. The "TRIJECT" model forms a continuous cycle which represent the ongoing process that runs when a change is introduced to the system <ref name="VanWyngaard"/>. But is the simplicity exactly what makes the triplet constraint useful? The broad categories of time, cost and scope/quality can basically contain everything you could imagine as a success criteria which you could argue is actually a very flexible model. It is just a matter of how specific you define you project. The risk is of course if you are a inexperienced project manager it can be hard to keep track of all these sub categories of success criteria which implies in the broad categories of time, cost and scope/quality. As mentioned earlier the Triple Constraint model is useful to understand how the trade-off mechanism work but it can not be used to actual determine success which you also have to keep in mind when using the model. The PMBOK guide describe the projects managers role as someone who has the ability to develop and manage scope, schedules and budgets so maybe it is not that important whether we use one model or the other as long as we remember the interdependence between the constraints <ref name="PMBOK"/>.		Today we have a definition of a project in the ISO 21500 which does not directly contain the the criteria of time, cost and quality and yet the model is still debated <ref name="ISO"/>. In line with Atkinson it is often claimed that the model is way too simple as a measure of project success and that it is neglecting other important constraints and that the model is not aligned with the actual lived experience of projects <ref name="VanDerHoorn"> Van Der Hoorn, B., Whitty, S.J. ''Signs to dogma: A Heideggerian view of how artefacts distort the project world'' International Journal of Project Management, 33:1206–1219, (2015). </ref>. It is stated that the Triple Constraint model simplifies the challenges and difficulties that will occur and will need to be addressed during a project. Van Der Hoorn & Whitty (2015) claims it can be critical for inexperienced project managers to use the triple constraint model because the focus will be to manage time, cost and scope/quality and everything else will be neglected which they consider as simple thinking <ref name="VanDerHoorn"/>. When it becomes to simple it is easy to forget the complexity of a project and the higher purpose. Even though Van Wyngaard et al. (2012) in general seem positive about the triple constraint model a modification to the model is still proposed <ref name="VanWyngaard"/>. The "TRIJECT" model is proposed to support/consolidate the Triplet Constraint model and connect it to the higher purpose of the project which is claimed to be missing in the traditional Triple Constraint model as also Van Der Hoorn & Whitty (2015) claims <ref name="VanDerHoorn"/>. The "TRIJECT" model forms a continuous cycle which represent the ongoing process that runs when a change is introduced to the system <ref name="VanWyngaard"/>. But is the simplicity exactly what makes the triplet constraint useful? The broad categories of time, cost and scope/quality can basically contain everything you could imagine as a success criteria which you could argue is actually a very flexible model. It is just a matter of how specific you define you project. The risk is of course if you are a inexperienced project manager it can be hard to keep track of all these sub categories of success criteria which implies in the broad categories of time, cost and scope/quality. As mentioned earlier the Triple Constraint model is useful to understand how the trade-off mechanism work but it can not be used to actual determine success which you also have to keep in mind when using the model. The PMBOK guide describe the projects managers role as someone who has the ability to develop and manage scope, schedules and budgets so maybe it is not that important whether we use one model or the other as long as we remember the interdependence between the constraints <ref name="PMBOK"/>.

S141886: /* Application */

2019-03-04T15:33:36Z

Application

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:33, 4 March 2019
Line 32:		Line 32:

	==Application==		==Application==
	The project manager will often during a project face ~~continuously~~ conflicting demands from stakeholders and competing priorities. During the project's life cycle it is the project managers job to balance between these constraints to obtain a successful project. As mentioned earlier the Triple Constraint model often ~~require~~ trade-offs performed by the project manager if additional requirements to either time, cost and scope/quality arise. It is therefore the project managers job to know how the constraints interrelate. The application of the model is to understand the mechanism of the interrelated constraints in order to obtain a successful project but it is not possible to determine success by using the model.		The project manager will often during a project continuously face conflicting demands from stakeholders and competing priorities. During the project's life cycle it is the project managers job to balance between these constraints to obtain a successful project. As mentioned earlier the Triple Constraint model often requires trade-offs performed by the project manager if additional requirements to either time, cost and scope/quality arise. It is therefore the project managers job to know how the constraints interrelate. The application of the model is to understand the mechanism of the interrelated constraints in order to obtain a successful project but it is not possible to determine success by using the model.

