Strategic Project Management - Away from PBO By Default Shadow P D - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Strategic Project Management

• Away from PBO By Default Shadow

P D Rwelamila Professor of Project Management & Procurement Systems Graduate School of Business Leadership University of South Africa (UNISA) South Africa

What to Cover

Context – PM for Contemporary Organizations Context – Forewords (4# ) Context – Executives/ Foot soldiers What is a PBO & Challenges in Practice? Visiting the Project Coal-face Linkage Between Projects & Strategy – Prac tical dilemmas Project Management Maturity – How mature is your organization? I nternal Re-engineering - Strategic PM in action

7 Primary Forces of Change Facing Contemporary Organisations

Compression of product life cycle Global competition Knowledge explosion Corporate downsizing Increased customer/client focus Rapid development of non industrialised countries & closed economies Small projects represent big problems

PRIMARY FORCES FACING CONTEMPORARY ORGANISATIONS

Compression of the product/ service life cycle:

computer aided design (CAD) & manufacturing

(CAM), have forced radical changes in the product life

cycle & clients are more demanding for improved

services.

Global competition:

transformation from national or regional economies to

• ne global economy during the 1970s, has brought

pressures on quality improvement and cost

containment

PRIMARY FORCES (Contd.)

Knowledge explosion

the growth in new knowledge has increased the

complexity of projects because projects encompass the

latest advances & services are also more technologically

complex.

it is hard to find a new product that does not contain at least one microchip

• the need to integrate divergent technologies (through PM)

PRIMARY FORCES (Contd.)

Corporate downsizing

after years of stressing growth and ‘big is better’,

• rganisations have begun to face the harsh reality that big

is also costly downsizing (or rightsizing if you are still employed) and

sticking to core competencies have become necessary for survival of firms. Middle management is a mere skeleton of the past - PM is replacing middle

management

it is rare today to find any major project performed

totally in-house - outsourcing, where the PMs have to

manage their own people but also their counterparts

in different organisations

PRIMARY FORCES (Contd.)

I ncreased Customer focus

the majority of customers no longer simply settle for

generic products/ or services. They want customized products/ services that cater for their needs

the customized environment requires a much closer

working relationship between provider & receiver

• PM is critical both to development of customized products

and services and to sustaining lucrative relationships with customers

PRIMARY FORCES (Contd.)

Rapid development of Developing Countries & Closed Economies

the collapse of the Soviet Union, Apartheid, etc., and the gradual opening of Asian communist countries, SADC and other African countries have created an explosion in

pent-up demand for consumer goods & infrastructure development

there is scramble to introduce new products and

services to these new markets & many firms are using PM techniques to establish distribution channels &

foreign bases of operations

PRIMARY FORCES (Contd.)

Small projects represent big problems

the velocity of change required to remain

competitive or simply keep up has created an

• rganisational climate in which hundreds of projects are

implemented concurrently - the climate has created a multi-project environment and a plethora of new

problems.

THE FORCES ARE REAL!

PM is ideally suited for a business environment requiring accountability,

flexibility, innovation, speed, and continuous improvement.

THE IMPACT OF THE 7 FORCES

it is no longer possible to to use traditional management methods to solve problems (individuals solving problems!!) - the need to use teams to solve problems (combined skill?)

• rganisational response to the forces cannot

take the form of an instantaneous transformation from the old to the new

Forewords (1)

“We found that too many leaders and managers, particularly at the upper and senior levels, were inclined to view project management as a special case management – a minor departure from the proper or expected ways of managing the organizations. Too

• ften, these managers failed to appreciate the strategic

role that projects can play in the management of their

• rganizations. Up until the last few years, many

managers tended to tolerate rather than fully accept project as the way to enhance organizational

• effectiveness. This caused PMs, functional managers,

and project professionals to see themselves in ambiguous roles in supporting project initiatives.”

:Cleland & I reland (2007)

Forewords (2)

12

“Aligning the organization’s portfolio of projects to maximize their contributions to strategic

• bjectives takes a highly coordinated effort. It

requires more than the old "grenade over the wall" approach, in which the planning staff identifies and characterizes the project and then tosses it to an uninformed and uninvolved project management group that is supposed to complete the project. - everyone must be engaged with the project before charging ahead.”

