Guessing is not a strategy: How to build decision velocity with AI and real-time data
June 10, 2026 | Live Webinar
How Does PPM Help You Optimize Resources?
| Situation: You want your PPM efforts to improve resource utilization. CA, the folks that bring you CA Clarity PPM, recently sponsored an IDC Survey - Organizations Optimize  Resources with PPM. We were lucky enough to ask IDC researcher, Randy Perry, a few questions about the survey and what it really means to you. By asking these questions, I tried to draw out some areas that you might want to focus on when conducting these types of efforts. Q: At the beginning of the report you offer a summary of benefits that participating companies experienced. • Number of projects managed increased 35%. • Cost per project was reduced 37%. • Redundant projects dropped 78%. • IT staff productivity increased by 14%. • Project failure rate dropped 59%. • The total annual benefit per 100 users is $83,500. • Payback occurred in 7.4 months. Which of these mattered most to these companies? (perhaps a top 3?) and why? Did the most important results line up with the way they sold the efforts in the first place? Randy Perry, IDC: The first two key benefits experienced by companies were reduction in number of redundant projects and reduction in the project failure rate. Roughly 40 percent of total savings came from reducing failed or redundant projects. Prior to the implementation of PPM software, companies, on average, had nearly 40 percent of their projects fail or deemed redundant. The primary cause of failed and redundant projects occurs in the planning stage due to issues with governance, IT demand, prioritization and selection. Most of the projects that failed should never have been initiated in the first place because they were not aligned with business goals or IT did not have a clear set of goals at the outset. Redundant projects would never have been initiated had all stakeholders had visibility into project prioritization. The third benefit most appreciated by companies in the study was the reduction in per-project costs. Per-project costs were reduced by 37 percent, which was primarily a result of better project and resource management. Better management allowed for a reduction in the time it takes to complete projects and also led to optimization of project staffing. Twelve of thirteen companies reported a reduction in project time by 13-63 percent (an average of 35 percent). Most companies used this time savings to complete projects that had been put off due to lack of resources. Q: You talk about organization measuring itself in the following areas: • IT governance • IT demand assessment • IT demand prioritization and selection • Business relationship management • Project management • Resource management If you were to come up with a forced ranking, how would you rank these in terms of their importance to an organization’s productivity? In terms of organizational effectiveness? (and Why?) Randy Perry, IDC: These areas are not entirely distinct and benefits of one tend to spill over into the others. For instance, IT governance is critical to an organization; it drives most of the other benefits. Prior to deploying PPM, 54 percent of the companies in the study had no IT governance program. In other words, their IT departments operated independent of the businesses they were supporting (budget setting notwithstanding). The business had no way of translating its goals to the IT department, no way of measuring the success of projects or IT, and, therefore, no real control of IT resources. Implementing IT governance establishes the link between business goals and IT budgets: it measures IT projects by their contribution to businesses’ strategic initiatives and ties changes in the business to changes in IT priorities. IT governance ensures that every project undertaken by IT has been approved by a board of stakeholders. Project goals are set and project successes can be measured. No one can later say: “Why are you doing that?” Resource management is the second largest benefit driver, accounting for 16 percent of total savings. Like IT governance, this is a planning area. PPM provides a way of looking at all the project-related requirements and then prioritizing people and other resources. Project management, perhaps the third most important driver, contains the knowledge loop that enables process improvement and optimization. Each project becomes a knowledge resource, enabling each successive project to be more efficient. Over time, projects are completed quicker with exactly the resources needed – no waste. Q: Clearly tools, coupled with process, have an impact in the following areas: • IT governance. • IT demand assessment. • IT demand prioritization and selection • Business relationship management • Project management. • Resource management. Are there particular tool functions that are important in each of these areas? Are there tools (specific tools or classes of them) that you know of that are particularly effective in any of these areas? Randy Perry, IDC: We really do not have research specific to a single function or tool. We covered a wide variety of tools – looking at seven different vendors. We found that one third of the participants used tools from multiple vendors. Q: At the end of your report, you categorize the study participants by industry, noting their maturity before and after PPM efforts. Which industries benefited most (and least) from PPM efforts? Why do you think that is? Randy Perry, IDC: The top three companies that saw the greatest benefits were financial institutions; the top two of those three were also among the most mature, so it’s all related. Financial organizations tend to have a greater reliance on their IT infrastructures than organizations in other industries do and, as such, their IT operations are more mature. Technology merely enables processes and policies. Companies at maturity level three (those with standardized processes, procedures and PPM tools) experienced 50 percent higher benefits than organizations at maturity level two (those with automated, but not standardized, processes and procedures) and 58 percent higher benefits than companies falling between ad hoc and automated, but not standardized processes and procedures. On a related note, IDC’s PPM Maturity Value Calculator, which was developed from the same IDC research. The calculator provides a personalized PPM maturity and benefits assessment. After using it, individuals can request a detailed action plan by email. The calculator is meant to give an overview of the benefits and next steps needed to build a PPM business case. |
Posted on: April 27, 2009 06:32 PM
| Permalink |
Comments (2)
Project Decision Making - Firmed Up.
