For more information go to http://www.mspm-stiftung.de or contact Manfred [email protected]Prize Award Ceremony of MSPM Foundation for Inaugural 2012 MSPM Manfred Saynisch Project Management Innovation Award (MSPI Award) Under the ICCPM 2012 Research and Innovation Seminar, Lille, 23 rd of August 2012 Documentation
76
Embed
Prize Award Ceremony of MSPM Foundation - gpm-ipma.de...Prize Award Ceremony of MSPM Foundation for Inaugural 2012 MSPM Manfred Saynisch Project Management Innovation Award (MSPI Award)
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
For more information go to http://www.mspm-stiftung.de or contact Manfred [email protected]
Prize Award Ceremony of MSPM Foundation for
Inaugural
2012
MSPM Manfred Saynisch
Project Management Innovation
Award
(MSPI Award)
Under the
ICCPM 2012 Research and Innovation Seminar, Lille, 23rd
of August 2012
Documentation
For more information go to http://www.mspm-stiftung.de or contact Manfred [email protected]
Overview of Presentation and content of Documentation
Introduction and overview of the MSPM-Foundation Manfred Saynisch
(Documentation in Annex 1)
Formal announcement of award recipient Manfred Saynisch
(Documentation in Annex 1)
Laudatory speech Dr Louis Klein
(Documentation in Annex 2)
Handing over of award / Award Presentation
(photo documentation)
Manfred Saynisch
(Documentation in Annex 3)
Presentation of award recipient / Acceptance Speech Prof. Christophe Bredillet
(Documentation in Annex 4)
Press Release - PM World Journal Adj. Prof. Mary McKinlay
(Documentation in Annex 5)
Press Release (Germany) Dr. Dietmar Lange
(Documentation in Annex 6)
Brief description of the MSPM Foundation
Manfred Saynisch established the Manfred Saynisch Foundation for Project Management
(MSPM Foundation) in 2006 with the objective of development professional and creative
research within the scope of the science for the future of Project Management.
The MSPM-Foundation is a legal capacity public foundation and is defeated by the foundation
supervision of the state.
The focus of the MSPM-Foundation is on supporting of a realignment of Project Management
as exemplified by the EPSRC Network "Rethinking PM" (UK) or the research program "Beyond
Frontiers of Traditional Project Management" (Germany).
The purpose of the foundation is to:
• Support research and apprenticeship in the area of project management
• Discover and transfer new knowledge
• Support the inclusion of surrounding subjects of modern sciences; like general and
social system theory, Product-Lifecycle-Management, brain research or the complexity
theory (among others: self-organization, evolution theory)
• Promote innovative and border-crossing ranges of topics which are not supported by
established protagonists / organisations
• Award the "Manfred Saynisch Project management Innovation Award" for
extraordinary performances. This will be awarded for the first time this year.
SPMCONSULT
Annex 1
Prize Award Ceremony
of
2012
MSPM Manfred Saynisch
Project Management Innovation
Award
conducted by
Manfred Saynisch
Founder and CEO of the MSPM-Foundation
ICCPM 2012 Research and Innovation Seminar, Lille, 23. August 2012
SPMCONSULT
Research Programme - The analyzed Sciences IAN
Introduction and idea of MSPM-Foundation I AN
The objective of the "MSPM-Foundation”:• Professional and creative development
• within the scope of the science and research
• for the future of PM
"MSPM-Foundation" First foundation for PM in Germany
…Ordo ab Chao or “The tail that wags the dog that wags the
tail”?
A CALL FOR PERESTROIKA
’Plato and Aristotle [...] asked: “How should one live?”, and that question
is as pressing now as it was in 400 BC’ (Putnam and Putnam, 1996, p. 14).
Questioning the rationalism
• “Those who expect a ‘social-scientific Newton’ to
revolutionize this young PM field ‘are not only waiting for a
train that will not arrive, but are in the wrong station
altogether’.” (Hodgson, 2002, p. 809; Giddens, 1993, p. 18).
