Project Half Double
March 2021Project Half DoubleMid-term Evaluation of Phase 3and Consolidation of Phase 1, 2 and 3
AcknowledgementsThe editors would like to thank the Danish Industry Foundation for funding this work andacknowledge contributions from all organizations involved in Project Half Double.CONFLICT OF INTERESTThe authors declare no conflict of interest regarding the funding agency, Implement ConsultingGroup or any other parties involved in Project Half Double.AARHUS UNIVERSITYNordre Ringgade 18000 Aarhus CDenmarkTelephone: 45 8715 0000EDITORSAnna Le Gerstrøm RodePer SvejvigAarhus UniversityAarhus UniversityREVIEWERSClaus Hjerrild HolmSandie Lang RosenlundNiels Nymark TrusbakTina Q. Kraul RasmussenJan FüsselCarsten ClausenRune Bruhn-HouenFlemming HedegaardLars JohnsenNicholas SchoellerMichael GøthcheMorten Dohrmann HansenHenriette FunchNiels EllingsøeSøren MadsenJacon Lyngklip SimonsenPeter Kjær SørensenJesper SchreinerEmilie Fraenkel KærnJohanne Lyngsø JensenMads LomholtJørgen AalbækMichael EhlersGN AudioGN AudioGN AudioGN AudioGN AudioGrundfosGrundfosGrundfosGrundfosSchoeller PlastMalmosMalmosAJ VaccinesAJ VaccinesBilaBilaGlobalConnectDansk ProjektledelseImplement Consulting GroupImplement Consulting GroupImplement Consulting GroupImplement Consulting GroupImplement Consulting GroupRECOMMENDED CITATIONRode, A. L. G., & Svejvig, P. (2021). Project Half Double: Mid-term Evaluation of Phase 3 andConsolidation of Phase 1, 2 and 3, March 2021. Aarhus University.
Table of Contents – with chapter authorsEXECUTIVE SUMMARYBy Anna Le Gerstrøm Rode (Aarhus University)1. INTRODUCTIONBy Anna Le Gerstrøm Rode (Aarhus University)2. TELLING THE HALF DOUBLE STORYBy Anna Le Gerstrøm Rode (Aarhus University)3. PRESENTING THE HALF DOUBLE METHODOLOGYBy Thomas Kristian Ruth and Karoline Thorp Adland (Implement Consulting Group)4. EVALUATING HALF DOUBLE PROJECTSBy Anna Le Gerstrøm Rode and Anne Jensby (Aarhus University)5. CHARACTERIZING HALF DOUBLE PROJECTSBy Anne Jensby and Anna Le Gerstrøm Rode (Aarhus University)6. COMPARING HALF DOUBLE PRACTICESBy Pernille Nørgaard Boris, Camilla Kølsen Petersen and Per Svejvig (Aarhus University)7. DIFFUSING THE HALF DOUBLE METHODOLOGYBy Anne Jensby, Pernille Nørgaard Boris and Per Svejvig (Aarhus University)8. HALF DOUBLE PROJECTS IN SMALL AND MEDIUM ENTERPRISESBy Anne Jensby and Anna Le Gerstrøm Rode (Aarhus University)9. EVALUATING PROJECT HALF DOUBLE PHASE 3By Anne Jensby and Anna Le Gerstrøm Rode (Aarhus University)10. CONCLUSIONBy Anna Le Gerstrøm Rode (Aarhus University)APPENDIX A. RESEARCH PUBLICATIONSBy Anna Le Gerstrøm Rode (Aarhus University)APPENDIX B. RESEARCH METHODOLOGYBy Per Svejvig (Aarhus University)APPENDIX C. RESEARCH LIMITATIONSBy Anna Le Gerstrøm Rode, Anne Jensby and Pernille Nørgaard Boris (Aarhus University)3
Table of Contents – with chapter headingsEXECUTIVE SUMMARY . 71INTRODUCTION . 82TELLING THE HALF DOUBLE STORY . 113PRESENTING THE HALF DOUBLE METHODOLOGY . 153.1Core element 1: Impact . 173.2Core element 2: Flow . 173.3Core element 3: Leadership . 193.4Local Translation . 204EVALUATING HALF DOUBLE PROJECTS . 224.1Evaluating Half Double project success and performance. 224.2Benchmarking Half Double project results . 264.2.1 Projects that meet original goal and business intent . 274.2.2 Projects that deliver stakeholder satisfaction . 274.2.3 Projects that fail . 284.2.4 Learning from benchmarking evaluations . 285CHARACTERIZING HALF DOUBLE METHODOLOGY CONTEXTS . 305.1Half Double Methodology sweet spots . 305.1.1 Host organization size . 305.1.2 Host organization industry . 315.1.3 Project type . 325.1.4 Project duration . 335.1.5 Project investment . 355.1.6 Project novelty, complexity, technology and pace . 355.1.7 Defining Half Double sweet spots . 375.2Learning from failure . 376COMPARING HALF DOUBLE METHODOLOGY PRACTICES . 396.1Impact practices . 404
6.2Flow practices . 416.3Leadership practices . 416.4Three core principles . 427DIFFUSING THE HALF DOUBLE METHODOLOGY . 467.1Literature on diffusion of management innovations . 467.1.1 Change agents and management innovation . 477.1.2 From adoption to institutionalization and legitimacy . 487.1.3 Diffusion of agile project management methodologies . 507.1.4 Synthesising diffusion of management innovations. 517.2Overview of diffusion study . 517.2.1 No implementation . 537.2.2 Superficial implementation . 547.2.3 Medium implementation . 557.2.4 Deep implementation . 577.2.5 Overall diffusion . 577.3Superficial implemention in Grundfos . 587.3.1 The first step with the Half Double project . 597.3.2 Story about the adoption process in Grundfos . 597.3.3 Adoption of the methodology within Grundfos . 617.3.4 Next step in Grundfos . 637.4Medium implementation in GN Audio . 637.4.1 The first step with the Half Double project . 637.4.2 Story about the adoption process in GN Audio . 637.4.3 Adoption of the methodology within GN Audio . 677.4.4 Next step in GN Audio . 697.5Reflections on diffusion of the Half Double Methodology. 708HALF DOUBLE PROJECTS IN SMALL AND MEDIUM ENTERPRISES 738.1Literature on project management in small and medium enterprises . 738.1.1 Defining small and medium enterprises . 738.1.2 Managing projects in small and medium enterprises . 748.2The Half Double Methodology in small and medium enterprises . 758.2.1 Project results in small and medium enterprises . 775