| Situation: You find yourself asking - What did we decide about that? Decisions made in a structured way often happen in meetings. They get captured in meeting notes and that's great.  Decisions made in reaction to new situations pop up every day. We have a brief email exchange about them and we at least feel like we've made a decision. -- or maybe some of us do. In the end those exchanges just create more loose ends.We recently talked to Chris Bright, from Zapproved about yet another simple, cool PM tool that addresses a critical issue - decision-making. I think his responses to my questions are enough to at least get you thinking about how you handle and document decisions. Q. How do you see Zapproved being used within the context of projects? Is it used more for sign-offs or for every day decision-making? Chris: We have users utilizing Zapproved for consensus building around big milestone approvals involving many participants on down to approval of routine, everyday decision-making between individuals. The feedback we get is that the app is helpful for keeping momentum in organizational processes and for tracking and recording tasks. Since a significant portion of any project is collaborating with others, Zapproved offers a solution that is easy to implement and that “sticks.” For larger groups, Zapproved offers several advantages. As is typical, most decisions are being made via email. That presents problems because one decision can fill up inboxes with long email chains that can be difficult to drive to conclusion. Plus, some people do not participate for reasons of travel or to passively resist the group. Tech blogger Robert Scoble posited that the number of emails required to do something in email is equal to the number of participants squared. That feels about right to me! Zapproved hosts the conversation in a single place online so everyone can see comments and feedback at one time and out in the open. If someone has not responded, it is clear that is the case. By bringing decisions into the daylight it puts pressure on laggards to not block the group and reduces interference of politics and personalities. On more routine tasks of acknowledging status reports and procedural steps, scheduling meetings and calls, approving travel requests, new hires, and other decisions that are plentiful but tend to not get tracked well, our system puts them in a repository and associates them with explicit approvals. This can help keep things moving smoothly since it reduces organizational friction around procedural steps. Q. Could you give us a couple specific examples (from your current organizational clients) of decisions that people manage within Zapproved? Chris: I’ve provided a few examples below of how our users are utilizing the system:
Q. I could see people using Zapproved as a way to track action items that come out of status meetings. Do know of any best practices around that? How is Zapproved used in that situation? Chris: Yes, I have spoken with a few people who use it for task management in the way you are describing. After a status meeting, the project manager sends task notifications to the appropriate people that scopes the task and provides a deadline. Once the person completes the task, they can “Approve” it to signal that state or “Deny” it if, for some reason, it was not done or no longer needed to be done. Q. You talked a bit about how Zapproved changes the behavior of people whose it, versus those who use email threads to document decisions. Could you describe those differences in terms of approach, wording, and structure? Chris: Yes, once people start using the system there are subtle shifts in behavior that managers find helpful. When someone is submitting a proposal they know that at the bottom of the message it says “Approve” and “Deny.” Email tends to have a casual tone so people are reluctant to write in an actionable way, i.e. citing outcomes and deadlines, because it comes across as awkward. We see emails ending with phrases like “let me know what you think” and other casual, polite words. Not the best approach when driving something to closure. In Zapproved the context of the system compels users to write in an actionable way. That simple shift helps enormously because it drives explicit statements such as “I am seeking your approval on this item.” As a manager, the amount of energy required to respond is reduced dramatically. We hear time and time again of how group productivity increases by providing a simple framework for process in teams. Q. Which types of decisions are best left out of Zapproved? Chris: Most decisions adapt well in Zapproved especially when transparency and an audit trail are key. Even though approvals in Zapproved are legally binding, one may want to check with an attorney before using it as the final sign-off on a multi-million contract. We are working on e-signatures that would add higher levels of redundancy on identity, so we hope that we will be able to fulfill even that role in the future! Q. How do you deal with decision-tree sorts of situations where decisions are linked to one another? Chris: At this time, that is an ad hoc situation that teams organize as needed. One of our users has built an e-procurement system on Zapproved with hierarchical workflows and it works well. It saves on paper and the alternative of an expensive, complex tool would have absorbed much more energy and resources. However, we are planning to build that functionality into Zapproved in a way that is easy and intuitive to implement. Q. How do you