Back to the Future
• “The past decade has witnessed a number of interesting shifts
in the way people think about organizations …this new
antithetical thinking can be interpreted as the re-surfacing,
or recovery, of certain strands of Aristotelian philosophy,
strands that were marginalized with the rise of scientific
rationalism in the 17th century, before management and
organization studies, as we tend to conceive of them,
began.” (Tsoukas & Cummings, 1997, p. 655)
Mode of Action & Knowledge
1. Theoria (end goal: knowledge for its own sake, Truth) involves Episteme (scientific knowledge, universal, invariable, context independent and based on general analytic and positivist rationality).
2. Poiesis (end goal: production of some artefact) involves Techne (craft/art, pragmatic, variable, context dependent, based on practical instrumental rationality governed by conscious goal);
3. Praxis (end goal: practical wisdom, action) involves Phronesis(Ethics, Politics, deliberation about values, pragmatic, variable, context dependent, based on practical value-rationality). “Phronesis is that intellectual activity most relevant to Praxis”.
Beyond the Gap Practice –Theory
• "The human and the social sciences do not differ from natural
ones primarily because they deal in what are called social
constructions, or because they require 'Verstehen' rather than
explanation, prediction and control. They differ because there
is a dynamical interaction between the classifications
developed in the social sciences, and the individuals or
behaviour classified." (Hacking, 2002b, p. 10).
• Redefining the dichotomy "scholars" vs. "managers/workers“:
PraXitioners and praxeologicial style of reasoning, defined as
being the "study of human action and conduct“.
WHAT THE HELL IS PRAXEOLOGY?
Anthology
• The word praxeology is accredited to Louis Bourdeau in his
"Théorie des sciences" (1882, last but one chapter).
(Ostrowski, 1967, p. 21).
• But this comprehensiveness recovers a diversity of
• As Piaget so aptly remarked, ‘intelligence organizes the world
by organizing itself’ (quoted in von Glaserfeld, 1984: 24).
• Following this reasoning, one way of viewing organizations as
complex systems is to explore complex ways of thinking
about organizations-as complex systems; in this article we
explicate this view, which we call second-order complexity.
Tsoukas & Hatch, 2001, p. 984
Logico-scientific mode
/
"operational" mode
Narrative mode
/
"project" mode
Objective (Bruner) Truth Verisimilitude
Central problem
(Bruner)
To know truth To endow experience with
meaning
Strategy (Bruner) Empirical discovery guided by
reasoned hypothesis
Universal understanding
grounded in personal
experience
Area of focus
(Declerck)
Repetitive activities Non repetitive activities
Method (Bruner) Sound argument
Tight analysis
Reason
Aristotelian logic [we would say
rather, Platonic logic which is
deductive, Aristotelian logic
being inductive and abductive]
Proof
Good story
Inspiring account
Association
Aesthetics
Intuition
Method (Declerck) Analytical
Statistical
Deductive / predictive logic
Inductive / projective logic
Qualitative
Fuzzy
Computable or impossible
abductive / anticipative &
projective logic
Logico-scientific mode
/
"operational" mode
Narrative mode
/
"project" mode
Objective (Bruner) Truth Verisimilitude
Key characteristics
(Bruner)
Top-down
Theory driven
Categorical
General
Abstract
De-contextualized
Ahistorical
Non-contradictory
Consistent
Bottom-up
Meaning centered
Experiential
Particular
Concrete
Context sensitive
Historical
Contradictory
Paradoxical, ironic
Key characteristics
(Declerck)
Planed actions
Masked actors
Process
Rational
Algorithmic
Anhistoric (reversibility)
Cooperation
Stable and making one feel
secure
Creative actions
Unmasked actors
Praxis
Para-rational
Mosaic
Historic (irreversibility)
Confrontation
Rich, ambiguous, instable
Limits and
correctives
(Tsoukas& Hatch,
2001, p. 993)
Limits of logico-scientific
knowledge (if … then)
- imperfect generalizations
- Tacit justification
- Requires consistency and non-
contradiction
Correctives / Propositional
knowledge (there… then)
- Contextuality and reflexivity
- Expression of purposes and
motives
- temporal sensitivity
Narrative, history and story
• Etymology of the words "story" and "history": through their
Greek and Latin origins, they conveyed a similar meaning
(relation of incidents (true or false), narrative of past events,
account, tale, story; a learning or knowing by inquiry; an
account of one's inquiries, history, record, narrative) and the
historian was "a wise man, a judge, able to know and see".
