Note: This is part 2 of a 3-part series on PMI vs. ITIL. Read part 1 PMI vs. ITIL:  How Are They Different Part 1 here.

This part of the comparison is about Information Technology Infrastructure Library (ITIL). I am told that it is pronounced “idle”, like in “the idle rich” or “my car idles badly.” I personally do not like that pronunciation.  It conjures up a vision of people standing around waiting for the go home whistle to sound (does any company do that anymore?).  I and some other authors I’ve spoken with pronounce it like “I tell.” That makes more visual sense to me. I visualize some leader telling the troops what to do and how to do it. The leaders telling the troops what to do and how to do it is exactly what ITIL is all about. ITIL is a framework of Information Technology Operational Organization Structure.

ITIL is a framework of best practices for quality IT Services Management. IT Service Management is defined as the delivery and support of IT services to meet the business needs of an organization. The recommendations of ITIL were developed in the late 1980s (around the time PMI’s PMBOK® Guide was published). ITIL origination was in the United Kingdom Central Computer and Telecommunications Agency (CCTA) which later merged into the Office of Government Commerce (OGC). ITIL has been adopted and accepted as a global standard for IT service management since the mid 1990s. There were predictions in the late ‘90s that ITIL would sweep the IT industry and by 2005 it would be the core practice of any large organization’s IT world; however, when those predictions were made they didn’t anticipate the crash of 2001 and subsequent bad economics for the next 10 years. Had the economy not crashed, we would all know more about ITIL. The adoption of ITL is expensive in both time and money.

I suspect the seeds of ITIL began when portfolio managers began to complain that the IT department was getting too much of the budget and they weren’t getting the value that they wanted. The structure of ITIL is to set up the IT department as an independent business. One of the first projects, which should be treated as a project with all the PMI rigors, is to publish a Services Catalog. A list of reports, online applications, web sites, etc., which the IT department offers to the company and sometimes even outsiders of the company. The purpose is a statement to the portfolio managers, “if you don’t like our prices, check the competition and you will see that we are competitive.” Of course not all companies, because of proprietary and confidential information, have the luxury to go to a competitor; however, if rates are published there can be some comparison shopping. This can be a real advantage to a portfolio manager if the IT is not proprietary or confidential. It will allow the portfolio managers to consider outsourcing to vendors that can take advantage of shared resources with other companies. This can have a very positive effect on the company’s bottom line.

The heart and soul of ITIL is the service desk. In the good old days we called it help desk, but someone decided to jazz it up and call it a service desk because it really does do more than just take “I broke it” calls. The service desk is a Single Point of Contact for the whole IT organization, whether you are a programmer, network specialist, hardware repair or install specialist, manager, change control specialist, configuration management person or whatever. There are several sophisticated software packages and a heart stopping price to help you manage the service desk.

There were two ITIL versions – v2 and v3. V3 is the latest path and v2 is going away or gone.  ITIL has two paths to certification. Both paths begin with the”v3 Foundations” class. The two paths are Service Support and Service Capability.  Both end with the ITIL Expert and then ITIL Master. The Service Lifecycle is a more technical path where Service Capability is more of a management path. Both paths include multiple courses. As you take and pass the exam course you are awarded points, eventually allowing you to sit for the Expert and then Masters Certification. As with the PMP^® certification you must document your experience, which is necessary for the higher certification. Since this blog is a high level understanding, I won’t go into the listing of classes.

With the similarities in the use of process by both PMI and ITIL one would think they would be joined at the hip. Well, the challenge is that ITIL has its own project management approach called PRojects IN Controlled Environments (PRINCE) with the latest version called PRINCE2. The method PRINCE2 is in the public domain, offering non-proprietary best practice guidance on project management. PRINCE2 is a registered trademark of OGC. There are two PRINCE2 qualification levels: PRINCE2 Foundation and PRINCE2 Practitioner. PRINCE2 Foundation level is for those with a requirement to learn the basics and terminology of PRINCE2.