filter out the smaller decisions from the larger ones? Can you tag them with project or category names? Chris: Every proposal has a “Project” field that can be defined by the user. Once a person has entered text in that field, it is stored and is available in a drop-down menu for any future proposals. This helps group and track decisions around a single project (i.e. “NASA Hydrogen Propellant Proposal”), or can also substitute for flagging more routine processes such as “Vacation Requests.” It is an easy way to put proposals in various buckets that makes sense for a team. Q. What’s at the top of the list for future enhancements? Chris: Our development paths are focused on adding functionality and increasing integration. As I mentioned, we are working on creating decision-tree workflows, embedded forms and even e-signatures. Looking at integration, we see Zapproved as a strong complement to other tools. Last month we introduced an add-in for Outlook and we want to expand access to Zapproved through other business applications as well as mobile platforms. |
Posted on: April 27, 2009 02:53 PM
| Permalink |
Comments (0)
Does Your PMO... Blow?
Situation: You are interested in PMO performance issues. At the end of 2008, ESI International conducted a study of 387 Program Managers, inquiring about the maturity and success of their PMOs. Only 8% of those surveyed described their PMOs as being successful.Among the study’s findings: Of the 92 percent who do not believe their PMO is successful, the main reason was a lack of:
Thirty percent of the respondents said the existence of their PMO has been seriously questioned in recent years. Among the attributable reasons are:
We spoke again with J. LeRoy Ward, PMP, PgMP, and EVP of ESI International about the survey. “PMO executives are keenly aware of the obstacles to their success,” said Ward. “Closing gaps in skills, knowledge and tools are critical for enabling PMOs to meet these challenges and enhance organisational project performance.” We then asked him a few more questiosn to get down to specifics. Q. How does the survey define success? It seems as if large numbers of these PMOs achieved some measure of success, but perhaps didn’t meet the higher standard set here. The survey did not set out to “define success”, but to identify barriers to it. Success is something that needs to be defined by each organization and should be determined based on the strategic goals and objectives set out by the executive, executives, or governance committee who supported the founding of the PMO. We have found in our more than 26 years of helping organizations improve their project management performance that success most commonly includes: cost control/savings; improving time-to-market; a decrease in troubled projects; increase in client satisfaction (internal or external); and increased revenue and profit. Other measures of success are more internal to the practice of project management to include better teaming, improved documentation and consistent application of best-in-class methodologies. In the survey, we did ask respondents how they defined success from a very high level/broad perspective. They said: • 25% -- client satisfaction • 22% -- project success • 22% -- consistent methodology deployed • 8% -- number of people trained • 7% -- higher ROI Clearly, these measures reflect the varying roles that PMOs can play within an organization. One of the qualitative survey respondents, a senior PM from a UK-based retail operation, put it this way, “The PMO has to justify its existence and provide quantifiable benefits for its existence.” My one comment on these numbers is that I was surprised that only 7% defined success as proving a higher ROI. In fact, this should be right up there with client satisfaction. While deploying a methodology is an important function from a project manager’s point of view, it is largely lost in the most important issues facing business owners, the very owners who pay for projects. Q. One of your study’s findings was that “The PMO is seen as an extension of administrative support, rather than a professional body with value-add skills.” Was that sort of comment restricted to those that are very governance-oriented (rather than support-oriented)? What are the best ways to demonstrate (and perhaps document) value-add skills in these environments so they aren’t questioned later? Based on the way the survey was conducted, it is difficult to draw a conclusion as to whether or not the role of governance would affect the perception of the PMO as more administrative rather than a professional body with value-added skills. That said, a proper governance structure includes the involvement of senior leadership and provides a direct communications channel that should enable the PMO to consistently demonstrate its value as a professional body with value-added skills. In other words, my 33+ years of professional experience leads me to conclude that the opposite is true. If PMO has a well constructed governance structure, it is more likely to be perceived as a value-add function. The “best” way to demonstrate value-added benefits for PMOs varies by organization. However, framing that conversation in a way that focuses on improved project and business outcomes with an emphasis on financial benefits should speak effectively to executive management. From a financial perspective, this can include, but is certainly not limited to: cost containment due to improved project success; increased revenues driven through smart project selection; or reduced labor