PMI Romania Annual Conference
| Last week, I was in Bucharest to deliver a workshop at the PMI Romania Chapter Conference. I enjoy sharing my knowledge and experience of applying AI in project management with participants who are eager to learn and open to embracing AI-based solutions. This was an extremely well-organized event, and every member of the volunteer staff made me feel welcome. They exuded professionalism along with their excitement to host such a well-attended (sold-out) event. I noticed the engaged attention of participants throughout my interactive presentation and was pleased that my 90-minute workshop received positive feedback. These project management practitioners have a thirst for knowledge and a desire to improve the projects they manage. The additional value was networking with like-minded individuals from many distinct project areas. This event may not be as large as a PMI Global Congress, but I encourage all project subject matter experts to accept the invitation to speak at local chapter events when an opportunity arises. It is very rewarding. I want to extend my heartfelt thanks to all the outstanding individuals I had the pleasure of meeting at the PMI Romania Chapter. Your warm welcome and enthusiasm made my workshop experience truly memorable. |
Four Steps to Increase Your Project Data IQ
| Project managers have a significant opportunity to increase the value they bring to an organization by embracing AI. This is especially relevant to data management. Making a machine learning algorithm effective requires determining the best set of project features to use as input. Data scientists are now a scarce resource. Yet, it is doubtful that a data scientist is prepared to understand the nuances of project data. Here are four practical steps for successful data management when using AI. These steps are designed to be straightforward and manageable, empowering project managers to take control of their data.
With increased skills in basic data management, the project manager becomes an integral part of the organization's successful adoption of AI-based tools. Their role becomes significantly more valuable, and their contributions will be recognized as they help navigate the complexities of AI. |
Comparing PMI Infinity Responses to Three Other Large Language Models
| Here is a comparison of large language model (LLM) responses to the same prompt. The scenario is a project manager asking for suggestions to recover a project schedule from being late. The input is simple as if the project manager had no time to perform extensive prompt engineering or provide specific current and historical project data. The comparison was made on the same day (June 20) for all LLMs. The first row is the LLM used. The second row indicates the number of steps in the suggested process, although some had sub-steps or additional suggestions. The recommendations are listed with similar content in the same row. Although the responses are summarized, the wording is intended to reflect the responses as accurately as possible. INPUT: “My project completion date is late to schedule. How can I recover the time?” The table is a summary of each set of responses.
Observations According to PMBOK 7th ed., the two main schedule compression methods are crashing and fast tracking. Crashing is a specific technique that determines the most effective schedule reduction at the least cost for tasks on the critical path. Fast tracking evaluates if tasks normally performed in sequence, a finish-to-start relationship, can have some or all of a task done in parallel with another task on the critical path. None of the LLMs suggested both of these. CoPilot was the only LLM that used the term “crashing” the schedule. It was disappointing that PMI Infinity did not include this. PMI Infinity and ChatGPT included risk management. ChatGPT and Gemini were the only LLMs that responded with a social concern for the well-being of the project team. It is important to remember that LLM responses, like those of other AI-based solutions, are determined by the data accessed. From my perspective, ChatGPT offered the most comprehensive recommendations, and CoPilot had the weakest response. What observations do you think are relevant in this comparison? |
Comparing ChatGPT to Two Other LLMs
| In a previous blog titled, An Empirical Study Comparing ChatGPT to Project Managers, I described a scope document study comparing the results of ChatGPT to the ability of project management students. In my research, ChatGPT was faster at identifying errors and more accurate, but it was only about 80 percent accurate. The study also revealed that some errors in the document were not listed by the large language model (LLM). One of my student groups at the business college in France performed a variation on my work and included it in their major assignment. They compared three LLMs by requesting them to identify errors in a scope document.
Observations The first observation is that LLMs perform at different speeds, although all are very fast compared to humans. The next observation is that each LLM had a different result. The explanation for different results should be obvious. Since the input document was identical for each LLM, the different results are based on what data each LLM could access. The quality and quantity of data used to train machine learning models are significant factors in producing accurate and reliable results. Acquiring high-quality data is becoming a priority for organizations that train machine learning models. I want to thank the students for allowing me to use their assignment content for my blog: Dalton Bent, Carlos Carlson, Allen Jomy, and Vishal Venkata Penjarla. Their study is one more example of the significance of data for AI technology to be successful.
|
Presenting Live at PMI Athens
| In May, I delivered a Masterclass at the annual Symposium for the Athens, Greece, PMI chapter. This was an extremely well-organized event, and it was exciting to present live in front of 200 people. There was an impressive lineup of speakers, all discussing the value of AI in project management. All speakers clearly engaged the attendees. My message to participants was about the knowledge we need as project practitioners to understand and implement AI solutions that improve project performance. Based on my conversations with participants, the overwhelming sentiment was the desire to find out how to take advantage of AI. AI technology does not offer a simple or straightforward solution. It is flexible around solving problems and increasing productivity. One observation was how having more project experience may not help with AI. While on stage, I polled people, asking them to raise their hands if they had ever used ChatGPT. About one-third indicated they had. Two months earlier, I asked a similar question to over 60 project management students in my classes at a business college in France. I asked how many had used ChatGPT on a regular basis. Every single student raised their hand. Is this evidence of a generational gap that will eventually have an impact on project managers? I heard from attendees at the symposium who were frustrated by unclear information about AI technology. How much data is required? What can be done about data security and privacy issues? How can ethical concerns be managed? Most importantly, participants wanted to know how to use AI successfully. In addition to answering their questions, I provided a step-by-step approach that starts with assessing their project data and then thinking about the project issue(s) they are trying to solve. AI technology has many branches and can solve various problems using different methods. Training and education are the most significant contributions to achieving effective AI solutions in project management.
|







