Interactive Planning (IAP) is a methodology used by projects to engage important stakeholders and subject matter experts in a facilitated workshop setting.
The engagement process is through collaborative discussion of project plan and strategy to develop a reliable, complete, and successful project schedule.
Interactive Planning is also widely known as Participative Planning (PP).
There has been a tectonic shift in how software is developed. Terms like Agile, CI/CD, DevOps, BDD, and TDD are new additions to the IT vocabulary.
These new practices and related tools promise to significantly reduce the time and effort required to build, test, and deploy software. Leading companies modify their applications daily and regularly push updates to their customers. For example, Trip Advisor updates its mobile app every two weeks.
A good understanding of diversity risk must be part of planning. The world is laden with so many cultures. Mixtures of these various norms creates a new norm that must be considered seriously.
If we look in the past, multiculturalism has a long and wide history in Canada. It was then adopted by the government during the 1970s and 1980s (Kobayashi, 1993) and (Duncan & Duncan, 1993).
In Primavera when we show Resource Usage Profile or Activity Usage Profile, the max value in Y-Axis is determined by software. And we may wonder how is it determined.
It is a common phenomenon. Something happens, usually something bad. Daily meetings are organized. Anyone connected with the event is there—from senior executives to junior staff. There is incredible focus. Then, the triggering issue is resolved. But the meetings continue.
It is inspirational to hear words that rhyme where a line and a stanza impart a meaning using the song-like attributes of the articulated statements. The command of a poem makes one remember. It helped some University students recall difficult formulas in integral and differential calculus. It is real and it does work. I’ve used it a lot during my college years singing “The Integral of u” to the tune of “The Wonder of u.”
Why do so many governing bodies allow their organisations to embark on high risk projects without insisting on a robust, independent assurance function?
There is nothing wrong with embarking on a high-risk, high-reward project that has the potential to transform an organisation. In fact they are almost mandatory if an organisation is going to leap-frog its competitors and gain a strategic advantage. But going into this type of project with blinkers on is a great way to waste $millions. The three elements needed to manage the risks and maximise the rewards are:
There is a debate in the Agile community regarding the role of the project manager and the scrum master. These discussions remind me of a song from the musical, Oklahoma. Rather than drawing on the commonalities and shared mission of the roles, the focus seems to be on what separates them.
The farmer and the cowman should be friends, Territory folks should all be pals. Rogers & Hart