Managing the Megaproject by: Mohamed Kamel

Managing the Megaproject

Mohamed Kamel

Sep 14, 2012

I hope what follows will spark an interest in discussing this topic, so that our collective knowledge can grow and our entire HHA family can benefit.   

The project management triangle contains four elements that we must monitor in any project: scope, time, cost and quality. Scope creep, project delay, cost overrun and rework are common deficiencies in projects. To be able to meet the project goals and objectives and to minimize these deficiencies, we should start the project management process as early as the first day of the project and as soon as the initiation phase starts. Throughout the entire project process, we should maintain strong monitoring of all these four elements.    

Megaproject is not a portfolio.  Megaproject is a project that has a higher magnitude in value and a special interest from the stakeholder, most commonly the public sector. Megaproject is a project with a life cycle, meaning that any action or decision taken at the first moment of the project will affect each of the four elements above until the closing out and beyond.

Inevitably, the project’s size and the public’s interest in it increase the complexity of managing the megaproject; so that managing the project is not only a matter of managing the four elements internally, but also of managing the expectations and the relation of the stakeholders. Moreover, because of the substantial impact of a megaproject, and the public’s attention to it, it creates multiple stakeholders, complicating the project management role. A megaproject is never a one-party challenge; it is a challenge for the entire slate of project partners.  Managing a megaproject successfully requires managing the complexity of each stakeholder’s objectives and roles.

The HR Challenge

In every project, human resources are the most important element, and success there depends on two actions we take at early stages: 1) creating procedures and 2) team building.  With megaprojects these first actions are more than important, they are crucial.

Managing human resources in a megaproject means managing individuals from different backgrounds, different experiences, different projects and different philosophies. In addition to these, moving from one scope to another often creates areas of confusion.

We have to be careful in understanding that managing team members is not instructing said members.  Managing team members means understanding their needs, their capabilities and their efficiencies.  It means coordinating their efforts and following up on their understanding of the project goals and objectives, as related to the four elements of scope, time, cost and quality. At that point, we can then provide direction.

Team building is not team assembling; if it were, we could simply assemble a team of the best professionals and the best personalities.  However, without building the strength within the team and a collective understanding of the role of each team member, and his or her responsibilities and authorities, we haven’t built a team. Instead, we’ve created a staggered and separated set of individuals working in isolation. So team building is an essential step.

Procedures are the most efficient way to run a project and are a tool in building the team as well.  All procedures are important, but most important is the communication procedure. In a megaproject, internal communication is key to managing the project.  And how we manage the communication between the internal and the external world is either a tool for success or a prescription for failure.

In any project, but most importantly in a megaproject, we should follow the most known quote in project management: “Don’t say it…Write it”.  Because a few days from now, it will be: “...you said…I said...well, what I understood was...”  When the history is lost, facts become opinions. 

A team has to stand firm in understanding the scope, the duties and the relation between the stakeholders. By applying the simple project management rules of communication, team building and follow-up, a megaproject could become a simple project that is only mega in magnitude and public interest.

J’ai voté Québec Solidaire, but why?

Mohamed Kamel*

September 1^st, 2012

When Jean Charest called for election, Quebecers wondered if he was going back to office or not? And most of us started to question if we were going to vote and if yes, to whom? Are we waking up on September 5^th to a minority or a majority government?

We entered this election with one question.  Are we ready to accept Charest’s bill 78 that for the first time in Canada, curbs people’s rights, curbing on freedom of speech while raising tuition fees and introducing his conservative views?  Charest governed for 9 years, shaded with corruption that involved many figures and he is not clean from it yet. He called the election to avoid negotiating with the students after issuing his undemocratic bill. For me when a party fails to listen to the new generation and their logic, they wrote their own death certificate.

On the other hand, there is Pauline Marois who has been trying to lead the Parti Québécois (PQ) for years, only succeeding once the party failed in all attempts to gain power.  Marois is the leader of the opposition who shyly supported the student movement in refusing the tuition increase and opposing bill 78.