• Dinsmore & Rocha (2012)

Forewords (3)

“PM is no longer about the sequence of steps required to complete the project in time. It is about systematically incorporating the voice of the customer/or client (my emphasis), creating a disciplined way of prioritizing effort and resolving trade-offs, working concurrently on all aspects projects in multifunctional teams, and much more. ……….- in this case 80% of the costs are determined before they take

• ver.” :Jones (2003): Lean Enterprise Research

Centre, Cardiff Business School, UK

Forewords (4)

“There are huge opportunities for eliminating wasted time and effort in almost every project . In manufacturing, Toyota estimate that only 5% of activities actually add value, 35% are necessary but do not add value, whilst the remaining 60% is pure waste – ‘muda’ in Japanese! By halving the effort in designing a new car, they show this ‘muda’ can be reduced by good

project management. Every PM…has not only to

manage their own project but seek ways of eliminating the ‘muda’ in their systems so they can do more for less, and more quickly next time!” :Jones (2003): Lean

Enterprise Research Centre, Cardiff Business School, UK

ProjectLink in the midst of the Upstream and Downstream of Project Management Development Strategic Project Management Tactical Project Management Technical + Social Cultural Project PM

Executive Management Interface between Project Link and Clients (internally and externally) and the focus to continuously ensuring appropriate and optimised solutions [Strategic emphasis; Core team & organisation; PMIS; Developing a PM; Becoming a learning

• rganisation; Inter-organisational relations]

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

The Project Manager and his/her Team’s Interface with stakeholders applying Project Management Best Practices The Project Manager and his/her Team’s Integration and Optimisation of the Required Project Resources (Technical) + Management (Social-cultural Issues)

Do You Know Who You Are?

16

A Project Based Organization (PBO) : Characteristics (1)

 management by projects must be an

• rganisational strategy;

 adoption of temporary organisations for the performance of complex processes;  it must manage a portfolio of different project types;  it must have specific permanent organisations to provide integrative functions;

Do You Know Who You Are?

17

A Project Based Organization (PBO) : Characteristics (2)

 it must apply a ‘new management paradigm’ (lean management, total quality management (TQM), business process re-engineering and learning organisation);  it must have an explicit project management culture; and  it must perceive itself to be project oriented.

Default Project Based Organizations

 Project unlinked to coherent strategies  Upper managers are unaware of the total number & scope of projects being undertaken  Lip service to learning from projects (audits & close-out reports out of the equation)  Window dressing project management information systems  The core-team is very weak and chaotic PROJECT BASED ORGS. BY DEFAULT AS A NORM

Project Management A Cinderella Field?

8 out of 10 project managers are accidental or have inadequate PM knowledge base Most organizations are fundamentally project based, are PBO by default – characterized by archaic & fragmented systems Project management training is characterized by curricula falling short a significant number of project management fundamentals

PROJECT MANAGEMENT POSTURING SEEMS TO DOMINATE

Accidental Project Managers – custodians

 Individuals are appointed as PMs because they have qualifications in the same field as the project’s core business  Player and referee roles – a conflict recipe  Perpetual competence challenges

 Understanding the social coalition dynamics (Overflowing IQ

• r Overflowing EQ or Balance IQ/EQ?)

THE GROWING SYNDROME WITH ENTRENCHED DYNAMICS

Project Management

• Context & Concepts

From a Linear Model to a Complex 3- Dimensional Maze –environment Features of a Project

A Project - Part of a Complex System (3-Dimensional Maze)

I nputs & outputs Sector/ I ndustry environment Country/ Economy environment Global environment

the need to understand the dynamics

• f environments

Project & PBO forces Sector/Industry forces Country/Economy forces Global Forces Inputs Output(s)

A 3-Dimensional maze –

envi nvironm nm ent nt

H&S – Health and Safety; Env. - Environment

Quality Schedule Cost Utility Project stakeholders H&S +Env.

