document.xls

Evaluation of project management complexity for IPMA Level B certification

Candidate reference number ...........................................................

Candidate name ...........................................................

CriteriaDescription of criteria

V

alu

e

Motivation/justification

High complexity Low complexity

1. Objectives, Assessment of Results

Rating

2. Interested Parties, Integration

Rating

3. Cultural and social context

Rating

4. Degree of innovation, general conditions

Rating

5. Project structure, demand for coordination

Rating

6. Project organisation

Rating

7. Leadership, teamwork, decisions

Rating

8. Resources incl. finance

Rating

9. Risk and opportunities

Rating

10. PM methods, tools and techniques

Rating

Total complexity score 0

This scheme is used to assess the complexity of project management in a project. Each indicator is rated according to four levels of complexity (4 = very high complexity, 3 = high complexity, 2 = low complexity, 1 = very low complexity). If the total complexity value is equal or exceeding 25 points, a project is appropriate to be used in a certification process on IPMA Level B. Ratings between 23 and 27 points need a careful verification. For a complete evaluation all criteria have to be rated.

complexityvery high (4)

complexityhigh (3)

complexitylow (2)

complexityvery low (1)

Mandate and objectiveConflicting objectivesTransparency of mandate and objectivesInterdependence of objectivesNumber and assessment of results

uncertain, vague many conflicts hidden very interdependent large, multidimensional

defined, obvious few conflicts

quite transparent quite independent

low, monodimensional

Interested parties, lobbiesCategories of stakeholdersStakeholder interrelationsInterests of involved parties

numerous parties many differentunknown relations divergent interests

few parties few uniform categories

few and well known relations comparable interest

Diversity of contextCultural varietyGeographic distancesSocial span

diverse multicutural, unknowndistant, distributedlarge, demanding

homogeneous uniform, well known close, concentrated

small, easy to handle

Technological degree of innovationDemand of creativityScope for developmentSignificance on public agenda

unknown technologyinnovative approachlargelarge public interest

known and proven technology repetitive approach

limited public interest low

Structures to be coordinatedDemand of coordinationStructuring of phasesDemand for reporting

numerous structuresdemanding, elaborateoverlapping, simultaneousmultidimensional, comprehensive

few structures simple, straighforward

sequential uni-dimensional, common

Number of interfacesDemand for communicationHierarchical structureRelations with permanent organisations

manyindirect, demanding, manifoldmultidimensional, matrix structureintensive mutual relations

few direct, not demanding, uniform

uni-dimensional, simple few relations

Number of sub-ordinatesTeam structureLeadersship styleDecision-making processes

many, large control spandynamic team structureadaptive and variable many important desicions

few, small control spanstatic team structure

constant and uniformfew important decisions

Availability of people, material, etc.Financial resourcesCapital investmentQuantity and diversity of staff

uncertain, changingmany investors and kinds of resourceslarge (relative to project of the same kind)high

available, knownone investor and few kinds of resourceslow (relative to project of the same kind)

low

Predictability of risks and opportunitiesRisk probability, significance of impactsPotential of opportunitiesOptions for action to minimise risks

low, uncertainhigh risk potential, large impactlimited options for actionslarge potential of opportunities

high, quite certainlow risk potential, low impact

many options for actionslow potential of opportunities

Variety of methods and tools appliedApplication of standardsAvailability of supportProportion of PM to total project work

numerous, manifoldfew common standards applicableno support availablehigh percentage

few, simplecommon standards applicable

much support availablelow percentage