Project Manager - Should You Really BE THE CHANGE?

I buy into the concept that if everyone (including PMs) take steps toward ownership and execute on genuine global sustainability; it means a better world for us all. Even though I didn''''t explicitly state it in my prior sentence, PMs are expected to always demonstrate integrity, honesty and a committment to continous improvement that adds value.

The results and approach will look different for each PM, project, portfolio and organization.

One thing I''''ve observed about Greg Balestrero is his keen sense of being a visionary as it relates to Project Management. I support Greg in that PMs can and will contribut to global sustainability. Greg operates from a state of empowerment instead of limitations. He encourages us to think out of the box in our daily jobs as we bring about change. We are ambassadors of change, this includes genuine global sustainability.

I will look to PMI to add content to their website related to (1) how to incorporate this into our jobs (2) examples of others doing it and (3) creating a community of genuine global sustainability for open blogging.

Best Regards,

Lavetta T. Stevenson PMP, PMI-RMP
Missouri - Show Me State

Posted: Oct 20, 2009 11:37 PM

I guess it has a lot to do with the role of the project manager in the design phases of a project. The PM is charged with delivery of the project as designed. If the architects and designers do not include the materials that provide for optimal sustainability, the PM, unless involved in that process, needs to assume that there is a legitimate business reason for those decisions. You can ask why if you are curious but a quick way to eliminate yourself from being chosen as a PM is to continuosly question upstream business decisions. Saving the planet is all well and good but unless you are a PM for Greenpeace or the Sierra Club it may not be in your, or your client's best interests.

There is a lot of politics involved in the environmental movement. One of the key skills of a good project manager is to be above the politices and be able to focus on the successful delivery of the project's scope.

Obviously a good post Dave as it has generated a lot of discussion.

Thanks!

Posted: Oct 21, 2009 10:21 AM

Although ‘Sustainability’ is good (high percent of the time), this shouldn’t be the primary focus of all projects. Environments, economy’s, and overall Humanity changes continue to escalate as time moves linearly thus mandating Program/Project Managers to think outside the box when it comes to getting ‘Product’ out the door timely, relative cost, and with the high degree of quality.

Posted: Oct 22, 2009 2:13 PM

Hello from New Zealand. It was great to talk with you last week, and I appreciate you continuing the conversation surrounding sustainability beyond Congress. You've invited quite an interesting discussion, and I'm really enjoying reading all of the comments - they're thought provoking and exactly the type of conversation that needs to be taking place. As I mentioned, I believe global sustainability and organizational sustainability are merging together in the formation of new business values and strategies. However, the specifics of how this will affect PM remains to be seen and will require the input of project managers from around the world.

As Frank pointed out in his comment, social responsibility and sustainability are not simply about reducing an organization's carbon footprint. While that's a part of the picture, the holistic view - sometimes called the triple bottom line - looks at an organization's overall impact on people, planet and profit. In other words, how is an organization behaving to improve employees lives and the communities in which they operate, reduce negative environmental impacts and be accountable to shareholders by turning a profit? From an organizational point of view (somewhat selfishly, I might add) organizations must be concerned with the health and well being of a future workforce, as well as the availability of adequate and appropriate resources, in order to ensure that there will be a “tomorrow" or the organization.

Some suggest that becoming a more socially responsible organization requires a significant financial investment. While I have no doubt some organizations could undertake initiatives that result in a financial burden, organizations who are leading global citizens are actually saving money as a result of sustainable policies and practices. Frankly, if organizations don’t concern themselves now with healthy and strong human capital, and with maintaining available resources in the future, the cost later on can very well be the demise of the organization. In the context of organization survival, the price seems worthy and necessary.

At Congress, when we heard from Ellen Jackowski from HP, Anne Larilahti of Nokia Siemens and Sandra Taylor, a consultant formerly with Starbucks , each noted that even when the economy took a downturn, their companies did not abandon their ethically responsible platforms. This is because global sustainability had become a part of the organizations'''' DNA or core values, and had the potential to continue to contribute positively to the bottom line. HP, for example, Newsweek's greenest business of the year , created a nonhazardous waste reduction program that saved the company nearly $7.7 million from reusing items and avoiding landfill costs, and generated $2 million in revenue by selling material to recyclers.

