1. Mantra for Innovative Project Management
Vikas Dubey
Advisory Project Manager
CSC INDIA

2. Innovations within Project
Management and It's
Innovative Applications
Mantra for Innovative Project Management -
Innovative Development or Research Initiatives
Vikas Dubey
PMI Member ID: 526375
PMP, PMI RMP, CISA, CSM, ITIL v3 F
This paper focus is on reviewing inventive models and theories and how they can be applied in the field
of project management to bring about a refreshing change. The views expressed in this paper are purely
author’s personal thoughts.
2 | P a g e

3. Contents
Contents......................................................................................................................................................3
Background..................................................................................................................................................4
Introduction.................................................................................................................................................4
Innovation and its Application.....................................................................................................................5
TRIZ Model...............................................................................................................................................6
Morphological Analysis............................................................................................................................8
System Concept-Knowledge....................................................................................................................9
Method of Focal Objects........................................................................................................................11
Conclusion.................................................................................................................................................11
About the author.......................................................................................................................................12
References.................................................................................................................................................13
Reference 1............................................................................................................................................13
Reference 2 ...........................................................................................................................................13
Reference 3............................................................................................................................................13
Reference 4............................................................................................................................................13
3 | P a g e

4. Background
Today, our mainstream delivery project management practice is at cross roads. The ground below us is
rapidly shifting, and we cannot be managing projects any longer like the way we have been managing in
the past. First, the new services landscapes are undergoing massive transformation to provide next-generation
service products. Second, the schedule-related challenges have increased so much so that
sponsors would like to achieve project outcomes as of yesterday. Third, another challenge which we are
facing today is that regular projects are increasing, thereby becoming commoditized to the extent of
becoming more of provisioning requests than “project” per se. Fourth key challenge is how to incorporate
new and innovative models into our project management concepts to achieve project outcomes and
address project challenges.
Introduction
To date, our project management has been defined in terms of triple constraints of scope, budget, and
schedule. However, in the dynamic times in which we are living, we see constant changes to scope.
Inability to adjust to the evolving scope makes us look rigid and anti-business. This is not because we
missed on any core elements of scope during planning, but due to the fact that our esteemed sponsors
would like us to address more and more new scope and deliverables in same amount of time. Coming
back, in today’s world, schedule is emerging as the most important and has now become the essence of
success minus the technical debt.
All this may make you think, why we are talking of Project Management and these topics? We are
thinking and discussing this topic because we would like to do projects in a manner in which we consider
limitless possibilities. We are talking about how to work towards a thought wherein refreshing approach,
free from any kind of constricted thinking in terms of constraints, can be nurtured. We are talking about
these things because we want to open up, like a lotus, whom the global people will look forward to project
management as panacea solutions for all of their problems and business needs, thereby furthering our
profession and its professionals in high demand.
4 | P a g e

5. Innovation and its Application
Coming to pure innovations / inventive thinking models, I have tried to look at various options available
which we can review, consider, and also possibly choose to apply in project management space. As per
me, there are four commonly taught inventive concepts (there could be more; however, the author felt
these are the main ones) in the field of innovations management:
1. A methodology for the systematic application of TRIZ - TRIZICS
2. Morphological Analysis or General Morphological Analysis
3. System Concept-Knowledge Theory - C-K Theory
4. Method of focal objects
Apart from above, about four decades ago, in the 1970s, radical concept of eXtreme programming
originated. More recently, we have seen massive interest in Agile followed by DevOps. If we observe
these trends, we find that basically, requirements need to be very quickly converted into meaningful
business results. The concept of DevOps takes us even further, when they try to include in its fold post
development/ deployment loop.
Let’s try and think how we can apply the above listed models in our field of project management, laying
emphasis on project management model.
5 | P a g e