ITIL is a challenge to implement. The scuttlebutt is that you have to try to implement ITIL three times before you might succeed. It takes a great deal of commitment by the organization in time and dollars. There is essentially an organizational chart of roles and responsibilities that must be filled.  These roles and responsibilities are not easy to fill and generally take experienced and expensive employee types; however, with that said, once implemented and maintained well, the organization can be very effective. This gets a little confusing.   For more information the website www.itil.co.uk has been replaced by the Best Management Practice website and the official ITIL website managed by the Best Management Practice partnership.

The third part of my blog will be a summary.

Originally published on Idea.com.

Note: This is the third post in a series on PMOs. Read part 1 What is a PMO and What Does It Do or part 2 PMO Business Value and Impact.

In the previous two blogs in this series we looked at what a PMO is, and the business value that they bring to a company. In this blog, I want to look at the considerations that might help you decide whether you need one. After all, they can cost a great deal of money so you should be sure there is a definite requirement.

First, let’s look at a standard project with a PM, several team leads, and various team members. The planning would normally be performed by the PM and team leads with possible input from senior team members or Subject Matter Experts (SMEs), and the plan would include the three basic baselines – scope, time, and cost, considering the other key elements such as risk, quality, resources, and communications, etc.

When the project goes into execution, the PM will normally have a weekly status meeting where he/she would determine the current status of milestones and deliverables (scope), how well this is being performed compared to the schedule (time), all relevant costs (cost) and would probably review risk. During this meeting he/she can implement corrective or preventative actions as necessary.

Now consider a very large project with several sub-projects. During planning there may be a need for a high level view of scope, time, cost, risk, quality, and resources covering all of the sub-projects. The sub-projects may each have a PM, so the overall PM is now managing a team of PMs plus the overall baselines of the project. This is starting to look like a Project Management team!

Now let’s look at a program with several or many projects. This is an expansion of the previous case, and unless the overall Program Manager is careful, it will be easy to lose control and become a statistic for project failures.

The answer for both of the last two cases is probably a PMO, elevating the functions that spread over multiple projects to a PMO team. This team will consider and evaluate the effects of one project on other projects in the program and, where necessary, institute proactive activities as soon as possible.

Other considerations for implementing a PMO include 1) possible resource efficiency improvements across the program and 2) a much improved change management process that evaluates the impacts of changes in one project on all the other projects before deciding to approve or reject that change.

So where is the line drawn between having a Project Manager and a PMO? A PMO can be relatively small, maybe the overall PM plus the individual project PMs, so although it may not be called a “PMO” it could be the embryo of a PMO. The larger the project or program gets, the more likely the PMO is to include:

• A risk manager to review risk of the overall endeavor
• A quality manager to ensure consistent quality goals and “look and feel” across all projects
• A scheduling manager to create the overall schedule, dependencies, milestones, deliverables etc.
• Other specialist personnel

Costs could be collected and reported at the PMO level as could overall status and progress reports, to give management the relevant level of detail they require.

Another major feature of the PMO is the customer interface, whether for internal or external customers. It relieves individual PMs from interfacing with the customer, but probably more importantly, it gives the customer one focal point of contact for the program rather than multiple individual PMs. The customer will be able to have a coordinated view and assessment of the program rather than having to piece together different reports from each project.

In short, there is a grey area between PM and a PMO and it is a subjective judgment as to when one morphs into the other. One big element of the decision whether to have a PMO or not is cost – both the cost of having a PMO and the cost of not having one (potential project/program failure).

Another type of PMO that can be deployed is at the company level rather than project or program level. Several major companies have PMOs not tied to specific projects, but to act as an oversight for all projects and programs being performed by the company. This type of PMO would normally contain senior PMs and might perform project audits at various stages of a project life cycle. They might define and implement project quality measures, tools, techniques, templates, etc. to be used across the company to provide a common “look and feel” for that company’s project deliveries. These senior people could also provide mentoring for the more junior PMs in the company. This type of PMO will be particularly interested in lessons learned from individual projects to provide improving project ability for a company. If a company does not have a methodology, tools, templates, etc. in existence, the PMO could be the entity to develop, train, and implement these standards across the company. The decision of whether a company should have a PMO or not is again a subjective judgment made by senior management and will be subject to financial justification.