	===The Dynamics of the Triple Constraint===		===The Dynamics of the Triple Constraint===
	The dynamics of the Triplet constraint indicates that a change in one of the constraints will result in changes in the others because of the interdependence between them. In many projects it is common that one or more of the constraints are fixed. For example if the project has a fixed time constraint the scope/quality of the end product will depend on the cost and available resources. The same dynamics apply if instead the project scope is fixed. The cost will then largely depend upon the schedule and duration <ref name="VanWyngaard"/> . According to Van Wyngaard et al.(2012) the inherent dynamics of the Triplet Constraint can be described by three key relationships (Figure 3) <ref name="VanWyngaard"/> . In the figure is scope represented as the third constraint, but it could easily be replaced with quality and the mechanism would be the same, as the figure shows that any of the variables can be obtained at the expense of one or both of the remaining two variables. [[File:Relations.png\|center\|thumb\|400px\|Figure 3: The three relationships of the inherent trade off mechanism of the Triple Constraint <ref name="VanWyngaard"/>]]		The dynamics of the Triplet constraint indicates that a change in one of the constraints will result in changes in the others because of the interdependence between them. In many projects it is common that one or more of the constraints are fixed. For example if the project has a fixed time constraint the scope/quality of the end product will depend on the cost and available resources. The same dynamics apply if instead the project scope is fixed. The cost will then largely depend upon the schedule and duration <ref name="VanWyngaard"/> . According to Van Wyngaard et al.(2012) the inherent dynamics of the Triplet Constraint can be described by three key relationships (Figure 3) <ref name="VanWyngaard"/> . In the figure is scope represented as the third constraint, but it could easily be replaced with quality and the mechanism would be the same, as the figure shows that any of the variables can be obtained at the expense of one or both of the remaining two variables. [[File:Relations.png\|center\|thumb\|400px\|Figure 3: The three relationships of the inherent trade off mechanism of the Triple Constraint <ref name="VanWyngaard"/>]]

	Within the trade-off mechanism is the notion according to Van Wyngaard et al. (2012) in general, that project managers are constrained to chose two of the three elements and in order to gain the chosen two the third is sacrificed. This is also known as: "Good, fast, or cheap? Pick two" <ref name="VanWyngaard"/>. This principle is used to describe Figure 3 in the following <ref name="VanWyngaard"/>. The first relationship in Figure 3 shows that if it is desired to achieve the scope or increase it, it requires that time and/or cost increases. If it is imagined that the cost is fixed, there is two outcomes for the project, either the project to be "cheap" because of the fixed cost or "good" because of increment of scope but the project can never be fast because of the increasing time. The second relationship in Figure 3 explains the effect of reducing the duration of the project. In order to reduce the time and make the project "fast" , a reduction of the scope together with a possible larger cost is necessary. Again we have two outcomes if we imagine that the scope is fixed. A "fast" and "good" project can be obtained because of the fixed scope but the project will never be "cheap" because of the larger cost. The third relationship in Figure 3 explains how the effect of reducing the cost affect the project. If the cost is reduced it necessitates a reduction of the project scope and/or a longer duration of the project. A fixed time gives rise to a "cheap" project and a "cheap" project because of the decreased cost, but then the project will not be "good". The relationships can be used as a guideline when understanding how the trade off between the constraints work. It can also be used to explain how additional demands from stakeholders affect the project. It is however important to keep in mind that there may be other aspects constraining the project and that the relevance of the constraints might depend on the context<ref name="Pollack"/>.		Within the trade-off mechanism is the notion according to Van Wyngaard et al. (2012) in general, that project managers are constrained to chose two of the three elements and in order to gain the chosen two the third is sacrificed. This is also known as: "Good, fast, or cheap? Pick two" <ref name="VanWyngaard"/>. This principle is used to describe Figure 3 in the following <ref name="VanWyngaard"/>. The first relationship in Figure 3 shows that if it is desired to achieve the scope or increase it, it requires that time and/or cost increases. If it is imagined that the cost is fixed, there are two outcomes for the project, either the project to be "cheap" because of the fixed cost or "good" because of increment of scope but the project can never be fast because of the increasing time. The second relationship in Figure 3 explains the effect of reducing the duration of the project. In order to reduce the time and make the project "fast" , a reduction of the scope together with a possible larger cost is necessary. Again we have two outcomes if we imagine that the scope is fixed. A "fast" and "good" project can be obtained because of the fixed scope but the project will never be "cheap" because of the larger cost. The third relationship in Figure 3 explains how the effect of reducing the cost affect the project. If the cost is reduced it necessitates a reduction of the project scope and/or a longer duration of the project. A fixed time gives rise to a "cheap" project and a "cheap" project because of the decreased cost, but then the project will not be "good". The relationships can be used as a guideline when understanding how the trade off between the constraints work. It can also be used to explain how additional demands from stakeholders affect the project. It is however important to keep in mind that there may be other aspects constraining the project and that the relevance of the constraints might depend on the context<ref name="Pollack"/>.