We imagined that she could govern, until she returned to the stone age and started fighting the windmills by not recognizing today’s society.  Marois is still dreaming of creating a confrontation between the old and the new Quebec, so she can win a separation referendum. She is re-introducing her party’s vision of a pure white catholic society that pretends to be secular just as a tool to refuse the others.  At the same time, she helped in shifting the party’s policy far from the left, disconnected the movement from the labour movement.

By refusing to accept the others and living in the past through her hard secular dream, Marois wrote her own political death.

Even her own team fragmented into two other parties, Option Nationale (ON) a new small party supported by one of PQ’s old guard, Jacques Parizeau, and Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ).

Competing with both the Liberal party and the PQ came the new political party, Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ).  When François Legault exited from the PQ, he formed his new movement representing the far right capitalizing on the remains of Action démocratique Québec (ADQ), a party that was born and died in less than 18 years.  CAQ, similarly to the ADQ, is a soft sovereign movement.  CAQ supported the Liberal in passing bill 78 and is calling for abolishing school boards, which will minimize the participation and the role of taxpayers and parents in managing the education system.  Another party that I can’t support!

Not being able to vote for any of these parties brought me back to the basics of democracy.  Why are we voting strategically? Why don’t we go back to the principals and vote for what we believe in?

I prefer a minority government because it is the only way to allow people’s voice to be heard.  When a majority governs, they became a sort of dictatorship.  They don’t fear people and don’t bother with people’s needs or their point of view.  They only serve their own close circle of beneficiaries, and that is proven by the corruption that has shaded our life for a while.

Some might vote for one of these parties based on one issue to avoid the others.  Some might vote against referendum, others might vote against Marois’ citizen chart and some might vote against bill 78 or the corruption.

I am sure that Quebecers are not looking for these votes.  Our children deserve better than that. We should come back to the principles. We need a strong party that can raise our concerns and represent the general population.  Québec Solidaire (QS), as small as it is, is co-lead by Françoise David and Amir Khadir, both long time activists for people’s rights and community development, believe in a soft secularity of the state that creates a state without a religion but maintains and respects people’s right in practicing their own believes. 

I voted for QS because they support all people’s rights, because their political stand is my political stand. 

Are they going to govern? Most properly not now, but maybe some time soon. If this vote didn’t help QS to govern, it will help us magnifying the need to apply the proportional representation.      

One day, we will be able to achieve our goal in recognizing the proportional representation, a basic democratic principal that big parties are afraid of applying, because it will bring power back to the people instead of corporations.

* Mohamed S. Kamel: is a Freelance writer, he is a professional engineer, a LEED Green Associate and a recognized project manager professional, he is Member of several civil society organizations, a co-founder of the Alternative Perspective Media (APM-RAM), , Quebec Antiwar movement “Échec à la Guerre”, Canadian Egyptian for Democracy (CEFD), National Association for Change in Egypt (Taghyeer – Canada), Association of the Egyptians of Montreal (AEM). He could be reached at public@mohamedkamel.com

Position de Québec Solidaire en ce qui concerne le voile - le hijab et la laïcité de l'État

English follow French

Position de Québec Solidaire en ce qui concerne le voile - le hijab et la laïcité de l'État

Vous savez que Québec solidaire est un parti laïc, qui défend la nécessité de la séparation des pouvoirs entre l’État et la religion.

Vous savez également que nous avons payé un fort prix politique pour avoir défendu le droit des femmes portant le voile à obtenir un accès entier à tous les emplois et postes de la société, incluant les postes offerts au sein de la fonction publique québécoise. De même, nous avons défendu leur droit à se présenter à tous les postes électifs, quel que soit l’échelon politique. Nous avons largement expliqué notre position dans notre mémoire soumis à la Commission Bouchard-Taylor. Comme parti, notre principe premier est celui de l’inclusion, pas l’exclusion. Et nous défendrons toujours ce principe.

Cela dit, je préciserai de cette manière ce que vous avez lu concernant mon opinion sur le port du hijab: je reconnais que plusieurs femmes musulmanes portent le voile par choix, pour des raisons spirituelles ou autres, qui sont les leurs. Nous respectons et défendrons leur choix, incluant leur droit fondamental à la liberté de conscience ainsi que leur droit à profiter pleinement des occasions offertes par la société.

