Project Management Central

Please login or join to subscribe to this thread
How Cynefin Framework determines project execution methodology?

Trying to find out how Cynefin framework tells us how to approach a set of different situations in project management methodology selection?
Sort By:

Using Cynefin's basic 4 categories (but keeping things brief):
- obvious / simple - not typically warranting a project approach; very linear, direct cause and effect; example would be call center, FAQ's.
- complicated - the realm of most waterfall projects; expertise and analytic approaches are useful; cause and effect preserved. My opinion is presumes overall environment relatively static or predictably changing.
- complex - cause and effect obscured, or even absent; better to use an experimental approach (probe, sense, respond, in Snowden's terms); Agile or other iterative approaches more likely to succeed, or just not fail as badly. Pattern identification useful. My belief is overall environment dynamic, and less predictable,
- chaos - turbulent, no sense of predictability or perceived correlation, missing frames of reference for coherence.; well outside domain of project management, other than for very brief periods of exposure.

Pench -

While Cynefin or another other categorization framework can help to guide the decision-making process, there are many other variables which need to be considered when choosing the right lifecycle and practices for a given project including its scope, constraints and the EEF's surrounding the project.


Please login or join to reply

Content ID:

"Once, during prohibition, I was forced to live for days on nothing but food and water."

- W. C. Fields