Further, not only were they delivering tangible business results - such as reducing operational costs, differentiating from the competition, and passing cost savings on to the customer - they were also creating intangible outcomes - such as attracting and retaining employees, strengthening brand reputation, and building customer loyalty. More than a PR stunt, this is not about simply saying, it's about doing what is right by an organization's stakeholders and in the process, doing right by shareholders.

The interesting question facing project management practitioners is: "What is your role in contributing to a more sustainable organization?" No doubt a project manager's role is not to solely focus on sustainability, but rather to incorporate it into his or her overall approach. So, in addition to focusing on scope, time and cost, a fourth consideration should be sustainability. Certainly, there are sensitivities relating to whether a project manager sits in-house or is an outsourced executor of a project. Further, project managers must weigh the risks of speaking up in an organization whose culture does not encourage new ideas, but ultimately, the goal is to bring positive business results which should not be overlooked. Going forward, the project professional is ethically responsible on behalf of the organization, and on his or her own behalf, to maintain vigilance, and in some ways, enforcement of the tenets of sustainability throughout the life cycle of the project.

From my perspective, project managers can either choose to lead or choose to follow – they can wait until it is a law or regulation, and then “comply” or they can help the organization integrate and develop sustainable values, processes, and practices. In short, lead now or comply later. The former approach is one for the "thinks" PM and will add far greater value to organizations and to their surrounding communities. As I have said, this is not about looking to check off a checklist; it's about being a forward thinker and identifying ways in which you can manage projects, portfolios and programs as responsible global citizens, focusing on the triple bottom line.

While in an ideal world, everyone within the organization - from top to bottom - would embrace this philosophy, I truly believe that project managers can be the agents for positive change - after all, project managers regularly manage change within organizations.

Ultimately, the question of the project manager's role is not going to be answered today or tomorrow, but these discussions will help shape how project managers approach their work and continue to be on the forefront of organizational excellence. I am excited about this dialog. And I am so committed to this topic that I have had PMI establish a community of practice for our members to share experiences and ideas about integrating global sustainability thinking into all projects and about integrating project, program, and portfolio management into all global sustainability actions. Therefore, I encourage your readers, who are PMI members to join the PMI Project Management Global Sustainability Community of Practice. They will have an opportunity to learn, share and contribute more to the role project management professionals have in meeting this important responsibility.

Posted: Oct 23, 2009 3:45 PM

Dave,

I see lots of great comments and viewpoints that should cause a PM to examine the greatest scope toward successful and cost-effective completion of a given project. What seems to be consistently lacking in the discussion is a definition of "sustainability". A couple posters noted this was too loose. They are right. Until the word, any word, is defined, it can simply be a buzzword that invokes an emotional response. As PMs, we must be able to lead a project through with a minimum of emotion--don''t get me wrong here, we are emotional beings and removing that from any human effort is impossible--but our focus must be on how to best accomplish the task at hand. We do so by critically evaluating the data and resources available against the goals of the project. We must realize we live in a political world and keeping a close eye on developing political trends is important, but cannot eclipse the purpose of the business providing a product or service to its customers.

Paul

Posted: Oct 25, 2009 6:40 PM

Dave,


Wow. An incredible thread of comments to digest! It is exciting to realize that sustainable project management is getting legs on an international level. There has been some discussion on what 'sustainable' means on a macro and micro level.


I work as a PM for essentially a software development company. Here are two off-the-top-of-my-head ideas for injecting sustainability into my day-to-day job:
1. Decrease the need for paper (provide more options through mobile phone accessibility and when we talk about changing/creating printable reports, identify what is absolutely necessary for our clients)
2. Increase ease of use (this may sound menial but on a micro level, the less time we keep users on the system, the less time they use energy right?)


From a macro level I think sustainability is a question I need to keep posing while planning and implementing in our company. It has been enlightening and educational to read these posts.


Thank you,
Jasmine


Posted: Oct 25, 2009 7:33 PM

Dave,

Thanks for putting this topic on the table. Although I enjoyed reading all the posts to date, I developed a gnawing sense of frustration about both the amorphous qualities of the topic (as mentioned by others) and the distracting political subtext of related environmental issues. (I also questioned whether Mr. Balestraro was playing the lateral thinking game my colleagues have used to train consultants—“pull two topics out of a hat and explain how they are logically connected or related”. The project manager as champion of sustainability seems tenuous at first blush.)

Before adding to the dialog, I think the obvious connections between project management and ‘sustainability’ should be called out:

1. PM in Green. All significant “green/sustainability” initiatives should benefit from the same quality project management that other initiatives do. So, project managers—by doing what they already do—play an important role in sustainability.

