Threaded Questions

Description

There are two parts of this assignment and you need to finish both two parts. Part One Consider the quote from Pearl Zhu, “The art of questioning is to ignite innovative thinking; the science of questioning is to frame system thinking, with the progressive pursuit of better solutions.” Discuss the Pearl Zhu quote stated above and how Systems Thinking affects, or would have affected, the outcome of your personal case study, as considered in the bullet point above. What questions would you ask to determine its complexity and your next steps to mitigate its complexity through an action plan. What would you do differently in the future and why? How does this fit with the quote from Peter Drucker that “What results have to be achieved to make a difference?” Deliverables 1. Please respond to the question with a minimum of 200-250 words. 2. It should include at least one reference from relevant peer-viewed journal articles and/or books or other reputable sources. 3. These sources must be properly cited in APA 7th edition format. Part Two Read the following two posts and replying each of them. Post One Discuss the Pearl Zhu quote stated above and how Systems Thinking affects or would have affected your personal case study’s outcome, as considered in the bullet point above. Active associations categorize complex systems among their connected components. A person cannot understand the system by individually looking at anyone or two or three components alone. The system is not just the number of components. Instead, it integrates the components, their relationships, and the interconnections between them (Project Management, 2021). According to Project Management Institute (2021), “a system thinker can investigate components of a system, recognizing that the components’ sum is not the system and that investigating the system while ignoring certain components that make it up will leave a faulty understanding of the system” (p. 1). Systems Thinking affects or would have affected the author’s personal case study’s outcome in two ways. The author’s case study or project is home improvement. The author is considering replacing his old bathroom cabinets on a budget. The author has to look at the whole system, which consists of the inner and outer characteristics. The author’s inner characteristics are open, ready to learn, change perspective, which deals with humility and acceptance of dealing with challenges in completing the project. The author’s outer characteristics are looking at the project and its characteristics. The author will shift his mindset of inquiring and learning by asking questions about the project itself. For example, what color paint to use or what brand to install, or how long will it complete the project? It is considered System Thinking. What questions would you ask to determine its complexity and your next steps to mitigate its complexity through an action plan. The author would ask to determine its complexity, and the next steps to mitigate its complexity through an action plan would be: Who will be involved? What is the budget? What are some risk factors? When will the project begin and end (timelines and deadlines)? Where will the project be at? How will the author decide what vendors and sellers to use? What would you do differently in the future, and why? The author would not change anything in the future because this project is a future project. However, the author will do more small home improvement projects to add value and comfort to the home. How does this fit with Peter Drucker’s quote that “What results have to be achieved to make a difference?” Peter Drucker’s quote fits because the best results are determined by the amount of useful planning put into the project. So that when the project is executed, it will produce the best results or make a difference. References Project Management Institute. “The Implications of Systems Thinking and Complex Systems.” Project Management Institute, Project Management Institute, January 2, 2021, www.pmi.org/disciplined-agile/the-implications-of-systems-thinking-and-complex-systems. Accessed March 6. 2021. Post Two One of the most complex projects I have ever worked on was a project in which a new facility was built to consolidate the network operations centers (NOC) for the data, radio, and telephone networks aboard the Marine Base in Twentynine Palms, Ca. The project including replacing all of the telephone switching system components with a new system and migrating the radio and data networks to the new facility. The system cutovers had to be seamless, no outages allowed. The Pearl Zhu quote, “The art of questioning is to ignite innovative thinking; the science of questioning is to frame system thinking, with the progressive pursuit of better solutions,” is very appropriate for the approach needed to pull this off. I understand the prompt quote applying to this project through a couple of other Zhu quotes, “Innovation becomes possible only if people can step out of their comfort zone” and “Progress is in simplification, which often follows complexity” (Pearl Zhu A Digital Visionary, n.d.). Projects have three areas that add to their complexity. They are ambiguity, human behavior, and system behavior. To “ignite innovative thinking” (behavior) on the project team, questions need to be asked. On the individual level, the questions are directed at finding out what the individual fears are that keep each person in their comfort zone. Once those are identified, the project manager knows where bridges of trust need to be fostered. On a group level, it is a matter of asking the right questions to determine the organizational/institutional fears that need to be mitigated to the point that the team feels safe stepping out of their comfort zone so innovation can occur. Many times on this project, the individual and organizational comfort zone issues were one and the same, not wanting to let their boss down. The answer was to get the bosses to explain to their project representatives that they were assigned to the project because the boss had so much confidence in their ability to bring a fresh and trusted perspective to the project (Navigating Complexity, 2014). The system behavior complexity is mitigated by asking questions that allow for simplification. This started with getting a grasp on all of the radio and data networks and all of the subscribers/users for the radio, data, and telephone networks. From there, it was a matter of understanding all the connections and equipment involved in connecting the circuits from the point they enter and leave the base (via Verizon) to the NOC to the individual user. The other piece to simplify was to understand the dependencies and system dynamics of each system. System dependencies were mainly a matter of circuits being on shared equipment before breaking out separately. There are many instances where networks share “transport” equipment. The last piece is understanding system dynamics. Many systems require separation (physical and electrical) to not bleed over onto each other. The complex system of systems became manageable by asking questions that determined connections, dependencies, and system dynamics of all the systems for the base (Navigating Complexity, 2014). The last component of this complex beast was ambiguity. There were numerous questions that needed to be asked to help provided clarity. The first was always, “what is your understanding of (whatever).” By asking this question, I could tell if the team had the same understanding of the situation. Where uncertainty existed, it was a matter of tracking down the organization responsible for the task and getting answers. In some cases, the only choice is to accept the uncertainty as risk and mitigate it. In each area of network design, open-ended architecture was strived to allow the future emergence of new technology (Navigating Complexity, 2014). This project came off very successfully. The only area I would change has to do with cutover. I would have each affected user group (Marine Units) explain their understanding of how they would be affected by cutover and when the day prior to cutover. The only glitches were in customers having unrealistic expectations on how cutover would happen. Cutovers happen in off-hours. Some users did not validate each user station until the next business day, when the unit was expected to be operational. The Drucker quote, “What results have to be achieved to make a difference?” applied to this project. On a complex project such as this, it is very important that the project team understands everything that must be achieved to be able to define project success. References PearlZhu.com. (n.d.). Pearl Zhu A Digital Visionary! PearlZhu.com. Retrieved March 11, 2021, from https://pearlzhu.com/quotes‌ Practice Guides for PMI Standards. (2014). Www.pmi.org. https://www.pmi.org/pmbok-guide-standards/practice-guides/complexity Deliverables 1. Reply each of these posts and you need to write two replies. 2. Your response to these two replies need to be substantive, meaning it should add something new to the original comment, including a level of depth that enriches the discussion (i.e. reflecting on their response, applying their comment to the workplace, the literature, etc.). 3. Each replies at least 150 words. 4. Each replies needs at least one references. Do not Plagiarism, thank you!