Furthermore it is of great interest to note, with regards to
power and values in project situations, that "story" became
a euphemism for "lie" around 1690s.
• Narrative thinking and approach are ideally suitable in order
to integrate the general and particular through stories and
history. (Taylor, 1985; Neustadt & May, 1986; Ricoeur, 1991;
Griffin, 1995).
Gaussian & Paretian worlds
Boisot, M., McKelvey, B. (2010). Integrating Modernist and Postmodernist
Perspectives on Organizations: a Complexity Science Bridge, 35(3): 415—433.
F=N-β, where F is frequency, N is rank/size
(the variable), and β, the exponent, is
constant.
Praxeological Inquiry & Complexity Discourse
• How can praXitioners accommodate paradoxical perspectives
and possible contradictions?
– "By generating and accommodating multiple inequivalent
descriptions [an increase of 'variety'] practitioners will
increase the complexity of their understanding and,
therefore, will be more likely, in logico-scientific terms, to
match the complexity of the situation they attempt to
manage (Bruner, 1996), or, in narrative terms, to enact it
(Weick, 1979)." (Tsoukas & Hatch, 2001, p. 987).
Praxeology mediating role
• Praxis and phronesis, in their mediating role - as developed
above - serve as focal point (Habermas, 1973, p. 20),
between the logico-scientific and the narrative mode, and
have been recognised as "emancipatory" (Habermas, 1971,
p. 314; Gadamer, 1975) , and offering "a way of reflecting on
disjuncture between the formal rationality and the
substantive rationality" (Kondrat, 1992, p. 253).
Mapping Complexity & MethodologyArea of Action /
Knowledge
Power-Law
distribution
(Boisot & McKelvey,
2010, p. 416)
Ashby Space area
(Boisot & McKelvey,
2010, p. 421)
Modes of thought
(Bruner, 1986, 11—43)
Social Sciences
(Tsoukas & Hatch, 2001,
p. 984)
Complexity Theory
(Tsoukas & Hatch, 2001,
p. 984)
Poeisis / Techne
Theoria / Episteme
Gaussian world (mean,
standard deviation,
variance)
Atomistic ontology
Deductive, inductive
approaches leading to
prediction.
Ordered regime Logico-scientific mode
Modernism
(Waldrop, 1992;
Holland, 1995;
Colander, 2006)
Objective world
Variance Models (Mohr,
1982)
First-order complexity
Observer "independent"
Natural and Biological
Systems Models
(Holland, 1995, Stacey,
1996; Pich et al., 2002;
Boisot & McKelvey,
2010)Theoria / Episteme
Praxis / Phronesis
Paretian world
Connectionist ontology
Scalable abductive
approaches leading to
anticipation (Boisot &
McKelvey, 2010, p.
426—427) or
"prescience" (Corley &
Gioia, 2011, p. 13)
(See also "future-
perfect" (Pitsis, et al.,
2003, p. 574)
Complex regime
Narrative mode
Postmodernism
(Pre-modernism)
(Kuhn, 1962; Berger &
Luckmann, 1966;
Derrida, 1978; Rorty,
1980, 1989; Lyotard,
1984, Morgan, 1997)
Social construction of
the World
Middle range theories
(Merton, 1949)
"Petits récits" (Lyotard,
1984)
Qualitative accounts
- narrating organizations
(e.g. case studies)
- Collecting stories
(storytelling)
- organization as
narration (interpretive
organizational research
rooted in literary
theory)
(Czarniawska, 1997a;
1997b; 1998)
Second-order
complexity
Observer "dependent"
Middle-level theorizing
(Gell-Mann, 2002, p. 23)
Interpretive
methodology
(Rorty, 1989)
Praxis / Phronesis Chaotic regime
A DIFFERENCE THAT MAKES A DIFFERENCE
• Call for a Perestroika: offer a balanced praxeological view
(praxeology defined as study or science of human actions and
conduct, praxis, phronesis and practices) of the above-
mentioned dichotomy between social and natural science
approaches
• praxeological inquiry – ‘inventor’s paralogy’ rather than
‘expert’s homology’ only (Lyotard, 1984, p. xxv) and “‘faulty’
logic that spawns invention” (Feyerabend, 1987 in Tsoukas &
Cummings, 1997, p. 673) – as a possible meta-approach
enabling level 3 acting & learning (Bateson, 1973) – to make a
difference that makes a difference.