2. Green in PM. Project Managers—as good corporate citizens—should look for ways to reduce waste, support ethical business practices, conserve resources, etc. within the scope of their daily work. Overall, most citizens of advanced cultures have a growing appreciation for thinking and acting this way (although it is not universal). Project managers are not exempt. (In my experience there is significant overlap between the greening of a project and good business—e.g., when one devises a way to accomplish a task with a remote, distributed team that has historically required travel, it is good conservation and good fiscal stewardship. It is also good business to know when to travel.)

If this was all Mr. Balestraro was talking about we wouldn’t have much to discuss (and this string of responses would be much shorter). It seems these two points only scratch the surface of his vision.

Mr. Balestraro’s further contribution to the conversation helped to address the problem of the amorphous topic. He confirmed that the holistic view of his topic is the triple bottom line—people, planet, profit. In a later paragraph he proposed that “…in addition to focusing on scope, time and cost, a fourth consideration should be sustainability.”

There are at least two important points to address here. First, I disagree with the proposed addition of sustainability as a fourth consideration alongside scope, time, and cost. If the project has a sustainability consideration it should be translated into one or all of the existing considerations of scope, time, and cost. SCOPE should include the goals or desired outcomes of the project. The best defined projects do this in multiple categories. A project might define goals in financial, brand, customer-related, employee-related, process, and environmental categories (Conner Partners, a firm with whom I often partner, calls these “currencies”.) The best planned projects factor in the TIME period required to ensure a solution is fully installed and its benefits are realized (as described by the scope). Time should also include all proper close-out procedures—including taking proper care of the people involved as they are recognized, rewarded, reassigned, etc. Good for people, good for business. COST should include all significant cost—not only dollars (or equivalent). Cost should consider capital expenditures, temporary service disruption, the lost opportunity to pursue other options with finite resources, disruption to the workforce, impact on executive and corporate trust, damage to brand image, etc. If we broaden our lens, we can see that sustainability is a factor, but not an independent one.

The second point is related to the relationship between the two lists—the triple bottom line (people, planet, profit) and the factors of scope, time, and cost. The second list (scope, time, cost) is not a continuation or an elaboration of the first; they compose a different lens through which the world is viewed--and in a sense--exist on a different plain. On the first plain, we are talking about corporate level decisions that define how the organization will declare success (people, planet, profit). On the second plain, we are discussing factors (scope, time, cost, and sustainability?) that a project manager deals with *in service to* the bottom line (however the organization defines it). Part of the frustration around this topic is rooted in the relationship between these two plains and the vastly different influence and responsibility that a project manager has in each.

Warren G. Bennis said, “Leaders are people who do the right thing; managers are people who do things right.”

Forgive the simplicity of the reference, but it applies. I am not suggesting that as project managers, we are not leaders. I am suggesting that in that role we are the managers—the stewards—of someone else’s leadership decisions. We are to “do things right” to ensure execution of the “right things” decided by others. As a project manager, I must bridle my passion for any other goal that limits my ability to deliver the full intent (the true purpose and desired outcomes) of the sponsor’s project. The PM should think twice about using the project as a vehicle for promoting personal passions—even noble ones. If by “doing things right” as a project manager, I earn the opportunity to play or influence on the strategic decision plain, there will I have the opportunity to help define the corporate “right thing” decisions.

Balestraro’s message is better suited to those operating on the “right things” plain. Although I am sure that Mr. Balestraro takes every opportunity to influence executives to think and act in more sustainable ways, his primary audience is the project management professional (lower case). Many executives—though hesitant to admit it—will roll their eyes when they hear someone encouraging project managers to add *anything* to the priorities of scope, time, and cost. There is a trust issue at stake here. The executive must be confident that all key players in the project are working toward the same goals and are making decisions in consistent ways. And each person adding a fourth elective to the list challenges that trust.

The good news is that whether or not we all embrace the specter global meltdown, mankind’s role as ‘steward’ of the global garden, the ethic of environmentalism, or the final word in the debate over paper or plastic, we can still have a thoughtful dialog about the roles project managers play in doing the business of business (or government, or education, or defense…)—and doing it more sustainably.