Although this blog gives some pointers as to when you might consider having a PMO, it is a highly subjective judgment based on things such as the company’s risk and quality policies, financial justification, and requirement for improvement of project success over time, among other things.

How do you see a PMO benefitting your current project or organization?

Next in this series we will look at how you might establish a PMO.

When it comes to projects, the classic definition of project success is to deliver a project on time, on budget and within scope. However, I’m not sure that definition is adequate. I think it’s time that we revisit the classic definition of success, at least with regard to projects.

If you’re like me, you’ve seen examples of projects which were delivered on time and on budget with the scope that was defined and requested only to find that the end result is never implemented or used. If the software that was developed during an application development project sits on the shelf and never gets used but otherwise satisfies the classic definition of success, we could say that we delivered a successful failure! After all, what good is the product if the end user never uses the technology or the application that we have developed?

Let’s take a look at the Millenium Stadium built in England. This particular stadium was built for a large event and was finished on time and on budget. Everybody hailed the project as a success when the stadium opened. It held that large event and then proceeded to sit empty and unused for a few years. (Note: the stadium is now used.) Is this project a success? For a while, it did not appear to be so.

On the other hand, we may be aware of examples of projects that have been delivered late and/or over budget but are now viewed as successful. One example would be the Sydney Opera House in Sydney, Australia. When the Sydney Opera House was unveiled, the project was seen as an embarrassment and a failure. The project took numerous delays, was way over budget and had some accidents resulting in deaths associated with it. But over time, this “unsuccessful” project has become the symbol of Sydney and a tremendous success. The opera house is impressive, used and loved.

Especially with regard to IT, we really need to revisit the definition of success. Delivering on time, on budget and within scope is not good enough. Too often we de-scope a project in order to deliver it “on time” and/or “on budget”, so it doesn’t often deliver all of the requirements that were requested. That is fine if everyone agrees to the change and to having a product with decreased scope, but it happens a lot. Also, we often don’t do a proper job preparing the end-user for this new product or service. Maybe we didn’t build a product that fully satisfied their needs after all. That’s a failure on our part. Maybe we didn’t provide appropriate and proper training. Maybe we didn’t give them time to get used to the new product or process or to get over their fears of a new system. Whatever the reason, it is hard to consider these projects a success if the application we developed is not actually being used correctly or at all.

What do you think? What would you propose to use as a new definition for project success? Let me know.

A major difficulty of project management is dealing with the inherent uncertainty involved. There are no perfect project plans, and there is little rationale for expending the time and resources needed to try to make them perfect.

Agile project management is one example that shows how reducing the amount of planning in a highly uncertain environment can provide more opportunities to deal with uncertainty as it arises over the life of a project. Other ways to deal with uncertainty in projects begins and ends with understanding what I call the three basic truths about uncertainty in projects.

I. Uncertainty exists.
II. Uncertainty results from incomplete information, or the unknowns involved.
III. Uncertainty ends when the unknowns are revealed.

Reducing uncertainty depends on understanding at least six key elements about it:

1. Point of view
2. Intention
3. Communication
4. Effort
5. Focus
6. Judgment

1.  Point of View
When thinking about project management, what is the right point of view to take? It depends a lot from where you’re viewing the project. Each stakeholder’s viewpoint is based on what they need or expect from the project.

-The customer and/or user view of what they need
-Management’s view of achieving some desired strategic objective
-The program manager’s view of the contribution to their program
-The sponsor’s view of how well the project is meeting its plan
-The project manager’s view of how effectively and efficiently execution of the work is being accomplished
-The project team’s view from how well they are being supported in doing their work

2.  Intention
Intention is how a project fits into each of these points of view. Due to differences in expectations of the various stakeholders, the total sum of the individual intentions for the project may not be wholly achievable, and some compromise is necessary among the stakeholders. The intention for the project is to try and balance the stakeholders’ intentions by first clarifying them, and then meeting them as well as is practical.

