I've been searching the boards for previous discussions about Project Sponsors, but none really fit the question I have today.
My inquiry is basically simple: who is the most suited to act as the Project Sponsor?
The PMBOK says that it's the person or group that provides the financial resources for the project. But can that definition stand the test of a real-life example? Let's examine my organization. Any request for an IT project that gets approved is funded by the IT Department's budget, even if the project is to, let's say, provide Finance with a better accounting tool. So, following the PMBOK's logic, the Sponsor should be the Head of IT, since he's the one holding the strings of the purse. However, what situation do we have then? An IT Sponsor, an IT Project Manager, and an IT team doing the work. Add to that that the Business Analysts are also in IT, and you've got a pretty one-sided situation. Basically, the Client ends up being entirely reliant on the goodwill of IT to get what he asked for.
But if that's no good, then what happens if the Sponsor is the Client? The role of a Project Sponsor is certainly to champion the project, so that's definitely something the Client will do well - they asked for the project, so they are the best placed to know why it must be done. But are they the best placed to see why the project should NOT be done? A Project Sponsor also needs to maintain objectivity and act in the best interest of the organization, which can mean killing the project if the benefits cannot be realized. Can you imagine the Client would ever kill his own project? Yeah, it's never happened to me before, either.
So who else then? One of the Client's peers who isn't involved in the execution of the project? But then office politics come into play - how do you garantee the Sponsor's objectivity?
Ideally, to ensure absolute neutrality, the Sponsor should be an individual who:
- didn't request the project in the first place
- doesn't have to commit any of his own resources
- doesn't stand to gain or lose anything from the project's success nor failure
- has enough power within the organization to curb the Client's enthusiasm for scope creep
- has enough power within the organization to pressure the other stakeholders into supplying the resources necessary for project success
- knows enough about project management as a discipline to perform adequately in his role as Sponsor
To be honest, now that I've written it down, it feels like I'm looking for a completely alien species. So what is the next best thing? Who would you recommend as Project Sponsor? Can you share any ideas, or examples of situations that worked well?
Thanks. Saving Changes...
Mark DyslinHR Project Leader| Xerox Business Services LLCDallas, Tx, United States
This is always a "special" topic in my mind. I don't know there is ever a standard, one-size fits all answer. So I will pay homage to a PM sage by posting his advice from an earlier thread: "if all else fails, a staircase and a good shove will get [the problem] out of your hair." The only question remaining: who to place at the top of the stairs? Saving Changes...
Julien:
Just a rule of thumb; remember the PMBOK is a body of knowledge; a guide.
Put on your thinking cap and consider your culture, the maturity of your organization, your organizational structure, who owns the budget and resources, who your customer is etc.
Others can chime in but to keep it simple I would recommend the following thoughts to consider:
It's okay to have more than one sponsor.
It's okay and probably makes sense to have the sponsor be the person or organization that is providing the budget for the project.
It's okay and sometime a good idea to have a sponsor from the client or customer organization.
It's a good idea for a Steering Committee to be considered to address some of your concerns/issues/culture
It's okay for the CIO of IT to be a sponsor but for a business driven project you should also identify a sponsor on the business side to help with end user acceptance and will help champion the business team
It's the job of the PM to help coach the team, sponsors and stakeholders in their roles.
It's your job as PM to advise the sponsor(s) of the resources you need. It also good to request a meeting of the key resources and your sponsor(s) to request the resources you need.
Also, most importantly it's critical to establish a sponsor and get them to kick off your project. and keep them engaged.
Let us know how it's going. Saving Changes...
Wai Mun KooPMO Director| Intergraph PP&MSingapore, Singapore
Julien,
Good question. A single rule of thumb I usually use is to ask myself this question "Who will be the eventual owner?" Think about this beyond the project lifecycle. After the project is completed, who is going to own the end product? Who is going to take care of it and be responsible for its benefits and ROI beyond the project lifecycle? In most of the cases, according to PMBOK, this will be the product manager.
In PMBOK, it states that the person or group that provides financial resources for the project is most suited to be the project sponsor. Think about it this way - it does sound proper to say 'who pays for it owns it'. Naturally, I would say that the owner will usually suited to be the sponsor as he needs to take care of the end product and ensure its benefits are met. Do take note that a sponsor needs not to be the subject matter expert, though it is essential that the sponsor is an expert in that area, but it is not necessary a must. Also, although sometimes the sponsor can be represented by more than one person, say as a group, it is important that you have one representative from that group to be the main contact, spokesperson and decision maker, else you will end up having confusion and conflict within the sponsor group. In the end, as a PM, you won't know who to listen to from the sponsor group.
