Re: Group D Final Summary on DBM

by JOHN IHEGBU (0603935) Wednesday , 28 October 2009, 02:45 AM

Introduction: It highlights the framework used to evaluate the success of any given project. It helps to ask the right questions to address the courses of action necessary to improve performance and identify learning requirements appropriate for today's projects. (Seely and Duong 2001). The Key Issue: The model disagrees with the assumption a one-size-fitsall solution. I quite agree with the model at a greater extent because as modern day projects get more complex, they require more robust technical know-how to handle such projects. Wideman (2001) corroborated the assumption by saying that it is the needs of the project that must be given priority rather than the natural inclination and preferences of people, hence matching people with the right level of competency for the type of project becomes paramount. The propensity of a project to fail or succeed depends on the capability of the project team and the commodity type as people tends to embrace and seek comfort within what they know (employing project approaches that are within their knowledge horizon) Wideman (2001). I agree with this because when the task gets complex, the need for the right people sets in and hence the need for learning,thus the DBM learning curve. I also agree with the Model that there is need for us to understand that there is always a higher level or bigger picture in project management learning which is corroborated in the DBM learning curve (Seely and Duong 2005).

Conclusion: It is the need of the project whether complex or not that should be given priority rather than natural inclinations and preferences of people and hence matching people with the right level of competency for the type of project they are capable of handling becomes paramount. And when such needs arise, some people will aspire to tackle the problems hence the learning horizon while some people will remain at their comfort zone. But the propensity of a project depends on the capability of the project team and the type of project involved. References Seely, Mark. (1996). Unpublished manuscript. Thinking beyond the Rules.

SEELY, M. and DUONG, M. 2001. The Dynamic Baseline Model for Project Management. Project Management Journal. June. 32 (2) pp. 25 - 36 TAPLIN, L. and KENDRA, K.2004. Project Success: A Cultural Framework. Project Management Journal. April. 35 (1). pp. 30 45 Wideman, R., 2001. Project Management Issues and Considerations (Issacon). Available at: http://www.maxwideman.com/issacons1/iac1150/sld011.ht m [Accessed 17 October 2009].

Show parent | Reply

Re: Group D Final Summary on DBM

by JOHN IHEGBU (0603935) - Wednesday, 28 October 2009, 02:43 AM

Hi Langes, Thanks for your comments and i will re-visit the Topic again and come up with something much better. Regards, John
Show parent | Reply

Re: Group D Responses

by Langes Supramaniam - Sunday, 25 October 2009, 10:14 PM

Dear Gary, you provided a major listing without any evaluation and specific examples. Your posting is descriptive and lack critical evaluation. Maybe you should have investigated how different type of organisation structure (e.g., functional, matrix and project) will affect the project management learning process (learning curve), knowledge/skills retention, lessons learnt documentation, skills set auditing and the relationship with DBM. You should have looked at how the classification of project's complexity rate and success rate (deliverability/probability of the project) with MBR, MBM, MBO, MBV, MBP truly represents PM performance and efficiencies of the project team. These 5 levels 'What If' project scenarios (classified by complexity/success rate) could potentially propose and identify the level of skills and competencies for the project team required to manage and complete the project successfully. You should also have investigated how DBM fits in a project's life cycle phase by phase mapping of project team's/resources competencies and project's scope difficulties (complexities) Best wishes Langes
Show parent | Reply

Re: Group D Final Summary on DBM

by Langes Supramaniam - Sunday, 25 October 2009, 10:11 PM

Dear John/Group D's Summary, You need to build upon from what your team members had posted, i.e., their responses looking at their collective agreement, disagreement, and expanding from their responses. This is what summaries are for - for forum posting. Summary still very descriptive and lack critical evaluation. You provided a major listing from wideman's 2001 work withoutany evaluation and specific examples - merely 'reporting' from current work. You should have looked at how the categories of project's complexity rate and success rate - MBR, MBM, MBO, MBV, MBP could facilitate the teaming of the correct resources for each type of projects complexity with specific examples from literature or practice (your group members experiences on project complexities and resources allocation).

