MAEN QADDOURAHProject Director| AJ SAUDIJeddah, Saudi Arabia
Prevention is better than Cure.What do you think as PM? Saving Changes...
Sort By:
Bala S DuvvuriProject Manager| ShellBangalore, Karnataka, India
It is like identifying risks and formulating the risk response strategies. Saving Changes...
Sergio Luis ConteHelping to create solutions for everyone| Worldwide based OrganizationsBuenos Aires, Argentina
It is a matter of quality management that have a great impact when you try to implement agile at enterprise wide fashion to create organizational agility. It is the difference between being reactive (cure) or being proactive (prevention). And it is fully related to innovation. Unfortunatelly lot of people use some words like agile, innovation, etc as buzzwords but all this terms are fully related from more than 30 years ago. Saving Changes...
Senior Projects Manager | Field & Marten AssociatesNew Westminster, British Columbia, Canada
Prepare and Prevent better than Repair and Repent ! Saving Changes...
M. Sahir A. Shatiry, PMI-RMP, PMPSenior Hook-up and Commissioning Engineer| Petronas Carigali Sdn BhdIpoh, Perak Darul Ridzuan, Malaysia
Hi Maen,
For project the triple constraints that always monitor is schedule, scope and cost. Based on the terminology that prevention better that cure, yes when we do the cure of course we will look into it;
a) Cure will effect our complete schedule, need to crash the schedule to meet the completion date. Additional manpower.
b) Costing will increase if crashing by having additional manpower, extra hours and etc.
c) Scope may change, the additional scope.
d) Need to relook the risk register and etc.
Thus, this kind of things surely impact on it due need to plan of rectification plan for the damages that already happen. How to avoid it happens, than the Quality Management need to be in place and all risks need to identify.
Thank You. Saving Changes...
Muhammed Nasir KAROFIHead of Department Political and Civic Education| National Orientation Agency Birnin Kebbi, Kebbi, Nigeria
It all depends on how you look at it, by cure it means the impact must have happened the magnitude and chance of reoccurrence are best lessons to be learned. Trying to avoid what never happened May trap you spending more than what it takes to cure. So be wise and critically assess the situation using simulations and other methods and tools that may prove effective and efficient. My question then is what if you allow to occur with minimal real time impact for you to have enduring cure or elimination strategy? Saving Changes...
Paolo CornaliProject Manager| HTA srlBrescia, Lombardia, Italy
I agree with Bala, prevention is better than cure and identify risk and find a way to mitigate them is the best thing to obtain that. Saving Changes...
M. Sahir A. Shatiry, PMI-RMP, PMPSenior Hook-up and Commissioning Engineer| Petronas Carigali Sdn BhdIpoh, Perak Darul Ridzuan, Malaysia
It also how u define the cure? Sometimes the cure is become the prevention step for next cycle of project. Saving Changes...
From a "medical" perspective, prevention avoids the need for treatment or cure. A cure means that the problem should not recur whereas a treatment is used to remove the effects of the problem.
From a cost-benefit-risk point of view, it is worth the cost of the prevention relative to the cost of treatment? For instance, if it will cost 600 dollars to prevent flooding, but the estimated cost of recovering from flooding is only 300 dollars, do you want to spend 600 dollars or is it better to spend 300 dollars every time it floods, if it ever does. Also, could you be doing something better with that 600 dollars than preventing flooding (the 'value' of money)? Saving Changes...
Community Champion