	==Limitations==		==Limitations==

S141886: /* Quality */

2019-03-04T15:32:28Z

Quality

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:32, 4 March 2019
Line 28:		Line 28:

	===Quality===		===Quality===
	Both the ISO 12500 standard (2013) and the PMBOK guide (2017) mentions quality as one of the competing project constraints <ref name="ISO"/> <ref name="PMBOK"/>. The PMBOK guide (2017) describes quality management as the processes for incorporating the organization's quality policy and controlling the product quality requirements in order to meet the stakeholders expectations. But is quality A part of the Triplet Constraint?		Both the ISO 12500 standard (2013) and the PMBOK guide (2017) mentions quality as one of the competing project constraints <ref name="ISO"/> <ref name="PMBOK"/>. The PMBOK guide (2017) describes quality management as the processes for incorporating the organization's quality policy and controlling the product quality requirements in order to meet the stakeholders expectations. But is quality a part of the Triplet Constraint?
	Some of the newest research by Pollack et al. (2018) have reviewed network diagrams and concluded that time, cost and quality were highly interconnected while scope was not even present in any of these networks. ~~Implied~~ that if the Triplet Constraint should be based on the most interconnected constraints it would consist of time, cost and quality <ref name="Pollack"/>. At the same time the paper argues that the relevance of the constraints whether if it is time, cost, quality, or any other criteria are entirely contingent on the context.		Some of the newest research by Pollack et al. (2018) have reviewed network diagrams and concluded that time, cost and quality were highly interconnected while scope was not even present in any of these networks. This implied that if the Triplet Constraint should be based on the most interconnected constraints it would consist of time, cost and quality <ref name="Pollack"/>. At the same time the paper argues that the relevance of the constraints whether if it is time, cost, quality, or any other criteria are entirely contingent on the context.