You should have identified from literature existing models/frameworks to facilitate project complexities and resources competencies and how it could be applied together with DBM model to improve project and project management performance. As DBM framework, if you investigate further, DBM is trying to propose a suitable framework to cope with project difficulties (complexities) and resources competencies. You should have further researched how DBM could fit in with existing organisation's micro, meso and macro factors for project management optimum performance. Conclusion is vague - it should be based on your own findings and not from other author's work. Best wishes Langes
Show parent | Reply

Re: Group D Responses (Summary)

by Langes Supramaniam - Sunday, 25 October 2009, 10:02 PM

Dear John, you re-worked your posting based on Senga's earlier comment on your posting dated 16th October 2009. Good, at least you are following up her feedback which actually all the forum memberes need to practice instead of a mere 'question-reply' session for the activities. There is still a major listing (work by Wideman, 2001) without any evaluation/specific examples. Your posting is still descriptive and lack critical evaluation. Maybe you should have investigated how different type of organisation structure (e.g., functional, matrix and project) will affect the project management

learning process (learning curve), knowledge/skills retention, lessons learnt documentation, skills set auditing and the relationship with DBM. You should have looked at how the classification of project's complexity rate and success rate (deliverability/probability of the project) with MBR, MBM, MBO, MBV, MBP truly represents PM performance and efficiencies of the project team. These 5 levels 'What If' project scenarios (classified by complexity/success rate) could potentially propose and identify the level of skills and competencies for the project team required to manage and complete the project successfully. Your conclusion '......................than natural inclinations and preferences of people..................' - can you please elaborate further with specific examples. Best wishes Langes
Show parent | Reply

Re: Group D Final Summary on DBM

by JOHN IHEGBU (0603935) - Sunday, 18 October 2009, 08:38 PM

The Dynamic Baseline Model Introduction: The Dynamic Baseline model (DBM) provides a context for discussion. It highlights the framework used to evaluate the success of any given project. It helps to ask the right questions to address the courses of action necessary to improve performance and identify learning requirements appropriate for today's projects. (Seely and Duong 2001). Taplin and Kendra (2004) also corroborated this relationship between organisational members (project managers and teams) and the processes used to perform the project. Duong and Seely (2001) highlighted two sides to the DBM; the people side and the project side. On the people side, four levels of Project management learning are identified: (MBR), (MBM), (MBO), and (MBV). On the project side the DBM also has a four level project classification (Product Design, Requirements, Objectives and Values Baseline) based on the Lowest Static Baseline (LSB) of

the project. The LSB is the lowest level that is relatively fixed for a project and therefore success should only be measured relative to its LSB. The model also explores the use of Lowest Management Level (LML) as a control point for projects. Wideman (2001) raised the following as Key issues in DBM:

There are clear steps or horizons which involves significant graduation from one level to another

The graduation from one level to another generally comes from the application of each behavior level by trial and error,

When there is succession of more complex projects where a certain level does not apply, people tends to seeks a bigger picture or move to the next higher level,

To be proficient in any level it requires a thorough grounding in the knowledge of the lower levels,

When there is a tough challenging project the attempt to apply level 1 logic in a level 2 environment or level 2 in a level 3 environment etc tends to push people to Forced learning,

This clearly demonstrate the need to move up from one level to a higher one,

For training to be effective, it should target one level above the persons current horizon.

Conclusion: It is the need of the project whether complex or not that should be given priority rather than natural inclinations and preferences of people and hence matching people with the right level of competency for the type of project they are capable of handling becomes paramount. Finally,

Koskela and Howell (2002) proposed that for an explicit theory of project managemen, there is extrapolated fifth level of Management by Politics, and that MBP are the keys to unlocking the potentials of project management profession.

References Seely, Mark. manuscript. (1996). Thinking beyond the Rules. Unpublished

SEELY, M. and DUONG, M. 2001. The Dynamic Baseline Model for Project Management. Project Management Journal. June. 32 (2) pp. 25 36 TAPLIN, L. and KENDRA, K.2004. Project Success: A Cultural Framework. Project Management Journal. April. 35 (1). pp. 30 45 Wideman, R., 2001. Project Management Issues and Considerations (Issacon). Available at: http://www.maxwideman.com/issacons1/iac1150/sld011.htm [Accessed 17 October 2009].

Show parent | Reply

Re: Group D Responses

by HARRISON OBI (0913238) - Sunday, 18 October 2009, 07:07 AM

Senga, Thanks for the comment on my suggestion which was rather restrictive. Learning is all about being innovative. Rgds, Harrison
Show parent | Reply

Re: Group D Responses (Summary)

by JOHN IHEGBU (0603935) - Saturday, 17 October 2009, 11:35 PM

The Dynamic Baseline Model The Dynamic Baseline model (DBM) provides a context for discussion. It highlights the framework used to evaluate the success of any given project. It helps to ask the right questions to address the courses of action necessary to improve performance and identify learning requirements appropriate for today's projects. (Seely and Duong 2001).