Cependant, nous avons d’importantes réserves lorsque le port du voile est imposé, de manière coercitive, par une quelconque autorité (frère, époux, mosquée, société et loi – tel que vécu en Iran, Arabie Saoudite et parfois même à Montréal). Dans ces cas, il s’agit alors d’un triste symbole d’une oppression. Québec solidaire a maintes fois exprimé ses profondes préoccupation pour la situation difficile vécue par les millions de femmes à travers le monde qui portent le voile contre leur gré. Nous nous porterons toujours à la défense de ces femmes.  Nous sommes un parti féministe et le féminisme est une expression d’humanisme.

 J’espère que ces précisions vous permettront de mieux évaluer et apprécier Québec solidaire. 

Amir Khadir

Député de Mercier

Québec solidaire

----------------------------------------------------------

Québec Solidaire’s position in regard to the veil – hijab and the state’s secularism

You know that Québec solidaire is a secular party, insisting on the necessity of separation of powers between state and religion.

You know also that we have paid a high political price for defending the right of veiled women to access to any jobs in the public domain and public and governmental services in Québec, including elected positions in any political sphere.  We have in large details explained our position in our memorandum before the Bouchar Taylor Commission. We are a party of inclusion and not exclusion. We have always fought bigotry, racism and islamophobia.  And we will stand by that.

This being said, I will precise my opinion about hijab, by reformulating what you have read in this manner: I acknowledge that many Muslim women wear the veil by choice, for spiritual or other particular considerations which is theirs. We respect their choice and will protect their fundamental right which includes not only freedom of conscience but also access to all opportunities in society. 

But we have important concerns when the veil is imposed to them by a coercive authority (brother, husband, mosque, society, law - like in Iran, Saudi Arabia, but even in Montreal) it is a sad symbol of oppression. Québec solidaire has often expressed our deep concern for the plight of millions of women who are forced to wear the veil without their consent in many places in the world. We will stand in the defence of these women too. We are a feminist party, because feminism is an expression of humanism.

I hope these precisions will clarify your appreciation of Québec solidaire.