-Stephen

Posted: Oct 26, 2009 11:10 AM

(My apologies for the misspelling--along with other typos--of Mr. Balestrero's last name. -swm)

Posted: Oct 26, 2009 11:21 AM

Stephen Maye brings up an interesting point, Is a project manager a ‘leader’ or a ‘manager’? Are we simply to follow orders, and get the things done that someone else has decided need to be done OR are we part of the planning team, do we have the right and the obligation to bring activities to the table?
Without wanting to sound corny … We all have responsibility for the planet and our decisions, even the small ones can have an effect. As project managers our thoughts and ideas have more power and can count for more than most peoples. We have the power to bring the green issues to the table and we should do so.

The decision for what to have on the deliverables list and what work gets paid for does rest with the executive, but they can only make those decisions placed in front of them. We should not simply assume that as the directives to “go Green” was not passed on that a decision against that “green” action was made; in my experience the executive team frequently just hasn’t thought about it yet.

I think that project managers are part of the leadership team for their projects. If we see a gap in the deliverables list, whatever that gap is, we have the right to bring that deficiency forward for discussion and planning. Not planning for environmental sustainability can add risk to the project in the form of everything from legal issues, to bad publicity to a reduction in project team moral. We should lead the discussion on these issues.


Posted: Oct 26, 2009 12:12 PM

One more thing, we should not assume that the "green" option is always more expensive. I have seen many times where this is not true. At the very least the options should be investigated and detailed and passed forward for a decision.

Posted: Oct 26, 2009 12:18 PM

I like your summary Dave.



I agree that we as project managers should not wait for anyone else to lead this; it is our job to look for sustainability, push back at times in support of it, and highlight the positive aspects of sustainable approaches over alternatives. It is our job to market sustainability as a benefit to sponsors and customers.



At the same time we should not let sponsors and institutions off the hook either. It is reasonable for them to make sustainability a requirement and expect external impacts to be transparent. For that matter, how about a "certified sponsor" credential that ensures our project sponsors know how to properly support our projects from all angles including sustainability?



I think the LEED is a good example in construction of a credential which certifies that the individual is using sustainable practices on their projects. I do not know of a similar certification process in any other industry, although I am sure there are some I just am not aware of.



Greg mentioned utilization of the computing in the cloud as a potential area for focus because it is harder to tell whether the organizations who are running all the servers are treating their people well, using sustainable practices, etc. In the old days you just had servers in your own local switch so it was easier to see the impacts right in front of you. You knew who was employed to maintain them and their work conditions and how much electricity was being used. You could even calculate the carbon footprint if you went to the trouble, but how do you do that now when your applications are hosted elsewhere?



The best thing we can do as project managers though is this: Instead of using vague terminology saying that we will "try to look out for sustainable approaches" we need to document specifics. It is the same with quality. Just saying you are going to focus on quality is not the same as setting specific, measurable goals and then holding yourself accountable as a measure of quality.



So, for each industry and company specifically, PMO leads and project managers should create specific guidelines for the context in which they work. It could be a checklist for each project, the specifics of which could role up to reporting at the program/company level to highlight what actions are being taken. Now you have some PR that is concrete and full of integrity.



Josh Nankivel

pmStudent.com

Posted: Oct 26, 2009 4:08 PM

More from Michael Wood [who sent this to my email directly - posted here with his permission]

There's nothing wrong with sustainability but it goes way way way beyond being green. That is merely a single dimension. Certainly idiologies come into play. Shall we factor into all our edeavors speculation on future regulations that may or may not materialize? And if so, at what cost?

Better to build in eco-friendly technologies. policies and practices where they are aligned with the stakeholders of the organization. Social conscience is but one dimension of the enterprise and should be respected given the proper evaluation of trade-offs are made.

My concern is when we put eco-friendly before function and payback to the point where payback is never achieved and true sustainability, the financial kind is threatened.

Given the compy with the inevetable concept would imply that all coal plants should just close down now and not wait for Cap & Trade. Any takers? Same with automanufacturers, why wait to be free of fossil fuel cars, why not just stop making them now? As an former "C" level exec. I believe PMs first alegance is to the enterprise and that they should follow the LEAD of the Board and CEO when leading projects and initiatives in all matters related to ROI, Sustainability and Social Righteousness. There job is deliver value that aligns with the enterprise. If that includes making eco-sustainability a priority then great. But that is just my opinion, and most likely a minority one at that.

Posted: Oct 26, 2009 5:04 PM

I have great respect for Greg Balestrero and the things he has accomplished while leading PMI. I find it hard to disagree with the idea of being more environmentally or socially responsible in what we do as PMs, so, I don''t really feel that it is something I can challenge in terms of the message, but in response to your question about whether or not this is something PMI should be focused on, I’m struggling with that one.