Features of a Project

Primary features:

a project anatomy (life cycle) (a beginning and end, with a number of distinct phases in between) – linear model? a budget with an associated cash-flow activities that are essentially unique and non-repetitive use of resources, which may be from different departments & need co-ordinating a single point of responsibility (i.e. the project manager)

team roles & relationships that are subject to change &

need to be developed, defined & established

Time Total Project Life Cycle

Plan Acco ccom plish Phase 1

CONCEPT

Conceive (C)

• Gather data
• Identify need
• Establish
• goals, objectives
• basic economics,

feasibility

• stakeholders
• risk level
• potential team
• Guesstimate resources
• Identify alternatives
• Present proposal
• Obtain approval for next

phase Phase 3

I MPLEMENTATI ON

Execute (E) Set up:

• organisation
• communications
• Motivate team
• Detail technical requirements
• Establish:
• work packages
• detailed schedule
• information control
• systems
• Procure goods and services
• Execute work packages
• Direct/monitor/forecast/

control:

• scope, quality, time, cost
• Resolve problems

Phase 4

TERMI NATI ON

Finish (F)

• Finalize product(s)
• Review and accept
• Transfer product

responsibility

• Evaluate project
• Document results
• Release / direct resources
• Reassign project team

Project Life-Cycle [generic] (developed from Rwelamila (2001) , the PMBOK series. Volume 1, Wideman and Fellow, 1991, p111-2) Phase 2

DEVELOPMENT

Develop (D)

• Appoint key team

members

• Conduct studies
• Develop scope baseline:
• end product (s)
• equality standards
• resources
• activities
• Establish:
• master plan
• WBS
• policies and procedures
• Assess risks
• Confirm justification]
• Present project brief
• Obtain approval to proceed

Phase 5

OWN & OPERATE

Finish (G)

• Project operate

commercially

• Project produces

cash flow to pay lender’s debts interest and principal repayment.

• Cost (operation &

maintenance, etc)

• Training?

Phase 6

TRANSFER

Finish (H)

• Quality of Facility/

service

• Evaluation process

Oper erat ion/ Use

Bridging the Gap Between Organisation Strategy & Projects – in the face of adversity!

From Organizational Planning to Project Implementation

 Organizational Strategies – Organization strategies are arrived at through conventional strategic planning  General Project Alignment – Once the strategic objectives are identified, successful strategic project alignment depends on establishing a fundamental interface between those objectives & each project’s specific setting. Activities that bridge the gap between strategic objectives & specific project planning are stakeholder management, prioritization, risk management

• rganization-wide systems, & strategic project planning

 Most PBOs have poor communication systems – a good number

• f projects suffer from non provision of appropriate network &

necessary data

SYMPTOMS – OPPOSITE TO PROJECT CRITICAL FACTORS

DEVELOPING A CORE TEAM PROCESS, ORGANISING FOR PM & DEVELOPING A PM INFORMATION SYSTEM

Developing & supporting core teams Organizing the Project Management effort Developing the Project Management information system

The Role of Project Core Teams (1)

The organisation of people into ad hoc groups takes advantage of bringing together individuals from different specialism/departments as needed for a project task

the need to differentiate between ‘team’ &

‘group’

The Role of Project Teams (2)

A ‘group’ is simply a collection of people. A ‘team’ meets the following characteristics:

the output of the group is greater than the sum of the outputs of the individuals; a greater range of options can be considered by exploiting differences in individual thought process; decision-making by team is likely to be better; more openness to taking risks, as the risk is shared between the team rather than carried by one individual; higher overall level of motivation as there is an inherent responsibility to others in the team & a desire no to let them down; and better support for the individuals within the team, who are more likely to be included in a greater range of activities than they would normally be exposed to, but without their having to work alone.

The Role of Project Teams (3)

Why focus on the role of teamwork?

to help the PM in the design & selection of the

workgroup;

to enable the monitoring of the degree to which the team is functioning effectively; and to provide feedback to the team to help

improve effectiveness.

The Role of Project Teams (4)

Life-cycle of Teams

teams have various stages of developments:

• collection
• entrenchment
• resolution/ accommodation
• synergy
• decline
• break-up

using this knowledge, the organization can resist moving core team members once they are assigned

Table 9.2 Team life-cycle

. Stage Characteristics Collection The bringing together of individuals into agroup with a collectivetask or problem to solve. The participants have a de gree of eagerness and initial enthusiasm and generally rely on the authority and hierarchy to provide a degree of certainty in this uncertain environment. They will use this initial phase to establish themselves and find what is expected of them. Entrenchment As the group starts work they begin to find out where each person stands on various issues.The entrenchment comes when people:; arrive with preconceived ideas as to how the project should be proceeding and are unwilling to be persuaded