expenses brought about by improved project management efficiencies. The greater the degree a PMO can work with executive management in identifying, selecting and aligning projects to an organization’s strategy, the more likely executive management will view the PMO as an integral player in setting such strategy, thus increasing the value of the PMO to the organization. To be sure, the ability to successfully execute those projects to realize the intended benefits is where the “rubber meets the road” and where reputations are earned or destroyed. From an executive’s point of view, the ability to beat a competitor to market, to satisfy existing clients, to expand geographically, or to expand a product line to a new demographic, and to demonstrate that project management was the vehicle which helped them accomplish that, will strengthen the role of the PMO and cause it to be seen as integral to business success. Q. Another situation that arose when people questioned PMO value was “Budget cuts necessitating cost justification, a difficulty for the non-revenue producing PMO. “ What are the best ways for a PMO to demonstrate and document ROI? (the more specific the better) Let’s take the case of a PMO in a global drug development organization. Studies by the pharma industry have shown that it takes, on average, 11 years and USD802 million to produce a drug that one’s doctor can prescribe. Needless to say, that’s a long time and a lot of money (no matter what currency you’re using!). As a PMO director in this organization, I would first select a random sample of drug development projects that the organization has completed within the past 5-10 years. We would then be able to average the length of time and money it costs us to produce our drugs; then we could compare that to the global average mentioned above. We would then initiate a number of improvements through the PMO to the Global Drug Organization to help boost performance. For example, we might institute or change the way projects are selected (portfolio management); we might establish criteria to be used in each phase of the drug development life cycle such that, if certain metrics were not met, the project would be terminated. We might change the way we form teams for these projects option for the Integrated Product Development Team approach, in which a core team is assembled at the outset who plans the entire project from start to finish having as its representatives members from each functional group within the company who will work on the effort (e.g., research, toxicology, clinical, legal, marketing, IT, etc.) We may also embrace the “heavy weight” project manager concept on certain strategic projects a concept used in the pharma and global auto industries. Finally, we may provide relevant, targeted training to each project manager to ensure they have the requisite skills and tools to do the job. Based on these and other improvements, we would then begin to gather project metrics that will enable us to benchmark these forward projects against our own experience, as well as the global data. To the extent we have shortened our time frame, reduced our costs, and produced “blockbuster” drugs, which is defined as any drug that earns more than USD1 billion/year, we can draw a correlation between our improvement efforts and our project management initiatives. The key issues most organizations have in demonstrating ROI is that they fail to establish this critical baseline. Project managers can often work with the same intensity as the fervently religious in that their “belief” in project management, far outweighs any evidence they can bring forth to prove their case. Belief, faith and hope work well in religious circles; rarely do these emotions ever convince a group of executives regarding the value of project management. [Editorial note: Electronic copies of the report are available upon request. Contact J. Scott Punk, APR] |
Posted on: March 30, 2009 04:17 PM
| Permalink |
Comments (6)
What I Learned (about KM and social media) in Military School
Situation: You are thinking about introducing social media into a challenging environment. We recently spoke with Dennis Cornell, Chief, Project Management Office, Office of the Secretary of Defense, Defense Information School. Dennis, along with his colleague and resident social media expert, Army Staff Sergeant Joshua Salmons, answered a few questions about how social media is being used in their secure military environment. Q. Your role, being responsible for strategic planning and maintenance at the Defense Information School really puts you on the hot seat for learning about and appropriately implementing anything new that changes how you deal with "information" in general. Do you have a process for deciding what to experiment with and what you eventually have people use as a matter of policy? Dealing with changes in technology and making decisions on what to use and when to implement is one of the bigger challenges within a military environment, especially here at the school where we are so technology dependent. When my job was mainly focused on the IT world, it was critical to be an internet research junkie. Up to 20% of any given day dealt with researching technology whether it was a new application, a new hardware set, or a new policy governing a particular technology. Life on the DoD’s NIPRnet is filled with restrictions and policies that make it difficult to find that 90% solution that meets the school’s requirements for communication and information sharing. Adding to the