6. TRIZ Model
The TRIZ was originally conceived by Dr. Genrikh Saulovich Altshuller, Russian author of Theory of
Inventive Problem Solving. 1
A more recent form, Systematic Inventive Thinking (SIT), has come up which is based on TRIZ. The SIT
was conceptualized by Israelis in the 1990s. SIT is a practical approach to creativity, innovation, and
problem solving, which has become a well-known methodology for Innovation.
In TRIZ, Dr Altshuller, while working at patent office, had analyzed more than two hundred thousand
patents in order to find out and identify common inventive principles, on which he has based his unique
formula, named TRIZ. While doing his analysis of such high number of patents, he concluded in his model
that there are about 40 common inventive principles. Dr. Altshuller’s key finding was to do with creative
solutions and an elimination of conflict, in a given problem scope statement. He concluded that we get
solutions for our problems and constraints by varying or playing around with input parameter, in order to
achieve the best fit solution. However, he noted that a conflict is a state where one parameter must be
changed, in order to get some benefit, but changing that parameter causes a deterioration of another
important parameter. Routine engineering designs deal with this situation by searching for the "best fit"
compromise, a trade-off that maximizes the utility and minimizes the negative impact of a specific
configuration of the variance of the available input parameters.
1 Theory of inventive problem solving - http://www.triz-journal.com/whatistriz, with special thanks to the author
of Triz, Dr Genrikh Saulovich Altshuller.
Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIZ and also Systematic Inventive Thinking - http://www.sitsite.com/
6 | P a g e

7. TRIZ Model
When we apply TRIZ to our project management approach, we can see that we are basically dealing with
triple constraint variables, but using 6-40 larger set of combinations to arrive at solutions in a given
constrained set in the context of project situation. However, in a common project scenario, we do not
commonly put in inputs into modeling software to derive possible solutions; we have rather chosen to do
somewhat freestyle, based on empirical evidence or regular practice.
Based on above, I am of the opinion that if we use a more formal project modeling software model
frequently, or rather to say more commonly like we use, say project scheduling software, coupled with
high statistical treatment of variables and constraints, we can come up with more solution options and
present more options to meet client and sponsor objectives, rather than in the absence of such modeling
software. For a moment, if we can think of its impact on estimates in terms of schedule, scope and
budget, it appears that this model has the capability to impact profound changes.
7 | P a g e

8. Morphological Analysis
The second inventive modeling method which we can consider reviewing is Morphological Analysis or the
General Morphological Analysis.2 This method was developed by Fritz Zwicky, working at the California
Institute of Technology, the USA. He had used this model on development of jet and rocket propulsion
systems. This model works backwards from outcomes to components level and not vice versa.
Diagrammatic depiction of Morphological Analysis
2
Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphological_analysis_(problem-solving)
Dr Fritz Zwicky - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritz_Zwicky
Diagram - http://redruthproductdesign.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/5a-ideas-morphological-analysis2.jpg and
also http://www.swemorph.com/ma.html
8 | P a g e

9. Zwicky Box and 3-Parameter field
When we choose to apply this model in the context of project management, we work backwards from
project outcomes to triple constraints. By going this way, we are more focused on client end objectives or
the benefit outcomes first and not become overly worried about project components; if I may suggest,
project outcomes override project constraints in this case, because we do projects and programs for end
benefit outcomes and not for battling with constraints. It is but obvious that constraints cannot be
overlooked in a practical world; however, their priority will only come second and will be considered only if
they come in the way of solving project outcomes. The work around will be third priority here.
System Concept-Knowledge
9 | P a g e

10. The third model is about System Concept-Knowledge or the C-K Theory.3. This model is based on C-K
theory, wherein “C” stands for concept space and “K” stands for knowledge space. It is basically a theory
of reasoning which is applied while in design stage. It is formally a breakdown design reasoning logic
which can be used in logic elaboration or logic expansion process, which leads to generation of unknown
objects. The theory builds on several past approaches of design theory, such as systematic, axiomatic,
creative, and so on design concepts and also uses artificial intelligence-based design models. The C-K
design theory claims that it is the first design theory which offers and explains the following:
1. Comprehensive formalization of design that is independent of any design domain.
2. Invention, creation, and discovery within the same design framework and processes.
Consider using this approach in project conceptualization and initiation and planning, keeping in mind that
this phase constitutes about 35% of project management. Let’s try to consider expansion of the C and K
spaces through the application of four types of operators: C→C, C→K, K→C, and K→K.
3 C-K Theory - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-K_theory
Hatchuel, A and Weil, B 2003, “A new approach of innovative design: an introduction to C-K theory.” Proceedings
of the international conference on engineering design (ICED’03), Stockholm, Sweden, pp 109–124
10 | P a g e