You are right that the sponsor needs to be able to champion the project as well as help to remove obstacles along the way. Perhaps PRINCE2 provides better definition for this (note that PRINCE2 does not have a definition for sponsor, but the equivalent of a sponsor is the executive role). In PRINCE2, an executive is defined as "The single individual with overall responsibility for ensuring that a project meets its objectives and delivers the projected benefits.This individual should ensure that the project or programme maintains its business focus, that it has clear authority and that the work, including risks, is actively managed.The Executive is the chairperson of the Project Board, representing the customer, and is the owner of the Business Case".
Brad EgelandBusiness Solution Designer| Bradegeland.comLas Vegas, Nv, United States
My project sponsors have always been someone with a stake in the success on the client's side. It may be an executive with a big financial stake and it directly affects his business unit or it may be a lowlier person who's career is riding on it...but it is usually the former. It might be nice to have that impartial type of project sponsor, but I would be somewhat concerned as to how engaged they would be in the project itself. I have enough to worry about, usually, managing a project team and customer on the one project plus 4-5 other projects to always trying to ensure that the customer remains engaged....though it is sometimes an issue anyway. Thanks for the discussion...good thoughts! Saving Changes...
Wai Mun KooPMO Director| Intergraph PP&MSingapore, Singapore
Brad,
You've pointed out another key issue with sponsor - engagement. Will the sponsor fully committed to the project? If so, does he know his role and responsibilities well and is clear on what he needs to do and how to do it? If not, it is the PM's job to prep the sponsor on this. Saving Changes...
Hanu KaravadiCISA PMP CSM PMI-ACP Senior Analyst Project Management and IT Governance Office| Toronto Police Service - Left in Dec 2020 & Looking for contract opps.Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
I came across a book - Project Sponsorship - Achieving Management Commitment for Project Success by Randall Englund & Alfonso Bucero - ISBN: 0 7879 8136 2
I think the book throws some light on the Best profile to serve as project Sponsor Saving Changes...
Mark, I don't know about this so-called PM "sage" you quoted, but he sounds like a fraud, you'd better be careful :)
Naomi, thanks for the tips. However, I tend to avoid having multiple sponsors - or multiple PMs, or multiple anyone that needs to take responsibility for anything. Because once you run into problems, everybody is going to believe that it's the other guy's job to deal with it, and in the end nothing will get done. No matter how much we want to please everybody by giving them a "voice" in the matters of our projects, I will stick with one Sponsor, one PM.
Wai, that's a good link you provided. Very interesting read. Looking at it from the PRINCE2 perspective does broaden the horizons a bit. My only wish is that this article, and many others of the same kind, would be read not by me, but by my boss, my boss' boss, and all the way to the top...
Finally, Brad and Wai, you're absolutely right about the engagement issue. I think the question here is: should the Sponsor champion the project first and foremost, or should he champion the organization's benefits? In a perfect world, the project should be made to be beneficial to the organization, so the former should support the latter and we wouldn't need to ask this question. However, in practice projetcs do sometimes deviate from their purpose, or run into difficulties that are so costly to resolve that whatever benefit would have been generated has already been expended. In such a case, continuing to champion the project would only result in prolonged bleeding of resources (financial and otherwise), whereas pulling the plug would prevent further losses.
Maybe I'm over-complicating things, or maybe things are just that complicated and that's why projects tend to fail so much. Pushing the argument all the way, what do you think then of having two roles: a Project Advocate, who champions the project fully and wholeheartedly, and a Project Detractor, who points out all the factual evidence that completion of the project is potentially detrimental to the company. Would an adequate balance be struck? Please try to imagine such roles in your companies and tell me what you think. It shouldn't be too hard - in every organization there always seems to be people doing nothing but pointing out the flaws in other people's work, so why not make it an official job for them? Saving Changes...
Julien:
You have not mention the size and complexity of your project but it sounds like sponsorship is new in your organization.
Many of us are sharing real world examples so consider what is best for your organization and start sharing your approach to see if you get buyin.
Let us know how it's going.
Cheers! Saving Changes...
Gail SeveriniManaging Director and Senior Consultant| Symphini Change Management Inc.Aurora, Ontario, Canada
I am with Wai Mun Koo 100% re "Who will be the eventual owner?". In our approach we identify sponsors not by who has the money (that is a complication) rather who has the change targets - the folks who have to change to drive the ROI. These are the sponsors who are responsible for driving the benefits. The clearest difference is a CRM project to be implemented by IT and used by the Sales Force. There is a symbiotic relationship here but only the Sales Force can drive the benefits. Daryl Conner writes about this extensively here http://changethinking.net/sponsorship-stra...out-sponsorship Saving Changes...
Wai Mun KooPMO Director| Intergraph PP&MSingapore, Singapore
Gail,
Thanks for sharing the link to Daryl's article. A good read. I especially like his 'Black hole' metaphor on the weak sponsorship at lower levels; it is so apt... Saving Changes...
