Monday, January 27, 2020

Comparison of Project Management Methodologies

Comparison of Project Management Methodologies Introduction Project management describes an organizational approach to the management about ongoing operations linked to a project. Project management has an importance since the early 1980s as a distinct discipline. The first step in developing any discipline is to develop a Body of Knowledge on the discipline as detailed concepts, processes and methodologies are developed. Project management has recognition due to the massive growth of the IT industry and managing the problems of projects effectively. Project management has body of knowledge, project management tools and software. The project management body of knowledge is a universal body of knowledge on the discipline and it has developed to make basic competency and knowledge in project management personnel to handle difficult projects in an ordered manner. A methodology is a set of guiding principle that can be modified and useful to a precise condition. A methodology might also be a precise approach, templates, forms, and even checklists used over the project life cycle. A recognized project methodology is supposed to lead the effort of all team members all over the life cycle of a project. All members of a group should be well-known with and use the selected methodology right through their projects. Many project management methodologies agreement with the management of a single project, without appreciating that many other projects in a company compete for the very same assets and awareness. The project management methodology should also suggest project managers with the point of view that there is a project management framework and related methodologies present in the company. In this article, we will be discussing PMBoK of the Project Management Institute (PMI, USA) and APM (Association of Project Managers) (UK). In addition, we will also look at PRINCE2, that is more of a software product for project management, but flexible enough to fit in between, a body of knowledge and a full scale SW product. While both APM and Prince2 have their origin in UK, PMBoK is from PMI of USA. APM represents the BoK from France, Germany, UK, and Switzerland. PMBoK and APM are body of knowledge while PRINC2 is a PM software product and hence branded as prescriptive (defined for the user with limited flexibility within the overall framework), while the BoK is just a body of knowledge, that need to be put to use by defining the operational elements. Benefits of Project Management Methodologies Structured approaches as in PMBOK and products such as Prince2, enable capture all elements of the project upfront; educate project team on the various elements and their relationships /dependencies, to create a workable and accountable team environment. Projects as different from non project (operational) environments are extremely time, resource, dependencies and outcome sensitive, and are not eternal. To implement a project, a team is assembled to execute the project as different from an operational phase where employees work on a consistent / homogeneous environment for long time, and there is a natural learning process of the job and cross dependencies. Projects cannot afford the luxury of natural learning. PM methodologies thus focus on the conscious deliberate approach to build capacity in the project team for execution through training, clear definition of the project, roles and tasks, assets, improvement description and methods of tracking improvement, communication, risk ma nagement and mid course correction, and so on. These are achieved through defined processes and definition of functional areas and their relationships. A project organization structure will deliver the output in line with the processes defined in the PM methodologies. Thus a structured approach greatly helps in avoiding costly and time consuming discoveries during the project phase, and adopting a trial and error method. It is basically an attempt to define and clarify upfront, and put in place processes to implement tasks that are clarified and defined. PM methodologies also ensure through IT technology that drives them, consistency and integrity of project information and the data it relies on, for subsequent actions by various project team actors. Data consistency and timely availability is one of the most critical impediments to any project. Technology induction in PM helps in having one single page view of all facets of the project at any point in time, for all stakeholders, on a need to know basis, within as well as outside the project. As structured approaches removes this shortcoming by capturing data from the business processes itself, there is no need for or time lost in database updating. The updating is thus compulsive, error free and automatic. Structured approaches also helps define criticality and automatic generation of alerts on defined project events for timely intervention as well as tracking performance. This helps avoid costly actions that otherwise would have been taken based on hunch, without access to current data. Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) PMBOK was initiated by the PMI in 1987 to standardize generally accepted project management practices. The focus is on process driven management to ensure standardization of good practices on the lines of ISO 9000 and the Software Engineering Institutes CMMI. PMBOK is structured as five process groups and nine knowledge areas and is compliant with IEEE Std 1490-2003. The five processes are: Initiating, Planning, Executing, Monitoring and Controlling, and Closing. PMBoK processes are project phase driven in terms of Inputs (documents, plans, designs, etc.), Tools and Techniques (mechanisms applied to inputs) and Outputs (documents, products, etc.). The nine knowledge areas address Project Integration, Scope, Time, Cost, Quality, Human Resources, Communications, Risk and Procurement. Each knowledge area is conceived to comprise all or some of the processes. The philosophy of any PM methodology is breaking down the works in a structured manner (WBS), sequencing them, define their relationships, dependencies, start and end dates, resources needed, costs, risks, and follow concepts of critical paths, resource leveling and so on. PM methodologies explicitly identify all above ingredients of a project that are mostly internal to the project. In addition, there are several factors considered to be exogenous to the project itself, which thinking is changing now. These exogenous factors are the human resources, finance, environmental management, stakeholder management, regulations, relationships, risks, project outcomes in terms of quantifiable benefits and the time when they are to occur, Thus project management has extended its boundary by internalizing their forward and backward linkages with the project itself. PM is no longer a pure engineering function, but a critical holistic techno, commercial managerial task. Why PMBOK? The project management body of knowledge is a generalized body of knowledge on the discipline, developed to create basic competence and knowledge, in project management personnel, to handle complex projects in a structured manner. This was important since the people working and managing projects (having to manage projects) in the IT industry, was young and inexperienced, and IT project management itself was an emerging area. Therefore it was felt that a defined body of knowledge is necessary to build the concept of PM. Comparison with Traditional or non-structured methodology (Waterfall Model) Waterfall model is expensive and lengthy to back to a previous phase to fix them if encounter difficulties during one phase. If there have problems with the design during construction, then the only way is to stop all construction work and restart the design process otherwise most of the construction work will not match the new design. Construction can start again only after the new design finalized, documented, and signed off. It makes changes very difficult to implement the PMBOK can formulate waterfall development seem natural and appropriate. PRINCE 2 PRINCE2 project management methodology is a world-class standard for managing projects to a successful conclusion. It is a de facto standard used widely by the UK Government and is broadly recognized and used in the private area, both in the UK and globally. PRINCE2, the method, is in the public area, offering non-proprietorial best-practice guideline on project management. In fact Prince2 is not good enough on the quality management in projects but strong on Risk Management. It covers how to arrange, proceed and control your projects.  As a Project manager, the principles of PRINCE2 and the related training can be used to any type of project to manage risk, control quality and change successfully, as well as build the most of demanding situations and opportunities, that occur within a project. The key features of PRINCE2 are: its spotlight on business justification a definite business constitution for the project management team its product-based development approach its highlighting on isolating the project into controllable and manageable stages its elasticity to be used at a stage suitable to the project PRINCE2 does not explain all aspects of project management.   Fields such as leadership and people management skills, detailed coverage of project management tools and techniques covered by other existing and proven methods are excluded from PRINCE2. Benefits of using PRINCE2 PRINCE2 gives benefits to the managers and directors of a project and to an organization through the apply of resources and the skill to manage business and risk more successfully. PRINCE is broadly recognized, understood and giving a general language for all participants in a project. It also supports formal identification of duties within a project and focuses on what a project is to deliver, why, when and for whom. PRINCE2 supplies projects with a controlled and organized start, middle and end. It helps to review of progress against plan and against the business case and ensure the involvement of management and stakeholders at the right time and place during the project and good communication guide between the project, project management and the organization. Project Managers using PRINCE2 are able to: set up terms of reference as a precondition to the initiate of a project use a defined formation for delegation, authority and communication split the project into controllable phases for more correct planning make sure resource promise from management is part of any approval to proceed give regular but brief management reports maintain meetings with management and stakeholders to a minimum but at the essential points in the project. For senior management PRINCE2 uses the management by exception idea. They are kept fully up to date of the project condition without having to be present at regular, time-consuming meetings. There are many organizations providing teaching, consultancy and tools services for PRINCE2, thus ensuring a competitive supply. In addition, there is an active user group dedicated to the support, promotion and strengthening of the method. APM Body of Knowledge The APM Body of Knowledge is a recognized collection of project management knowledge. It gives introductions and general guides to those areas measured vital to the regulation of managing projects, and it is visibly structured with definitions, explanations and recommended further evaluation material. This information will direct and help those involved in project management in their effort, studies and learning for accepted qualifications. While a structure has been provided to handle the BoK, it should not be construed as one element of the structure, being independent of the other. In fact they are all interdependent and the structure is only for the purpose of logical organization and clarity. They are