Think of it this way – if you are travelling by car and using SatNav it continuously monitors where you are and where you are going so that if you make a mistake and deviate from the correct route it can get you back on track. If it didn’t do that you wouldn’t reach your destination. Project management and project monitoring is the same principle. If you aren’t keeping a track on how you are doing you can’t fix a problem.

Why, What, How?
Building a good team is the single most important thing a Project Manager can do to achieve a successful project. With the right attitude, a team will overcome almost any difficulty to succeed in its goals. In most projects there will be times when only the determination of the team can overcome the difficulties and carry the initiative through to success. Even when there is no pressure, the team’s spirit and enthusiasm will be reflected in the quality of the solution and the extent to which other people buy-in to it.

There is a whole area of academic study and practical experience about building good teams. Business psychologists present many theories concerning the way in which people interact. A world-class Project Manager needs to be an amateur psychologist and a manipulator of human behaviour. Here are some of the factors which generally lead to a good team:

shared belief in the value and achievability of the team’s goals,
awareness of the value of the individual’s own role and contribution,
recognition of the value of other team members (whether they are key specialists or just non-specialist, junior assistants),
desire to work collaboratively, sharing thoughts, ideas, concerns, etc,
friendship – enjoying working together with a common purpose,
supporting each other in recognition that the team’s success requires all members to be successful,
coaching junior members rather than bossing them,
listening to ideas and advice from other team members,
making time to communicate with other team members,
celebrating successes,
rewarding good team behaviour in financial and non-financial ways.
To achieve this collaborative team style, the Project Manager usually needs to behave as one of the team – collaborative, supportive, friendly, etc. The Project Manager should be the best of friends with each team member to the extent that each participant would go to great lengths to help the project succeed.

It is interesting to compare this project management style with the traditional view of the Project Manager. Often the best recognised Project Managers are those who make a lot of noise, bang the table, make snap judgements, are tough with their people, "crack the whip" and generally drive people to perform through the exercise of power. These behaviours are very visible and it is common to find managers with this personal style do get recognised and promoted.

A regime of terror can only succeed so far and for so long. There comes a point where the participants give up trying and no amount of pressure can persuade them to increase their contribution. Beyond that point, people will leave and the project will fail. Conversely, in a collaborative team the participants feel that the team’s success is their own personal mission. They will respond ever more determinedly as the pressure rises.

The Project Manager who has created an excellent team will find the team performing optimally with very little intervention. Herein lies the dilemma for a career-minded Project Manager. In good projects the Project Manager does not need to (and should not) exhibit dramatic, powerful, personal characteristics, but the organisation’s leadership may be more likely to recognise the talents of a manager who creates a lot of noise.

The reality is that a sensible balance achieves the best results:

reward vs punishment

pleasure vs pain

opportunity vs threat

encouragement vs coercion

The classic analogy is the donkey, motivated by the promise of a carrot and the threat of a beating with the stick. Most psychologists believe that the positive experience of the carrot is much more successful than the negative threat of the stick. They would argue that the stick should be applied only on rare occasions with good cause – or, maybe, never at all. The carrot should be offered as a constant reward for performance.

A similar balance should be achieved between the stimulus generated by the availability of opportunities versus the instinctive survival reaction to threats.

The best compromise can sometimes be achieved by people taking on different "good guy" and "bad guy" roles. Think about the "headteacher sanction". In a school class, children should be exposed for most of their time to a friendly, helpful, collaborative teacher. If they behave badly, it is unwise to damage the teacher-student relationship so the threat of pain and punishment takes the form of a trip to the headteacher. If you apply this logic to a hierarchical structure, the conclusion is that each person more than one level from the bottom needs to be a friendly, collaborative, supportive mentor to their immediate subordinates, but a tough, demanding figure in the eyes of those below. Each manager needs to be able to play both roles.
Human behaviour is driven by a combination of many factors – some controllable, some not. The inherent nature of each individual is something the Project Manager can do little about. The way participants are assigned to roles and sub-teams can be controlled. In an extreme case, the Project Manager might choose not to use a given individual if their character would not fit in. Look for a good balance of personalities as well as skills when building the sub-teams and the working relationships within the Project Team. This is an area where considerable psychological research has been performed – many publications and training programmes are available.

Building a collaborative team
But who said teams need to be hierarchical? Within a team you will find a mixture of different people with different assignments – but that does not necessarily require a hierarchy. The best team cultures develop where team members recognise that everyone else also has important value to contribute.

For each issue someone needs to be the recognised leader; someone has to believe it is their responsibility to drive an issue otherwise it may become forgotten. For each issue there will be a sub-set of people most appropriate to make contributions. "Appropriate", here, means a combination of capability, resource scheduling/availability, and the need to build a good team.

The team structure that develops (either formally or informally) will be flexible such that the right people work together for any given topic. It also means that a leader for one issue might be only a contributor for another – and vice versa. A can be B’s "boss" in some aspects of the teamwork, but B might be A’s boss in others.

In this example, see how the Applications Development Team Leader is an important contributor to the Solutions Architecture Team and also to the overall project leadership team. In fact, all the leaders can be a leader in one context but a contributor in others.

