Part of what makes this question so interesting is seeing people's responses and digging a little deeper. Michael brings up the point of projects that "fall below the radar". Depending on what you mean by "fall below the radar" you might have different reactions.
I know some people who say that if a project "falls below the radar", then it should be terminated. Plain and simple -- if it is not authorized the work should not be done. These people have seen some huge, unauthorized pet projects done as "special exceptions" and they use governance to try to avoid it happening again.
At other companies things do not become a "project" or require special authorization unless they exceed a certain size. For these companies, "below the radar" just means "too small to manage quite so formally." Usually they are within the spending authority of a single manager, and it is up to the manager to figure out how to manage them.
I like Michael's thought: "If you don't know what is a project to you - you won't know what to do." It is really up to you to figure out what a "project" should be. Hopefully you have some reason to call it a "project" and that will trigger certain standards and organizational processes.
This is an interesting question, and I love seeing all the varied responses. Saving Changes...
Brian PhillipsCEO| Yellowhouse.net Pty LtdHolland Park East, Qld, Australia
Good question – people often need to determine if the cost of PM adds value to the process.
Ask yourself if the 'work' introduces something new to the business (internal change) or is about delivering new capability for a client (external change).
If so, you might consider managing it as a project if it ticks these boxes:
1. Needs dedicated resources to compete the work (other than their usual job)
2. Is unique and must be completed in a specific timeframe
3. Needs to be managed from new funding (internal or external)
4. Is driven by a business manager who will own the end results
5. Needs some structure and rigour to ensure it maintains visibility
The best approach is to develop a brief Charter or Business Case as a starting point to determine the level of project management required.
The next question (logically) is “How do I manage the work as a project without adding too much overhead?” That is, how do we scale the use of project management to ensure we do the work in a controlled environment without adding extra cost.
Saving Changes...
Roger Francis AucoinManager, Process Quality & Compliance, ISO, ICO, RMO| New York State - Statewide Financial SystemWynantskill, Ny, United States
Thanks. I like the idea of "scaling" the use of PM. Saving Changes...
Gabrielle MaherPMO Consultant| IndependentLondon, London, United Kingdom
Hi - A Portfolio Office (as opposed to PMO - which supports the delivery of programmes - or PO which supports the delivery of projects) is recognised as the industry standard for defining the 'right' projects or programmes an organisation invests in.
They manage the project 'ideas' wishlist for the organisation and they also manage the programme / project pipeline. The Portfolio office (which sits above the PMO and PO) operate a value management matrix - the key question they will ask is - are the 'right' projects and programmes being commissioned that support business value, ROI and alignment with strategic organisational objectives. They work with senior management boards to ensure the optimal value is realised from the portfolio, they prioritise and select the composition of the portfolio of programmes / projects commissioned.
They achieve savings and efficiencies, eradicate duplication, link change benefits to the performance managment structure etc. They help business leaders by ensuring their investments are balanced in terms of costs, size. risk exposure and projected ROI (return on investment). They expose projects / programmes that are too risky and move funds from low value projects to high value strategic initiatives. Their focus is on supporting the success of the business and improving business value and strategic growth.
Portfolio offices tend to sit at an organisation level - but can be divisional or group focused (ie. Group IT). The OGC has recently published the P30 (Portfolio, Programme and projet offices) which discusses the functions of the 3 various offices in more detail. You can buy the book on the OGC website.
.......And if you haven't a portfolio office !!!! - then a Project can be 'mandated' by a business sponsor (a sponsor is a business champion who pays for the project). The sponsor should complete the project mandate - which sets out the project objectives, scope etc. from a business perspective. As several people have pointed out - you then need to startup a project and develop a business case to ensure there is appropriate justification for the investment in the project. Every project needs a project sponsor and stakeholders who will benefit from the project - the sponsor is usally the primary stakeholder and the person who will benefit most from the project.
Without benefits being realised - there is no basis in theory for any project to go ahead - although typically 'pet' projects always get there by stealth and come in 'under the radar'..
Saving Changes...
Gabrielle, I would be interested to know what studies or information you have seen to support the idea that a Portfolio Office "is recognized as the industry standard for defining the 'right' projects." I see some people advocating the use of special offices for a variety of functions, but I have not seen a Portfolio Office used very often in any company (small or large). None of the companies I have worked with had one.
I usually see the authorization of projects tied to the authorization of budget and the control of human resources. The people who control the people and the money typically authorize the projects. I have never seen a special office used to authorize new projects, unless you consider something like "The Office of the COO" or "The Office of the President", where the top-executive and their close advisors review and authorize projects. Saving Changes...
Gabrielle MaherPMO Consultant| IndependentLondon, London, United Kingdom
Hi Alex - I made the contribution fairly late Friday night so excuse any overly generous statements!! I should have been more specific and said that the 'P30' best practice guidance issued by the OGC in the UK 3rd quarter 2008 is a recognised 'emerging' best practice for the '3Ps' (Project, Programme and Portfolio managment) where the trademark name 'P30' refers to the offices that support the 3Ps. The OGCs description is "A P30 model provides a decision enabling/delivery support structure for all change within an organisation".
The problem we have all faced historically is there were very little standards / recognised guidance available that described the role of the various '3P' offices. the hierarchical structure, service offering or assurance capability. Hence the value proposition to the business world varied as did business risk exposure. Here in the UK the lack of standards has caused a lot of confusion - and the P30 offering was been eagerly awaited for some time - and is generally regarded as a best practice standard.
The P30 model is aligned with other OGC best practice (PRINCE2, MSP, M-O-R etc). The name of the publication is ' P30 Portfolio, Programme and Project Offices ' - available on the OGC procurement website - link below.
The OGC continue to update their methodologies and best practice guidelines as organisational change evolves and matures. They have done a lot of work recently around maturity models in 3Ps (P3M3) and have expanded their best practice guidance into the P30. As with all OGC methodologies it is supported by a formal accreditation. They are revamping MSP and reissueing PRINCE in 2009 with a renewed focus on organisation governance.
There was a lot of press (certainly in the UK) on these topic - and has been a hot topic on the conference circuit - some useful links below to 2009 events - and OGC links.
March 2009 - PPSOSIG conference - Special Interest Group for project and programme management
http://www.ppsosig.co.uk/ The conference will focused on the realism of P3O
http://www.usergroup.org.uk/ - there is more discussion on the P30 OGC initiative on The (OGC) Best Practice Usergroup.
Porfolio offices are noticably becoming a standard organisational best practice in the UK - certainly in the last few years. The banking fraternity are ahead of the pack - but Portfolio offices are common in FTSE listed companies and they are more and more becoming adopted company best practice. I have worked with several - they tend to have the same role - but different levels of maturity.
The Portfolio offices I have worked with support the senior management investment decision making that pre-empts the project / programme commissioning process. The ones I worked with were focused on the alignment of the business and IT strategies, commissioning strategic objectives (Programmes) and removing redundancy / duplication. They track the delivery of benefits realisation and work closely with ERM and Compliance. Hope this helps.
Thanks for the background and information, Gabrielle. It seems like the UK experience is quite different than what I have seen in the US.
I certainly know of the OGC publications, and they are wonderful. They are rarely followed or treated as standards in the US. A few brave souls are working in the US to promote these standards and accreditations, but I see little progress here.
Thanks again for the references. Saving Changes...