8.2.2 Project characteristics in small and medium enterprises . 798.2.3 Project practices in small and medium enterprises . 798.2.4 Evaluating projects in small and medium enterprises . 828.2.5 Learning from Half Double in small and medium enterprises . 848.3Exploring the Half Double Methodology in Malmos . 848.3.1 Presenting a medium enterprise setting . 848.3.2 Presenting two Half Double projects . 858.3.3 Comparing Half Double projects . 858.3.4 Evaluating project performance . 868.3.5 Evaluating project success . 878.3.6 Evaluating project practices . 888.3.7 Evaluating the Half Double Methoolodgy in Malmos . 888.4Three perspectives on Half Double in small and medium enterprises . 899EVALUATING PROJECT HALF DOUBLE PHASE 3 . 909.1Defining formative evaluation . 909.2Status on Phase 3 of Project Half Double . 909.3Challenges and opportunities for Phase 3 . 939.3.1 Diffusing the methodology across organizations . 939.3.2 Combining the methodology with other standards . 949.3.3 Abstracting the methodology to a reflective mindset . 949.4Final remarks on formative evaluation of phase 3 . 9510CONCLUSION . 96APPENDIX A: RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS . 98APPENDIX B: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY . 100APPENDIX D: RESEARCH LIMITATIONS . 102REFERENCES . 1096
Executive SummaryBy Anna Le Gerstrøm Rode (Aarhus University)Project Half Double (PHD) has a clearmission: to define a project managementmethodology that can deliver “Projects in halfthe time with double the impact” whereprojects in half the time should be understoodas half the time to impact (Rode et al., 2019,p. 5). These targets were reached duringphase 1 and 2 of PHD.the HD projects compared to the referenceprojects – suggesting that the HDM is aradically different way of managing projectsthat significantly changes practice as usual.The biggest difference was found for theImpact principle – largely a result of HDprojects’ intensive use of the Pulse Checkpractice.This report is the first publication of phase 3.The purpose of phase 3 is to diffuse andbroaden Half Double to a number of small andmedium sized organizations to reach a tippingpoint, thus creating a sustainable businessmodel in which the concept of Half Double cancontinue as a self-sustaining and independententity. This report presents an evaluation of 75projects and 67 organizations working with theHDM over five years.A study focusing on the diffusion of the HDMshows that the HDM has been able to maintainitself in many of the case organizations afterthe HD projects have finished, but also that itis a challenging task to diffuse the HDM toother project teams and departments.The report provides a short account of theHDM and an update on previous evaluationsof the first 16 organizations implementing theHDM. The evaluation shows that, the successrate is high in nine (56%) of the 16 Half Double(HD) projects implementing the HDM.Moreover, almost half (47%) of the HDprojects have a higher performance comparedto projects not implementing the HDM.An evaluation of the characteristics of the bestHD projects indicates that the HDM seems towork well across a variety of contexts. Theindication is strongest in large organizations,within healthcare, electronics, food, andmanufacturing industries, and in small andshort projects of various types but especiallysupply chain optimization.A study of the practices employed in all theevaluated projects shows that all three coreprinciples of the HDM are represented more inFinally, a focus on the specific context of smalland medium sized enterprises shows that theproject performance and success rate in theseorganizations are not remarkably differentfrom large enterprises. Specifically, five out ofnine SME HD projects have a high successrate, and none have a low success rate.Moreover, two out of five SME HD projectswhere data on comparable reference projectsis available have a higher performance, twohave a medium performance, and one haslowerperformance.Together,theseevaluations indicate that although introducingand implementing a new methodology like theHDM in the SME context can be a challengein itself, the results are encouraging. Based onthe learnings from this segment, it seems thatthere is great potential for SMEs embarking ona Half Double journey.Altogether, the evaluations consolidated in thisreport are promising regarding the use of theHDM, but they also confirm that “one size”does not fit all.7
