Just for background, I work for a large financial services company with about 400 people in the IT section.
The company has a way to prioritise the major projects but has no effective way of managing the changes to those priorities.
The projects often affect many different divisions within IT and when the priorities change, the knock-on effect is very big - project planning, resource constraints, change management, comms, etc.
Is there a decent process that could be followed to help get us through the turmoil?
It would be good to talk with you in more detail on this requirement. Sounds as if you have a project selection and prioritisation system that works, at least at the project approval stage.
It would be interesting to analyse why the same tool cannot be used for re-prioritisation. Is it a matter of the construction of the tool, or is it a matter of program/project governance. I would have thought a firm like AMP would have a reasonable amount of PM rigour.
I can cite examples from Australian Industry that could well be of advantage. Broad based selection and priorisation tools that use generic KPI's, even a balanced scorecard approach, are gaining a lot of credibility.
As a basic point of reference, at risk of covering ground well known to you is to at least refer to a broad based methodology. An example is attached in theses slides, but any methodology needs to be organisationally specific, naturally.
Having worked with AMP myself (in Sydney 2001-2002) I can see where you're coming from. This basically comes down to successful integration of communication and stakeholder management, and also scope change management. I'd be surprised if C.A.T.S. didn't have some sort of scope change control tools available, perhaps they could help you out. Alternatively if you're after something on communications and stakeholder management please let me know, I’d be happy to discuss. Saving Changes...