• Question 1: Are the research approaches used appropriate for
generating contributions that matter to both theory and
practice with regards to what a ‘project’ is or to what do we
do when we call a specific situation ‘a project’?
• To the ontological question, I advocate to consider "Project
Management-as-Praxis"
• Tensions and Paradoxes
– 1- project—action: between product (poesis) and process (praxis) and 2 – project—actor: between individual and collective actors.
• “Ontological Argument” about the non-paradigmatic nature of project management
– “As soon as we name a situation "project" we create it. But naming alone ('say') is never enough and "for a name to begin to do its creative work, it needs authority. One needs usage within institutions. Naming does its work only as a social history works itself out." (Hacking, 2002b, p. 8).
• Project management – as – Praxis: “Reconnecting Means and Ends, Facts and Values” (Tsoukas & Cummings, 1997, p. 668).
• Knowledge that matters – phronesis, practical wisdom
(Parsons, 2011) – could be consequently developed through
praxeological inquiry (praxeology being defined as science of
human action, praxis guided by phronesis in situation, and
being the focus of inquiries (Petruszewycz, 1965, p 12, Smith,
1999, 2011, p. 3).
• Question 2: On the basis of which intellectual virtues is the
knowledge generated and what is the impact for theory and
practice?
• To the epistemological question, I propose to contemplate
"Knowing-as-Practicing"
• The relations between Theory and Practice
• Mediating Theory – Practice: the role of a praxeological style
of reasoning and mode of inquiry > Knowing-as-Practicing
Theory – Practice and modes of inquiry
�
Theory Practice
Theory
(episteme, techne,
phronesis)
4 - knowledge 'from' practice (poeisis / techne;
praxis / phronesis)
6 - knowing 'as' practicing (theoria / episteme,
poeisis / techne, praxis / phronesis) -
2 - knowledge 'for' practice (techne, episteme /
poeisis)
3 - knowledge 'in' practice (techne episteme /
poeisis)
5 - knowing 'in' practice (poeisis / techne; praxis /
phronesis)
6 - knowing 'as' practicing (theoria / episteme,
poeisis / techne, praxis / phronesis)
Practice
(theoria, poeisis, praxis)
1 - knowledge 'about' practice (techne, episteme
/ poeisis)
4 - knowledge 'from' practice (poeisis / techne;
praxis / phronesis)
5 - knowing 'in' practice (poeisis / techne; praxis /
phronesis)
6 - knowing 'as' practicing (theoria / episteme,
poeisis / techne, praxis / phronesis)
3 - knowledge 'in' practice (techne, episteme /
poeisis)
5 - knowing 'in' practice (poeisis / techne; praxis /
phronesis)
6 - knowing 'as' practicing (theoria / episteme,
poeisis / techne, praxis / phronesis)
• I argue that a praxeological style of reasoning, epistemic script
and mode of inquiry is appropriate to project situations.
• Considering Project Management as Praxis, involves
recognizing a pluralistic view for knowledge (co)production
and transfer, the role of the 'praXitioner'.
• Question 3: Are the mode of action of the practitioners
‘prudent’ and are they differentiating or reconcile abstract
rationality from situated reasoning, espoused theory from
theory-in-use with regards to the mode of action they adopt
in particular project situations?
• To the praxeological question, I recommend prudent action
(praxis guided by phronesis) linking ex ante and ex post
understanding of the context and integrating deliberation
and understanding into the "moment" of action.
• "what do rigor and relevance mean in [project]
management?" [that is under conditions of uncertainty.
• Action and Uncertainty
• Prudence: standards or Verstehen?