1IntroductionBy Anna Le Gerstrøm Rode (Aarhus University)The purpose of this report is to present theresults of a mid-term evaluation in phase 3 ofProject Half Double (PHD).The report extends previous evaluations fromphase 1 and 2 presented in five earlier reports(Rode, Frederiksen, & Svejvig, 2018; Rode etal., 2019; Svejvig, Adland, Klein, Nissen, &Waldemar, 2017; Svejvig et al., 2016; Svejvig,Rode, & Frederiksen, 2017).Taken together, these six reports present acomprehensive evaluation of 75 projects and67 organizations working with the Half DoubleMethodology (HDM) over a period of fiveyears.The Half Double journey began in May 2013when a group of dedicated project enthusiastsasked themselves: How do we create a newand radical project paradigm that can createsuccessful projects? The formal part of PHDwas initiated two years later in 2015. At itscurrent stage, it is a three-phase project.Phase 1 ran from June 2015 to June 2016 andincluded seven organizations with eight pilotprojects implementing the HDM and 23reference projects not implementing the HDM.Phase 2 ran from July 2016 to June 2019 andincluded nine organizations with 11 pilotprojects and 21 reference projects. At the timeof writing, we are in the middle of phase 3,which started in August 2019 and is scheduledto end in December 2022. The complete HalfDouble journey is outlined in chapter 2.The goal of the current phase 3 is differentfrom the earlier phase 1 and 2 which had aclear mission of creating “a projectmethodology that can increase the successrate of projects while increasing thedevelopment speed of new products andservices”. That target was reached by the endof phase 2 with the formalization of the HDMwith the overall aim of delivering “Projects inhalf the time with double the impact” whereprojects in half the time should be understoodas half the time to impact (benefit realization,effect is achieved) and not as half the time forproject execution. The complete HDM ispresented in chapter 3.Based on implementation, evaluation andrefinement of the HDM in the 16 organizationsfrom phase 1 and 2, the last report concludes“that The HDM can lead to higher impact – interms of project speed and/or performance”(Rode et al., 2019). This conclusion isconfirmed in the overall evaluation in thisreport of all finalized pilot and referenceprojects in the 16 organizations of phase 1 and2. The complete evaluation of pilot projectperformance and success rate is shown inchapter 4. The following three chapterspresent further details of the evaluation inthese organizations. Chapter 5 elicits thecharacteristics of high performing andsuccessful pilot projects – to establish theconditions under which the HDM seems to bemost effectful. Chapter 6 compares the HDMpractices applied in pilot and referenceprojects – to establish in what way the HDMmakes the biggest difference. Chapter 7follows the HDM as it diffuses within andacross organizations – to establish thereasons for adopting the HDM.The overall purpose of the current phase 3 isto establish ground for the methodology tocontinue in an independent Half DoubleInstitute. In other words: “The purpose ofphase 3 is to diffuse and broaden Half Doubleto a number of small and medium enterprises(SMEs) to reach a tipping point, thus creatinga sustainable business model in which the8
concept of Half Double can continue as a selfsustaining and independent entity.”The current findings from the SME setting arepresented in chapter 8 which reveals thepreliminary learnings from the first nine SMEpilot projects. Note that in this phase 3, theword “pilot” project loses part of its originaldouble meaning of testing both the HDM initself but also the organizational context inwhich it is implemented: in this third phase, theHDM is mature and hence, the word pilot onlyrefers to testing the HDM in a new context.Consequently, in this report we use the term“Half Double projects” to signify this change. Inessence, the meaning of the two words (pilotproject and HD project) is the same: projectsapplying the HDM.The overall status of phase 3 of PHD in termsof reaching its overarching goal is outlined in aformative evaluation presented in chapter 9which ends with a list of challengesaccompanied by possible explanations andinspiration for further improving the rest ofphase 3.Behind PHD is the Half Double Institute whichwas launched in March 2020 