The presentation I saw at the PMI Global Congress that had the most significant impact on me was given by Gary Heerkens and it was called “A ‘State of the Union’ Address on Project Mangement: An Examination of a Profession in Crisis”. In his talk, Heerkens put forth the argument that what we do as PMs is facing a crisis that is “related to authority figures – those who determine how project mangement is deployed and practiced.” Quoting and referencing a number of respected leaders in the PM community, including Harold Kerzner and Neal Witten, as well as his own 20 years of experience, Heerkens explored what he perceives to be a gradual erosion of respect for the role of Project Managers. Some of the case studies he presented included PMs being assigned projects in which they had neither the background or resources necessary to have any reasonable chance of success, or companies who have the position of Project Manager organizationally listed as one step up from secretary. Perhaps more telling than anything else, he referenced the question he has been asked with increasing frequency over the past two decades of working and teaching in project management, “How do I get out of this career?”

PMI was founded with the goal of legitimizing our profession in the workplace, and they’ve had great success in expanding project management on a global scale, but getting us a seat at the table is not enough. For the profession to be able to wield the power in the workplace that is necessary for us to make an impact on things like environmental responsibility, a significant amount of work needs to be done to raise the perceived value that seasoned PMs bring to a company.

Everyday that I go to work I take up the mantle of change agent, but more often than not, the change I am focused on is a little lower in Maslow’s hierarchy. The sad reality of it is that many of us end up acting as an agent of change for organizations who sometimes forget to keep their folks motivated to even think about “the business” at all instead of simply appeasing a manager who may be more focused on following a defined process simply because it is defined.

Environmental responsibility is something we should all be focused on at an individual level, I have no argument against that. We should all wear seatbelts too. My challenge to PMI would be to ask them, now that you’ve reached a point where PMs are an accepted part of the workspace landscape, what are you doing to shift the perception so that Gary Heerkens no longer has students show up for a basic PM training program claiming that they’ve just been put in charge of a $9 million project and that their management told them they could learn everything they needed to know about project management in a single three day class.


Posted: Oct 27, 2009 1:46 AM

In my opinion this topic is (or should be) bigger than Green and Sustainability. Project Managers have the opportunity to play a larger role in a company''s overall social responsibility strategy. There are often many solutions to a problem or need - the cheapest, the fastest, the newest, the sleekest. Some might say that we''re tending towards the trendiest with so many green related buzzwords, but I think we should focus on helping our companies have a social conscious - making decisions that we can all live with in the long term. Doing the right thing isn''t usually the cheapest, fastest, newest or sleekest - but should still be considered if there is a social value beyond the bottom line. Does it protect or improve the environment? Does it eliminate the use of child labor? Does it create opportunities for an underpriviledged group of people? Does it advance a body of knowledge for which the community at large will benefit? Sometimes these alternatives can cost little more than traditional solutions, and depending on the company''s social compass, might be well worth the additional upfront downside (cost, time, etc).



Posted: Oct 27, 2009 10:31 PM

I only have a brief comment. The discussion about "sustainability," reminds me of the difference between "scorched earth" projects and "capital investment" projects. I've seen many projects where the PM did ANYTHING to bring it in home on time and under budget, including cutting software corners, buying less than optimal equipment, working their crew into the soil. I've seen (thankfully, many more) projects where the PM realized that both he and his product were going to be around long enough for the public to have a good, long look at them, and behaved accordingly.
This seems to me a metaphor for the "sustainability," discussion. As a project manager, yes, you work for the business management that is ultimately making the "what" decisions. But as a project manager, it's largely left up to you "how" that's going to be accomplished. Often, that leaves a lot of leeway to lead your team down a path with a few more benefits than just the financial bottom line. A PM isn't in a position to change a strip mine assignment into a wildlife preserve one, but they might be in a position to divert the stream that would have been poisoned from the mine they're assigned to dig.

Posted: Oct 28, 2009 8:43 PM

Dave:

Greg makes several valid points here. It is perhaps less noticable in the commercial world, but when you are dealing with a government entity (such as, in my case, the City and County of Denver) sustainability becomes a major factor in projects of all sorts.