11. C-K Theory Model
The initial concept is partitioned using propositions from K: K→C. These partitions add new properties to
the concepts and create new concepts: C→C. Thanks to a conjunction C→K, this expansion of C may in
return provoke the expansion of the K space: K→K
As per this theory, the process can be thought to be made of square of design. One architecture design
solution, say C0 will be a path in the C-space that forms a new proposition in K. There may exist several
architecture design paths, for same C0 as well. Unlike Morphological Analysis, this is a forward theory,
progressing from scope to outcomes and not vice versa. We need to consider this in light of project
solution approaches and how many method options we can generate to achieve project deliverables and
benefit outcomes. The best fitting in terms of triple constraints can be ranked and chosen for
implementation as our preferred project solution approach.
Method of Focal Objects
The Method of Focal Objects,4 is a technique of creative problem solving which is about the synthesis of
seemingly non-matching characteristics or unique of different objects to create something new and
different from original components. Like for example, if we mix red and green color, we will get yellow
color. This method was originally brought to us by Professor F. Kunze of Berlin University in 1926 and it
was then called “Method of catalog.” In 1958, an American scientist, C. Whiting further worked on this and
improved upon it, thereby renaming it as “Focal Objects Method” as we know today.
Conclusion
What these theories, model and methods forces us is to think and consider different and diverse options
and consider them while doing planning and project solutioning in order to achieve project outcomes. This
breaks our constricted thought process and enables us to use innovative options to achieve goals.
If we look at all of these models, we might be forced to think why we need to be doing what I am
proposing and what are the critical success factors involved?
4
Method of Focal Objects - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Method_of_focal_objects
11 | P a g e

12. We are doing this in order to explore and discover new ways of doing projects, out of the box, open and
receptive, innovative and inventive, improvise and every time, map it back to project management.
The first critical success factor will be use of refreshing new methods which have been well thought of
and well applied in case of project management, in response to the massive transformation of business
environment which we are facing, to be able to provide next generation of products and services. The
inventive model will play a very crucial role here, to be able to truly deliver project outcomes which will
establish continued business benefits.
The second critical success factor will be ability to use inventive models, both backwards and forwards to
be able to consider various options in shorter time frame using simulation models based on these
inventive concepts, to provide list of ranked outcomes which can be zeroed upon to best satisfy end
objectives.
The third critical success factor will be differentiation, which projects done using inventive models will
provide, over the run of the mill commoditized projects, to be able to deliver genuinely unique products
and services.
The fourth critical success factor will be we would have considered new ways of doing projects, solution
approach, problem solving, constraints handling, assumptions testing, etc., The level of ideation and
option generation, I can foresee working with mission to apply these methods to new ventures, start-up
projects, with an aim to make them a success is our view.
In response to the planning, the work breakdown structure will be the first point wherein it will be clearly
depicted, next is our project solution approach and then deliverables list should reflect it. The project
scheduling casted in scheduling software will also clearly reflect it.
In the end, I have tried to review four key inventive models and see which ones are closest fit for
application in project management. I felt the models which I have chosen to cover in this paper are good
and established candidates, however, I am aware that, someone else may try and explore some other
model, which is perfectly fine, and this would only help in bringing about diversity of thoughts to the table.
Last but not the least, I would like to take this opportunity, to wholeheartedly acknowledge and thank each
of reference sources and their authors whom I have referred in this paper.
About the author
http://in.linkedin.com/pub/vikas-dubey/a/7a0/a99
12 | P a g e

13. References
Reference 1
G.S. Altshuller, “Theory of inventive problem solving” –
Hatchuel, A. and Weil, B., “A new approach of innovative design: an introduction to C-K theory.” Proceedings of the
international conference on engineering design (ICED’03), 2003, Stockholm, Sweden, pp. 109–124.
http://www.triz-journal.com/whatistriz, with special thanks to the author of Triz,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIZ
http://www.sitsite.com/
Reference 2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphological_analysis_(problem-solving)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritz_Zwicky
http://redruthproductdesign.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/5a-ideas-morphological-analysis2.jpg and also
http://www.swemorph.com/ma.html
Reference 3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-K_theory
Reference 4
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Method_of_focal_objects
13 | P a g e