as an importantmilestone on the way to reaching the overalltarget of phase 3. The institute is an impartialand non-profit foundation with the purpose ofincreasing the rate of success in projectsthrough free dissemination of materials on theHDM as well as training and certification. Theinstitute rests on a collaboration betweenImplement Consulting Group, the DanishProject Management Association, the DanishIndustryFoundation, and AarhusUniversity. Roles and responsibilities aredivided between these four partners.Implement Consulting Group serves as theoverall project leader on PHD and establishescollaboration with new partners as well as HDproject organizations implementing the HDM.The Danish Project Management Associationserves as the primary manager of thecertification and guarantees its quality. TheDanish Industry Foundation, an ncially with 2.1 million euros to sponsor thethird phase of PHD. Finally, Aarhus Universityserves as the principal investigator evaluatingthe HDM and as the editorial team of thisreport.The team of researchers at Aarhus Universityevaluating PHD has over the last five yearsparticipated in several activities to generateand analyze data and disseminate results.These activities have resulted in a long list ofresearch publications – which is shown inappendix A and divided into two parts: 1)publications for practitioners like this reportand including the previous reports mentionedearlier 2) publications for academics coveringpeer reviewed conference proceedings andjournal articles.It is important to note that while this report isreviewed in the organizations contributing to it,the report has not been through an academicpeer review process. Consequently, the workpresented in this report cannot be regarded asfinished research results according toguidelines from Aarhus School of Businessand Social Sciences. Rather, the workpresented in this rep
By Anna Le Gerstrøm Rode (Aarhus University) 1. INTRODUCTION By Anna Le Gerstrøm Rode (Aarhus University) 2. TELLING THE HALF DOUBLE STORY By Anna Le Gerstrøm Rode (Aarhus University) 3. PRESENTING THE HALF DOUBLE METHODOLOGY By Thomas Kristian Ruth
temperature in the above table to calculate the property. Also temperature as a function of enthalpy or entropy are included. Table 5.3 Public Functions in Region 3 public double Prt(double r, double t) pin kPa public double Rho(double p, double t, int phase) U in kg/m3. See Section 5.1 public double V(double p, double t) ( , ) p v pT RT
and ending when the full time has elapsed. For each half life elapsed, cut the mass in half, increase the time by an amount equaf to the half life, cut the fraction in half, and add one to the number of half lives. Mass Time Fraction Half lives 320 0 i 0 160 12.4 Vz 1 80 24.8 % 2 40 37.2 v, 3 20 49.6 X 4 10 62 %i « Answer the questions below .
Chapter 2. Double fi anchetto in the Caro Kann 153 Chapter 3. Double fi anchetto in the Modern 163 Chapter 4. Double fi anchetto in the “Hippo” 187 Chapter 5. Double fi anchetto against 1.d4 205 Chapter 6. Double fi anchetto in the Fischer System 231 Chapter 7. Double fi anchetto
Mastic vinyl siding products meet or exceed ASTM D3679 performance standards in the VSI certification program. WITHSTAND THE IMPACT OF RECOMMENDED . QUIET WILLOW DOUBLE 4" DOUBLE 4-1/2" DUTCH LAP DOUBLE 5" AMERICAN WALNUT DOUBLE 4" DOUBLE 4-1/2" DUTCH LAP WOODLAND GREEN DOUBLE 4" DOUBLE 4-1/2" DUTCH LAP ASPEN GREY
Show Double double on the whiteboard, replacing 'this' with '1' and 'that' with '2'. Make sure that learners understand that two 1's, for example, are read as 'eleven' not 'one, one'. Discuss the meaning of 'double double' (double, then double again). Then ask them in their pairs to work out the total of all five .
Rectifier broadly divided into two categories: Half wave rectifier and full wave rectifier. Working principle of half wave rectifier: In half wave rectifier only half cycle of applied AC voltage is used. Another half cycle of AC voltage (negative cycle) is not used. Onl
DESIGN OF HALF ADDER AND HALF SUBTRACTOR AIM: To design Half-Adder and Half Subtractor using basic logic gates and verification of truth table. APPARATUS: THEORY: Half-Adder: A combinational logic circuit that performs the addition of two data bits, A and B, is called a half-adder. Addition will result in two output bits; one of which is
ANATOMI LUTUT Lutut adalah salah satu sendi terbesar dan paling kompleks dalam tubuh. Sendi ini juga yang paling rentan karena menanggung beban berat dan beban tekanan sekaligus memberikan gerakan yang fleksibel. Ketika berjalan, lutut menopang 1,5 kali berat badan kita, naik tangga sekitar 3–4 kali berat badan kita dan jongkok sekitar 8 kali. Lutut bergabung dengan tulang femur di atasnya .