difficulty of implementing a common platform is that most people use a lot of different tools outside of the workplace. Being on the so called “hot seat” means having to filter a lot of ideas of those that see a tool for its “cool factor” and focusing on the tools that meet the needs of the organization as a whole. Then it becomes a matter of examining the new, fancy tool to see if it holds any benefit for internal operations, if it needs to be included in the “here’s what’s out there” list, or if it’s yet another product. We do have an internal development network that allows us to test new applications that are either recommended by leadership or through our planning team. We use the DINFOS staff to provide feedback during our test and evaluation approach before any decision to implement into the live environment is made. The difficulty is with applications that we cannot host internally. External policies of the DoD play a huge role in whether or not those applications can be leveraged as a resource for information sharing. Many of the current social media tools are on the “blocked” list within the DoD community. The challenge then becomes a matter of having an exception granted and proving to the decision makers at the DoD level that the tool not only is vital to mission success, but that it poses no threat to the DoD network. Q. What does a power Social Network user look like at the DOD? Is it the "Coolness" of the apps that attracts them or is the functionality? I’m going to call on the school’s Social Media guru, Army Staff Sergeant Joshua Salmons to give you the “cool” answer for this. From Joshua Salmons: “I’m going to define the DoD power social network user as someone who has a healthy knowledge of social media and IT, who knows how SM can augment the public affairs mission and which precautions should always be exercised when speaking to the public. Basically, the power user is a social media advocate and is well versed in explaining the value of these new applications. These individuals have endured constant conflict with nay-saying bureaucrats and doubters and are very sharp on the monetary-, labor- and process-saving benefits to social media applications. People who are drawn to apps just because they look cool aren’t power users. A big part of leveraging social media apps in the workplace is user adoption. Functionality alone does not ensure widespread use amongst the masses. Applications should have a certain coolness or sexiness to them—meaning function should meld with form and interface to exude gestalt. When Xerox engineers first developed the mouse and graphic user interface, company execs dismissed the “cool” new technologies. They said computers were for professionals, there was no need for anything to make them more accessible. Steve Jobs bought the idea for the mouse and GUI and, today, Apple products are still very artistic in their design in addition to their functionality. In turn, they attract an extremely ardent following.” Q. Do you use any of the older (what we used to call groupware) collaboration apps within the DOD? What do you see as potential replacements for them and why? I’ve been a Sharepoint user since 2001. I first introduced it into the school as a means of sharing documents and collaborating in a single-source environment. With the latest version of Sharepoint, some of the more common social media tools have been implemented. This has allowed us to grow a wiki-like applications which we’ve named the DINFOPEDIA. This tool has allowed us to more readily share information internally. One of things that the school has had to overcome with collaborative tools is the old school mentality of knowledge is power, and if it’s my knowledge then I also have job security. There are numerous portal products on the market and new ones being developed all the time. While I don’t foresee implementing or find a replacement for our current platform, if there is a tool that provides the greater than 90% solution and is cost effective, I’m sure it will be something that I recommend for test and evaluation. Q. Are any leading edge applications used to collaborate between agencies at the DOD? Are there any used for collaboration with outside organizations, suppliers or vendors that work particularly well? Platforms like Intelink are becoming places where dozens of agencies can contribute toward projects at various levels of classification. The biggest advocate for collaborative communication in the early part of the decade was the Army with its push to have all service members use the common platform Army Knowledge Online. The DoD piggy-backed on what the Army did and followed AKO with their version called the Defense Knowledge Online (DKO). Both provide email service, file sharing, and discussion groups. They are very expansive portal systems which, in my opinion, have grown to the level of actually being overwhelming. Q. What Web 2.0 or social networking application do you see the biggest potential for within the DOD? If I had to pick one, I’d say wikis. Given the transitory nature of the military, the opportunity to store and transmit tacit knowledge is amazing. Policies, field manuals, regulations, personal tips from vets can all be collected, organized and given out where it’s needed. The monetary savings on printed material would be worth it alone. The benefit of current, up-to-date TTPs, regs or even phone rosters—all secured as appropriate, of course, is great! |
Posted on: March 30, 2009 12:47 PM
| Permalink |
Comments (3)
PMBOK Now - Agile Later?