• f the merits of allowing the group to decide on the course of action. This phase can be very destructive and is generally

fairly unproductive .The reasons for this unproductiveness are issuessuch as disillusionment with the goals of the project, competition for power or attention within the group, or general confusion as the work being undertaken bears little relationship to the goals of the project. Resolution/ The disagreements begin to be resolved, and characteristics such as mutual accommodation trust, harmony, self-esteem and confidence are seen.This is where the team starts to put aside the negative social effectsand move to being more productive. Synergy Basedon Ansoff (1968), synergy is definedas when the output of the whole isgreater than what would be obtained from the component parts, otherwise stated as 2 + 2 =5. This is the peak of effectivenessof the team, leadership is shared, and there is a new motivation to complete the tasks at hand. Decline At some point the team will meet an event when its effectivenessstarts to decline- this can be through h the nature of the task being undertaken not changing or the focus of the activities beingallowed to move towards a social group. Break-up

If this occurs naturally before the task is finished, there can be problems in getting a new team to take up theremaining

• work. They will be expected to get 'up to speed' very quickly and have an additional pressure on them.

Where the group finishes its·task and it is during one of the earlier stages of development, either in resolution or synergy, the effects on future projects can be highly beneficialas the participants go away with good memories of the work they have done.

The Role of Project Core Teams (5)

Personalities in teams

understanding of the ways in which individuals behave in group situations the curriculum vitae & interview, though maligned, is still the normal mode for recruiting in most project environments

Roles and descriptions - team-role

contribution Allowable weaknesses Plant: creative, imaginative,

• unorthodox. Solves difficult

problems. Resource investigator: extrovert, enthusiastic, communicative. Explores opportunities. Develops contacts. Ignores details. Too pre- .

• ccupied to communicate

effectively.·

• Overoptimistic. Loses interest
• nce initial

enthusiasm has passed. Coordinator:mature, confident, a good chairperson. Clarifies goals, promotes decision-making,dele- gates well. Can be seen as manipulative. Delegates personalwork. Shaper:challenging, dynamic, thrives on pressure. Has the drive and courage to overcome obstacles. Can provoke others.Hurts people's feelings. Monitor evaluator:s.ober, strategic and disterning. Sees all options. Judges accurately. Lacks drive and ability to inspire others.Overly critical. Teamworker:cooperative, mild, perceptive and diplomatic. Listens, builds, averts friction,calms the waters.- Implementer: disciplined, reliable, conservative and efficient. Turns ideas into practical actions. Completer: painstaking, conscien- tious, anxious. Searches out errors

· and omissions. Delivers on time.

Indecisive in crunch

• situations. Can be easily

influenced. Somewhat inflexible. Slow to respond to new possibilities. llnclined to worry unduly. Reluctant to delegate. Can be a nit-picker. Specialist: single-minded, self- starting, dedicated. Provides knowledge and skills rn rare supply. Contributes on only a narrow

• front. Dwells on technicalities.

Overlooks the 'big picture'.

The Role of Project Core Teams (6)

Effective Teamwork

Project teamwork must make a positive contribution to the success of the project:

• the structure of the team & its composition are broken

down into 3 basic categories - related to the appropriate or most likely phase in the project life-cycle

• how teams work? - the disintegrated group (no

agreement between team members & decision process in turmoil); - the integrated team (there is complete consensus on all matters, but gone over the edge in terms of effectiveness)

Project Core Teams – Beyond Comfort (7)

Effective Teamwork - the internationalization & globalization environment (1)

in the last 12 years there has been a massive increase in internationalization & globalization of

business. This process has been institutionalized by various international agencies, such as:

• GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs & Trade)
• GATS (General Agreement of Trade & Services)
• WTO (World Trade Organisation)
• EU (European Union)
• NAFTA (North American Free Trade), etc.

The Role of Project Core Teams (8)

I nternationalization & globalization (1)

The culture shock!

• A PM + Team members as encapsulators?
• A PM + Team members as absconders?
• A PM + Team members as cosmopolitans?