3.  Communication
Communication is the lubricant that makes a project flow smoothly. It is close to being an absolute that all problems on projects are due to some problem with communication. Effective communication begins at the highest levels where a project originates with the definition of what is needed and expected from the project. This need and expectation must be made clear throughout all levels of a project- from management through the sponsor, to the project manager, the team, and even to ancillary participants such as vendors and others involved in some way with the project.

4.  Effort
Effort of course is the dedicated energy needed for project accomplishment. This is not just the energy of the team doing the work, but the energy needed from all of the stakeholders to make a project successful. Effort doesn’t end after a stakeholder’s initial involvement is over; it is the energy continually added to the project throughout its lifecycle.

5.  Focus
Focus ensures that the energy expended on the project is done in the most effective and efficient manner: the right work is being done on the right things, in the right way, at the right time. This requires the project manager to carefully determine, authorize, and monitor the order of work being done, and how well it’s being done in meeting the agreed upon schedule.

6.  Judgment
The unknowns creating uncertainty in a project require making a lot of decisions;, not only in the best interest of accomplishing the project, but also in the best interest of the product of the project during its useful lifetime. There is little to celebrate in completing a project that delivers a product prohibitively expensive to maintain, or with an unacceptably short life. However, it is not only the judgment for decisions of the project manager and team that is involved. Judgment begins with management deciding on which projects to pursue and then following those projects through their development to ensure that adequate support is provided, when needed. These are, after all, management’s projects. Those involved in completing a project are only management’s instruments to accomplishing it.

I feel strongly that incorporating these six key elements into your projects will help to better understand and reduce the uncertainty involved.

On past projects, how did you use these six elements?

Editor’s note: This is the third post in a series about implementing PeopleSoft projects. The second post on initial considerations for PeopleSoft implementations can be found here. 

It’s no accident that there are two processes in Project Initiation and twenty in Project Planning according to the Project Management Institute.  Many organizations make the costly mistake of diving right in because there is “no time to plan”.  On the contrary, most projects fail in the beginning as planning efforts are sacrificed for “action”.

In spite of the organization’s impatience, it’s your responsibility as the Project Manager to educate senior management in the advantages of compiling a thoughtful and reasonable plan before jumping into project execution.  

What are the key points to consider when planning a PeopleSoft implementation? Here are some factors to consider: 

1. Scope Definition:  Even if the organization compiled the world’s best Request for Proposal for a suite of software, the process of reviewing and verifying those requirements (and discovering new ones in the process) is absolutely essential for the proper scope definition of a PeopleSoft project. Especially if more than one module is to be implemented, requirements must be considered in light of a tightly integrated system. For example, configuration of the budget and general ledger modules can have a substantial and often irreversible impact on the sub-modules of Accounts Payable and Accounts Receivable. It may be worth dedicated PeopleSoft training for the project team and subject matter experts to increase their understanding of the system in order to articulate those requirements more definitively. 

2. Work Breakdown Structure:  Once the requirements are fully understood and gaps between what is and what should be are clearly identified by your seasoned PeopleSoft integrator, the WBS can be crafted with a solid foundation. However, software configuration and modifications to bridge gaps are only two out of potentially hundreds of other work packages including the elements of communications, stakeholder management, quality, risk management, hardware procurement and set up, testing, and training. 

3. Project Schedule:  Once scope is fully defined and a solid WBS is in place, employ the best possible experts to define, sequence and estimate required resources and time for each work package. When you develop it to your satisfaction and present it to management, resist the temptation to meet their often unrealistic expectations to implement such a game-changing system within their timeframes. If the timeframe doesn’t meet with their approval, craft at a scope that will. Even though the notion of the Triple Constraint (Time, Scope and Cost) is losing favor according to PMI, it is still true in concept. Something’s gotta give!

If the above considerations aren’t daunting in and of themselves, that’s not all. There are seventeen additional processes (according to PMI, that is) that the PM should at least consider before Execution begins in earnest.  Again, it is your duty to lead your organization through these processes even while senior management is questioning what your team is doing all this time.

How will you convince your senior management to invest serious time and effort in the planning process?

I was working with a group of people recently and one of them said, “It’s better to have 80% on time than 100% too late.” I love that statement.  Let’s explore that today.

