Is this a policy or a standard? The PM policies I've read don't usually get into the level of detail of individual metrics.
I'd suggest looking at metrics which are not tied to a specific delivery approach so that you can compare & contrast projects across the portfolio. For example, value delivered, features used/features delivered, EVM metrics, stakeholder satisfaction and team satisfaction are all lifecycle-agnostic.
Programme-level metrics can build on the same ones as are used for projects with a stronger emphasis on outcome achievement.
Kiron
...
1 reply by COLLIN ALMARALES
Mar 20, 2019 7:03 AM
COLLIN ALMARALES
...
Actually Kiron, I’ve never seen a policy that covers Portfolio, Programme or Projects. I’ve seen procedures to enable governance, which, though well-intended were not in line with organisational objectives for simplicity while doing things correctly. Similarly I’ve seen metrics that just didn’t make sense and attempts to avoid breaching them.
Standards abound. I’ve seen organisations trying to overlay PMI standards & PRINCE but not successfully. On large agile initiatives, Scaled agile framework was used wile individual teams used scrum. The governance of such initiatives was left floundering to catch up with the rapid pace of change the organisation was going through from moving from waterfall to agile
Saving Changes...
Sergio Luis ConteHelping to create solutions for everyone| Worldwide based OrganizationsBuenos Aires, Argentina
Perhaps I did not understand your point but let me say you are mixing things. Portofolio/Program/Project management are functions organizations define as part of their strategy. To put them in place you need to define rules, from rules policies and from policies procedures. All these stuff is totally independent of the approach you take. Saving Changes...
I tend to look at project metrics with respect to both output value and project efficiency. The specifics will vary greatly by business type, maturity of the business, new product or improvement, and many other factors. Regardless, the questions are still, "Are we getting the desired result from the projects?" "How effective are we at getting to the results." "How can I measure these qualities?"
The output metrics are those which show whether or not the projects are achieving the expected value. This could be product cost, rate of growth, quality, or whatever business factors are your strategic priority.
The efficiency metrics are process related. These are how effectively you are working to achieve your value objectives. Change process cycle time, rework needed, numbers of changes processed. etc.
For business decision making purposes, this will help identify where to spend efforts to improve, and are those improvement efforts working. Saving Changes...
anca stefanescuProject methodology expert| BRD GROUPE SOCIETE GENERALEBucharest, Romania
I have the same question as Kiron: policy or standard? The meaningful metrics must be defined by those directly involved/affected by the programs and projects. What do you want those metrics to reflect? Who will read them? Will the results be enough to show a concise, complete and correct picture of the program/project? Answer these questions first never mind the methodology used. Saving Changes...
COLLIN ALMARALESProgramme Manager| HyperopticLondon, -- No Selection --, United Kingdom
Mar 19, 2019 6:46 PM
Replying to Kiron Bondale
...
Collin -
Is this a policy or a standard? The PM policies I've read don't usually get into the level of detail of individual metrics.
I'd suggest looking at metrics which are not tied to a specific delivery approach so that you can compare & contrast projects across the portfolio. For example, value delivered, features used/features delivered, EVM metrics, stakeholder satisfaction and team satisfaction are all lifecycle-agnostic.
Programme-level metrics can build on the same ones as are used for projects with a stronger emphasis on outcome achievement.
Kiron
Actually Kiron, I’ve never seen a policy that covers Portfolio, Programme or Projects. I’ve seen procedures to enable governance, which, though well-intended were not in line with organisational objectives for simplicity while doing things correctly. Similarly I’ve seen metrics that just didn’t make sense and attempts to avoid breaching them.
Standards abound. I’ve seen organisations trying to overlay PMI standards & PRINCE but not successfully. On large agile initiatives, Scaled agile framework was used wile individual teams used scrum. The governance of such initiatives was left floundering to catch up with the rapid pace of change the organisation was going through from moving from waterfall to agile Saving Changes...
Within the context of a PM framework I believe our organization struggles as well. What I have learned recently is that to be truly successful in the long run, an organization must as Sergio stated set up the "rules". That starts with a governance structure, policies, guidelines, processes, and then procedures. We also struggle between the definition of a "program" and "project". Many projects in our organization would be considered programs in other similar organizations. That in itself causes much strife, as defining a program as a project usually means less resources. As far as metrics, or KPI's this aspect has alluded me for over 10 years. Lots of talk of KPI's but I have seen very little by the way of practical and worthwhile metrics in practice. In fact, I recall several years back, a senior vice-president from Raytheon stated that they themselves had not quite come to grips in defining such metrics. I'm interested to hear what others have to say regarding this. Good question. Saving Changes...
Thomas WalentaGlobal Project Economy ExpertHackenheim, Germany
Well, Collin, IBM had (and has?) such a policy for project and program management, stating the minimum requirements to be followed by any project manager.
It included elements for all kind of IBM projects, regardless of delivery model, agile or not. It did not contain any metrics. Metrics would be derived from the needs of the individual business groups.
Four elements were covered: PM process, PM Governance, the necessity for phases, and a PM System. Saving Changes...
"Interestingly, according to modern astronomers, space is finite. This is a very comforting thought--particularly for people who can never remember where they have left things."