The Role of Project Core Teams (9)

I nternationalization & globalization (2)

The PM relocation transition curve:

• unreality
• fantasia
• interest
• acceptance of reality
• experimentation
• search
• integration

14-17

The Relocation Transition Curve

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LENGTH AND RIGOUR OF TRAINING AND CULTURAL FLUENCY REQUIRED

Length of Training Level of Rigour Cross- Cultural Training Approach 1-2 Months 1-4 Weeks Less than 1 Week High Low

Information Approach  Area briefing  Cultural briefing  Films/books  Use of interpreters  Survival-level language training Effective Approach  Culture assimilator training  Role- playing  Cases  Culture shock: stress reduction training  Moderate language training Experiential Approach  Assessment centre  Field experiences  Simulations  Extensive language training

Length of stay 1 or less (Months) 2-12 (Months) 1-3 (Years)

ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE

There is no ‘best’ kind of organisation structure

• the most appropriate structure depends on the
• rganization's goals, type of work, and

environment

As organizations grow or the environment

changes, additional subdivisions and new groupings are implemented to better handle new situations & emerging problems.

CHOOSING AN ORGANISATIONAL FORM (STRUCTURING PROJECTS)

choice is determined by the situation, but even so is partly intuitive

risks involved in the project! cultural preferences of the parent

• rganisation

Pure Project (Dedicated/or Fully projectized) Organisation(1) Fig.2-8

the project is separated from the rest of the parent system

• ne individual, the programme/ project

manager , maintains complete line authority over the entire project

Pure Project Organisation (2)

Merits:

control over resources responsiveness to customers

Demerits

cost-inefficiency low level of knowledge transfer among projects

Functional Project / or Mixed Organisational System (1) Fig.2-7

nearest to the traditional functional hierarchy where the PM co-ordinates the resources across functional departments little formal authority to the PM to manage the project, control resources, or make decisions suitable for nurturing smaller projects that are not yet stable under the wing of an existing

• dept. (later allow them to have autonomy

when ready)

Functional Project / or Mixed Organisational System (2)

Merits:

no duplication of activities functional excellence

Demerits:

insularity slow response time lack of customers focus

Matrix Project (1) Fig.2-11

a combination of pure & functional project the topology of the matrix structure has same format as a mathematical matrix (vertical lines represent the functional dept.’s responsibility & authority, while horizontal lines represent the project’s responsibility & authority) there is no single executive to whom PMs generally report

Matrix Project (2)

Merits:

efficient utilisation of resources functional expertise available to all projects increased learning & knowledge transfer improved communication & customer focus

Demerits:

dual reporting relationships need for balance of power

Project Organisation (Comments)

The positive & negative features of alternative organisational forms & their variants (hybrids) need to be understood by top management so that they can select the organisational form most suitable for their situation

DEVELOPING THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM(PMIS)

“ I nform rm at ion is no longer r sim ply a st ra rat egic asset ; it is a cri rit ical enabler r of su success. ss.”

Birnbaum (2001)

Hewlett-Packard Senior VP of R&D

Developing the Project Management Information System (PMIS)

For a continuously operating Project Portfolio Process, monitoring the critical project measures, such as the PM Office, is required so projects can be determined, if necessary, and new projects initiated. Monitoring is collecting, recording, and reporting information concerning any and all aspects of project performance that the PM or others in the

• rganisation wish to know.

> Hence the need for a PMI S

Information - food for the system

Ability to conduct evaluations - quality of

information will determine the strength of base information

Ability to produce a reliable proposals -

depends on the quality of information available

Ability to manage risks - depends on the

quality of information available

Contents of PMIS

According to Graham & Englund (2004), the PMI S should do the following:

Answer questions of the major stakeholders Facilitate communication between team members, team members & other stakeholders, between PMs, & PMs and upper managers Help to answer “what if?” questions (allocation of resources) Help organisation learning (e.g., audit & close-out information)

Developing a PMIS

The need to agree up front on the specifications of the PMIS (what should be

the content & how much information)

Upper managers to agree on what they require from the PMIS - What should be

the input? What should be the output?

BECOMING A LEARNING ORGANISATION

Project Audit & Closure

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to fulfill it.”

• Santayana (1863-1952)

“We learn from experience only if the experience is preserved & studied.”