A life lesson in college

When I was in college, I had an accounting professor who gave tests that were almost impossible to finish in the time allotted. His attitude was that he would rather see your work and thought process on all questions for partial credit than have a fully correct and complete answer on some questions. Those students who worked through a portion of all questions scored higher than those who completed some of the questions fully. In his view, it is better to provide 80% of most things than 100% of some things.

This is a lesson in life. We rarely have the luxury of finishing our to-do lists, or even the necessary and critical portion of our to-do lists. We certainly don’t get to those tasks designated for “when I have some free time”. It is a reality that we often must complete as much as we can as best we can in order to survive.

Relating this to our projects, our work and our lives

Isn’t it better for our customers to roll out a product or service that fits 80% of their wish list rather than roll out nothing (in an effort to be perfect) and serve 0% of the need? We have the option to improve the 80% to 100%, but often we leave that product at 80% either because of constraints or because it turns out that the 80% was good enough. Either way, it’s still better than 0%.

How many bright ideas are still just that – ideas? Isn’t it better to provide something rather than nothing?

I realize there are exceptions to this statement and that in some cases, like hospital or public safety, 80% won’t do. But even in those settings, there are places where improvements make a difference, even when they are not perfect.

A Caveat

Note: This doesn’t mean that sloppy or incomplete work is good enough. I realize there are people who consistently perform at levels not quite good enough. In their haste to do more, they are really performing at closer to 40%-60%, not the 80% I am referring to. Fifty percent delivery only creates more rework for them and for those they work with. That is not what I am talking about here at all.

What do you think? Is it better to provide 80% of most than 100% of some? How about 80% on time rather than 100% late?

Note: This is part 1 of a 3-part series on PMI vs. ITIL.

The terms Project Management Institute® (PMI) and Information Technology Infrastructure Library ® (ITIL) are tossed about with the assumption that everyone has the knowledge and experienced to know what these two organizations are all about.  That would be a false assumption.

Based on an email I received asking for the basic difference and similarities between the two, I intend to do a high level explanation, with enough information to get you thru a basic conversation.  This will be a many part blog, as to hold you in suspense and make you eager for the next publication J (Did I mention you had to have a good sense of humor to be a good project manager).

PMI and ITIL are mutually exclusive, meaning you can have a performing organization using ITIL organizational structure without using PMI methodology OR you can have a performing organization using the PMI methodology without using the ITIL organizational structure. There is real synergy when both are implemented, endorsed, and supported by senior management. A very important point must be made. If Senior Management does not fully support the PMI approach and the ITIL structure, they both have a low probability of succeeding.

Let’s start off discussing the PMI. The PMI was established in 1969. It was originally formed by a small southern university to put structure to the construction industry. In 1981 the PMI Board of Directors authorized the development of the “A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK)”. Subsequently the PMI and the PMBOK have become the de facto standards in project management. The PMI is all about a structured process approach to project management. I hear the word “project” tossed around very loosely in the business world. It is often misused, almost as often as the term “Critical Path”, but that is another blog. For an event to become a project it must possess three characteristics.

1)      It is “Temporary”; it must have a specific start and end date.

2)      It must, at the end of the project, produce a unique product, service, or results.

3)      The event must use “progressive elaboration”.

Those are the key requirements that make an event a project. If it doesn’t meet those standards it is an “Operational” event. Projects are a subset of Operations. ITIL is all about operational organization structure. The PMI with the PMBOK gives a project structure, organization and suggested process.  A process is “A series of actions or task performed to achieve pre-described output or results”. Process is one of the binding similarities between PMI and ITIL. The PMBOK is a kind-of a road map regarding how to manage a project. The basis for the process used in project management are the five process groups:

1. Initiating
2. Planning
3. Execution
4. Control & Monitoring
5. Closure.

And the nine knowledge areas:

1. Integration
2. Scope
3. Time
4. Cost
5. Quality
6. Human Resources
7. Communication
8. Risk
9. Procurement

By combining these process groups and areas of knowledge there are 42 processes that are used in the PMI approach to project management.