The Key issues in DBM (Wideman 2001) are as follows:

y y y y y y y  There are clear steps or horizons which involves significant graduation from one level to another  The graduation from one level to another generally comes from the application of each behavior level by trial and error,  When there is succession of more complex projects where a certain level does not apply, people tends to seeks a bigger picture or move to the next higher level,  To be proficient in any level it requires a thorough grounding in the knowledge of the lower levels,  When there is a tough challenging project the attempt to apply level 1 logic in a level 2 environment or level 2 in a level 3 environment etc tends to push people to Forced learning  This clearly demonstrate the need to move up from one level to a higher one,  For training to be effective, it should target one level above the persons current horizon

Conclusion:

It is the need of the project whether complex or not that should be given priority rather than natural inclinations and preferences of people and hence matching people with the right level of competency for the type of project they are capable of handling becomes paramount.

References

Wideman, R., 2001. Project Management Issues and Considerations (Issacon). Available at: http://www.maxwideman.com/issacons1/iac1150/sld011.htm [Accessed 17 October 2009].

The Dynamic Baseline Model for Project Management, by Mark Seely and Quang Duong, Project Management Journal, Vol. 32, No. 2, June 2001. TAPLIN, L. and KENDRA, K.2004. Project Success: A Cultural Framework. Project Management Journal. April. 35 (1). pp. 30 45
Show parent | Reply

Re: Group D Responses

by DONALD MACRAE (9615570) - Saturday, 17 October 2009, 04:13 PM

Senga, Thanks for the tip on citations from on-line sources. Rgds Donald
Show parent | Reply

Re: Group D Responses

by Senga Briggs - Saturday, 17 October 2009, 10:59 AM

Hmn Harrison Its not what I think that is important in this process - its what you think and learn. One thing to remember is that there is no black and white in project management only grey. We need change big time in project management - don't think it will last much longer if it keeps feeling to deliver and failing to maximise investment - do you? Mark identified one

way it could perhaps change - there are lots of others - be innovative! Senga
Show parent | Reply

Re: Group D Responses

by GARY GILBY (0810709) - Friday, 16 October 2009, 10:47 PM

The dynamic base line model

Introduction A group study of software projects carried out by the Standish determined that a staggering 90% of projects failed with more than one third cancelled before completion. This revelation has prompted debate that this failure rate is caused by ineffective use of project management tools and techniques. Seely and Duong 2001 provide a framework for addressing these issues through the Dynamic Baseline Model (DBM). Key issues The DMB provides a framework for analysing the project management learning process as an indicator of the expected success of a project. It consists of two sides, the people side and the project side. The model has a four-level project management learning curve consisting of: Level 1 Management by Rules (MBR) 1 to 7 years project experience Level 2 Management by Methods (MBM) 7 to 11 years project experience Level 3 Management by Objectives (MBO) 11 to 15 years project experience Level 4 Management by Values (MBV) 15+ years project experience It is acknowledged that in progressing through each learning curve a thorough grounding in the knowledge of the lower levels is first required. The DBM features a four level classification based on what is known as the lowest static baseline (LSB). The LSB is described as the foundation upon which the project is positioned and thus can only be expected to meet its LSB, therefore success or failure should be measured relative to that baseline.

Conclusion In conclusion, the model indicates how project management methodologies have evolved in recent history from MBR, during the industrialisation period, through to MBV. It portrays project management learning as a building process through successive learning phases promoting discussion and debate as to the next learning horizon. Bibliography Seely, M. and Duong, Q. (2001). The Dynamic Baseline Model for Project Management. Available at: http://www.pmir.com/html/pmdatabase/file/pmjournals/jun01.pdf. [8 October 2009] CALLAHAN, K.R. and BROOKS, L.M., 2004. Essentials of strategic project management. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc. LOCK, D., 2007. The essentials of project management. 3 rd ed. Aldershot: Gower Publishing Ltd.
Show parent | Reply

Re: Group D Responses

by Senga Briggs - Friday, 16 October 2009, 08:53 AM

Feedback Not bad at all and Nick thanks for organising repsonses. Its a good starter article though a relatively dated one (first written 1999) but the debate it raised still goes on:

The DMB challenges the classical project management model and its established beliefs that one size fits all and that any project manager can manage any type of project given the correct tools. It is a framework for classifying project complexity, characterizing project management approaches , analyzing the project management learning process and managing the expectations of project outcomes It identifies 5 different project levels each of which requires a different focus on leadership and with that a different personality type of both the leader and the participants. It also describes five paradoxes that emerge as you move up the scale to Management by Values and beyond. It has been criticised as lacking real underpinning research to

back up the contentions made for it and it has spawned huge debate over the suitability of the classical approach.