If we expand this thinking, it is possible to generate a highly collaborative team where every member has at least one issue to lead upon. In this table, we see how the Project Manager has assigned staff to the various issues. Even the most junior team member, Pat Sapphire, has a team leader role to play – Pat is responsible for organising the team’s social events.

Very much so.

I don’t know how the project could have been protected more.

Perhaps something went wrong with the contracts. Imagine if the contract calls for person A to deliver a system running on equipment X at site Y at time Z. Imagine if a futher contract was signed with B calling for B to deliver a system running on equipment X at site Y at time Z. Maybe A and B hsd to "fight it out" to share the equipment and the deliveries never eventuated. Hopefully people kept records and someone in the future can "walk the cat backwards" and see what happened.

start here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_management

goole showed 367 million hits on the question

PG Diploma in software quality career growth path:

Career Graph – Test Engineer – Senior Test Engineer- Test Lead – Test Manager / Project Manager.

PG Diploma in project management career growth path:

Project manager/Business Analyst – Manager – Director – Vice President

Depending on the industry you are working for jobs differ; for example in hospitals you may be appointed as Professional Billing Analyst/ Project Manager; in construction industry as a PM.

PG diploma in Project management and certification that are PMP, CAPM and other will help you reach the top that is work as project director.

Project Management Professional (PMP) certified professionals would get following job opportunities:
Project Manager, Information Technology (IT); Project Manager, Software Development; Senior Project Manager, IT; Program Manager, IT; Project Manager, Construction Manager, Project manager, Engineering manager, Project consultant, Project coordinator, Team lead, Project controls engineer, Project controls analyst, Business manager, Asset consultant, project management consultant

Learn more about Post Graduate Diploma in Software Testing or Software Quality Management –

http://www.ccsq.in/pgdst/pdf/PGDST_Brochure.pdf

2009/2010 NCFE Operations Management Level 4
Introduction to Operations Management, Product Planning & Positioning, Process Design, Managing Demand of Materials, project management, Quality Management, Productivity Methods & Measurements, Scheduling & Capacitor, Time Based Operations

2009/2010 NCFE Electricity Fundamentals Level 3
Circuits & Current, Electrical Circuits, Energy & Heat, Resistive circuits, Circuits in series, Electrical Potential & Electromotive force, Capacitance & Inductance, Electromagnetic Induction

2009/2009 City & Guilds AutoCAD 2D Computer Aided Design Level 2

2007/2009 Level 3
BTEC National Diploma in Manufacturing Engineering
Final grade DDM (340 UCAS Points)
Business systems for technicians (Distinction), Communications for technicians (Pass)
Mathematics for technicians (Pass), Mechanical principles and applications (Pass), Health, safety, risk assessment and welfare in engineering workplace (Distinction), Properties and applications of engineering materials (Distinction), Electro, pneumatic and hydraulic systems and devices (Distinction), Computer aided drafting (Distinction), Applications of welding technology (Distinction) Project Double (Pass), Primary forming (Distinction), Secondary processes (Merit), Manufacture planning (Distinction), Selecting and improving secondary processes (Distinction), Computer numerical control of M/C tools (Distinction), Further Mathematics for technicians (Pass), Six Sigma (Pass),

2006/2007 BTEC first
Diploma engineering 2006/2007 overall grade (merit) Level 2
Working Practices in Engineering (Pass), Using & Interpreting Engineering Information (Pass), Applied Electrical & Mechanical Science for Technicians (Pass), Mathematics for Engineering Technicians (Pass), Preparing & Controlling Engineering Manufacturing Operation (Pass), Selecting Engineering Materials (Distinction), Selecting & Using Secondary Machining Techniques to Remove Material (Pass) Engineering Assembly Techniques (Distinction), Engineering Marking out (Pass), Casting & Molding Processes (Distinction)

2004/2005 City & Guilds Introductory Tungsten Arc Gas Shielded
Welding Aluminium & Stainless Steel

1998/1999 NVQ Level 2 Fabrication Engineering Manufacturing
General Health & Safety, Basic Engineering Drawing Measuring & Marking Out, Basic Engineering Materials, Handling Engineering Information, Establishing Effective Working Relationships, Basic Oxy- Fuel Gas Cutting, Basic Manual Metal Arc Welding, Basic Plate
Work

KEY SKILLS QUILFICATIONS

2009/2010 NCFE Basic Maths Level 2

2006/2007 City & Guilds Key Skills Level 1
Information & Communication Technology

1998 City & Guilds Key skills Entry Level
Communications & Numeracy

No. Unless it is buried under some other title, you don’t have static and dynamic mechanics – the handling of forces in materials that lead to failure that allow a mechanical engineer to say that a particular part, assembly, or machine will withstand the specified forces or it won’t.

My project management professor deducted 20 points for this "grammatical error" and I would like to know what is correct.

Thank you so much.

In your case your professor was correct, however if you had written, ‘we provide a top quality range of equipment’, that would also have been correct. I think it was a bit harsh for your professor to deduct 20 polnts though.

It seems to me that it should be a non issue in many jobs, just needing a bit of self management and discipline from yourself. You are already doing this apparently.

If you would be interested in helping me please let me know as soon as possible. Any and all help is greatly appreciated. If you’re interested I can e-mail it to you. (It’s about 3 pages long but double-spaced). Thank you.

You can email me in my profile.