In our organization an accepted PM methodology is in place and now we have come to debate whether we should have a PM policy. My understanding is that a methodology is not binding, it is the method having a structured set of steps of best practices. Methodology need progressive improvement to follow it entirely, therefore not following is not a violation, in contrary policy is binding. Is my understanding correct?
Since PM methodology is not 100% followed, autoditors have reported non-compliance and recommended to have a seperate PM policy.
I wish to have your expert opinion on this please.
Saving Changes...
Sort By:
Peter WrightProgramme Manager| BAE SystemsSouthport, Merseyside, United Kingdom
Aslam,
I have not heard of policy purely for Project Management before, but I have heard of PM core competencies that should be measured with individuals which should also align to the method, so if they are not completing a certain aspect of the method and it is reflected in their job objectives etc then you have by defacto a "pollicy" which can be enforced with each individual.
Auditors will align your actuals to the methods, so if you have not provided flexible methods and not all of your projects fit that model you are likely to get failures.
This seems to me to be a failure in the way the method is implemented - make it flexible (e.g. Prince 2) this is sometimes written in such a way that if you do not generate a cottage industry size documentation then you are not compliant. Tailor the method so it provides flexibility (and efficiency) to the business but it also shodl give the auditors the ability to see where tihs flexibility has been agreed, e.g. at project initiaiton this project will not have a PID and was agreed by the project board on the xxx/xx/xxxx.
In short = The job descriptions and objectives of the PM's should be your policy.
Saving Changes...
Mark Price PerryBusiness Driven PMO Evangelist| BOT InternationalOrlando, Fl, United States
Hi Aslam, great post and reply from Peter. Many folks advocate, and I agree, that PM methodology alone is not enough. In fact the term "PM Methodology" is outdated as it simply does not contain all of the non-application kinds of PMO content assets such as processes, guidance, policies, SME tips and advisements, and supporting PMO and project management related information. Also, PM methodologies, especially those that are aligned to industry standards like PMBOK, do not address all of the work that is done before initiating and after closing, not to mention governance and PMO management work done over the life span of the project. So, back to your question, yes, your understanding is in line with what most PMOs do and a PM policy can be a great help to establish and continually improve all of the various policy matters as a matter of business management. Saving Changes...
Wai Mun KooPMO Director| Intergraph PP&MSingapore, Singapore
You will need to make sure your policy take into consideration of various types of projects. It is not possible to have all projects to follow everything. Certain items may be optional for smaller or less complex projects. Saving Changes...
To understand better the context can you pls specify what is the purpose of the audit? Is it an internal audit or an external audit?
Saving Changes...
Joy SmithProject Manager | America's Credit UnionDupont, Wa, United States
This post and responses are helpful as our organization is in a similar situation. Although a PM methodology has been in place for a few years, external auditors have advised us to create a PM Policy. Is it possible to ask to share templates of a PM policy, specific to FI's? Or a link to resources that can aid with this request?
Thank you in advance. Saving Changes...