Amir Khadir

Député de Mercier

Québec solidaire

Distributed by

Mohamed S. Kamel

Human Rights Activist

Member of several civil society organizations

Cell: +1 (514) 863-9202

public@mohamedkamel.com

http://forafreeegypt.blogspot.com/

لـن نمــوت َ إذا مــا أ ُلغِــــيَت ْ قــَــطـَر

للشاعر والاكاديمي

الفلسطيني الكبير

د. أحمد حسن المقدسي

لــن ْ نعيــش َ كأيتــام ٍ بــلا حـَــمَـد ٍ

ولـن نمــوت َ إذا مــا أ ُلغِــــيَت ْ قــَــطـَر ُ

لكـننا دون َ سـَــيْف ِ الـــشام ِ جارية ٌ

يـَـلوطـُها التـُّـرْك ُ .. والرومان ُ .. والتـَّــتـَر

لا تـُـسقِطوا الشام َ يا أعـراب ُ واعتبِروا   هـذي جـَهنم ُ فـي بغـداد َ

تـَـسـْـتعِر ُ

اللعبة ُ ابـتدأت ْ.. واللا عـبون َ أتـَـوا  وكاتـب ُ النــَّـص ِّ خـلف َ

الـباب ِ مـُـستـَتِر ُ

والحرب ُ توشـك ُ أن ْ تـُـلقي مَعاطِـفـَها  وَقــودُها الــنـفط ُ

والـدّولار ُ والبـَـشـَر ُ

ماذا أقـول ُ لأعــراب ٍ تـُـحَرِّكـُهم

كـف ُّ العـمالة ِ والأحـقاد ُ والـبـَطـَر ُ

فـأي ُّ جامعة ٍ تـلك َ الـتي خــَـنـَعَت ْ

فــيها التـــَّـآمـُـر ُ بالأخلاق ِ يَـعْــتـَمِر ُ

 قــرن ٌ وجامـعة ُ الأشـرار ِ في صَــمـَم ٍ

فالأرض ُ تـُنـْهــب ُ، والأعـراب ُ مـا نـَـفـَروا

 والقـدس ُ تـُـذبح ُ مِــثل َ الطيْر ِ راعِـفة ً

 فأطـْـرق ٌ القـوم ُ ، لا حِــس ٌّ ولا خـَـبَر ُ

 كـم ْ قبـَّـلوا كــَـف َّ جـَـزّار ٍ يُـقـَـتـِّـلنا

 وفـوق َ أشـلائنا يا ويْـحَهم سـَـكِروا

هــل تـِلك َ جـامعة ٌ أم تِـلك َ مَـزبلة ٌ يَسوسُها في زمان ِ العـُهْـر ِ

 مـَن ْ صَـغـُروا

 هــذي الــزَّريْـبـَة ُ ما عـادت ْ تــُـمـَثــِّـلـُنا مـادام َ تـَسـكنها

 الثــيْران ُ والحـُــمُر ُ

 اليوم َ أنعـي لأهـل ِ الخـير ِ جامعة ً

 عـَـرّابـُـها الـدُّب ُّ والأفـّـاق ُ والــقـّذِر ُ

 لـو ذرّة ٌ مـِــن ْ حـياء ٍ في وُجُوهـِهـِم ُ

 لأشـعلوا النار َ فـي الإسـْـطبل َ وانتـحروا

 لا تقتــلوا الــشام َ فالــتاريخ ُ عـَــلـَّمنا أن َّ العـُــروبة َ دون َ

 الــشام ِ تـَــندَحِـر ُ

 فــأمـَّة ُ العـُــرْب ِ لا تـَــفـْنى بـلا قـَــطـَر ٍ لـكــنها دون َ

 رُمـْـح ِ الـــشام ِ تنكــسِر ُ

 ولــن ْ نعيــش َ كأيتــام ٍ بــلا حـَــمَـد ٍ ولـن نمــوت َ إذا مــا أ

 ُلغِــــيَت ْ قــَــطـَر ُ

 لكـننا دون َ سـَــيْف ِ الـــشام ِ جارية ٌ

 يـَـلوطـُها التـُّـرْك ُ .. والرومان ُ .. والتـَّــتـَر ُ

 قـبائـل ُ النـفط ِ باسـم ِ الــحُب ِّ تقتـُــلـُنا

فالـحُب ُ فـاض َ بـهم ْ، والعـِـشق ُ ينفجـِــر ُ

 عـواصِـم َ المِلح ِ عـودوا عـن مَحَــبَّتِكـُم

 فلـدغة ُ الحـُـب ِّ مــنْ أنيابكم سـَـقـَر ُ

 يا مرحـبا ً بـِـدِمُــقــراطية ٍ هـَـبَطـَـت ْ

 مِـن َ الـسماء ِ وقــد كانوا بـها كـفروا

 هـذا الـــزواج ُ مــن الموساد ِ نعرِفـُــه ُ ولــيس َ يـُخـْــطِئه ُ

 سـَــمْـع ٌ ولا بـَــصـَر ُ

                                     هـذي دموع ُ تماسـيح ٍ ، فـما ذ ُرفـت ْ لـشعْب ِ غـــزة َ والآلاف ُ

 تـُــحْتـَضـَر ُ

 هـذا العـويل ُ علــى الأرواح ِ لـم نـَرَه ُ والناس ُ تـُـطـْبَخ ُ في قـانا

 وتنـْــصَهـِر ُ

 وفـي العـراق ِ صـَـمَتـُّم ْ صـَــمْت َ مـَــقـْبَرَة ٍ وآلة ُ المـوت ِ لا

 تـُــبقي ولا تـَـذَر ُ

 أمـَّا القـَـطيف ُ ، فـَـهُم ْ أبــناء ُ جــاريـَة ٍ

 وقـَــتـْلـُهم طــاعة ٌ للـه ِ يُعـْـــتـَبَر ُ

فما رأيـْـنـَا عــيونا ً أدْمَعَـت ْ دُرَرَا ً

 ولا قـُلـوبا ً علـى الأرواح ِ تـَنـْـفـَطِر ُ

ا تـقتـلوا الــشام َ إن َّ الـشام َ روضتـُنا دون َ الــشآم ِ يـموت ُ

لضَـــوء ُ والــقـَمَر ُ

لا تـَـذْبحوها فــهذي الــشام ُ لوحـَــتـُنا لولا الـــشآم ُ لـمات َ

الــشِّـعْر ُ والــــحَوَر ُ

يا شـام ُ صبرا ً ، فإن َّ الغـدْرَ دَيـْــدَنـُهم كـم مـرة ٍ لــتراب

الـقـُدس ِ قــد غــدَروا !!

ظـَـنـُّوا الـزَعامَة َ دشـْـداشـا ً ومـِسْـبَحَة ً

 ولـحْيـَة ً بـِــسـُموم ِ الـنفط ِ تـَخـْـتـَمِـر ُ

 حَسِـبْـتـُهم ْ مـِـن ْ خطايا الأمس ِ قد فـَهِـموا

