I just started a new job as a PMO Analyst. The company has developed it's own project/programme management methodology but they are having a hard time getting PMs to comply (required checkpoint governments are missing etc).
For example, before a project can proceed from one stage to the next it needs an internal approval (like a governance gate document). The problem is that PMs proceed to the next stage without these documents but between them and the customer they have effectively agreed to proceed not least because of key milestone dates (they cannot delays just because a document has not been signed which would be signed anyway- this wastes resources). Then the documents are retrospectively completed which defeats the whole purpose.
My idea is that if there was a automated process management system software that can guide PMs through the process and making it easy for them to fill in the required documents and gain approval then PMs would actually comply. For example, if you had a system like Remedy that takes the documents and automatically guides the PMs to the next stage and where approvals are done via a click of a button and automatic email notifications this will make compliance easier. It is a lot easier than having to search for templates etc.
I was wondering if anyone has any idea of how to get PMs to comply with in-house methodology? Will process automation help and if so what are the ones on the market?
Also, how would one deal with estimations? For example, being able to provide accurate estimations to the customer as early as possible even when the requirements are vague. Estimations that vary widely from one stage to the next can obviously increase costs dramatically for the customer.
Thanks in advance
Saving Changes...
Sort By:
Michael WellesManaging Director| EdWel Project and Risk Management TrainingChicago, Il, United States
Fundamentally, the most widely available and widely used project management tools do not manage the project work flow well. Putting together a timing plan and resource responsibilities on the WBS makes little difference for organizations with strong internal methodologies. The key is to have your tool built around your methodology and not have your company built around some tool in my opinion.
With our software partners we have developed an Oracle-based project work flow tool that allows all project stakeholders to complete and track their project work within the tool. From engineering/design drawings to project governance documents, each is embedded within the tool and tied into the prevailing project management methodology. Each of these governance documents can also link to best practices, online training, and/or detailed explanations. Essentially, the tool becomes your desktop and you spend your entire day within the tool.
Additionally, our tool's reporting capabilities allow management to see exactly what has and has not been completed at either the program level, project level and customer level It is even possible for management to review document quality, make corrections/suggestions, or opt out of doing a particular portion of the methodology with no impact on the tool's capabilities.
If you then tie everything into financials, you can then have a complete picture of the program. It also makes it easier to see who is complying on a daily basis.
Thanks for your reply. I very much appreciate it. It's good to hear from experience what others have done and how it has worked and your insight is definetly usefull.
The only disadvatnage is that a bespoke solution would be more expensive than an off the shelf tool right? Also, I guess your bespoke tool would have to be customisable/scalable?
Thanks Saving Changes...
Gabrielle MaherPMO Consultant| IndependentLondon, London, United Kingdom
Hi - the gated process I think you are referring to comes under the banner of 'quality' management - the aim of which is to support the successful delivery of project / programme. The process involves that checkpoint / gated reviews are carried out at pre-agreed stages within the project lifecycle . It is generally incorporated into the PMO assurance function - but can equally be seperated into an organisational quality managers role. The aim of the gated review process is to provide a stage end healthcheck to ensure the objectives of the projects are not compromised and are still 'viable' , and that the project/ programme is healthy / ready to move to the next stage.
If the PMO have written an internal methodology that needs to be complied with - it should include the quality gated review process in its governance handbook. The process needs to be transparent and the PMO should specify what is entailed - the aim/value of the process - and what is required of PMs at each gated checkpoint review. A simple powerpoint slide would suffice in the first instance - showing all stages in the project lifecycle - all quality gates / checkpoint reviews - and all documents to be reviewed at each gate.
Only then can PMs incorporate these requirements into their plans.
Most PMOs will also issue standard document templates to demonstrate the content / and quality of the documents that are needed for each gate. The checkpoint QG review process should be conducted by a senior PMO / or dedicated quality manager - alongside the project manager.
As senior management and project boards signoff on each stage of the project - the PMO also need to communicate / get buy-in to the process from this level of management - otherwise the value of the process is lost. Quality can not be managed retrospectively - it needs to be pre-agreed by the board at the outset of the project. Quality takes time to deliver and costs money - therefore it is imperative the level of quality required of the project is agreed at project startup.
Once adopted into the Governance control framework PMs should not be allowed to proceed to the next stage of a project if they can not demonstrate that all requirements (products - project management and technical products) for each stage of the project are complete. Stage management of projects is essential for quality control. Project boards should be made aware of the organisations quality gated process / requirements - and advised that projects can not proceed to the next stage until the gated process requirements for quality is achieved - they should be made aware that its in the sponsors and stakeholders best interest! The problem arises where time and cost become paramount to boards and project managers are left trying to retrofit quality with no time and no budget available - hence the need to pre-agree the quality plan at the outset of the project - so that project managers and boards agree what is to be delivered upfront. Saving Changes...
"Imagine if every Thursday your shoes exploded if you tied them the usual way. This happens to us all the time with computers, and nobody thinks of complaining."