Don't lose sight of this article when responding to other activities - you will find its useful Senga
Show parent | Reply

Re: Group D Responses

by Senga Briggs - Friday, 16 October 2009, 08:49 AM

John Good response - covers the model but look at what others have done and try and not repeat - liked the summary of the main points of the article though. The key is that it challenges the classical project management model and its established beliefs that one size fits all and that any project manager can manage any type of project given the correct tools. Yes it is a fram ework for classifying project complexity, characterizing project management approaches, analyzing the project management learning process and managing the expectations of project outcomes.

You need to watch citation of web sites - follow this guide: Authorship or Source, Year. Title of web document or web page. [Medium] Available at: include web site address/URL(Uniform Resource Locator) and additional details such as access or routing from the home page of the source. [Accessed date]. Senga
Show parent | Reply

Re: Group D Responses

by Senga Briggs - Friday, 16 October 2009, 08:42 AM

Duncan well done - sound first post - start with a summary of the article and then focus on a part - leaves plenty of room for others to join and have something new to discuss. For online citations you should include date accessed - someone else might try a few days later and site not available - thats why its required. So to cite an online article: Authorship or Source, Year. Title of web document or web page. [Medium] Available at: include web site address/URL(Uniform Resource Locator) and additional details such as access or routing from the home page of the source. [Accessed date]. Senga
Show parent | Reply

Re: Group D Responses

by DONALD MACRAE (9615570) - Thursday, 15 October 2009, 09:26 PM

BSM084: Project Fundamentals Topic 1, Discussion Activity 2 - The Dynamic Baseline Model (DBM) Donald MacRae (Group D)

Introduction Following a number of studies[i] (The Standish Group 1994 plus updates) in the performance of projects, The Dynamic Baseline Model (DBM)[ii] (Seely & Duong 2001) helps provide a framework to evaluate the project management learning process as well as an indicator of the likely success of a project.

Key Issues Identified

There are two sides to the DBM[iii] (Seely 1996), the people side and the project side.

Four levels of Project Management Learning are identified on the people side: Management by Rules (MBR), Management by Methods (MBM), Management by Objectives (MBO), and Management by Values (MBV).

There are distinct steps or horizons within the learning curve which require progression from one level to the next. To be effective at any given level requires a sound knowledge of the preceding levels.

Undertaking progressively more challenging projects is viewed by Seely[iv] as the most effective method for forced learning where an individual by example is attempting to apply Level 1 logic in a Level 2 environment and so on.

It is important to ensure is that the correct level of competency is matched to the corresponding project classification to ensure it is the needs of the project that are driving any given approach to project management.

On the project side the DBM also has a four level project classification (Product Design, Requirements, Objectives and Values Baseline) based on the Lowest Static Baseline (LSB) of the project. The LSB is the lowest level that is relatively fixed for a project and therefore success should only be measured relative to its LSB. The model also explores the use of Lowest Management Level (LML) as a control point for projects.

Conclusion

The DBM does not provide a solution but does however offer a framework to promote the asking of correct questions to address the right actions required for improved performance and learning requirements in the context of todays projects irrespective of their complexity or nature of commodity.

References and Bibliography

[i] The Standish Group (1994) CHAOS Report,

http://www.standishgroup.com/sample_research/chaos_1994_1.php

[ii] Seely, Mark & Duong, Quang (June 2001). The Dynamic Baseline

Model for Project Management, Project Management Journal, Volume 32, Number 2, Page 25.
[iii] Seely, Mark. (1996). Thinking beyond the Rules. Unpublished
manuscript.

[iv] Seely, Mark & Duong, Quang (June 2001). The Dynamic Baseline Model for Project Management, Project Management Journal, Volume 32, Number 2, Page 26.

Kloppenborg, TJ (2008) Project Management - A Contemporary Approach, South Western Cengage Learning.

Callaghan, KR & Brooks, LM (2004), Essentials of Strategic Project Management, Wiley.