The PMI offers a variety of certifications. The most popular and most recognized is the Project Management Professional (PMP) certification.   There are in excess of 400,000 PMP’s in the world. This is a dynamic number that increases monthly. The PMP certification requires documentable years of experience in project management and must be able to pass the certification test. Most aspiring candidates assume that by reading and studying the PMBOK they can pass the test. One big caution, note that the title states that it is a “Guide”. This is a very important subtlety in the title. What the PMI is alluding to is that not all you need to know to pass the PMP examination is in the PMBOK.  You must have more knowledge than what is in the PMBOK.

After one reads or starts reading the PMBOK, the usual reaction is “this is all common sense, however if we did all these steps and filled out all of these forms, we’d be over budget and not have much accomplished”. I usually say at this point, this is about being a manager and using common sense for an approach.  You may not need all the forms and process to do your project, however don’t disregard some of the major steps. Planning is the key to success, whether you are using the PMI approach to project management or ITIL in your organization structure.

In summary, PMI and ITIL are both about approach, structure, and process. PMI is about “Projects” and ITIL is about “Operational Organization structure”. If you wish more information on PMI and PMP the official web site is http://www.pmi.org/. The next blog will be more about ITIL.

Originally published on Idea.com.

I’m sure it’s been quite a while since many of us who have earned PMP certification actually studied the PMBOK in preparation for the exam.  It is not surprising, then, that we move forward in our careers as project managers utilizing our own style.  Some of that style may be based upon selective PMBOK concepts tailored to our unique personalities and skills sets.  But more than likely, much of what we do as project managers is based upon the corporate culture in which we find ourselves, particularly in larger organizations which develop their own sets of tools and techniques.  Nevertheless, having a point of reference, such as the PMBOK, is useful, if not comforting, because it attempts to foster continuity and standards within our profession. 

To refresh my memory, I recently reviewed old notes taken while attending a PMP boot camp several years ago.  The exam questions were based upon the following areas of project management knowledge: Initiating, Planning, Executing, Monitoring/Controlling, Closing and finally Professional/Social Responsibility.  Specific topics found within these areas include project charters, scope management, work breakdown structures, team organizational structures, cost control, quality control, risk management… well, you get the idea.  The list goes on and on.  And although these topics are presented in a generic, project-agnostic format, each is addressed in significant detail.  So much detail, in fact, that sometimes we may lose sight of one of the main roles of the project manager – looking at the larger picture and taking a reality check.  Allow me to explain.

I often work on innovative pilot projects that are proof of concept endeavors with specific objectives, deliverables and relatively brief timelines.  Accordingly, these projects have limited resources, not only in dollars, but also limited in scope, time and particularly limited in staff.  That last point should be underscored, because limitations in staff resources require the project manager to assume many roles and wear many hats.  Sometimes we might act as a second set of eyes for quality assurance.  Other times, we may get involved with finding technical solutions to specific problems.  And of course, we are always managing the project sponsor’s expectations.  So viewing the project from a larger perspective and applying proactive, commonsense judgment is a critical PM talent.  Yes, the templates, methodologies and concepts presented in the PMBOK are important, but remember that these are simply tools to be used at the discretion of the PM.  Projects are comprised of a unique mix of cultures, personalities, objectives and constraints that often cannot be approached mechanically in a “paint by numbers” fashion. 

To illustrate, I once worked on an innovation project sponsored by a rather large healthcare organization.  The vendor selected to provide the technology was a relatively small company with limited staff.  So limited in fact, that many of the vendor’s employees had roles and responsibilities that were somewhat blurred and interchangeable.  That said, it was not surprising that this vendor had some weaknesses in areas of quality control.  So I took it upon myself to act as an impartial Q/A analyst, if only for a few days.  By temporarily offering my services as a pinch-hitter, we were able to identify three or four critical errors in workflow and functionality prior to implementation. It was a reality check utilizing common sense in a proactive fashion appropriate for the scope and limitations of this particular project.  It could be argued that the responsibility for quality assurance belonged to the vendor, but in reality they had their plates full with too many competing tasks.  Only the PM had the larger perspective to assess the Q/A situation and identify the weakness.  And the temporary role assigned to myself spared the project for failure and also saved the healthcare organization from embarrassment.  The reality check allowed me to identify a need that might have been missed under a template approach with tasks checked off.