treated separately due to their significance and to aid in simplicity of their presentation. In reality, many topics may fit into more than one section as they may be applicable to more than one phase of a project. For example, project risk management and project quality management are not to be treated as topics in isolation. APM Body of Knowledge and PRINCE2 Compared There are many similarities that can be found when comparing the APM Body of Knowledge with PRINCE2. For example, they both: Describe generic approaches to project management that can be useful in spite of the type of project Can be applied across geological and cultural boundaries, even though they both originate within the United Kingdom Recognize that they cannot provide a one-size-fits-all formula to project success Cover the topics of Business Case, Organizational Roles, Quality Management, Risk Management, Change Control, Issue Management, Configuration Management, and aspects of Planning and of Progress Control. The key difference between APM Body of Knowledge and PRINCE2 PRINCE 2 is a structured project management method and APM BoK a body of project management knowledge APM BoK provides descriptions and explanations of a broad range of project management topics and takes a discipline-based approach to project management , where PRINCE 2 Provides detailed descriptions of specific approaches that PRINCE2 has for a fairly narrow range of project management topics and takes a process-based approach to project management A brief comparison of PMBOK and APM depicts following salient features In addition to commonalities, PMBOK explicitly addresses socio economics, quality management, risk management, communication, stakeholders and organizational influences, while APM addresses success / failure criteria, post project appraisal, project environment such as law, mobilization, delegation, leadership communication, conflict, negotiation, and industrial relations, marketing skills. IT Governance and Methodologies IT project committee has come into view as an important corporate duty. The capacity to manage strict managerial and board control over main IT projects throughout their lifecycle, has become a decision making issue in shaping businesses bloom and creator with tools at the spirit of most businesses. PRINCE 2 offers a process model that is aimed to be applied, as a set of steps in a coherent sequence by a project manager in planning and managing a project. The application of the process model is adjustable to almost all types of projects and a good number of complexities. Managing Successful Projects with PRINCE2 manual contains a number of materials that are regulations for a project manager in applying the process model. The PMBOK details are a set of processes that descend under nine Knowledge Areas and can be connected in five groups if the project manager prefers. PMBOK offers the project manager a considerable range of data about proven practices in this area and provoke the project manager to relate these where they think appropriate but PRINCE2 provides more regulatory steps for the project manager and teams to follow. Knowledge areas of the PMBOK and the procedures and materials of PRINCE2 and APM have many similar topics. It is clear that all three represent best practice with their difference being in the implementation as a methodology and a number of terminology differences. The PRINCE 2 approach has some advantages that it brings a degree of consistency in an organization. At the same time as allowing for tailoring to a range of projects generally requires undertaking the same processes and using the same terminology for all projects. There have some payback in corporate program management, project staff training programs, project presentation and tracking systems. The disadvantage is restricts creativity in the diversity of methods applied to managing a project. There have some benefits in accepting both PMBOK and PRINCE2 to co-exist in several companies. PMBOK presents the academic knowledge resource that is useful in improving the profession of project management. It also permits flexibility in adoption and implementation that is context driven. PRINCE2 presents a process model that is applied directly by project managers and teams from a diverse range of backgrounds to make consistent project management and project results. Though there are several commonalities across projects of all types one need to have organizational efficiency, flexibility and creativity to make various kind of projects. In short PRINCE2 is a ready to consume food, while PMBOK and APM are ingredients that need to be cooked the way one wants, but one need to know how to do it. Concluding observations While there are only a few initiatives on the Body of Knowledge in Project Management such as PmBok and APM, there are several Software products that help implement a professional and structured project management practice. These products vary from stand alone packages that are implementable on single systems to the most sophisticated ones that are even implementable as a web based system, Some of the products also integrate with the other organizational systems such ERP and functional software packages that help integrate the entire functions of running an organization whether in the excusive business of managing projects or projects are only one of the activities of the organization. While the BoK helps those in project management to understand project management as a structured disciple the products helps in implementing structured project management practice. Project management as any other discipline is still emerging and it should not be surprising if the discipline undergoes a complete transformation as the discipline matures and branches out into further project specific specialties as has happened in the case of Enterprise Resources Planning (ERP). Project management specialists should look out for such evolving opportunities with an open innovative mind.