We deal with not only Technology Projects covering a wide variety of customer agency needs (public safety, public development, libraries, museums, traffic management, paving, snow removal, etc.), but also construction projects and technology integration, and must consider much else when taking these from ideation to implementation. Carbon footprint, waste generation, recycling, paper usage, and a host of other less visible sustainability issues come to the forefront.

I believe it is incumbent on an Association like PMI to champion the change which we will all have to go through over the coming years to promote sustainability and reduce the projects more negative impacts across the board. Because we are dealing with public money in the provision of service to our constituents, we must deal with this issue ALL of the time.

Posted: Oct 29, 2009 4:49 PM

Great topic. Congruent with the closing speech at the Orlando Congress. IMO there's nothing wrong with retaining a wider view while working through your projects - or any other kind of work. Just don't take your eye off the ball. Poor broke people who are not delivering business value are responsible for most of the environmental degradation on the planet. Rich people who are succeeding are the ones that can afford to save the whales.

So make your projects successful first and if it's easy to be sustainable (or whatever) during that process then do it.

Posted: Nov 2, 2009 4:21 PM

Thanks Dave for the "thought provoking" conversation. My thought on this is that you're both right.

"Integrating economic, social and environmental value into all portfolios,programs, and projects enables project management practitioners to add quantifiable advantage to their organizations," said Gregory Balestrero,president and CEO, PMI."

It really all goes back to an organizations' strategic plan that is aligned with the projects, programs and portfolios of an organization, government agency, nonprofit or small business.

The global economy has been in a downturn for a few years so the handwriting has been on the wall for some time so to speak. Organizational CIOs/AIOs/CEO/CFO are going from a "doing more with less" mantra to today "doing less with less" mantra. Governments are adopting best practices from various sources to bring in innovation in IT using Enterprise Architecture, pairing with launch of green IT initiatives to reduce the carbon footprint in the enterprise, improve sustainability for the environment and business and recruit, retain and train a sustainable workforce and make government services accessible and transparent to the consumer. It' can't happen fast enough as in many states including California, businesses close daily, budgets are tightened to avoid loss of services to consumers and everyone is doing less with less.

All of this change has created a huge opportunity for project management practitioners to apply innovation in the use of social media tools, showcase best practice methodologies and techniques in Project Management and help broaden the pervasiveness of project management into Communities of Practice. Every resource from top to bottom is affected by these changes. PMI can play a big part in helping to advocate to project managers how they can make a difference across the globe; Greg is doing a nice job in carrying the flag with his message.

Greg Balestrero also mentions; "Frankly, if organizations don’t concern themselves now with healthy and strong human capital, and with maintaining available resources in the future, the cost later on can very well be the demise of the organization. In the context of organization survival, the price seems worthy and necessary."

Global organizations are grappling with real human capital issues so every resource from Information Technology to Human Resources are working on operational and strategic projects. Human Resources is tranforming from a transactional to a project based department in the organization. Project Human Resource Management is not just an issue from a project perspective but is a very real global human capital issue in regards to sustainability from a business perspective. Today, people need jobs and organizations need qualified ,skilled talented resources to fit into the right jobs like Project Management, Human Resources, Information Technology and the list goes on.

IBM came out with their "IBM Global Human Capital Study 2008 - Unlocking the DNA of The Adaptable Workforce" by Tim Ringo and Randy MacDonald which listed four top themes for Global HR Executives: Developing an adaptable workforce – A critical capability, Revealing the leadership gap – Future growth at risk, Cracking the code for talent, and Driving growth through workforce analytics. Also, Society for Human Resource Management Foundation (SHRM) did a similiar study entitled "Strategic Research on Human Capital Challenges 2007". SHRM Foundation findings are not to far off the IBM study listing five future challenges: Succession Planning, Recruiting and Selecting Talented Employees, Engaging and Retaining Talented Employees and Providing Leaders with Skills to be Successful, Rising Healthcare Costs, and Creating/Maintaining a Performance-based Culture. These studies are pretty signicant to the HR field of practitioners who hold a major department in all organizations; they have alot on their plate and I believe that project management can help in a big way.

All in all studies show we have a human capital crisis issue, a multigenerational workforce, fewer early retirees and retirees returning to the workforce and over 50% of women today who are sole breadwinners in their households.

PMI has also created a complimentary Project Human Resource Management Community of Practice |http://bit.ly/nqb2s. Please join this new emerging community that is an important anchor on this issue of sustainabiliy to contribute, learn and share your thoughts.