So make it a practice to take a reality check at least once a week.  Use your unique perspective as PM to ensure that issues are identified and resolved before they become someone else’s headache after implementation.  Don’t get lured into repetitive, templated motion.  In contrast, take time for some serious, objective assessment of the project’s status and health.  This habit requires insight and judgment, but then again, but that’s why project managers are put in charge.  That’s reality.

How do you remember to take a step back and give your project a reality check? How often do you do that?

Note: This is Part 2 in a series on Project Management Offices. Part 1, What is a PMO and What Does it Do? can be found here.

In Part 1 of this series, I outlined what a PMO is and what a PMO can or should do. Now let us turn to the business reasons and incentives for having a PMO. A PMO is often packed with senior and expensive resources so there has to be a good business case for this expenditure.

Not all programs can justify the cost of a PMO. However, consideration has to be given not so much to the cost but to the “value” of a PMO: things like how much does it influence the success of the project, how much money can it save, how much additional cost would there be and could the program objectives be successfully met without one, etc. So let us look at some of the features of a PMO and how this could be cost justified.

Baselines

At the project level we have three key baselines: scope, cost, and time. It is the Project Manager’s responsibility to establish and then meet those baselines. In a program where there may be multiple related projects, each of those projects will have their own baselines and there may be a Program Manager who is in overall charge. However, the Program Manager has a finite limit regarding the number and complexity of projects in the program that they can manage alone. It will not take long for the Program Manager to start recruiting additional resources to assist in managing various aspects of the program. It also does not take long for this to escalate and morph into a PMO, whether recognized or not.

Constraints

One thing most projects will do is to evaluate constraint priorities – the flexibility matrix. What is the key “driver” for each project – time, cost, or scope/functionality? If different projects have different priorities there is a high chance that the program will not be totally successful due to conflicting project priorities. If, for example, the program is time driven, the whole program must be complete by a certain date. Unless each individual project understands that time is the key driver and if they focus on one of the other constraints instead, they could cause the program to slip. So enabling a time driven program to coordinate and amalgamate individual project schedules and milestones will enable identification of the program’s critical path, ie which projects are on the critical path. The PMO can then ensure the focus on these projects is to attempt to ensure critical timescales are met. This could provide major benefits to a company in terms of reducing cost of slippage of a time driven program and have a direct impact on the bottom line of the program and the company.

If the program level critical path changes, the PMO should be aware of this and shift their focus to the new critical path projects, so again maximizing the chance of overall success. Missing a time deadline can have serious financial implications for a company, and the reverse is true – meeting contractual or defined deadlines can save or gain additional revenue.

Information and Reporting

Without relevant coordination and management of the constituent projects at the program level, senior management may not be able to obtain a consistent view of the program objectives and status without a lot of digging. Consequently, one of the major functions of a PMO would be to gather information from the constituent projects, combine these disparate objectives, plans, status reports, deliverables etc. into a set of higher level overall program information for easier understanding by management. These reports should indicate developing issues at the earliest time, together with any action required to put a program back on track.

Risk

Some tasks that the PMO will undertake at the program level may include overall risk management – assessing how a risk on one project might impact other projects. If a risk starts to happen on one project, the PMO can immediately assess action required on other projects to minimize “knock-on” effects.

Quality

Ensure a consistent look and feel for each project under the PMO and provide templates that can be used to ensure the constituent projects look like they are coordinated and are not just a mixture of random projects thrown together. This may not have a tangible bottom line benefit but will improve the final product of the program.

Managing a Program vs. a Company-Wide PMO

All the above considerations were in regard to multiple related projects in a program. Now let us consider a “company” PMO where the PMO is not managing a program of related projects but is there to provide assistance on all projects being undertaken by the company. Many of the benefits detailed above also apply to this scenario, but there are also additional considerations.