• Whitaker (1999)

Project Audit (2)

It is estimated that about 90% of all projects across industries/sectors are not seriously reviewed or audited 10% of projects that are seriously audited appear to be done by extremely well- managed organisations which are vigorously committed to continuous improvement &

• rganisation learning

Project Audit - report outline

A very general outline common to those found in practice is as follows:

(1) I ntroduction (description of the project,

• bjectives)

(2) Current status (on project parameters) (3) Future project status (auditor’s conclusions on progress) (4) Critical management issues (issues requiring close monitoring) (5) Risk management (review of major risks & their impacts) (6) Caveats, limitations & assumptions

Project Review/Closure (1)

“…termination comes to every project. At

times, project death is quick and clean, but more often it is a long process; and there are times when it is practically impossible to establish that death has

• ccurred.”
• Meredith & Mantel (2013)

Project Review/Closure (3)

The final project review/ closure report:

Good project management systems have a

• memory. The embodiment of this memory is the

final project closure report. The final report is not another evaluation; rather, it is the history of the

• project. It is a chronicle of the life and times of the

project, a compendium of what went right & what went wrong, of who served the project in what capacity, of what was done to create the substance

• f the project, of how it was managed.

Project Review/Closure (4)

The report content:

(1) Project performance - comparison between what

was achieved VS what project tried to achieve

(2) Administrative performance - don’t treat the

‘pencil pushers’ with grudging tolerance!

(3) Organisational structure - how the structure

aided or impeded the progress of the project

(4) Project & administrative teams - individuals &

interpersonal communication & cooperation

(5) Techniques of project management - outcome

dependent on the skill with which the forecasting,

planning, budgeting, scheduling, resource allocation, risk management, and control are

h dl d

ORGANIZATION MANAGEMENT

PROJECT C PROJECT B PROJECT A PROJECT D PROJECT E PROJECT F PROJECT G PROJECT H PROJECT I PROJECT J PROJECT K PROJECT L Operational Goals

Multi- Disciplined Teams

Source Resources Logistics Team Mobilization

Procuremen t

Create Product & Service Portfolio Monitor Expectations Product/Service Targets Interfacing Company Objectives Mission, Vision

PROJECT-SPECIFIC PRINCIPLES

GENERAL PROJECT ALIGNMENT Stakeholder Management Prioritization Organizational Overview Strategic Project Planning Risk Analysis Organization Management

OPERATIONAL PROJECTS STRATEGIC PROJECTS CAPITAL EXPANSION PROJECTS PROJECTS FOCUSSED DIRECTLY TO STAKEHOLDERS

FROM ORGANISATIONAL STRATEGY TO PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION

Common Project Challenges - Symptoms (1)

 Most PBOs do not have appropriate troubleshooting strategies – most projects suffer from inabilities to handle unexpected crises & deviations from project plans  Dominance of incompetent PMs – a significant number of people who assume positions of PMs are technical experts & incompetent administratively, interpersonally, and technically (project specific)  Excessive power & politics – it is common to find high degrees of political activities within organisations & perceptions of projects furthering self-interests of

• rganisation members

SYMPTOMS – OPPOSITE TO PROJECT CRITICAL FACTORS

Common Project Challenges - Symptoms (2)

 Negative impact from environmental events – it is common to find external organisational factors (especially within public sector) affecting operations

• f project teams negatively

 Urgency is an elusive word (especially in public sector

• rganisations) – fundamental fact of a temporary

social coalition seem far away and the consequences

• n project parameters are enormous

SYMPTOMS – OPPOSITE TO PROJECT CRITICAL FACTORS

Which Model of Project Management? The PMI (PMBoK)? The APM (APMBoK)? The IPMA? BS(BS6079-1:2002)? ISO (10006:2003)? PRINCE2 (OGC2003)? IAPPM (CPPBoK)?

Project Management

• f Change

Project Organization Project: Changing to Managing Organizations by Project

Planning Review of Mission & Vision Control Change Management

Strategic Alignment

Organization Performance Objects

Cultural Change Communi cation People

Organization & Management Requirement

Administration Stakeholde r Analysis Statement

• f Policy

MOBP External Influence

Positioning Regarding Market competition Revalidation

• f

Organization Objectives

Setting Performance Standards Operationa l Premises Internal Agreements Results Analysis Change Definition Rethink or Review Company Values Organizational Climate: Now Organizational Climate: Future

Communication Strategies Monitor Communication

Selection Channels Spread the Word Team Building

Roles & Responsibilities

Allocation & Reallocation

• f People

Evaluation of PM Competency Developing New Competencies

Competency- Based Pay

Systems

Organization Design

T & D Strategies Process Technology

Reporting Relationships

Change management

• f the project

Management

• f resistance

to change Positioning of leadership Evaluation of alliances Trend analysis

THE NEED FOR ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE – PROJECT BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE APPROACH

How mature is your organisation? (1)

Capabilities of applying PM good practices against others in a particular industry/ or sector:

Stage 1 (I nitial): no formal methodology, training, project

review process, project authorization process, project risk assessment; projects are typically late, over budget, no utility considerations, poor quality.