Situation: You are curious about what's happening in Agile these days. Agile approaches can be confusing to the uninitiated, but they are absolutely gaining in popularity. Agile tools are also becoming more commonplace and Projity is one that seems to help bridge the PMBOK and Agile worlds a bit. Recently we talked with Jeff McKenna, co-creator of Scrum and VP at Serena Software. He gave us some insights on what is happening now int he world of Agile.Q. We've been hearing a lot about SCRUM and Lean lately on Gantthead. Are you still seeing increased usage of Agile processes in the IT space? In other disciplines? We are seeing a rather continuous uptake of agile processes in all areas of software development. IT has been a bit slow to take up Agile but that rate is increasing. Q. Which flavor of Agile is most popular right now and why? Are the flavors industry-specific? I think of Agile flavors applying more to the levels of the organization than specific industries. When first adopting Agile, folks have historically leaned toward Extreme Programming (XP). Executing agile well requires good engineering practices and XP has a strong focus on engineering practices. As those practices improve then we see Scrum being used more. Since Scrum is focused on work management and team dynamics. Even later in adoption we see Lean being used to guide the business in a more agile manner. I should also say that this view is a bit generalized. This is my recommendation for adoption and what I see working. Using Scrum without strong supporting engineering practices is possible and is difficult. It is my view that industries adopt new technology at rates more local to the industry rather than the 'whole'. We are seeing that with Agile. Some industries are very far along, others are just getting started. Q. In general, where do you think the Agile movement is headed over the next 5 years? More and more acceptance and integration into mainstream. Perhaps in 5 years, we will just accept that this is how good software is developed. I am hopeful. Agile is how I have seen good software being developed for over 45 years. Now we have a way to talk about it. Q. What is driving the change you've just described? When executed well, Agile works: Teams are more satisfied, planning is easier, time to market is faster, business knows what is going on, design emerges. I could go on. Q. The latest version of the PMBOK is said to address the merging of Agile methods and the PMBOK approach. What are your thoughts on that? This is another sign of widespread adoption. It is always difficult for new methods to be accepted. The PMI folks have fought Agile for a long time and are either noticing that it works or desire to use an 'embrace and extinguish' strategy. I prefer to believe the former. Agile as implemented often has some weaknesses. PMBOK has some things to say that are useful regarding those weaknesses. On the other hand, Agile really is different in important ways and if the important aspects of Agile are lost, then the gains are lost as well. Q. When approaching projects from an Agile perspective, what are the most important skills for a PM to have? The most difficult aspect of the PM job is to learn to consider work in what we term vertical slices. What is the least that can be done that still provides business value? Doing this well is a skill that needs to be learned. Once learned and when working with agile development teams there are wonderful opportunities to reduce time to market, delight customers and have satisfied development teams. Q. How does Projity, as part of the Serena offering, address the issues above more effectively? Projity is used to manage more classically developed projects in a more agile way by reducing the ceremony associated with the work. Q. What are the “must have” software tool attributes when dealing with Agile projects today? The key question is: Does the tool support your environment? Number of teams, number of projects, your terminology, and your worker distribution. As an agilista, I am always looking for the least complicated and intrusive tool to use to accomplish my work. |
Posted on: March 24, 2009 10:05 PM
| Permalink |
Comments (6)