Having led a PMO for a major computer company, I can highlight some of the benefits. Before there was a company PMO, all projects were little “islands” of work. The company wide PMO was staffed by several of the most senior PMs in the company and the main roles of the PMO were to:

• Train all PMs in the company methodology – this was compulsory for all PMs.
• Provide a consistent framework to review all potential projects to ensure that any response to an RFP that the company submitted had considered all the relevant areas of the plan, had achievable baselines, and risk was contained.
• Provided the framework for Quality audits or reviews of all major projects in execution to ensure consistent application of the company methodology, in particular financial, time, quality and risk management.
• Provide a formal mechanism for mentoring less experienced PMs.
• Allow for consolidated monthly reporting on all projects to assess any problem areas and attempt to even out risk among all company projects.
• Provide templates and tools that could be used not only throughout the USA projects but also were accessible globally.
• Implement a standard and comprehensive change management process for all US projects.

In conclusion, there are many quantifiable benefits of having a PMO for both a group of related projects in a program or as a company-wide function to improve project management over time in a company. There are also many intangible or “soft” benefits of a PMO such as common standards, methodologies, tools and templates, etc. that will have an eventual impact on the bottom line of a company even if they cannot be quantified at the individual project level.

The next post in this series will look at why you might want a PMO and at what stage you could think about creating one.

I had a boss once who loved to draw on the white board. It became something of a joke on his team, that at the beginning of a meeting we would hide the dry erase markers before he came into the room. It never stopped him; he started carrying them around. Only recently do I truly appreciate his approach.

Sidebar for a personal story: My daughter’s soccer team recently ended their season and part of my end of season gift was a coloring book and crayons and the missive that it was something to help me reduce my stress (something of a gag gift). At home after the party, I sat down with the coloring book and colored a picture. I took the time to work slowly and carefully, experimenting with different colors and used shading to highlight areas. It took me back to a calmer time: I worked on the image for me, not for my boss, or my kids, or for the executive committee – just for me. I loved it.

I am known among my peers as the visual learning guy. I push hard on the team to use fewer words and more pictures in both the training materials we produce and the presentations we create. If an image is worth a thousand words then we should we be creating voluminous training in images, not pages of text. Too often, the push back is, “I can’t draw” or “I’m not creative.” Let me say now that everyone can take this approach given some processes and tools.

1. Take some time to tap into your creative side. A quick search on Google yields a plethora of sites on coloring to relieve stress. I’m not saying you should make it a daily habit, but why not take a few minutes once in a while to doodle? It unlocks a thinking habit that thrives on free association and random connections that you might not have considered. Those links are the foundations of innovation and might lead to bigger and better ideas.
2. Incorporate a process for thinking differently. The Six Thinking Hats framework developed by Edward de Bono is a wonderful starting point for organizing meetings and encouraging a style of thinking. Assign the role of Green Hat to various team members and have them work at being the creative, “blue sky” thinker. By assigning the role to a person you give permission for ideas to flow and remove limitations.
3. Encourage mind-mapping as a technique for organizing information. On many occasions I find myself in meetings struggling to grasp how all the parts of a program or initiative are tied together. The various stakeholders have input into the problem and the resulting maelstrom can be hard to decode. A mind map can help illustrate the interconnectedness of all the ideas and make concrete the linkages that the entire team needs to see.
4. Seek out visual representations of complex ideas. I have two sites I visit regularly to keep my mindset firmly planted in a visual approach. One is the RSA.org channel on YouTube. This British think tank does a fabulous job of linking thought leaders to artistic displays of the concepts. The images drawn in the videos make the presentations so much more vivid. Another is visual.ly a web site that shows how information can be presented visually and, in my opinion, more memorable.

Finally, let me say that visuals don’t have to be high end art work to be effective. A very simple visual can speak volumes to the reader and communicate at more levels than a paragraph of text. Visuals are great for learning, meeting management, brainstorming, even project management (what’s a WBS but a visual of all the tasks in a project?). Don’t fear the creative side, embrace it and take your projects and work into a different, better, more holistic place.

How are you using visuals and creativity to work more efficiently in your role? If you aren’t using them now, how could you?