Lock, D (1984), Project Management, Gower.

Show parent | Reply

Re: Group D Responses

by Senga Briggs - Thursday, 15 October 2009, 04:40 PM

Nick good start - and this is the key issue:

The article poses the question whether or not the classical project management concepts still apply and the extent to which they fit the new realities . Senga
Show parent | Reply

Re: Group D Responses

by Senga Briggs - Thursday, 15 October 2009, 04:38 PM

Ibifubara Sound post covers the subject matter and leaves plenty for others to talk about so there is a propensity to fail - to what extent do you think the model can help with failure? Occasionally you need to watch your grammar Regards Senga
Show parent | Reply

Re: Group D Responses

by Senga Briggs - Thursday, 15 October 2009, 04:35 PM

Harrison well researched and well argued within word count and citation fine Senga
Show parent | Reply

Re: Group D Responses

by NICK SMART (0818013) - Wednesday, 14 October 2009, 05:11 PM

Review The article poses the question whether or not the classical project management concepts still apply and the extent to which they fit the new realities . It defines the classical concept as that represented within the Project management Body of Knowledge (BMBOK) and the new realities as an environment for projects of instantaneous communication coupled with high complexity. It proposes the Dynamic Baseline Model (DBM) as the resolution to the inadequacies of the classical model. The DBM explore s the evolution of project management behaviours and requires the matching of manager type to the complexity of the project. There are four levels of behaviour identified, Management by;
y y y y
Rules Methods Objectives Values

The primary assertion is that the classical model is equivalent to Management by Methods is only effective when used in projects of modest complexity. The article asserts that as projects become increasing complex only MBO and MBV behaviours will be effective. The PMBOK does identify the need for a Project Manager to have skills and wider thinking as defined as MBO and MBV behaviours within the Dynamic Baseline Model. PMBOK identifies PESTLE and SWOT analysis as tools a project manager should apply to their project and environment. PMBOK identifies the progression of project management into programme management where the delivery of business and strategic goals are defined as objectives, very much like those defined as MBO and MBV. MBR = Project team member MBM = Project Manager MBO = Programme Manager MBV = Business Manager / Managing Director Conclusion The DBM stimulates the debate with regard to the matching of management

types and their behaviours to the level of project complexity however it need not disqualify the classical approach fully as a tool for considering the same objective.

References

Blake, I and Bush, C., 2009. Project managing change, practical tools and techniques to make change happen. Harlow: Prentice Hall.

Wysocki, Robert K., 2009. Effective project management, traditional, agile, extreme. 5th Ed. Indianapolis: Wiley.

Seely, M.A., 2001. The dynamic baseline model for project management. Project Management Journal, 32(2), pp. 25-36

Grundy, T., 2006. Rethinking and reinventing Michael Porter s five forces model. Strategic Change, 15, pp. 213-229
Show parent | Reply

Re: Group D Responses

by HARRISON OBI (0913238) - Wednesday, 14 October 2009, 07:53 AM

Pls, in summarizing endeavour to include this under key issues as it was commended by Senga...Another is the implicit projects management theories as practiced today that explains frequent project failures, consequently, the suggestion that an explicit theory be adopted for future project management profession (Koskela and Howell 2002) Besides, include the proposition for an explicit theory of project management (Koskela and Howell 2002) You can get that from my writeup.

Rgds, Harrison
Show parent | Reply

Re: Group D Responses

by JOHN IHEGBU (0603935) - Wednesday, 14 October 2009, 12:57 AM

The Dynamic Baseline Model

Introduction: The Dynamic Baseline Model (DBM) highlights the framework used to evaluate the success of any given project. The model suggests that the success of a project is evaluated base on Lowest Static Baseline (LSB). The LSB can be determined as a factor of a project success if the people involved in the project corresponds with the project requirements and complexity. The Key Issues in DBM are as follows:
y y y  There are clear steps or horizons which involves significant graduation from one level to another,  The graduation from one level to another generally comes from the application of each behavior level by trial and error,  When there is succession of more complex projects where a certain level does not apply, people tends to seeks a bigger picture or move to the next higher level,  To be proficient in any level it requires a thorough grounding in the knowledge of the lower levels,  When there is a tough challenging project the attempt to apply level 1 logic in a level 2 environment or level 2 in a level 3 environment etc tends to push people to Forced learning,  This clearly demonstrate the need to move up from one level to a higher one,  For training to be effective, it should target one level above the persons current horizon (Seely & Quang, June 1999).

y y

y y

Conclusion: The DBM provides a context for discussion, to address the courses of action necessary for improving project performance and to identify learning requirements appropriate to todays projects (Quong & Seely, June 1999).

