During the 1940s, line managers used the concept of over-the-fence management to manage projects. Each line manager, wearing the hat of a project manager, would perform the work necessitated by their line organization, and when completed, would throw the “ball” over the fence in hopes that someone would catch it. Once the ball was thrown over the fence, the line managers would wash their hands of any responsibility for the project because the ball was no longer in their yard. If a project failed, blame was placed on whichever line manager had the ball at that time.
The problem with over-the-fence management was that the customer had no single contact point for questions. The filtering of information wasted precious time for both the customer and the contractor. Customers who wanted firsthand information had to seek out the manager in possession of the ball. For small projects, this was easy. But as projects grew in size and complexity, this became more difficult.
Following World War II, the United States entered into the Cold War. To win a Cold War, one must compete in the arms race and rapidly build weapons of mass destruction.
The victor in a Cold War is the one who can retaliate with such force as to obliterate the enemy.
The arms race made it clear that the traditional use of over-the-fence management would not be acceptable to the Department of Defense (DoD) for projects such as the B52
Bomber, the Minuteman Intercontinental Ballistic Missile, and the Polaris Submarine. The government wanted a single point of contact, namely, a project manager who had total accountability through all project phases. The use of project management was then mandated for some of the smaller weapon systems such as jet fighters and tanks. NASA mandated the use of project management for all activities related to the space program.
Projects in the aerospace and defense industries were having cost overruns in excess of 200 to 300%. Blame was erroneously placed upon improper implementation of project management when, in fact, the real problem was the inability to forecast technology.
Forecasting technology is extremely difficult for projects that could last ten to twenty years.
By the late 1950s and early 1960s, the aerospace and defense industries were using project management on virtually all projects, and they were pressuring their suppliers to use it as well. Project management was growing, but at a relatively slow rate except for aerospace and defense.
Because of the vast number of contractors and subcontractors, the government needed standardization, especially in the planning process and the reporting of information. The government established a life-cycle planning and control model and a cost monitoring system, and created a group of project management auditors to make sure that the government’s money was being spent as planned. These practices were to be used on all government programs above a certain dollar value. Private industry viewed these practices as an over-management cost and saw no practical value in project management.
Source : Project management A system approach to planning, scheduling and controlling [EIGHTH EDITION] By HAROLD KERZNER, Ph.D.