 ظــَــننتـُهم فـَـهـِموا ، لـكنـَّهم بـَــقـَر ُ

 يا رب ُ عـفوك َ، أنـْـقِذنا بمعجزة ٍ

 تـُـزلزلُ الأرض َ فـيهم ، إنـَّهم فـجَروا

The ‘charter of secularism’ obscures what really matters

Traduction français en bas
The ‘charter of secularism’ obscures what really matters

The important issues are ignored and tensions needlessly aroused
The Montreal Gazette, August 27, 2012

http://www.montrealgazette.com/opinion/charter+secularism+obscures+what+really+matters/7148047/story.html

 

by Ehab Lotayef *

As the Quebec election approaches I find myself, unfortunately, pressured to vote for a candidate and party based on my religious sentiments and my feelings of discrimination against my community, rather than formulating my opinion based on the multitude of challenges — economic, educational, health-related, corruption-related, and justice issues — that face Quebec society as a whole. Can you blame me? Maybe you can, but before you issue your verdict, please hear me till the end.

The recommendations of the Bouchard-Taylor commission were supposed to relax tensions between the majority in Quebec and different minorities, and address, once and for all, the question of “accommodation.” Yet after all the money that was spent and the effort that was put into the process, most of Bouchard-Taylor’s recommendations were not implemented. The door was left wide open for further political games at the expense of more important issues, and to the detriment of Quebec’s minorities.

Now, five years later, the Parti Québécois is reopening the issue in an attempt to win more votes at the expense of minority rights. And so those of us who would like to stand together against Law 78, against corruption, and against charging the poor more and letting the rich off easy, are forced to abandon those real battles for the fog of the PQ’s “charter of secularism.”

From what little we know of it, the goal of the charter is to assert secularism mainly by forbidding public employees from wearing religious symbols on the job. But what are you going to do about people’s names? If your last name is Singh, or ends with -berg, or if your first name is Mohamed, will you be forbidden from identifying yourself publicly if you work for the government? Many things will give away your religious or cultural affiliation other than your “symbols.”

There is another issue that many advocates of secularism are either ignorant of or choose to ignore: namely, the difference between a religious symbol and a religious obligation. As a Muslim man I can wear a verse of the Qur’an on a chain around my neck; you can call this is a religious symbol, and it is certainly optional for me. But as a Muslim I have to pray five times a day; this is a religious obligation. For a Muslim woman who believes in the requirement to cover her hair, that covering is a religious obligation. The same applies to Sikh men. Certain attire is believed to be a religious obligation by Orthodox Jews. For those individuals, the way they dress is not a religious symbol; it is a part of practising their religion.

How can the state, in the name of any noble value, force those citizens to choose between following their religion and representing the state? What we should be doing instead is to encourage government employees — and all of those who deal with the public — to act professionally while at the same time exposing their cultural identity. This is the way to build real harmony in our society.