Bibliography
The Dynamic Baseline Model for Project Management, by Mark Seely and Quang Duong, Project Management Journal, Vol. 32, No. 2, June 2001. http:www.pqa.net/ProdServices/ccpm/W05002001.html#3%20History%20of%20Proj ect http://www.maxwideman.com/issacons1/iac1150/sld006.htm
Show parent | Reply

Re: Group D Responses

by IBIFUBARA BROWN (0910017) - Tuesday, 13 October 2009, 10:49 PM

INTRODUCTION

The Dynamic Baseline Model (DBM) suggests that present day project management tools and technique are insufficient for todays complex projects. It suggests that learning needs in project management has to be addressed for there to be a realistic increase in the success rates of projects. It also defined the different level of project complexity and the corresponding management methods.

KEY ISSUES

i.

Conventional project management approach, tool and techniques are not sufficient to deal with complex projects hence leading to a high rate of failure due to the application of lower project management technique. This view is reinforced by Koskela & Howell (2003) conclusion that traditional project management is simply counterproductive; it creates self -inflicted problems that seriously undermine performance

ii.

Success of a project is greatly dependent on the appropriate determination of the project complexity which must be matched by the corresponding management method. Wysocki & McGary (2003) states that the nature and characteristics of the project must dictate the type of management approach to be taken

iii.

Project successes are greatly reduced when a project is managed beyond the complexity zone of the employees. attempting a project beyond our horizon means exercising faiththe DBM by identifying the knowledge horizons, enables us to distinguish knowledge from faith (Duong & Seely 1999)

CONCLUSION

The DBM suggest that the propensity of a project to succeed or fail is dependent on the correct determination of the project complexity and the application of the right management system. It advocates that a new project management technique with the approp riate learning process is required to tackle the complexity of todays project. Wysocki & McGary (2003) concludes that Project has fundamentally changed but our approach has not. A new approach is required, one that recognizes the project environment an d adapts accordingly.

References

Koskela, L and Howell, G. (2000) The Underlying Theory of Project Management is Obsolete. Project Management Institute Seely, M and Duong, Q. (2001) The Dynamic Baseline Model. Project Management Journal 32 (2), pp 25-36 R.K. Wysocki and R. McGary Effective Project Management 3 rd edition 2003
Show parent | Reply

Re: Group D Responses

by HARRISON OBI (0913238) - Tuesday, 13 October 2009, 10:17 PM

INTRODUCTION: This model based the expected project success on two key indicators; the people side and the project side (Seely and Duong 2001) They posited that if the appropriate project management approaches are matched with each project complexity, they would be less project failures. Taplin and Kendra (2004) also corroborated this relationship between organisational members (project managers and teams) and the processes used to perform the project. KEY ISSUES: The key issues are the dynamism in project management, giving the four trends elucidated by them: management by rules, -methods, objectives, and values, and an extrapolated fifth model; management by politics. (Seely and Duong 2001) Another is the implicit projects management theories as practiced today that explains frequent project failures, consequently, the suggestion that an explicit theory be adopted for future project management profession (Koskela and Howell 2002) CONCLUSION: The propositions for an explicit theory of project management (Koskela and Howell 2002) and the extrapolated fifth level of Management by Politics; MBP are the keys to unlocking the potentials of project management profession. Besides, customers also have a stake in

assessing the project effectiveness (Shenhar, Levy and Dvir 1997) Finally, more detailed quantitative studies should be undertaken to underpin the deliverables of this proposed model. REFERENCES: KOSKELA, L. and HOWELL, G.2002. The Underlying Theory of Project Management is Obsolete. 2002. Proceedings of the PMI Research Conference. 2002. pp. 293 302 SEELY, M. and DUONG, M. 2001. The Dynamic Baseline Model for Project Management. Project Management Journal. June. 32 (2) pp. 25 - 36 SHENHAR, A., LEVY, O. and DVIR, D. 1997. Mapping the Dimensions of Project Success. Project Management Journal. June. 28 (2). pp. 5 13 TAPLIN, L. and KENDRA, K.2004. Project Success: A Cultural Framework. Project Management Journal. April. 35 (1). pp. 30 45