Sunday, January 19, 2020

A Comparison and Contrast of Ideas of Beauty

It has often been said that â€Å"beauty is in the eye of the beholder.† This may well be true, but many people, particularly women, have trouble seeing their own beauty, especially when they do not look just like everyone else.The three short stories that were assigned, â€Å"Beauty: When The Other Dancer Is The Self,† by Alice Walker, â€Å"Mirrors,† by Lucy Grealy, and â€Å"The Story of My Body,† by Judith Ortiz Cofer, all share the same premise. In each story, each young woman is faced with trials due to the way they look. The way that they choose to deal with these trials, however, is different for each one.â€Å"Beauty: When The Other Dancer Is The Self† is the story of Alice Walker’s life as a child. She thrived on being considered cute and â€Å"sassy.† At one point in the story, she even mentions that she was fond of staring at people, just so they would notice her and how beautiful she was. Unfortunately, all that changed wh en she was accidently shot in the eye with a BB pellet.She lost sight in that eye, and the eye formed a large white cataract that people would stare at and comment on. Walker refused to look anyone in the eye for years. She became extremely uncomfortable with the idea that she was no longer beautiful in the traditional sense, and her social and scholastic abilities suffered for it. When she was older, she had the chance to have the cataract removed, and nothing but a blue scar remained.This did wonders for her confidence, until she had a child of her own. She worried about what the child might think of her blind eye, but a television show featuring a blue globe gave the child the idea that her mother had a world in her eye. To the child, this was a wonderful thing. Walker, gaining acceptance from her child, was able to finally accept herself.â€Å"Mirrors,† by Lucy Grealy, is the story of the author’s battle with cancer of the jaw and the disfiguration it caused. Greal y was young when she had to have part of her jaw removed, so along with the normal trials of growing up, she was forced to deal with the pain of chemotherapy and the stares and taunts of insensitive children and adults.When the reconstruction of her face failed time after time, she gave up looking into mirrors. In fact, she avoided any shiny surface. She stayed in the library most of the time, reading books about the Holocaust and other dreadful times in history to make her pain seem less significant. When she finally had a chance to have work done on her face overseas, she jumped at the chance.She seemed to think that having a â€Å"perfect† face would solve all of her problems. Instead, the surgeries caused new problems. She had to have work done on the healthy side of her face to make a match, and she ended up looking nothing like what she thought she would. Not being able to reconcile with her new face, she ignored mirrors for a whole year. However, at the end of her stor y, she encountered a man who made her feel good about herself. Finally, she had the acceptance she needed to peak at her reflection in a window.â€Å"The Story of my Body,† by Judith Ortiz Cofer, tells the tale of what is was like for the young Cofer to grow up Puerto Rican. In her own society she was considered light skinned and tall. When she moved to the United States, she was considered dark and short. This instant change in the way people perceived her was very hard for the child to take.She got to the point where she no longer wanted to look at herself. She was an outcast at school, so much so that her parents had to send her to live with her grandparents in order to attend a different school. Unfortunately, things weren’t much better for her there. She was bone-thin at the age where most teenagers start to blossom.She was also considered â€Å"dirty† by white people, and was unable to date the boy she loved because his parents would not allow him to date a â€Å"dark† girl. However, Cofer excelled in school. It was the one thing that she could do right. When her good grades got her into college, she was in a different world where people found her â€Å"exotic† and beautiful. Being accepted came, oddly enough, by being different.These three stories have much in common. For instance, all three women gave up looking at themselves for various amounts of time. Being told that they were â€Å"ugly† and â€Å"dirty† took a toll on each one’s self esteem. Each woman had a physical problem. Walker had a discolored, blind eye, Grealy had a terribly disfigured face, and Cofer, along with being the exact opposite of the standards for beauty, had chicken pox scars all over her face.All of these reasons, although they vary in severity, were more than enough reason to make a young woman want to hang her head. No one ever said that the teenage and young adult years were easy, anyway. Perhaps the most important thi ng that they all had in common was the need for something to better their perceptions of themselves. For Walker, it was her child. Once she had acceptance from her little one, she was free to face the world.For Grealy, it was having lunch with a man who did not seem disgusted or turned off by her deformities. His attitude towards her was enough to make her want to see what he saw in her. For Cofer, it was excelling in school and making it to college. There she found people who didn’t care if she was different, and some that actually seemed to like her better because she was different. She could finally think of herself as pretty again.The stories also have some contrasting themes. The types of suffering experienced by the women were vastly different. Although one can emphasize with Cofer over being picked last in gym and looking different, her suffering was much less than Grealy’s loss of a portion of her face or Walker’s loss of sight. The way that each woman o vercame her difficulties is also different. Cofer used her smarts and her mental ability to rise above those who tortured her. Walker was partially freed by having her cataract removed in order to look more â€Å"normal.†However, Grealy turned her back on her femininity for a while and withdrew into books, not wanting to accept the fact that she lived in the real world. She was perked up by the man mentioned above, but she fell into a sad life of drug addiction and eventual suicide. This is perhaps the largest contrast. While Walker and Cofer found their beauty, Grealy apparently never did.In conclusion, these three stories have a lot to teach us about our reaction to suffering. We should not hide ourselves away from the world because of our problems, but neither should we cause other people to want to hide away because of our stares and comments. Beauty is subjective. Magazines and movies would have us believe that only one kind of beauty is acceptable, but that is not the c ase.People who rise from adversity are often left with beautiful souls, and that is what we should look for in a person. All these women mentioned were beautiful because they persevered, and it is a shame that Grealy could not come to see herself in that light. If nothing else, these stories should show the reader that beauty really is in the eye of the beholder, and we should never do or say anything to steal another person’s beauty from them.

