Turki Abdullah
Your question is both timely and essential.
PMI does not impose a one-size-fits-all answer — and that’s intentional.
The scope of a PMO must be aligned with the strategic intent, governance model, and maturity level of the organization.
However, based on PMI standards (such as PMBOK® Guide, The Standard for Portfolio Management, and Organizational Project Management), there are a few guiding principles worth highlighting:
A PMO’s role is not limited to “strategic projects” per se.
Even if deeper involvement (control, decision-making support) is reserved for strategic initiatives, a holistic portfolio view requires visibility over all change initiatives, including operational or tactical projects.
Governance ≠ micromanagement.
The PMO can adopt a tiered governance model:
- Full lifecycle support for strategic programs/projects
- Light-touch oversight (registration, health check, risk escalation) for operational initiatives
- Advisory or enablement role for functional areas managing BAU improvements
Excluding operational projects entirely from portfolio reporting can distort resource planning, risk appetite and benefits realization.
Without an integrated view, you risk local optimization at the expense of global performance.
PMI’s Organizational Project Management (OPM) model encourages alignment across portfolios, programs and projects — regardless of strategic vs operational labels.
What matters is the value being delivered and the level of risk, complexity, and interdependency.
So, to answer your question directly:
No, the PMO should not “completely exclude” operational projects.
Even a monitoring-only role adds value.
Yes, operational projects should be registered and reflected in the portfolio dashboard — if the PMO is to act as a reliable steward of enterprise-wide performance and delivery capability.
