I work for a company that has little project management experience or procedures. They recently appointed a deputy sponsor for the project. I think this was given to the person because that person put themself up as the Project manager but were passed by. As the PM on this project I think it's not a good idea to have 2 sponsors or is it? Any comments?
Saving Changes...
Sort By:
Andy JordanPresident| Roffensian Consulting S.A.Cherry Grove, AB, Canada
Anon, I would certainly have some concerns with multiple sponsors - the obvious problem is that there is the opportunity for differences in direction which impacts the project. That said I have seen instances where it has worked, usually on projects that cover more than one area of expertise and the sponsors are effectively sponsoring their own area of accountability within the project. I still would rather have those roles as SMEs with a single overarching sponsor however. Your situation sounds a little different though - deputy sponsor implies that there is still a single decision maker and the role may work, in the same way as a proxy can work if a sponsor is unavailable. My concern in this situation would be that it is another level of separation from both the PM and the ultimate decision maker and from the sponsor and his or her project. Clearly there needs to be very close alignment between the sponsor and their deputy - you can't go forward with a decision only to have it overruled a week later. If the situation is set in stone then I would insist on 1) documented and agreed to roles / responsibilities / commitments / timelines / etc between the sponsor, deputy sponsor and PM (who has to approve what, how quickly will decisions be turned around, etc) and 2) continued involvement of the sponsor in the key project meetings / decisions etc (I have an article on the Gantthead front page this month that outlines my thoughts on sponsors). Hope that helps, Andy Jordan, President, Roffensian Consulting Inc., www.roffensian.com Saving Changes...
Anonymous
The key is to clearly define the roles of the two sponsors, getting their participation in the definition of the roles. A RACI chart can sometimes really help. If the three of you continue to find areas in which there is a great degree of overlap, it will become evident to them through this process. Where I am at, we usually always have two sponsor roles; one that is more hands-on and closer to the affected business areas and the other is at a high enough place in the organization that can intervene if/when required. Those two sponsors know their role and there is little overlap. Saving Changes...
It worries me when I see this type of approach to an initiative. I'm a big believer in single point of accountability.
I'm assuming you are talking about sponsorship at the Program level, rather than the project level?
At the Program Level, using MSP as the basis for my comment, the program owner is the Senior Responsible Owner (SRO), who may elect to have a support committee of relevant stakeholders (say two or three perhaps known as the program steering committee). Ultimately though the SRO has the authority and the responsibility to deliver the program.
Each project, sitting beneath the project should be governed by a project executive, comprising supplier, user and project customer. This group is focused on the tactical implementation of the project for the benefit of the overarching program.
Never ever accept a watered down version of your program / project governance structure.....if you don't have single point accountability then you have greater chances of failure.
Regards
Mark
www.reverseturkey.com Saving Changes...
Anonymous
I was the Project Manager of a project and the CFO was the sponsor. I feel it's okay if the CFO wants to have an assistant to cover for him/her in case they are busy with other matters when you need them. The "deputy sponsor" would have to work very closely with the sponsor in order for that to work. Saving Changes...
Mark Price PerryBusiness Driven PMO Evangelist| BOT InternationalOrlando, Fl, United States
Dear Anon,
Nice post and replies. I have the same perspective as the other contributors. Generally speaking:
I like to see one sponsor
A red flag immediately comes up in my mind when I see a deputy sponsor in the mix
I would seek to have the sponsor / deputy sponsor roles clearly defined
Having said that, I would prefer there not be a deputy sponsor, period. And, given the description of your situation, "company with little PM experience, etc." all the more reason to be cautious. But, I wouldn't worry or fight it. In fact, there could be a very good business or staff developmental reason why management named the deputy sponsor that may not be, or need be, apparent to the project manager and team.
Good luck with your project...!
Mark Perry, BOT International
Saving Changes...
Agreed on the opinions that if the roles are clearly defined you probably won't have an issue. We use a role called "Project Owner" which causes some confusion, but that's probably because the role isn't well defined. Saving Changes...
