Effective Governance

 

The term "Governance" is frequently used in discussion about project and program management.  While this term infers a common means of how a program is managed, it is mis used, misunderstood, misaligned, and adds to confusion instead of clarity.

In the people sense, governance implies how we will play together in the sandbox.  The protocols for proper communication, the decision making process, and general "how to do things" are all part of the governance model.   

However, at the program level, you must also consider the sense of value governance.  Value governance is looking at he results of the delivered capabilities against expected the expected benefits.  This is evaluating the results of the work, not how the people interact to accomplish the work.

Thus effective program governance helps ensure that the promised value is achieved as benefits are delivered. The resulting benefits review requires analysis of the planned versus actual benefits across a wide range of factors, including the key performance indicators. In particular, the following aspects should be analyzed and assessed during the Benefits Delivery phase:

• Strategic alignment. Focuses on ensuring the linkage of enterprise and program plans; on defining, maintaining, and validating the program value proposition; and on aligning program management with enterprise operations management. For internally focused programs, the benefits realization processes measure how the new benefits affect the flow of operations of the organization as the change is introduced and how negative impacts and the potential disruptiveness of introducing the change may be minimized.

• Value delivery. Focuses on ensuring that the program delivers the promised benefits and that these benefits translate into value. There may be a window of opportunity for the realization of a particular planned benefit and for that benefit to generate real value. The program manager, program governance board, and key stakeholders may determine if the window of opportunity was met or compromised by actual events in the program or component projects (for example, a delay, cost overrun, or feature reduction). Investments may also have time value, where shifts in component schedules have additional financial impact.

Adding the dimension of value to the dimension of people interaction contributes to the confusion around the term governance.  But in both circumstances, governance determines how decisions are made.  ?