From FORwiki
			
												
			
|   | This article is developed within the scope of the Project Visions and Visioning, an effort to enhance Foresight learning through collaborative work. | 
  
Visionary Project is the third lecture from a module on Visions and Visioning, first taught to graduate students from the Communication Faculty of the National School for Political and Administration Studies (Romania).
  No Vision, No Projects 
 
  project management - a troubled discipline 
- optimization school - how to plan a project?
- factor school - what determines a project’s success?
- contingency school - why do projects differ?
- behavior school - how do projects behave?
- governance school - how are projects governed?
- relationship school - how are projects generated?
- decision school - why do projects continue to live?
  cross-fertilization 
- a simple and clear-cut definition of project and project management would be a difficult feat
- projects are defined as complex sets of activities, complex tasks, organizational structures, organization processes, transactions, networks, large-scale investments
- some overlap and shared ideas are discerned regarding project definition, such as temporarity, complexity, and interdisciplinary
  Temporary Social Systems 
  temporary organisation 
- the time dimension is reflected by various concepts that are being used: temporary work, temporary systems, projectification and temporary organisations
- groups of people collaborating to accomplish a joint task with the duration of the collaboration explicitly fixed, either by a specific date or by the attainment of a predefined task or condition
  some features of TOs 
- a set of diversely skilled people working together on a complex task over a limited period of time
- limited in duration and membership, and in which people come together, interact, create something, and then disband
- structures of limited duration that operate within and between permanent organisations.
- bringing together a group of people who are unfamiliar with one another’s skills, but must work interdependently on complex tasks
- separate legal and financial entities set up for a specific task and dissolved upon its completion
  communalities & variables 
- four common elements: 
- limited duration 
- one or more tasks to achieve, which are the reason for which the TO is set up 
- one or more teams interacting and working on the task(s) 
- the production of change through action and the completion of tasks(s)
 
- variables: 
- the complexity of the tasks 
- the level of uncertainty as to whether the objective will be met 
- the interdependence of team members 
- limited resources (time, instruments, budget)
- the degree of red tape within the TO
- leadership style 
- methods and styles of communication 
- levels of complexity of intra- or inter-organisational TOs
level of isolation and/or interdependence of the TO with respect to the organisational contexts
 
  interorganisational TOs 
- composed of independent and sovereign organizations collaborating mainly to contribute to a common task
characteristic elements:
- partnerships
- team structure
- goals
- roles
- responsibilities
- products
- paperwork
- assessment criteria
 
  trans-national European projects 
- pre-project - the preparation and planning of the project proposal and the establishment of the consortium
- implementation, monitoring and on-going evaluation of the project work-plan
- reporting – sets out and clarifies achieved, on-going and final results and deliverables and their consistency with planned aims, objectives, defined resources and timing.
- exploitation and mainstreaming - criteria in assessing the projects’ effectiveness and results
  ITOs organizational dimension 
- micro: core partners - information, decision-making, co-ordination flows, work flows are most stable over time
- meso: partner’s consortium - competences and roles are defined during the bid preparation stage
- macro: stakeholder network - fragile with respect to external stresses
  Shrinking Time 
  life in the dromosphere 
-  in this new world of accelerated reality, traditional planning becomes in many ways a contradictory effort
-  planning requires a model that structures the world and allows change to be studied in a context that is assumed to remain stable
-  planning works best when the dimensions of the problem remain the same
  strategic information systems 
- IS developed with the intention of furthering or enabling a specific strategy
- most important SIS applications are those which enable an organization to form its future relationship with its environment
- the challenge is to break the rules of the past and structure IS to meet a variety of changing information requirements, some of which cannot even be known before the systems are built
  vision failures 
- the problem is that, by modeling processes and structures as they are at present, SIS developments are failing to take into account future requirements
- detrimental effects:
- the organisation's SIS development effort will be diverted or wasted
- the SIS will not support the organisation's long-term strategy
- the organisation's strategic flexibility may be compromised
 
  step 1: conception 
- creative, generative mental process, probably with a high degree of originality and with relatively little formality or routine
- potential techniques may support the process:
- creativity methods – ”blue-sky thinking”, ”brainstorming”, ”world caffe”
- abstractization – SWOT, TOWS, STEEP, PESTE analysis
 
  step 2: interpretation 
- abstract and intuitive qualities of vision are at odds with the precision which is necessary for analysing, specifying and designing information systems
- support:
- focussing techiques – SODA (Strategic Options Development & Analysis), SCA (Strategic Choice Approach)
- giving meaning - semantic analysis techniques
 
  step 3: intention 
- interpretation of the abstract vision onto achievable objectives, define targets and levels of performance
- techniques for:
- objective-setting – Strategic Options Generator, ICA model
- target-setting – CSF (critical success factor analysis)
 
  step 4: synthesis 
- contributions of the various participants and the various strategic options which have been identified at the previous stage are synthesized into ”a single ambition”
- practices
- participation – soft systems methodology
- consensus-building – Delphi technique
 
  step 5: integration 
- communicating the agreed values, norms, behviours and having them accepted as the ”cultural norm”
- components:
- communication techniques
- inspiration - inspiring the participants to accept and follow the vision; team-building techniques
 
  step 6: implementation 
- the information system would be designed as it should be, not as it is presently
- architectures and models are based largely on normal analysis and design techniques such as entity-relationship models, data flow diagrams and a variety of referential matrixes
- the approach may be forward-looking, but the  techniques for developing requirements don’t support it
  what about the nature of projects? 
- the structural relation between project and vision crumbles, as the vision implodes into a project that is both determined by the vision and its container
- the project is re-shaped into an evolutionary endeavor, in which even the word “project” is recursively re-imprinted
- the reason for “project” proves to be internal, rather than external, while dissatisfaction is revealed to result from alienation, rather than stress factors
  Concept 
  probing the future 
- a concept car is a car prototype made to showcase a new vehicle’s styling, technology, and overall design before production
- they are often shown at motor shows to gauge customer reaction to new and radical designs which may or may not have a chance of being produced
  concept vehicles