This is where project management I believe has it slightly wrong. It is taught as a disjointed independent set of activities and products and not as a flow or mesh or weave of activities and products.

In this case if something is out of place it immediately becomes apparent because it can be "seen" or "heard" just as a wrong musical note in a melody can be heard to be incorrect as it disrupts the flow. Conversely, it is difficult to "hear" or "see" something out of place in hip=hop as there is no melody in which to gain that insight.

But the real issue for me is the impact this "non-harmonious" approach has on the way projects are actually managed. Not often is there a clean continuous and harmonious movement when looking at or investigating a project, particularly a problem project. The impression is more of a staccato of disconnected or out of tune movements, activities and products.

• The WBS was under estimated or steps missed out.
• The relationship between the design and what the customer wanted didn't marry up and we couldn't resolve some of the issues around which there was disagreement.
• The design didn't lend itself to being developed in the given time frame.
• Risks were developed independent of the design, schedule and costing.
• There was no connection between the requirement, the design and cost estimate and schedule estimate. So when the costs were reduced, just where to cut back was a problem. Alternatively, when the requirements changed, determining the impact on the cost and schedule was mostly guess work.

These examples are all about levers - move a lever, or have a lever moved on you, then you can't work out the effects or impacts. Accordingly, for me the current approach in project management can lead to the disjointed management of project effort and hence can contribute to complications and problems. So this is one reason why I am writing this blog.