	==Application==		==Application==

S141886: /* Scope */

2019-03-04T15:31:31Z

Scope

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:31, 4 March 2019
Line 25:		Line 25:
	The scope is related to the work and deliverables necessary to complete the project successfully and the processes required to identify and define these. Project scope management is very important no matter which type of project. If the scope is not controlled and resources are used on tasks that are not a part of the scope it can be difficult to deliver a finished project that is on time and budget. As stated by the PMBOK Guide (2017) scope management is primarily concerned with defining and controlling what is, and what is not included in the project<ref name="PMBOK"/>. Another important dimension in project scope management is how to be able to deal with and manage changes. During the project new demands can arrive naturally as the project evolve and stakeholders might have new and additional requests which changes the scope. The duration of each new task is critical to the successful completion of the final project <ref name="Westland"/>.		The scope is related to the work and deliverables necessary to complete the project successfully and the processes required to identify and define these. Project scope management is very important no matter which type of project. If the scope is not controlled and resources are used on tasks that are not a part of the scope it can be difficult to deliver a finished project that is on time and budget. As stated by the PMBOK Guide (2017) scope management is primarily concerned with defining and controlling what is, and what is not included in the project<ref name="PMBOK"/>. Another important dimension in project scope management is how to be able to deal with and manage changes. During the project new demands can arrive naturally as the project evolve and stakeholders might have new and additional requests which changes the scope. The duration of each new task is critical to the successful completion of the final project <ref name="Westland"/>.

	How to cope with stakeholders and to only accommodate those changes that are necessary to achieve the project goals and deliverables are important as changing the scope can have great impact on the cost and schedule because of the interdependence in the Triplet Constraint. For example if we have a project where the goal is to ~~built~~ a two storey family house the scope is then determined by the goal. The idea is that if we know what to achieve, it it possible to find a way on how to do it <ref name="Marchewka"> Marchewka, J.T. ''Information Technology Project Management: Providing Measurable Organizational Value'' John Wiley & Sons, Inc., (2003)p.31-34 </ref>. In other words, the scope is defined by the goal. When the scope is determined the schedule and budget can be determine as well and the work can begin. If the client then asks for additional features e.g a balcony or an extra storey this will not surprisingly require additional resources. Extra work load for the team due to increase of the project scope will result in time and cost increase according to the Triple Constraint (Figure 1). If the budget was fixed the only way to decrease the cost is to decrease the scope, meaning no additional features in this case <ref name="Marchewka"/>. It could also be the time that was fixed meaning additional resources in terms of people would have to work on the project resulting in higher cost in order to meet the scope. Because the three constrains are interdependent a change in one of them will result in changes in the others.		How to cope with stakeholders and to only accommodate those changes that are necessary to achieve the project goals and deliverables are important as changing the scope can have great impact on the cost and schedule because of the interdependence in the Triplet Constraint. For example if we have a project where the goal is to build a two storey family house the scope is then determined by the goal. The idea is that if we know what to achieve, it it possible to find a way on how to do it <ref name="Marchewka"> Marchewka, J.T. ''Information Technology Project Management: Providing Measurable Organizational Value'' John Wiley & Sons, Inc., (2003)p.31-34 </ref>. In other words, the scope is defined by the goal. When the scope is determined the schedule and budget can be determine as well and the work can begin. If the client then asks for additional features e.g a balcony or an extra storey this will not surprisingly require additional resources. Extra work load for the team due to increase of the project scope will result in time and cost increase according to the Triple Constraint (Figure 1). If the budget was fixed the only way to decrease the cost is to decrease the scope, meaning no additional features in this case <ref name="Marchewka"/>. It could also be the time that was fixed meaning additional resources in terms of people would have to work on the project resulting in higher cost in order to meet the scope. Because the three constrains are interdependent a change in one of them will result in changes in the others.

	===Quality===		===Quality===

S141886: /* Scope */

2019-03-04T15:31:05Z

Scope

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:31, 4 March 2019
Line 23:		Line 23:

