Defining PMT 2.0 (what and who)
PMT 2.0 defines a project as temporary or permanent undertakings created to develop a product or provide a service to achieve a specific objective. PMT 2.0 is based on a tripartite concept. The first part (project) is characterized by complexity, chaos, uncertainty, and nonlinearity (mortality). The complexity of the PM domain is the result of PPGE expansion efforts. The second part (knowledge) is a game changer and power broker. Immortality (sustainability, competitive edge, maximization of ROI that endures) is the third part. The three-step tripartite process is comprehensively explained in a five-step-process (See Appendix M). The knowledge objective can be PPGE-based micro-training, PPGE-based macro training, continuous learning, and hiring or retaining knowledge practitioners. The study’s Proposition 4 stated that if knowledge is the game changer between project mortality and immortality, then the continuous acquisition of knowledge about phenomena is propitious to a project’s success. In other words, if the advanced knowledge of PM complexity, nonlinearity, and uncertainty is essential to PM, then the relationship between phenomena and the achievement of business or project objectives can be positive, negative or none.
To achieve what and who, according to PMT 2.0, project professionals must thoughtfully acquire some level of knowledge and experience about the manifold challenges and chaos of PM phenomena. Lundy and Morin (2013) and Reich et al. (2013) indicated profound understanding and a practical application of knowledge about PM, program and globally oriented organizations, can enhance the power and strength of PM professionals to make positive changes within their organizations. In other words, in-depth knowledge of PM phenomena helps reduce the failure (mortality) rate of complex projects.
The depth of knowledge about phenomena will further enable practitioners to become knowledge employees able to self-organize, self-manage, self-sustain, interconnect and collaborate. A progressive, effective, and efficient collaboration will produce a better-negotiated contract, attract funding agencies, shareholders, and put in place creative and innovative policies that will sustain short and long-term business objectives. Kuura et al. (2013) argued that the development of highly skilled and competent workforce had led many countries including United States, China, UK, and Australia to improve performance, consequently bolster, and increase the rate of PM success.
The definition of who or what constructs may also refer to any system that has become complex and nonlinear or expanded due to projectification, programification, and globalization efforts. Besides the complex, uncertain, and unpredictable nature of PM phenomena, the domain of PMT 2.0 includes resource scarcity, shortage of macro trained professionals or knowledge employees, the rarity of complexity procurements, equipment, and increased difficulty in obtaining physical capital (Brahm & Tarzan, 2015). Other elements of chaos comprise market constraints, currency fluctuations, unstable political and economic systems, disparate management styles, legal, social, psychological, cultural, and environmental factors. PMT 2.0 espouses the notion that weak and nebulous definition of phenomena can undermine the theoretical underpinnings practitioners need to squarely and unmistakably focus attention on the fundamental PM management challenges that PPGE creates (Gelso, 2006; Harlow, 2009; Wacker, 1998)