Stage 2 (Repeatable): move (just) above Stage 1; 25-

50% of projects deliveries are on time, within budget, utility issues addressed & there are quality considerations

Stage 3 (Managed): 50/50 move on Stage 1 issues; 50-

75% of project deliveries are on time, within budget, utility issues addressed & there are quality considerations

How mature is your organisation? (2)

Capabilities of applying PM good practices against others in a particular industry/ or sector:

Stage 4 (Distributed): Opposite of Stage 1

characteristics; Certification in PM is a requirement for all PMs; All employees require basic PM knowledge & skills to be employed; 75-95% of project deliveries are on time, within budget, clear utility considerations and quality.

Stage 5 (Sustained): management by projects is an

• rganisation philosophy; Executives & managers are PM

certified; all PMs must complete internal qualification/certification program; continuous improvement is a norm; and 99% of projects are within Q, C,T, & U levels.

How mature is your organisation? (2)

The amount of time it takes an organisation to achieve full maturity vary significantly from one

• rganisation to another

Very few organisations have reached the 5th stage Many organisations have achieved the 3rd Stage & parts of the 4th Stage It is not unusual for an organisation to exhibit some

• f the characteristics in more than one stage

It is not possible to skip a stage (because maturing is a process that requires time)

Where to From Here?

 Ability in technical expertise is not an overriding indicator of the effectiveness of a PM – temporary leadership potential a requirement for a PM  Balanced training: technical & socio-cultural – proposed curriculum  ‘Grenade on the wall’ approach – negating the principles of a core team & matching strategy with projects STRATEGIC PM IN PROJECT ORIENTED ORGANIZATIONS – CENTRAL FOCUS

Aligning projects with strategy (What to do) (1)

Undertake a review of all the projects that are currently under way as well as those completed

• ver the past year (1)

(i) Ask every department to list all of the projects that they are currently working on. What is the goal of each? What is the strategic alignment, if known? (ii) Create an inventory of all projects in the organization, regardless of size or scope, that are currently on the go within all departments and within the whole organization

Aligning projects with strategy (What to do) (2)

Undertake a review of all the projects that are currently under way as well as those completed

• ver the past year (2)

(iii) Measure each of these projects. Are they within Q, C, U, & S & according to the original scope? Are they meeting requirements as defined? Or, are there no measurements in place? (iv) Identify projects completed over the past year and measure their success rate. These lessons learned will help to identify project prioritization in the next step.

Aligning projects with strategy (What to do) (3)

Develop a systematic approach to prioritizing all projects(1)

(i)Develop criteria against which to prioritize all projects Include impact on organization strategy and stakeholders. This is best done with a subcommittee of senior management. (ii) List all projects along with their goal, purpose and strategic alignment and the identified criteria necessary for determining the expected impact each project will have on the organization. This process will allow you to rank each project quantitatively and determine its level of priority.

Aligning projects with strategy (What to do) (4)

Develop a systematic approach to prioritizing all projects (2)

(iii) Establish a committee of senior management to review and assess project prioritization on a monthly basis. This committee will provide final approval on all project implementation priorities.

Aligning projects with strategy (What to do) (5)

Align projects to organizational strategic plans (1)

(i) Review the organization strategic plans and if none exist meet with the senior executive team to gain an understanding of the key strategic priorities. (ii) Examine all projects to determine their alignment with the

• rganization strategic goals. This strategic alignment will

demonstrate how each project's successful execution will support the organizational strategic plan.

Aligning projects with strategy (What to do) (6)

Align projects to organizational strategic plans (2)

(iii) Terminate projects that are of low priority or not somehow linked to organizational strategy. Their immediate termination will ensure they stop costing the organization money, resources, time and unhappy stakeholders. Projects not linked to

• rganizational strategy add no measurable value to the
• rganization.