	===Scope===		===Scope===
	The scope is related to the work and deliverables necessary to complete the project successfully and the processes required to identify and define these. Project scope management is very important no matter which type of project. If the scope is not controlled and resources are used on tasks that are not a part of the scope it can be difficult to deliver a finished project that is on time and budget. As stated by the PMBOK Guide (2017) scope management is primarily concerned with defining and controlling what is, and what is not included in the project<ref name="PMBOK"/>. Another important dimension in project scope management is how to be able to deal with and manage changes. During the project new demands can arrive naturally as the project evolve and stakeholders might have new and additional requests which changes the scope. The duration of each new task is critical to the successful completion of the final project <ref name="Westland"/>. How to cope with stakeholders and to only accommodate those changes that are necessary to achieve the project goals and deliverables are important as changing the scope can have great impact on the cost and schedule because of the interdependence in the Triplet Constraint. For example if we have a project where the goal is to built a two storey family house the scope is then determined by the goal. The idea is that if we know what to achieve, it it possible to find a way on how to do it <ref name="Marchewka"> Marchewka, J.T. ''Information Technology Project Management: Providing Measurable Organizational Value'' John Wiley & Sons, Inc., (2003)p.31-34 </ref>. In other words, the scope is defined by the goal. When the scope is determined the schedule and budget can be determine as well and the work can begin. If the client then asks for additional features e.g a balcony or an extra storey this will not surprisingly require additional resources. Extra work load for the team due to increase of the project scope will result in time and cost increase according to the Triple Constraint (Figure 1). If the budget was fixed the only way to decrease the cost is to decrease the scope, meaning no additional features in this case <ref name="Marchewka"/>. It could also be the time that was fixed meaning additional resources in terms of people would have to work on the project resulting in higher cost in order to meet the scope. Because the three constrains are interdependent a change in one of them will result in changes in the others.		The scope is related to the work and deliverables necessary to complete the project successfully and the processes required to identify and define these. Project scope management is very important no matter which type of project. If the scope is not controlled and resources are used on tasks that are not a part of the scope it can be difficult to deliver a finished project that is on time and budget. As stated by the PMBOK Guide (2017) scope management is primarily concerned with defining and controlling what is, and what is not included in the project<ref name="PMBOK"/>. Another important dimension in project scope management is how to be able to deal with and manage changes. During the project new demands can arrive naturally as the project evolve and stakeholders might have new and additional requests which changes the scope. The duration of each new task is critical to the successful completion of the final project <ref name="Westland"/>.

			How to cope with stakeholders and to only accommodate those changes that are necessary to achieve the project goals and deliverables are important as changing the scope can have great impact on the cost and schedule because of the interdependence in the Triplet Constraint. For example if we have a project where the goal is to built a two storey family house the scope is then determined by the goal. The idea is that if we know what to achieve, it it possible to find a way on how to do it <ref name="Marchewka"> Marchewka, J.T. ''Information Technology Project Management: Providing Measurable Organizational Value'' John Wiley & Sons, Inc., (2003)p.31-34 </ref>. In other words, the scope is defined by the goal. When the scope is determined the schedule and budget can be determine as well and the work can begin. If the client then asks for additional features e.g a balcony or an extra storey this will not surprisingly require additional resources. Extra work load for the team due to increase of the project scope will result in time and cost increase according to the Triple Constraint (Figure 1). If the budget was fixed the only way to decrease the cost is to decrease the scope, meaning no additional features in this case <ref name="Marchewka"/>. It could also be the time that was fixed meaning additional resources in terms of people would have to work on the project resulting in higher cost in order to meet the scope. Because the three constrains are interdependent a change in one of them will result in changes in the others.

	===Quality===		===Quality===

S141886: /* Scope */

2019-03-04T15:30:45Z

Scope

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:30, 4 March 2019
Line 23:		Line 23:

	===Scope===		===Scope===
	The scope is related to the work and deliverables necessary to complete the project successfully and the processes required to identify and define these. Project scope management is very important no matter which type of project. If the scope is not controlled and resources are used on tasks that are not a part of the scope it can be difficult to deliver a finished project that is on time and ~~under budged~~. As stated by the PMBOK Guide (2017) scope management is primarily concerned with defining and controlling what is, and what is not included in the project<ref name="PMBOK"/>. Another important dimension in project scope management is how to be able to deal with and manage changes. During the project new demands can arrive naturally as the project evolve and stakeholders might have new and additional requests which changes the scope. The duration of each new task is critical to the successful completion of the final project <ref name="Westland"/>. How to cope with stakeholders and to only accommodate those changes that are necessary to achieve the project goals and deliverables are important as changing the scope can have great impact on the cost and schedule because of the interdependence in the Triplet Constraint. For example if we have a project where the goal is to built a two storey family house the scope is then determined by the goal. The idea is that if we know what to achieve, it it possible to find a way on how to do it <ref name="Marchewka"> Marchewka, J.T. ''Information Technology Project Management: Providing Measurable Organizational Value'' John Wiley & Sons, Inc., (2003)p.31-34 </ref>. In other words, the scope is defined by the goal. When the scope is determined the schedule and budget can be determine as well and the work can begin. If the client then asks for additional features e.g a balcony or an extra storey this will not surprisingly require additional resources. Extra work load for the team due to increase of the project scope will result in time and cost increase according to the Triple Constraint (Figure 1). If the budget was fixed the only way to decrease the cost is to decrease the scope, meaning no additional features in this case <ref name="Marchewka"/>. It could also be the time that was fixed meaning additional resources in terms of people would have to work on the project resulting in higher cost in order to meet the scope. Because the three constrains are interdependent a change in one of them will result in changes in the others.		The scope is related to the work and deliverables necessary to complete the project successfully and the processes required to identify and define these. Project scope management is very important no matter which type of project. If the scope is not controlled and resources are used on tasks that are not a part of the scope it can be difficult to deliver a finished project that is on time and budget. As stated by the PMBOK Guide (2017) scope management is primarily concerned with defining and controlling what is, and what is not included in the project<ref name="PMBOK"/>. Another important dimension in project scope management is how to be able to deal with and manage changes. During the project new demands can arrive naturally as the project evolve and stakeholders might have new and additional requests which changes the scope. The duration of each new task is critical to the successful completion of the final project <ref name="Westland"/>. How to cope with stakeholders and to only accommodate those changes that are necessary to achieve the project goals and deliverables are important as changing the scope can have great impact on the cost and schedule because of the interdependence in the Triplet Constraint. For example if we have a project where the goal is to built a two storey family house the scope is then determined by the goal. The idea is that if we know what to achieve, it it possible to find a way on how to do it <ref name="Marchewka"> Marchewka, J.T. ''Information Technology Project Management: Providing Measurable Organizational Value'' John Wiley & Sons, Inc., (2003)p.31-34 </ref>. In other words, the scope is defined by the goal. When the scope is determined the schedule and budget can be determine as well and the work can begin. If the client then asks for additional features e.g a balcony or an extra storey this will not surprisingly require additional resources. Extra work load for the team due to increase of the project scope will result in time and cost increase according to the Triple Constraint (Figure 1). If the budget was fixed the only way to decrease the cost is to decrease the scope, meaning no additional features in this case <ref name="Marchewka"/>. It could also be the time that was fixed meaning additional resources in terms of people would have to work on the project resulting in higher cost in order to meet the scope. Because the three constrains are interdependent a change in one of them will result in changes in the others.

	===Quality===		===Quality===

S141886: /* Cost */

2019-03-04T15:30:12Z

Cost

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:30, 4 March 2019
Line 20:		Line 20:

	===Cost===		===Cost===
	Normally projects cost money and the cost is related to the processes required to develop the budget and to monitor progress to control ~~costs~~<ref name="ISO"/>. In order to complete the project within an approved budget project cost management is needed. Project cost management includes the processes involving estimation of costs so the budget can be determined. When the budget is determined the cost has to be controlled so the project can be completed within budget<ref name="PMBOK"/>.		Normally projects cost money and the cost is related to the use of resources and the processes required to develop the budget and to monitor progress to control cost<ref name="ISO"/>. In order to complete the project within an approved budget project cost management is needed. Project cost management includes the processes involving estimation of costs so the budget can be determined. When the budget is determined the cost has to be controlled so the project can be completed within budget<ref name="PMBOK"/>.

	===Scope===		===Scope===