Project Management

Monday 13 - Tuesday 14 October 2014 (2 day course)

8.45am for 9.00am - Finishing around 4.30pm

BCS, 1st Floor, The Davidson Building, 5 Southampton Street, London, WC2E 7HA | Maps

BCS Members: Free of charge
Non-Members: £40.00 (including VAT @ 20%)

If you book, and are unable to attend, please cancel your booking via the BCS site and also contact Soheir Ghallab, who is our committee member looking after Tom’s courses. There is normally a waiting list for Tom’s courses.

Tom Gilb Hon FBCS and Kai Gilb


Most IT projects fail wholly or partly to satisfy expectations of funders and stakeholders (try Googling IT Project Failure). The Royal Academy of Engineering concluded that: 'The methods for avoiding IT project failure are known to the community, but not practiced'. There is a huge motivational, political and economic problem here, and we are not going to solve it with this course alone. But for those who want the 'well hidden' knowledge of how to succeed in IT Project Management, we are going to present those techniques that we believe need practicing in order to succeed.


  • Focus on Stakeholders: why it is dangerous to focus on users and customers alone.
  • Focus on Value: why it is bad to focus on functions, use cases, building code.
  • Quantifying Values and Qualities: how to make unclear requirements much clearer
  • Using Planguage (Planning Language) to specify project-critical requirements in more-useful detail
  • Multiple Levels of Project Control (Organization, Stakeholder, IT, Tech Design)
  • Measuring the work flow quality: Specification Quality Control.
  • How to relate designs to requirements, value drivers to value needs: Impact Estimation Tables
  • Decomposing Project Deliverables by Value: the 111111 Method
  • Cost Estimation by Feedback, and Change. How to deliver, before the deadline.
  • Case Studies of results using these methods.

Time Allocation:

1. Project Requirements

Day 1 am

1.1 Stakeholder Analysis: the sources of requirements.
1.2 Requirement classifications and definitions.
1.3 Requirement Templates and Rules.

Day 1 pm

1.4 Quantification of Quality Requirements
1.5 Exercise: Stakeholders, Values, Clear Requirements
1.6 Instructor Led Workshop: One participant-suggested requirement, in depth
1.7 Exercise: One quality or value requirement in depth on one page template

2. SQC, Design, Architecture, Impact Estimation Cost Estimation

Day 2 am

2.1 Design Specification Template: A Rich specification method.
2.2 Impact Estimation, Value Delivery Tables theory
2.3 Class Exercise: fill out impact estimation table.
2.4 Specification Quality Control (SQC) Method, Part 1
2.5 SQC Method, Basic Theory part 2
2.6 SQC Demonstration, class exercise
2.7 Cost Estimation: Dynamic budget and deadline Control instead of bad up front estimates.

3. Value Delivery: Value Decomposition,

Day 2 pm Evo Method

3.1 The Evolutionary Project Management method (‘Evo’): Efficient Value Optimisation.
3.2 & 3.3 Evo cases: Confirmit, Bring, US DoD Persinscom, Citigroup UK, and some ‘relatives’ IBM Cleanroom, Lean Startup.
3.4 The 111111 Unity Decomposition Method, for value delivery
3.5 The 20 Principles of Decomposition, for value delivery
3.6 Exercise in Design Decompositionfor requirement-value delivery
3.7 Class Photograph, Diplomas, Certification, last questions


This course will not turn you into a 'Project Master', but it might be a clear step in that direction. It certainly does not cover all aspects of project management, just the ones that we experience are done very badly now, and for which we have specific 'medicines'.

About Speakers: Tom Gilb and Kai Gilb

Tom Gilb and Kai Gilb have, together with many professional friends and clients, personally developed the Agile methods they teach. The methods have been developed over five decades of practice all over the world in both small companies and projects, as well as in the largest companies and projects. Their website offers free papers, slides, and cases about Agile and other subjects.

There are many organisations, and individuals, who use some or all of their methods. IBM and HP were two early corporate-wide adopters (1980, 1988). Recently (2012) over 15,000 engineers at Intel have voluntarily adopted the Planguage requirements specification methods; in addition to practicing to a lesser extent Evo, Spec QC and other Gilb methods. Many other multinationals are in various phases of adopting and practicing the Gilb methods. Many smaller companies also use the methods. They have advised top management at UK Companies on Business Agile in 2013 and earlier.

Tom Gilb

Tom is the author of nine published books, and hundreds of papers on Agile and related subjects. His latest book ‘Competitive Engineering’ (CE) is a detailed handbook on the standards for the 'Evo' (Evolutionary) Agile Method, and also for Agile Spec QC. The CE book also, uniquely in the Agile community, defines an Agile Planning Language, called 'Planguage' for Quality Value Delivery Management. His 1988 book, Principles of Software Engineering Management (now in 20th Printing) is the publicly acknowledged source of inspiration from leaders in the Agile community (Beck, Highsmith, and many more), regarding iterative and incremental development methods. Research (Larman, Southampton University) has determined that Tom was the earliest published source campaigning for Agile methods (Evo) for IT and Software. His first 20-sprint agile (Evo) incremental value delivery project was done in 1960, in Oslo.

Tom has guest lectured at universities all over UK, Europe, China, India, USA, Korea - and has been a keynote speaker at dozens of technical conferences internationally. He did his first TEDx talk in Trondheim in 2013.

Tom is an Honorary Fellow of the BCS.

Kai Gilb

Kai Gilb has partnered with Tom in developing these ideas, holding courses and practicing them with clients since 1992. He coaches managers and product owners, writes papers, develops the courses, and is writing his own book, ‘Evo – Evolutionary Project Management & Product Development.’

Tom & Kai work well as a team, they approach the art of teaching their common methods somewhat differently. Consequently the students benefit from two different styles.