– By contrast, to the pseudo-quantitative or mathematical
methods, which distort and oversimplify, human action is
accomplished by the use of “Verstehen” “the intuitive
quickness of enlightened understanding”. (Schütz, 1964,
p. 4). This can be related to “Ingenium” “an ‘intelligent’
action, ‘ingenium,’ this mental faculty which makes
possible to connect in a fast, suitable and happy way the
separate things” Giambattista Vico (1708).
Mapping risk/uncertainty to Ashby space and
areas of action / knowledge
Risk/Uncertainty Power-Law distribution
(Boisot & McKelvey, 2010,
p. 416)
Ashby space area
(Boisot & McKelvey,
2010, p. 421)
Area of Action /
Knowledge
Risk 1 (objective
probability)
Gaussian world (mean,
standard deviation,
variance)
Atomistic ontology
Ordered regime Poeisis / Techne
Risk 2 (statistical
probability)
Poeisis / Techne
Theoria / Episteme
Uncertainty 1 (known
unknowns – subjective
probability)
Paretian world
Connectionist ontology
Complex regime Theoria / Episteme
Praxis / Phronesis
Uncertainty 2 (unknown
unknowns –
unpredictability)
Chaotic regime Praxis / Phronesis
Theorising Risk and Uncertainty in Social Enquiry: Exploring the Contribution
of Frank Knight
Jarvis, Darryl S L
History of Economics Review; Summer 2010; 52; ProQuest Central
Page 1
• The Aristotelian teleological understanding of the world
implies to consider individuals and objects according to the
purposes they have and the role they have to play.
• Judging the contextual uncertainty is a goal-oriented and
reflective intuitive process and not a rational one in a
'controlled environment'
• A consequence of the teleological understanding is that there
are no abstract or ahistorical individuals, but persons
defined by and interacting with historical, social, cultural
context. (MacIntyre, 1985, p. 57—59).
• "Praxis is the form of reasoning appropriate to social,
political, or other interactive contexts in which the individual,
drawing on experience to provide a grasp of the immediate
situation, reasons how to act prudently and correctly in a
given set of circumstances. Prudence supersedes
effectiveness as the relevant virtue in such cases. Indeed, the
prudent person may be called on to make choices among
several potentially effective (or equally ineffective) courses of
action." (Kondrat, 1992, p. 239).
ORDO AB CHAO OR “THE TAIL THAT WAGS THE
DOG THAT WAGS THE TAIL”?
To not conclude…
• "Knowing-as-Practicing" in the context of "Project
PM World Journal Volume 1, Issue 2 September 2012 http://pmworldjournal.net/
Laudation for Christophe Bredillet for Inaugural 2012 Manfred Saynisch Project Management Innovation Award,
By Mary McKinlay in UK
23rd of August 2012, Lille, France – On the 22nd of August 2012 at the Research and Innovation
Seminar of the International Center for Complex Project Management (ICCPM) held at the SKEMA
Business School in Lille, the audience was delighted to hear an address from Manfred Saynisch
updating his work on the New Order of Project Management.
Manfred Saynisch is an award-winning researcher in Project Management, co-author of “Beyond the
Frontiers of Traditional Project Management” and he also announced the establishment of the
Manfred Saynisch Project Management Foundation. He has established this to promote research and
development of new ideas in PM. Stephen Hayes, CEO of the ICCPM, emphasised the importance of
the work of the Manfred Saynisch Project Management Foundation for the development of ground-
breaking advances in project management and their benefits for complex project management.
On the 23rd August the Winner of the inaugural, 2012 Manfred Saynisch Project Management
Innovation Award was announced as Professor Dr Christophe Bredillet. Manfred Saynisch, in his
introduction to the award spoke of Christophe’s ground breaking research for a philosophy of
science promoting Project Management.
Manfred’s announcement was followed by a laudatory speech given by Dr Louis Klein of the Systemic
excellence Group (Berlin). In his speech Louis highlighted the essence of Bredillet’s work as shifting
the research focus from the ontological “What is project management?” to the praxeological and
consequently more systemic question: “What do we think that project management is and what are
the practical implications of this thinking for the project management practice”.
