reverse engineering opm3 - focusing on improvement - by saadi adra - icompetences ppm2013

The OPM3 Model: Reverse Engineering for a more Practical and Rapid

PMO Maturity Eng. Saadi Adra

General Manager, CMCS Lebanon SAL

PhDc, OPM3 Professional,

PMP, PgMP, PMI-RMP, PMI-SP, EVP

Biography

•  PhD in Project and Program Management (SKEMA, France). 2012-

•  20+ Years in Project and Program Management Training and Consultancy

•  PMI/OPM3 Advisory Board AACE Volunteer Work

•  “Most Credentialed” Professional Award- PMI Lebanon-2012

Conferences

•  PMI Government Community of Practice Webinar: “Project Governance Policies Enhance PMO’s Existence.”

•  CMCS PMO Annual Event in UAE: “Orchestrating PMO Tools”

•  EVIAP in Lisbon: “The Utilization of Earned Value Management for Establishing Governance Frameworks”

Conferences •  EVM in Valencia : “Bearing and Value within

Governance Frameworks” •  JEA Conference in Amman: Construction Risk

Management •  PPM 2012 iCompetence Conferences in

Casablanca: •  Program and Portfolio Management Standards •  A Government Management Case Study •  Organizational Project Management and OPM3

Index / 6 Case Studies •  OPM3 WHAT versus HOW •  The OPM3 Reverse Engineering Value Proposition •  Interpreting the OPM3 SMCI Improvement Stages •  Improvements for Quick Wins •  Common Factors in Improvement Planning for PMOs •  Types of OPM3 Improvements •  Case 1: Oil & Gas Manufacturer and Commissioner •  Case 2: Mobile Telecommunication Service Provider •  Case 3: Local Government Municipality •  Case 4: System Integration Semi-Government Program •  Case 5: Capital Holding •  Case 6: Energy & Power •  Conclusion

Note by Author

This power point does not reflect all the details of the submitted paper. It is meant as a guideline for the audience, while the details and supporting information is found within the paper content.

OPM3 WHAT versus HOW

•  OPM3 ProductSuite Assessment using Rigorous/Evidence-based interviews provides the WHAT (problems/status)

•  OPM3 Improvement Planning does not include HOW (remedy)

Improvement Value Proposition

•  Reverse Engineering the OPM3 capabilities and Best Practices provides quality checklists for building missing processes

•  Building a process in this manner is like cheating on an exam (you already know the answers), but it is considered ethical.

Interpreting the OPM3 SMCI Improvement Stages

–  Standardize Stage –  Measure Stage –  Control Stage –  Improvement Stage

1.  Owner/governance? 2.  Is the process documented? 3.  Is it communicated? 4.  Is it fully implemented?

1.  Establish Measurement 2.  Prioritize 3.  Implement

1.  Control Plan 2.  Implement 3.  Monitor 4.  Stabilize

1.  Evaluate 2.  Document 3.  Communicate 4.  Implement

Improvements for Quick Wins:

Your OPM3 Assessment Questions become your TOR

Common Factors in Improvement Planning for PMOs

•  Training and Competency Development is core improvement

Common Factors in Improvement Planning for PMOs

•  Policy, Standard, Guideline, Process, Procedure, Playbook, Methodology enhancements are always required.

Common Factors in Improvement Planning for PMOs

•  Project Management tools selection comes after PMO improvement roadmap is in place.

Common Factors in Improvement Planning for PMOs

•  Continuously obtain support from the Sponsors. Involve the Sponsors to alleviate the resistance for Change that comes from influential stakeholders.

Types of OPM3 Improvements

•  Capabilities and best practices that require some minor efforts to earn. Reap the Low-hanging fruits.

Types of OPM3 Improvements

•  Improvements that require Organizational Change – first eradicate the illusions.

Case 1: Oil & Gas Manufacturer and Commissioner

•  Objective: The current Gas Plant projects are not profitable. •  Assessment Status: low score, the organizations needs to

develop project management processes. •  Improvement / New Setup: The company decided to outsource

development of full project management processes.

