There is no typical structure for a PMO organisation, it will depend on the size, maturity, services, business lines etc of the company to denote roles you need and how many people you wil use to fill them vs how many roles an individual will take on, as someone can perform more than one role.
I have seen the following GUIDES for staffing a PMO from the P3O Guide):
Sizing Option #1 – Programme Value
The guide says “The cost of the Programme Office may range between 3% and 5% of the total programme value.”
Sizing Option #2 – Programme Size
The numbers below offer a basic average headcount based on size of the Programme:
Programme of 30 (P3O of 3)
Programme of 60 (P3O of 6)
Programme of 120 (P3O of 7)
Programme of 200 (P3O of 9)
Programme of 500 (p3O of 17)
Programme of 1000 (P3O of 25)
These are all guides and not to be taken as a definitive figure. These numbers take into account:
Management Reporting Overhead
Basic IT Tools
P3M3 Maturity level of 2 – 3
You will of course (if you use this method of sizing) need to take into account for P3O’s with higher or lower Maturity, Additional roles, locations/geographies, type of programme (the amount of legislative overhead?), or the services you are and are not offering the programme and the business.
Sizing Option #3 – By Function and Service
The third “Sizing Option” suggested by the OGC in the P3O Guide, is my preferred choice. It is based on the services you are offing or will offer and functions you are performing (or will perform) and gets you to estimate the level of effort over a given period, such as a month, along with the competencies and skills you will need in your P3O to deliver these. (The example PMO RACI Matrix may help you identify, please feel free to download and tailor for your use.)
You should break the month down as much as possible so you can start getting a good picture of weekly resource requirements built up from hours and days, while using this method. Saving Changes...
I know this post is dated, but I just spotted it and wanted to add my two cents which is, for the love of GOD, let's stop looking for and talking about PMO structures and roles and responsibilties. Instead, let's focus the attention and discussion on what project-related business problems does our leadership team have for which a PMO of some kind can be of value. And from the perspective of the leadership team, let's assess the merits (value) of solving those problems, the organizational (PMO) goals and objectives that should be put in place that serve as measures of those problems being solved. After that has been done, and ONLY after that has been done, then the PMO can plan and execute a strategy of which PMO structure and roles will be duly noted. It is when we put the cart before the horse and jump into the typical people, process, tools diatribe that we invite all kinds of basic business management errors. Saving Changes...
I addition to Martyn's sizing information, the P3O manual also includes structures and a considerable range of roles that may exist in a P3O, with role descriptions. Saving Changes...
Where should Program/Project Managers reside, should they come under PMO or under technology arm who execute IT projects? If they are under PMO what kind of control PMO can have other than maintaining PM pool, skill development, allocation etc. Who should own/control Project/Program Managers (Should it be under CIO office or under PMO
Where should Project Quality Assurance team reside, as far I understand most of them say it should be independent entity and PMO should not control them, wanted to understand this scenario.
Where enterprise PMO should themselves reside, some say under CEO or should be centralized or should reside under CTO office, wanted to understand this scenario.
Under PMO, how satisfied PMs could be on their Career Paths since if under CIO they have defined path (from BA-Team Lead-PM-Program Manager) Saving Changes...