Friday, January 10, 2020

Children learn Essay

The Guidance for the Foundation Stage Curriculum (2001) suggests that an appropriate curriculum for young children is a play-based curriculum, offering children a choice of play based activities and experiences. Siraj-Blatchford and Clarke (2000) agree that play has been well documented as a means by which young children learn.  Ã¢â‚¬Å"Play is highly valued in the Early Years for its ability to stimulate and integrate a wide range of children’s intellectual, physical, cultural, social and creative abilities.† (Siraj-Blatchford and Clarke 2000, p.76) However, unstructured play, in its’ purest sense, may cause a number of problems when providing suitable provision for children demonstrating hyperactive, impulsive or inattentive behaviour due to lack of structure and continual distraction. Kewley (1999,p.151) would agree when stating,  Ã¢â‚¬  Unstructured situations such as playtime often cause problems for children with ADHD†¦because of the over-reaction to the stimulus and their impulsive behaviour.† Ballard (1997) defines an inclusive setting as one where â€Å"differentness† is an ordinary part of human experience. Indeed, differentiation is the key to effective teaching and learning. However, problems arise when the whole structure of the curriculum is inappropriate for the needs of a particular child. Cooper (1999) would agree that it is invaluable for the practitioner to be aware of the specific circumstances in which individual children perform best in order to plan for the learning needs of these children and suggests that some aspects of an Early Years curriculum may aggravate symptoms of ADHD when stating, â€Å"Children with ADHD can become overwhelmed by the massive over stimulation they experience in a group situation and through free-play activity.† (Cooper 1999, p.144)  In addition,  Barrow (in: Merton 1998) and Toothhill and Spalding (in: Sefton 2000) also found that children with ADHD responded better in highly structured lessons than less organised ones.  Ã¢â‚¬Å"Children with ADHD are often hypersensitive to distraction. It is important, therefore, to ensure that they are seated in a place that is relatively free from distraction.† (Cooper 1999, p.146) Thus, making the task of suitable inclusive provision difficult for practitioners in Early Years settings. However, many opportunities for structured, adult-directed play do exist within the Early Years. (Siraj-Blatchford and Clarke 2000) Games such as those with rules, card games, matching games, and outdoor games with balls all provide opportunities for adult-directed play and provide the child with instructions and guidance for playing the game, rules of turn taking and developing new information. In addition a play-based curriculum offers opportunities for high levels of adult support and encouragement and a kinaesthetic based approach to learning, which is a preferred style of learning for many children with ADHD. Kewley (1999,p.146) concurs, stating, â€Å"Children with ADHD tend to be intuitive and need a practical approach to learning rather than a highly theoretical approach.†Ã‚  Research suggests however, that a high number of children with ADHD are not acknowledged as having SEN and instead their inappropriate behaviour highlighted as unsuitable candidates for mainstream settings. Hayden (1997) suggests that this attitude does not improve as the children enter formal education. Hayden researched children who had been excluded from primary school and found that children with ADHD are more likely that most to be excluded from school for behavioural reasons. This does appear at first glance to be surprising, when considering the evidence to suggest that a structured environment is more appropriate for a child with ADHD. Cooper (2005) offers an explanation for this however, and suggests that when considering the constructions of ADHD that, it is influenced by both biology and the social environment. Cooper infers that â€Å"school† plays a major part in the process of social constructions and indicates that children with ADHD are expected to conform to an unsuitable and ridged social framework and inappropriate curriculum when stating, â€Å"Pupils from an early age are expected to internalise and behave in accordance with a set of rules that derive from constraints imposed by a teacher-centred, curriculum-focused method of teaching pupils in age related groups.† (Cooper 2005,p.128)  Cooper also suggests that inappropriate teacher/child ratios may create social disorder problems that are met by a set of lineal rules, designed to regulate peer interaction and movement around school. Concluding that the majority of problems arise from an externally imposed age determined curricula as apposed to a negotiated curriculum. These findings are alarming when considering recent developments, legislation and guidance relating to children with SEN and may indicate that the behaviour aspect of children with ADHD is being used as a scapegoat strategy for settings who are not meeting the needs of these children.  