Pauline Marois and her Parti Québécois should drop this charter, which will bring nothing but social tensions and discrimination, and instead focus on the real issues that face our society: education, health, corruption and, above all, social justice.

* Ehab Lotayef is a Montreal poet, activist and engineer.

------------------

Une Charter de sécularisme: une diversion aux enjeux importants

par Ehab Lotayef *

Dans le tourbillon des campagnes électorales je me trouve, malheureusement, obligé de choisir selon mes sentiments religieux- plus que mes croyances- et mes impressions de discrimination contre ma communauté plutôt que mon opinion avertie basée sur les nombreux défis ; l’économie, l’éducation, le système de santé, la corruption et l’indépendance auxquels nous faisons face comme société Québécoise dans son ensemble. Est-ce que vous me blâmez? Avant de rendre votre verdict, lisez ce que j’ai à dire jusqu’au dernier mot.

Les recommandations du rapport Bouchard-Taylor étaient censées fermer la porte sur de telles chicanes, favoriser un climat de détente entre la majorité et les différentes minorités et régler une fois pour toutes la question des ‘Accommodements’.

Cependant après toutes les dépenses et les efforts investis dans le processus la plupart des recommandations de Bouchard-Taylor n’ont pas été implantées quand Monsieur Charest a réalisé qu’il n’en tirera aucun gain de popularité.  Alors, la porte a été alors laissée grande ouverte pour des manœuvres politiques au détriment des enjeux importants pour notre société, en particulier en ce qui concerne les minorités.

Cinq ans plus tard, le Parti Québécois utilise des moyens semblables pour gagner des votes aux dépens des droits des minorités. Plutôt que de permettre à ceux qui appuient la justice et la liberté de s’unir contre la Loi78, contre la corruption et l’exploitation des pauvres alors que les riches se dérobent, ces batailles de principe sont perdues dans le brouillard de la Chartre de Sécularisme.

Une chartre qui ne peut se matérialiser, non seulement parce qu’inconstitutionnelle mais aussi impraticable.

Si le but de cette Chartre  (de ce que nous connaissons d’elle) est d’affirmer le sécularisme en défendant aux  employés publics de porter des signes religieux qu’allons nous faire des noms ? Si votre nom est Sing ou se termine par –berg ou que votre prénom est Mohamed,  vous sera-t-il désormais interdit de vous identifier au public si vous travaillez pour le gouvernement ?

Maintes indications vont révéler votre religion ou culture autres que les symboles. Au contraire, nous devons encourager les employés autant que toute autre personne dans la place publique d’agir professionnellement tout en affichant leur identité car de cette façon une vraie harmonie par l’intégration pourra s’installer dans notre société.

Il ya aussi une autre problématique que les ténors du sécularisme ignorent ou bien choisissent de négliger: la différence entre un symbole religieux et une obligation religieuse. En tant qu’homme musulman, je peux porter un verset du Coran à mon cou, vous pouvez appeler cela un symbole religieux mais c’est sûrement optionnel. Je dois aussi prier cinq fois par jour, ceci est une obligation religieuse.

Selon la majorité des mouvances islamiques, une femme musulmane doit se couvrir la tête. Pour les femmes qui adoptent cette pratique c’est une obligation religieuse. La même chose s’applique aux hommes Sikh. Un certain code vestimentaire est aussi considéré comme une obligation par les Juifs orthodoxes. Pour ces individus, la façon dont ils s’habillent n’est pas un symbole religieux mais fait partie intégrale de leur croyance.

Alors, comment l’État au nom d’une quelconque valeur peut-elle forcer des citoyens de choisir entre suivre entre leur convictions et leur devoir de représenter leur gouvernement?

Madame Marois et le Parti Québécois devraient abandonner cette Chartre qui n’apporte rien excepté des tensions and plus de discrimination. L’emphase devrait être accordée aux vrais problèmes qui menacent notre idéal pour une société Québécoise démocratique, inclusive, égalitaire et prospère.

* Ehab Lotayef est un poête militant et un ingénieur.