I work in the Group PMO of a company made up of 49 businesses of different sizes that operate across multiple sectors. We are currently trying to put into a place a Project Review Board at a Group level. Not your typical Review Board that deals with issues if and when they arrive. We want to assess major projects at the Initiation Phase to review all the necessary documents to ensure we have a realistic budget and timeline before the official sign-off. We want the Board to be made up of people from across the Group with specialist experience, in the project type under review, to engage in a support and peer-review capacity on major projects.
I have been trying to find some information on roles and responsibilities of members for such a Board and its fair to say I have struggled in my search thus far! I wanted to use this platform to see if anyone has had experience of what I've described above and would be willing to help me out with this!
What are you specifically looking for? As part of the federal government, we have almost a dozen or so project approval bodies and committees.
...
1 reply by Beni Azam
Dec 10, 2019 9:09 AM
Beni Azam
...
Well what we want from the Project Review Board is for them to provide guidance for major projects, based on their experience and best practice. Based on that what would you suggest to be the roles for members of the board, and following that what would be the responsibilities?
We are basically looking for examples of other large organisations doing this and seeing how they went about it.
What are you specifically looking for? As part of the federal government, we have almost a dozen or so project approval bodies and committees.
Well what we want from the Project Review Board is for them to provide guidance for major projects, based on their experience and best practice. Based on that what would you suggest to be the roles for members of the board, and following that what would be the responsibilities?
We are basically looking for examples of other large organisations doing this and seeing how they went about it. Saving Changes...
Thomas WalentaGlobal Project Economy ExpertHackenheim, Germany
IBM had such a process for project QA covering solution design and delivery for clients. Very successful (reduced troubled projects measurably). It employed 6 standardized checkpoints QAx and what you describe would be QA3. There was not one PRB for the whole organization, but localized QA functions for business units (e.g. countries), sometimes combined with the PMOs.
The QA reviews used checklists and risk assessments which were continuously updated with lessons learned. Saving Changes...
Stéphane ParentSelf Employed / Semi-retired| Leader MakerPrince Edward Island, Canada
I suggest you consider a project management community of practice. It would be composed of project managers. Project managers usually will listen to other project managers. Don't try to get non-project managers to tell project managers what to do. Saving Changes...
This is the overarching body for the federal government departments. Internally one of our boards has the following responsibilities (edited of course), but I hope you get the idea:
- execution of the enterprise-level challenge function with respect to new investment proposals and changes to approved investments
- undertaking assessments of new investment proposals between $XX and $XX in value
- authorizing successful proposals between $XX and $XX to move to Project Definition and Implementation stages within affordability envelope provided by XXXX committee
- authorizing changes to previously approved proposals estimated between $XX and $XX
- granting approval for successful proposals between $XX and $XX
- reviewing the performance of the approved proposals on a regular basis as well as the overall investment plan as whole
- ensuring linkages between organizational priorities, risks,...
- monitoring resources assigned to agreed activities in the...
- providing resource impact assessments to...
- monitoring of approved in-year resource allocations
- management of notional Horizon 1 resource allocations
- resource review of projects raised through the...
- recommending financial adjustments as a result of new or revised policies...
- periodic review to track fiscal performance and project progress to meet strategic goals and objectives Saving Changes...
I'd echo Stéphane's feedback about making it a peer-level delivery assurance step rather than heavy governance oversight. The challenge with such bodies is they usually lack the context of a given project and try to apply a process rather than a principle-based lens to the planning and control of a given project.
I agree and disagree with Stéphane and Kiron. Don't get too heavy on governance, but you still require a governance structure, and terms of reference for board and committee members. Having committee and board members with actual project experience is a must as there is no point in having governance boards and committees that bring no value-added, and are only are there to "rubber-stamp" approvals with no contextual experience or awareness. Having said this, I don't see members being peers either, as members should hold positions of higher authority and responsibility within the organization. Saving Changes...
