Denis F. Cioffi
Denis F. Cioffi
Denis F. Cioffi, Ph.D., a professor in the Department of Management Science, is Director of the Project Management Program, School of Business and Public Management, at The George Washington University.
Dr. Cioffi received a B.S. from the State University of New York at Albany, an M.A. from the University of Virginia, and a Ph.D. in astrophysics from the University of Colorado. After several years of astrophysics research (at the University of California at Berkeley, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, and North Carolina State University), he made a transition to management by becoming an Associate Program Director at the National Science Foundation. Dr. Cioffi spent 1996 in the Executive Office of the President, where he was a Senior Policy Analyst in the Office of Science and Technology Policy. He returned to academia with a position at George Mason University, where he was a Research Fellow at the Center for Science, Trade, and Technology Policy.
By definition, integrators seek to include. Although written mostly within the context of a single project, this book takes a broad view of integration, beyond the limited notion of a coherent approach only to a project’s triple constraint of budget, schedule, and scope. The historical foundation of mathematical integration turns out to have relevance to modern knowledge management and hence, modern project management. Thus, we begin by examining the meaning of the term integration and discover that a co-inventor of calculus was 300 years ahead of his time in thinking about knowledge management.
At least several papers in the literature (e.g., see Bibliography notes 4, 5, and 28), as noted in Meredith and Mantel  discuss particular templates for the traditional coordination of budget, schedule, and scope. And while project management texts recognize the importance of integration, most give a only few pages to its explicit mention. In his discussion of the growth of project management from its “traditional” ways, Kerzner  writes that “modern” project management demands integration skills of its practitioners, and he quotes several specialists who testify to the critical importance of these skills. Kerzner also reminds us that the global project manager faces especially difficult integration problems.
The Project Management Book of Knowledge (PMBOK®)  advocates the standard approach to “project integration management,” dealing with plan development, execution, and change. In contrast, this book views integration as expressed in 1967 in a classic paper in the Harvard Business Review  as “the achievement of unity of effort.”
The authors of “New Management Job: The Integrator” did not use the words “project management,” which they may not have recognized as a discipline in 1967, but they indicated the primary area that the integrator should handle: “the nonroutine.” They also anticipated “rapid rates” of change that would drive organizations to operate “like R&D-intensive firms”—in other words, companies would work with projects, and projects need integrators.
More than 30 years later, in a special series by the Industrial Research Institute dedicated to Succeeding in Technological Innovation, another author discussed management of the “innovation process” and wrote that it requires “a dedicated full-time coordinator-integrator,” who should communicate well and be skillful both technically and in business. 
Whatever the description and whatever the locale, effective integration management in projects comprises two inherent components: hard work and a good attitude (which itself often requires hard work). Good project plans are not static until after the project ends. Project changes mandate continuous iteration and integration of project plans. As Frame observed, reluctantly but realistically, “between 50 and 65 percent of our project budgets is dedicated to chasing paper.”  Much of this paperwork, now with a huge electronic component, is rightfully driven by the integration concerns of managing the project and its plans and personnel.
Analogous to the worries of a project manager watching the real-time changes of any project variable affecting the triple constraint, the branch of mathematics called calculus deals with (among other things) varying rates of change. In project management, one deals with costs, schedules, and scope, which can change frequently, sometimes erratically. Change is a fact of project life.
In calculus, to integrate means to sum, and one approximates reality with more accuracy by summing finer and finer elements. In project management, only by bringing together cost, schedule, and scope elements in sufficient detail can one produce a true picture of a project.
Project managers should view their projects as systems. Leibniz, a cofounder (with Newton) of calculus, conceived of integration mathematics broadly. In fact, Leibniz is credited with the conception of a formal system. 
Leibniz described the integral technically as “the sum of all lines,” but more generally he saw his creation as a structure “for the acquisition and organization of knowledge.”  And that’s what project integration is all about: Data, information, and knowledge related to all aspects of a project are acquired, organized, and assembled to present a coherent picture of the project’s status. In today’s parlance, these efforts are called knowledge management. In a project environment, one must also manage the people who can provide or transmit relevant information. Thus, project integration management harnesses the tool of knowledge management to pursue unity of effort.
The words “integrate” and “integration” have meanings outside the sphere of mathematics. To integrate means to “make entire or complete,” and integration represents creating the whole “by adding together or combining separate parts.” 
If only some fraction of a project’s separate parts is being managed, a project is not being managed in an integrated manner. An individual may feel responsible for a budget or a schedule or a scope—but who integrates and begins managing the project? Even if the fraction approaches 100 percent, the project is not necessarily being managed systematically (i.e., as a system). If not integrated, the project is, by definition, only partially managed. To say, therefore, that one is managing a project implies integration management.
The expanded notion taken in this book sets an even higher standard. If a project manager integrates budget, schedule, and scope, but is not concerned with the so-called stakeholders and the people on the project team, the integration task is incomplete.
The following chapters describe particular areas within the management of a project where integration is especially important, or where a certain tool or process furthers integration efforts. Chapter 2 examines the concept of knowledge more thoroughly and begins the discussion of integration management with the idea of sharing information from the start. Much of integration occurs in the development of the project plan, and thus the major section of this book, Chapter 3, is devoted to this topic. Chapter 4 takes a new look at earned-value analysis, which is a major integration tool.
In the context of integration, Chapter 5 looks briefly at people issues, and Chapter 6 discusses integrity. In many ways, the most difficult and important discussion takes place in Chapter 6. If all the project’s processes and special techniques are planned and prepared correctly, but there is no integrity, the project will fail.
Explore how to assess a wide range of factors to determine which contract type will provide the government the best value...
Transform your workplace into a well of learning and employee potential fulfilled with the help of this book!
Use past performance to win contracts at the lowest risk and cost
Learn project management processes, tools, and techniques that are scalable and adaptable to small projects.