Following this speech, which combined a tribute to the serious work of Christophe Bredillet with
some good humoured references to a Hawaiian shirt, Christophe delivered an erudite and thought –
provoking presentation of his research.
From left to right: Manfred Saynisch, Christophe Bredillet, Louis Klein
The inaugural, 2012 Manfred Saynisch Project Management Innovation Award was accredited to
Christophe Bredillet. The award winner was, according to Manfred Saynisch, awarded for his ground
breaking research for a philosophy of science in favour of Project Management. In his laudatory
speech Louis Klein highlighted the essence of Bredillet’s work as shifting the research focus from the
ontological “What is project management?” to the praxeological and consequently more systemic
question: “What do we think that project management is and what are the practical implications of
this thinking for the project management practice”.
The award ceremony took place on the 23rd of August 2012 at the Research and Innovation Seminar
of the International Center for Complex Project Management (ICCPM) at the SKEMA Business School
of ESC Lille. Stephen Hayes, CEO of the ICCPM, emphasised the importance of the work of the
Manfred Saynisch Project Management Foundation for the recognition of ground-breaking advances
in project management and their benefits for complex project management.
About the Author
Mary McKinlay is a Trustee and Board Member for both the Association for Project Management
(APM) in the UK and the International Centre for Complex Project Management based in Australia.
Following a degree in Systems Engineering, Mary’s career has encompassed working on large
multinational projects as well as internal IT projects. She is a project management practitioner and,
after 30 years in aerospace and defence , founded Mary McKinlay Projects
Ltd in September 2005.
In 2005, Mary was appointed as an Adjunct Professor of Project
Management at Skema in France where she teaches at the Lille and Paris
Campuses. She also works as a Visiting Professor for the EMBA Course in
Complex Project Management at Queensland University of Technology in
Australia, in addition to working as a teaching fellow at the National Centre for Project Management
at the University of Middlesex in the past year.
Her industrial experience has been complemented by work on research programmes, involving
collaboration internationally between industry and academics. She has produced many papers and is
a frequent conference speaker worldwide. The job of interesting young people in engineering
careers is a passion of hers and she is also a STEM Ambassador with special responsibilities as a
Bloodhound Ambassador (Bloodhound SSC project).
Annex 6
Press release (Germany)
Sternstunden des Projektmanagements
Erster MSPI-Award geht an Prof. Christophe Bredillet
Am 22. -23. August 2012 veranstaltete das International Center for Complex Project Management (ICCPM, www.iccpm.com) sein jährliches „Research and Innovation Seminar (R&I Seminar)“ in Lille (Franreich). Es war eingebettet in das international renommierte EDEN Doctoral Seminar der SKEMA Business School /Uni Lille (Frankreich), gegründet von Prof. Christophe Bredillet (u.a. Chefredakteur PM-Journal, PMI/Wiley-USA) und heute geleitet von Prof. Rodney Turner (Chefredakteur Internat. Journal of PM, IPMA). Hier treffen sich zahlreiche Doktoranden aus aller Welt und diskutieren ihre Arbeiten mit führenden Wissenschaftlern und bedeutenden Praktikern aus Amerika, Asien und Europa. Das diesjährige Leitthema war „Projectification of Society“. Projektmanagement 2. Ordnung (PM-2)
Am ersten Tag des R&I-Seminars von ICCPM begeisterte Manfred Saynisch das Publikum mit seinem Vortrag über die Fortschreibung seines Konzepts zum PM-2 „Second Order Project Management (PM-2) for mastering complex projects" [1]. Prof. Hiroshi Tanaka (Gründer der japanischen PM-Gesellschaft PMAJ) zeigte sich sehr interessiert an den neuen Sichtweisen und diskutierte Vergleiche mit dem neuen japanischen Konzept des „P2M“.
