<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Resilient Projects</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pmhut.com/resilient-projects/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pmhut.com/resilient-projects</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 03:20:21 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Successful Software Projects Are Miraculous - PM Hut</title>
		<link>http://www.pmhut.com/resilient-projects/comment-page-1#comment-19369</link>
		<dc:creator>Successful Software Projects Are Miraculous - PM Hut</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Mar 2010 11:12:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pmhut.com/?p=4185#comment-19369</guid>
		<description>[...] many of you know who follow my thinking, they key to successful projects is resilience: how well a project adapts to change. The implication of this line of reasoning is that success or [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] many of you know who follow my thinking, they key to successful projects is resilience: how well a project adapts to change. The implication of this line of reasoning is that success or [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Laura Bamberg</title>
		<link>http://www.pmhut.com/resilient-projects/comment-page-1#comment-11876</link>
		<dc:creator>Laura Bamberg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 15:09:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pmhut.com/?p=4185#comment-11876</guid>
		<description>I would say a resilient project is less about the tools you use and more about attitude. Change is not always bad - sometimes a change request in a project makes the end result better. But when change occurs, having the right attitude - whether being humble due to your error, or happy about an opportunity - can be made even better by a positive outlook. When things go wrong, most people are at least frustrated and others very upset. That doesn't change anything - the only thing that can be changed is the project manager's attitude.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would say a resilient project is less about the tools you use and more about attitude. Change is not always bad - sometimes a change request in a project makes the end result better. But when change occurs, having the right attitude - whether being humble due to your error, or happy about an opportunity - can be made even better by a positive outlook. When things go wrong, most people are at least frustrated and others very upset. That doesn&#8217;t change anything - the only thing that can be changed is the project manager&#8217;s attitude.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JohnD</title>
		<link>http://www.pmhut.com/resilient-projects/comment-page-1#comment-11711</link>
		<dc:creator>JohnD</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 19:46:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pmhut.com/?p=4185#comment-11711</guid>
		<description>If I understand correctly, this is more than traditional Risk Management which tries to proactively identify, quantify and have planned responses to deal with an event when it happens.

In that context, Risk Management would certainly seem to be a part of Resiliency. Yet there's more - what about the proverbial "unknown unknowns" - the project gotchas - the events that you didn't even think to think of. Having a culture to effectively deal with those situations when they arise seems to be appropriate. 

This seems more like "adaptation". ie Resiliency = Risk Management + Adaptation.

For more on adaptation, see Geoffrey Moore's book "dealing with Darwin".</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If I understand correctly, this is more than traditional Risk Management which tries to proactively identify, quantify and have planned responses to deal with an event when it happens.</p>
<p>In that context, Risk Management would certainly seem to be a part of Resiliency. Yet there&#8217;s more - what about the proverbial &#8220;unknown unknowns&#8221; - the project gotchas - the events that you didn&#8217;t even think to think of. Having a culture to effectively deal with those situations when they arise seems to be appropriate. </p>
<p>This seems more like &#8220;adaptation&#8221;. ie Resiliency = Risk Management + Adaptation.</p>
<p>For more on adaptation, see Geoffrey Moore&#8217;s book &#8220;dealing with Darwin&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: crgpm</title>
		<link>http://www.pmhut.com/resilient-projects/comment-page-1#comment-11701</link>
		<dc:creator>crgpm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 15:54:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pmhut.com/?p=4185#comment-11701</guid>
		<description>Ummm...isn't this project risk management?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ummm&#8230;isn&#8217;t this project risk management?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

