Give a Practical World Application of the two Methodologies - 550 Words

Give a Practical World Application of the two Methodologies (Essay Sample) Content: PROJECT MANAGEMENT MODELSEskerod Riis (2009, p.8) clarifies that changes in organizations are delivered through implementation of projects and sharing plans for a project. Project management has developed over the years some management methodologies are available for businesses to utilize to manage projects. Among the most used methods include PRINCE 2 and AGILE. PRINCE 2 is the worldà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s most popular project management framework which is made up of integrated different elements. The primary features that PRINCE 2 is based on are the processes, themes, principles and tailoring the methodology to suit project needs. On the other hand, AGILE is an approach that uses iterative procedures to determine the requirements of development projects especially for information technology projects (Malik 2013, p.57).PRINCE 2 methodology is principlesà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬ based which makes it possible for the approach in providing a framework that is applicable irrespective of projec t scale, organization, geography, type of project or culture (Burtonshaw 2008). This methodology operates under a controlled environment which helps project managers to assign roles to different team members by considering their expertise. The method is also flexible making it easy to make changes depending on the size of the project, objectives, and requirements of the organization. The flexibility in its theoretical approach makes the methodology familiar with project managers. Bentley (2004, p. 217) explains that PRINCE 2 has advantages that are beneficial to the organization. First, the approach is product based and divides a project into phases making it easy to manage. The division of the project into stages helps the project management to remain focused and ensures they deliver quality work. Second, the methodology improves communication among the team members and as well as the team and the interested external stakeholders. Third is that the team learns how to save time and become more economical when it comes to the utilization of assets and other resources. However, this methodology is disadvantaged in that it does not provide the required level of flexibility demanded by some modern projects. For instance, the software industry is experiencing tremendous growth requiring new and sophisticated innovations. PRINCE 2 may find it difficult to cater for some of these modern projects. On the other side, AGILE methodology divides a project into sprints that are then assigned to small groups (Cobb 2011, p. 563). This iterative approach of AGILE ensures that there is adequate monitoring of a project, and also it is possible to make immediate changes as opposed to constant review. One of the pros associated with AGILE is that the iterations provide instantaneous feedback. Additionally, the sprints in the methodology ensure that defects are fewer in the final product owing to quality assurance tests perfumed in each cycle. The method has a disadvantage in that immediate feedback sometimes result to scope creed. In his book (Maylor 2010) argues that the two methodologies are similar in that they have a common central theme; the provision of templates, techniques and tools for project management hence avoiding the need for reinvention. Both methods seek to lower inherent risks arising from undertaking projects. The fundamental difference between the two methodologies is that PRINCE 2 focuses on planning and analyzing the future and caters for possible hazards. In contrast, AGILE is more flexible and requires no substantial changes and networking. In conclusion, both approaches are essential for project management, but PRINCE 2 proves a better methodology. Vodafone provides an excellent example in a successful application of PRINCE 2. The company applied this approach in 2003 in the à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‹Å"à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Improving Capabilityà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ãƒ ¢Ã¢â€š ¬ project which ended in 2004. The end results were that the firm was awarded level 3 in both PMMM and P2MM by APM. The company also saved  £1.2M from the project (Kujala et al.2010, p. 368)