Case 1: Oil & Gas Manufacturer and Commissioner

•  Required Organizational Enablers: Resource Allocation –  BP5220: Provide Competent Organizational Project

Management Resources –  BP1590: Record Project Resource Assignments

•  Quick Win Approach (Reverse Engineering OPM3): –  The next $120M mega project received qualified resources from project

execution. –  The proposal price included all required components, while not over-priced,

thus securing the contract. –  The project execution team were then able to kick-off implementation

without the need for re-estimation and redesign.

•  Conclusion: Even before conducting the second assessment, the OPM3 reverse engineering proved highly efficient.

Case 2: Mobile Telecommunication Service Provider

•  Objective: Departments formulize islands. Mega projects require enhancing collaboration and communication amongst the different technical units.

•  Assessment Status: Lack of sponsorship role definition •  Improvement / New Setup: Enhancing existing processes

and introducing the role of the sponsor.

Case 2: Mobile Telecommunication Service Provider

•  Required Organizational Enablers: Sponsorship –  BP1450 Establish Strong Sponsorship –  BP5340 Establish Executive Support

•  Quick Win Approach (Reverse Engineering OPM3): enhancing practical aspects of communication and execution, through bringing the active support of sponsors.

•  Conclusion: Mega projects for implementing a new data service, requiring the active collaboration of ten different departments were being carried on faster with less interruptions.

Case 3: Local Government Municipality •  Objective: Projects never finish on time, Changes are not

centralized, Scope is often not met, Quality is below standards. •  Assessment Status: No formal project methodology, no

competent PMs. •  Improvement / New Setup: Establish a PMO to develop and

maintain program/project processes and enhance competency.

Case 3: Local Government Municipality

•  Required Organizational Enablers: –  Competency Management –  Individual Performance Appraisals –  Project Management Training

•  Quick Win Approach (Reverse Engineering OPM3): Now the required competencies for internal and external stakeholders are clearer

•  Result: This project is still underway; thus, it will take some time to walk the talk.

Case 4: System Integration Semi-Government Program

•  Objective: A System Integrator to implement and manage a five-year Mega Program. Each vendor works independently, without the required interfacing and integration.

•  Assessment Status: The program did not have an office, nor a PMB – Performance Measurement Baseline.

•  Improvement / New Setup: Establish A Program Management Office.

Case 4: System Integration Semi-Government Program

•  Required Project Standardization: Program Management Plan, including PMB, Cash Flow and sub-projects’ schedule. Focus on Benefit Management, Governance and Stakeholder Management

•  Required Organizational Enablers: Since this was a standalone program, OEs are not covered.

•  Quick-Win Approach (Reverse Engineering OPM3): The Program Management Approach enabled the establishment of a full functional PgMO.

•  Result: The objective was to establish an organizational PMO later on; work should start on OEs.

Case 5: Capital Holding

•  Objective: Enhance the profitability of the Holding through proper financial capacity management and portfolio balancing.

•  Assessment Status: The Holding lacked a formal Portfolio and Risk Management standard.

•  Improvement / New Setup: A formal Portfolio management methodology was developed.

•  Stage / Portfolio Domain.

Case 5: Capital Holding

•  Required Organizational Enablers: –  Organizational Project Management Vision and Mission –  Strategic Alignment

•  Quick Win Approach (Reverse Engineering OPM3): The existing projects/investments were requested to provide periodic reporting within standardized forms.

•  Result: Immediately, the Holding stopped some components before authorization, and selected others for further analysis.

Case 6: Energy & Power

•  Objective: Assess the maturity of Project, Program, Portfolio in all stages of improvement – SMCI, then provide a detailed Improvement plan with strategic prioritization, based on the needs of the organization.

•  Assessment Status: The mega programs - fully outsourced - were managed beautifully.

•  Improvement / New Setup: Nine improvement projects were suggested, with prioritization according the pre-requisite logical relationships and top management preferences.

Case 6: Energy & Power

•  Required Organizational Enablers: –  Organizational Project Management Practices –  Organizational Project Management Methodology

•  Quick Win Approach (Reverse Engineering OPM3): The improvement is yet to be subcontracted.

•  Result: The client already endorsed OPM3 and required several employees to acquire formal OPM3 training.

Conclusion

•  Urgent and demanding need for PMO services for Competency Development and awareness, especially amongst top management.

•  Conducting the improvement at the element the following assessor will inquire about, provides better results for the following assessment.

Asking the Right Questions!