Das Konzept des PM-2 von Manfred Saynisch mit dem zugehörigen Forschungsprogramm „Neue Wege im PM“ wurde mit drei internationalen Forschungspreisen ausgezeichnet. 2007 wurde es mit dem damals erstmals vergebenen „IPMA Research Award“ ausgezeichnet sowie 2010 mit den ebenfalls erstmals vergebenen „ICCPM Research Prize for Complex Projects“ (zusammen mit Arbeiten von Dr. Thomas Baumann und Dr. Louis Klein für eine größere Arbeit aus dem Forschungsprogramm „Neue Wege im PM“). Ferner wurde für die Arbeiten zum PM-2 in 2011 der "Project Management Journal Paper of the Year Award" des Project Management Institut (PMI) verliehen. PMaktuell berichtigte mehrfach darüber [2]. MSPM-Stiftung (www.mspm-stiftung.de)
In seinem Vortrags zum PM-2 gab Manfred Saynisch auch bekannt, dass er eine Stiftung für Projektmanagement gegründet habe, die „Manfred Saynisch Stiftung für PM (MSPM-
Stiftung)“. Zweck dieser Stiftung ist die Förderung von Forschung und Entwicklung von neuen Ideen und Konzepten im PM, wie es beispielsweise das PM-2 Konzept darstellt. Stephen Hayes, CEO des ICCPM, betonte die Bedeutung der Arbeiten von Manfred Saynisch zum PM-2 Konzept sowie der MSPM-Stiftung für die Anerkennung bahnbrechender Fortschritte im Projektmanagement und deren Konsequenzen für das Feld des komplexen Projektmanagements. Erstmalig konnte in diesem Jahr der „Manfred Saynisch Project Management Innovation Award (MSPI-Award) vergeben werden. Verleihung des MSPI-Awards
Die Preisverleihung fand am 23. August 2012 innerhalb des R&I-Seminars des ICCPM in Lille statt. Der Preisträger, Christophe Bredillet, wurde, so Manfred Saynisch, für seine bahnbrechenden Forschungen zu einer Wissenschaftsphilosophie des Projektmanagements ausgezeichnet. Forschungen zu grundlegenden Neuentwicklungen im PM, wie es das Konzept des Projektmanagements 2. Ordnung darstellt, müssen sich den Kriterien einer Wissenschaftstheorie stellen. Doch die traditionelle Wissenschaftstheorie, wesentlich fußend auf den Positivismus, ist nur bedingt geeignet, Kriterien abzuleiten für Forschungsprozesse, die auf Evolutions- oder Chaostheorie, Selbstorganisationsprinzipien oder Hirnforschung basieren. In diese Lücke stoßen nun die Arbeiten von Bredillet, die dadurch eine hohe Aktualität erhalten.
In seiner Laudatio pointierte Dr. Louis Klein Bredillets Arbeiten als den gelungenen Versuch, den ontologischen Forschungsfokus des „Was ist Projektmanagement?“ auf die praxeologische und in Konsequenz systemischere Frage abzustellen: „Was denken wir, dass Projektmanagement sei, und was sind die Konsequenzen eines solchen Denkens für die Praxis des Projektmanagements?“. Also ein Transfer von einer traditionell positivistisch ontologischen Perspektive auf einen Forschungsfokus des ontologischen Pluralismus unter konstruktivistisch erkenntnistheoretischer Perspektive.