Posted: Nov 3, 2009 6:33 PM

Dave and Greg,



Outstanding discussion!



This is a natural for us, if you will excuse the pun. The comments here give us further inspiration and provide traction for an effort we have had underway for some time.



We are particularly proud, inspired, excited, motivated - many words come to mind - when we read the insightful comments by PMI CEO Greg Balestrero.

As you are probably aware (and thanks for directing us here, Dave Garrett!), we have been pioneers in this area. We have initiated a web page (EarthPM) - at the intersection of Green and PM, were amongst the first on the Sustainability Community of Practice, are under contract for a green PM book due out in early 2010, and have formally submitted a proposal to PMI for significant enhancements to the 5th Edition PMBOK(R) Guide and the Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct - all focused on sustainability.



In fact, this is a perfect place to once again express our strong sentiments by sharing the Five Assertions of EarthPM:




1. A project run with green intent is the right thing to do, but it will also help the project team do things right.

2. Project managers must first understand the green aspects of their projects, knowing that this will better equip them to identify, manage, and respond to project risks.

3. An environmental strategy for a project provides added opportunity for success of both the project and the product of the project.

4. Project managers must view their projects through an environmental lens. This increases the Project Manager’s (and the project team’s) long-term thinking and avails the project of the rising “green wave” of environmentalism.

5. Project Managers must think of the environment in the same way that they think of quality. It must be planned in, and the cost of "greenality", like the cost of quality, is more than offset by the savings and opportunities it provides.





We welcome the opportunity to participate in this discussion and, given the fact that we are still in the process of editing our book, and also given the fact that our website features interview with leaders in this area, we want to invite project managers - whatever their viewpoints or angles on this subject - to engage us in dialog on this most timely and important of subjects.



The best way to get to know us better and to get into that dialog is to visit us at http://earthpm.com, where you can check out our background in the area (about 60 years between us), contact information, an "Earthly Blog", and interviews with green project leaders.



Thanks, and we look forward to connecting with many of you on this.



Dave Shirley, PMP

Rich Maltzman, PMP

EarthPM - at the intersection of Green and PM

Posted: Nov 4, 2009 12:08 AM

Greg will be speaking about sustainability (see press release below) at IIL's IPM Day Virtual Conference tomorrow. -- just in case you want to hear it from the CEO himself.

PMI Celebrates 6th Annual International Project Management Day

—CEO Gregory Balestrero to serve on panels addressing sustainability in project management—

Newtown Square, Pa., 2 November 2009 — Project Management Institute (PMI), the world’s leading project management professional membership organization, joins a global community of organizations celebrating International Project Management (IPM) Day on 5 November 2009. IPM Day, now celebrating its 6th anniversary, is dedicated to recognizing the extraordinary efforts made by project management professionals everywhere – across industries and geographies.

In recognition of IPM Day, PMI president and CEO Gregory Balestrero will participate in a webcast , hosted by International Institute for Learning (IIL), with other project management experts to discuss critical issues facing project managers and project teams today. He will also serve on two panels on the subject of “Achieving Sustainability in a Shifting Global Economy” with renowned project management thought leader Dr. Harold Kerzner, IIL. Other participants for the two panels will include Bonnie Nixon, manager of Hewlett-Packard's Ethical Sourcing Program; David DeLaire, CTO for wind energy pioneer Eolfi; and Steve DelGrosso, PMP, director of Project Management Center of Excellence at IBM. Both will be moderated by IPM Day founder Frank Saladis.

“In honor of International Project Management Day, it is fitting that the foremost project management leaders are gathering together to discuss what I believe to be one of the most important topics for the future of project, program and portfolio management – global sustainability,” said Balestrero. “Far from simply looking at the carbon footprint of our projects, project managers must consider the ‘triple bottom line’ – people, planet, profit – as they look to truly add value to the organizations they serve. Through my conversations with project managers around the world, I have witnessed very thoughtful and productive discussions surrounding the role project managers can take to advance more sustainable organizations through their work. While no one has all the answers at this time, I believe the sustainability panels on IPM Day – and conversations occurring simultaneously around the world – will get us one step closer to developing a consensus and identifying common practices for the profession.”

In order to further engage project management professionals on the topic of sustainability, PMI has established the Project Management Global Sustainability Community of Practice , a Web portal that allows members the opportunity to learn, share and contribute more to the role they have in meeting this important responsibility.

Posted: Nov 4, 2009 1:54 PM