When examining the issues surrounding ADHD it is clear that successful inclusion both in the Early Years and Primary school settings is problematic. On the one hand a play-based curriculum is the most suitable form of learning for the majority of young children and is endorsed in Early Years Settings, whilst on the other the symptoms that children with ADHD display suggest that such a curriculum would exasperate these symptoms. However, as previously discussed, some aspects of a play-based curriculum are preferable to the more formal approach of primary school. The PLA (2001) suggest once children have been admitted to the setting, an environment that is created should be one that encourages all children to flourish. Furthermore, Kewley (2001, p6) states the inclusion of children with ADHD is a â€Å"moral imperative†, however, Farrell and Polat (2003) argue that the inclusion of children with EBD has the potential to cause barriers to the government implementation of their policy of social inclusion. This would suggest that although differing levels of ability can be quiet easily catered for, behavioural and emotional differences are not as easily accommodated in educational settings. Visser and Stokes (2003) found that many people agreed with the inclusion of children with SEN, however when it came to children with EBD they were often denied inclusion due to their SEN. This supports the research undertaken by Hayden (mentioned previously) that children with ADHD are excluded from primary school due to behavioural reasons. The DfES (2006, p.1) suggest that children with ADHD can have an overwhelming affect in the setting when stating, â€Å"pupils with ADHD present challenges for teachers, both in effective behaviour management and in keeping them focused on the task in hand.† [online]  Teachers may feel threatened by having to deal with a child with ADHD, particularly if they have no training in the area and lack confidence, in addition to having to give instruction to a further 30 children or more. The parents of other children may feel that the attention has been drawn away from their children as more time needs to be spent dealing with disruptive outbursts and one to one tuition. All these factors effect the successful inclusion of children with ADHD. Swinson, Wolf and Meling however, disagree that these children’s needs would be addressed more effectively in special schools and conclude that there is much evidence of mainstream schools successfully including children with EBD and there was no evidence to suggest children with EBD benefit from special school. Rose (2002) found that teachers felt they could successfully include children with EBD, but only with additional classroom support. This may suggest a lack of confidence in their ability to meet the needs of children with ADHD in their care. Swinson, Wolf and Meling (2002) suggest that this view is not uncommon, they found that many teachers felt they were not sufficiently trained to meet the needs of inclusion. Another reason that teachers insist on additional classroom support may be due to the time and attention children with ADHD need. Newelle (2001) agree that children with EBD take up a lot of time and resources. All of the barriers above are not isolated to ADHD or indeed EBD they are general inclusion issues that have been successfully addressed throughout a majority of mainstream settings, particularly Early years settings. Albeit ADHD may manifest itself in differing ways and appear to centre around continuous, disruptive behaviour, for some leading to exclusion, however, all children with SEN should have their needs met and advice given by the DfES (2000) should apply to all children when stating,  Ã¢â‚¬Å"Children with special educational needs all have learning difficulties that make it harder for them to learn than most children at the same age. These children may need extra or different help from that given to children of the same age† [online] According to the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) [online], ADHD can have long term effects on the child’s ability to make friends and over time these children may develop emotional problems such as poor self-esteem and depression if the child’s needs are not met. McEwan (1998) identifies emotional reactivity and conduct problems, which include symptoms such as a shot fuse due to getting easily frustrated, overreacting to things that happen, defiant behaviour, verbal hostility and angry outbursts. Fletcher-Campbell (2001) looks at the problems of children with EBD and suggests that these children alienate themselves from their peers, due to their behaviour. Thus, â€Å"Some manifestations of the disorder tend to isolate children with ADHD from their peers, who will sometimes react with hostility to impulsive and hyperactive behaviour. This can result in long term difficulties in relation to other individuals and developing and sustaining relationships – and the emotional problems that follow often exacerbate the struggle to learn.† (Question Publishing 2003) [online] Effects of inattention and impulsivity causes children problems with turn taking and this suggests they often interrupt when others are talking or playing. (Cooper and O’Regan (2001) In addition McEwan (1998) argues that children with ADHD can often be selfish and self-centred, which means they are likely to find it hard to make friends and build relationships. They are often unaware of social cues and do not worry about the consequences of their behaviour.