Von links: Manfred Saynisch,( Vorstand MSPM-Stiftung), Christophe Bredillet (Award Preisträger), Louis Klein (Laudator) – Foto: Steve Raue
Klein wies in seiner Laudatio ferner darauf hin, dass der für die Verleihung des MSPI-Awards an Bredillet die Veröffentlichungen zu seinen grundlegenden Forschungsergebnissen im „Project Management Journal (PMJ), die u.a. die problematische Verknüpfung von Theorie und Praxis thematisierten, Auslöser und Begründung war. [3]
Klein ist Experte auf dem Gebiet des Systemicschen Change Management und komplexen Projektmanagement auf einer globalen, Cross-Cultural Plattform. Er war Vice President der berühmten International Society for the Systems Sciences (ISSS) – gegründet 1955 von Ludwig v. Bertalaffny – und ist gegenwärtig Direktor der World Organisation of Systems and Cybernetics (WOSC). Er arbeitet im Forschungsprogramm der „Neuen Wege im PM“ mit. Sternstunden des Projektmanagements - Vortrag des Preisträgers Prof. Christophe Bredillet
Die Laudatio von Klein war eine Synthese, die einerseits eine Hommage an Bredillets seriösen und bahnbrechenden Arbeiten war und andererseits mit humorvollen Einlagen mit Bezug auf ein „Hawaiian shirt von Bredillet“ das so schwierige Thema auflockerte. Danach überreichte Manfred Saynisch, als Vorsitzender der MSPM-Stiftung, die Award-Urkunde an Bredillet . Seinerseits revanchierte sich Prof. Bredillet, inzwischen Direktor der “Project Management Academy at Queensland University of Technology - Faculty of Science and Engineering” in Australien, mit einem exzellenten zukunftsweisenden wissenschaftlichen Vortrag, der weit über seine bisherigen Arbeiten hinausging und weitreichende Perspektiven für die zukünftige Forschung und Entwicklung des PM aufzeigte. Sein Thema lautete: „Complex Project Management - Towards a Praxeological & 2nd Order approach”. Auch Bredillet lockerte seine anspruchsvollen wissenschaftlichen Ausführungen auf mit seinem paradoxlastigen Motto: Ordo ab Chaos or “The tail that wags the dog that wags the tail”? Das Resonanzspektrum der Zuhörer reichte von „standing ovations“ bis zu stiller Reflexion zu den weitgehend neuen, aber bedeutsamen Inhalt. Referend Michael Cavanagh (ordinierter anglikanischer Priester und Experte für hochkomplexe Projekte), der bereits 2010 auf der Jahrestagung der englischen PM Gesellschaft APM eine Key Note zum Project Management 2. Order (PM-2) hielt, sprach von „Sternstunden des Projektmanagements – ich erlebte die beste Präsentation in dieser Wochentagung“. „Zum grundsätzlichen Nachdenken anregende höchst gebildete wissenschaftliche Ausführungen“ konstatierte Prof. Mary McKinlay (Vorstand ICCPM und der englischen PM Gesellschaft APM, ehem. Vice Chair IPMA). „Bredillet ist der größte Denker, den wir augenblicklich in der PM-Community haben“, urteilte Manfred Saynisch. Mit seinen Überlegungen und Konzepten zum „Praxeological approach“ ist Bredillet auf dem besten Weg, das von Immanuel Kant in seinem Essay „Über den Gemeinspruch: Das mag in der Theorie richtig sein, taugt aber nicht für die Praxis“ geforderte Mittelglied der Verknüpfung und des Übergangs von der Theorie zur Praxis für das Projektmanagement zu definieren. Er weist mit seinen Arbeiten den Begriffen der Theorie und der Praxis eine neue Rolle zu, die in dem Titeltext von Kants Essay die Polarisierung aufhebt.. Stiftungen benötigen Spenden Um die Fördermaßnahmen der MSPM-Stiftung zur zukünftigen Weiterentwicklung des PM mittels Awards oder Zuschüssen fortzusetzen und auszuweiten ist die Stiftung auf Spenden angewiesen.
Kontakt zu den Spenden und zu diesem Artikel: E-Mail: [email protected] oder '[email protected]'. [1] Saynisch, M.: Mastering Complexity and Changes in Projects, Economy, and Society via
Project Management Second Order (PM-2). Project Management Journal PMJ, Vol. 41, Nr.5,, 4-20, Dec. 2010, Wiley/PMI USA
[2] PMaktuell, in Nr. 4/2007 (S12-14); 5/2010 (S44); 2/2012 (S59-60). [3] Insbesondere: Bredillet: "The link Research-Practice: A Matter of "Ingenium" - Part 1-3", in the editorial
of PMJ, Sept. 2006 - March 2007 Bredillet: "Blowing Hot and Cold on Project Management", in PMJ, June 2010 Dr. Dietmar Lange München, den 15.10.12 Contact: MSPM-Foundation, c/o SPM-CONSULT Dueppeler-Str. 19, 81929 Munich / Germany Tel: +49 89-93 93 09 51; E-Mail: [email protected] E-Mail: '[email protected]' http://www.mspm-stiftung.de