common pitfalls in portfolia management
TRANSCRIPT
Drive Your Business
Common Pitfalls in Project Portfolio Management
by Scot Hanley
2 ©2016 WGroup. ThinkWGroup.com
One in six projects is a ‘black swan’, or a project that goes so badly it threatens
corporate financial stability. Now more than ever, companies must critically examine
their Project Portfolio Management processes for optimizing success.
Organizations are continually asked to do more with less. The temptation to short cut project
governance processes that are perceived as unneeded or a waste of time increases with
every additional project added to the company’s workload. Ironically, it is usually short cutting
the process that leads to manifested risks, increased costs, and additional workload.
Typically it is our experience that the problem is not the governance
process itself. It’s the perception that the process is too complex or too time
consuming. Unfortunately this leads to common pitfalls that are not accounted
for as the corporate governance system is designed or modified.
How can companies ensure
that their project portfolio
management (PPM) system
is used effectively and reaps
the expected benefits? To
explore this, let’s examine
the major components of
an effective PPM system:
corporate project and
program governance; project
analytics; and corporate
strategy and culture.
We’ll look at the problems
typically encountered and
make recommendations
that could prevent or
solve these problems.
Introduction
Elements of PPM
FORM
ALIZ
ATIO
N
Project Analytics
& Selection Criteria
2
3
1
Corporate Strategy & Culture
Project Governance
Project Portfolio(s)
3 ©2016 WGroup. ThinkWGroup.com
Demand management can result from numerous
sources, including corporate strategy (transformed
into objectives and projects), balancing or aligning
the current portfolio of projects as a result of
change or new directives,
and the “raw demand” of
needs that result from daily
operations and often take
the form of ad-hoc requests
from individual contributors,
teams, and others.
1. Corporate project and program governance
Developing governance bodies asynchronously
Organizations will often take the “crawl before you run” approach to project
governance for reasons that make sense during the period of transition to a new
method of governance but many times lead to a number of problems later on.
Common pitfalls
Governance bodies should be set in tandem at the division and corporate levels. Launching
a corporate-level body without a corresponding division-level body will result in a lack
of confidence by division-level managers and below in the corporate-level body. Doubts
will arise that the group has all the information it needs to make educated decisions
in forming and adjusting the project portfolio while accounting for stakeholder needs.
Similarly, corporate-level management will often doubt decision making at the division
level. As division-level management feels the pressure to deliver “everything,” corporate-
level management will begin to question priorities and financial decisions as the portfolio is
filled to capacity (and beyond) due to the division level manager’s fear of saying “no.”
• Raw demand for project resources
• Program formalization
4 ©2016 WGroup. ThinkWGroup.com
Failing to fully leverage project analytics and establish formal decision-making criteria
While there are hundreds of portfolio
management tools on the market today, all of
them are useless in performing project portfolio
analytics without guidance from governance
bodies. The two must go hand in hand.
We often see decision-making criteria that are
not aligned with corporate strategy. This leads to
a disjointed, complex, and (sometimes) agenda-driven approach that may benefit certain divisions,
while not necessarily delivering on corporate strategy. Decision-making criteria should be aligned
with corporate strategy goals, documented, and reviewed regularly with governance teams.
Many governance bodies do not plan for their own decision-making process, seemingly expecting
executives and directors (who have their own agendas and objectives) to make collaborative
decisions in a fact-based and objective manner. Failure to achieve governance level goals
often happens because new behaviors were not defined or planned for. Additionally, decision-
making criteria are often focused solely on demand intake, and not portfolio balancing.
Corporations that are mature in portfolio decision-making will have often adopted decision-making
tools (Expert Choice, etc.) to assist in the process. Many have even established strategy-aligned
attributes or questionnaires for evaluation in project charters, SOWs, or other project artifacts to
streamline the evaluation and portfolio balancing process through the formal governance channel.
In addition to supporting demand intake, PPM analytics should be provided (no matter the
maturity level of the tool or process) to include, at a minimum, some level of understanding
of impact to the current portfolio of projects. We often hear clients make statements such as
“we’re not good at forecasting” or “we are immature at capacity planning,” yet they conduct
these activities informally each day. We have seen clients successfully use spreadsheets at
the initiation of project portfolio management to gauge staffing bottlenecks. Using common
sense and basic understanding of the resources available, they begin changing behaviors
and focus on a more objective and fact-based approach that aligns with corporate strategy. By
doing so, clients are far more successful in growing into enterprise-level project portfolio tools
because the decision-making criteria and decision-making process have been established.
5 ©2016 WGroup. ThinkWGroup.com
Failing to formalize the governance process
Formalization means a number of things when it comes to project portfolio management.
Chief among them is the need to clearly identify from the top down all project governance
objectives, procedures and desired outcomes. We sometimes see clients attempt to
launch project governance bodies in a bottom up manner or with little support from the C-
Suite. Simply put, organizations that sidestep this critical item are doomed to fail.
Governance comes with a significant set of changes related to people, process, and
technology (PPM tools, Help Desk tools, etc.). Without a plan to understand current
behaviors and required future behaviors, and without consistent, visible support from
senior management, the probability of success in this endeavor will be very low.
Plan to have as a major sponsor for your initiative a significant C-Level influencer who is visible at
all corporate-level governance meetings and appears at division-level meetings from time to time.
Additionally, have a plan to reinforce new decision-making behaviors that will initially challenge
the organization. Formalization will lead to documented staffing plans, business cases, and
dependency mapping across projects; change management addendums; and more. All of these
may be new to the organization, but they are required to perform adequate, fact-based PPM.
Companies that are mature in formalizing the PPM
governance process typically employ business-
relationship management to ensure a focus on IT-business
alignment. By working with a focus on each corporate
line of business from a centralized unit, demand can
be reviewed in one “source of the truth” (typically a
combination of request management and PPM tools) to
gain further efficiencies in the governance process.
6 ©2016 WGroup. ThinkWGroup.com
2. Project portfolio analyticsProject portfolio analytics are the tools, algorithms, and
heuristics necessary to evaluate project-related data for
use in PPM decision-making. This data includes elements
of resource capacity, ROI, portfolio impact, value, risk,
and other elements important to the organization.
In numerous instances we have seen organizations
fall into one of the following traps.
Common pitfalls
Purchasing and implementing a PPM tool before the process is defined and accepted
PPM tools (Planview, Clarity, etc.) are expensive
and, in most instances, should be purchased after
the company has accepted the PPM function.
Poor expectation setting
Not every PPM tool is capable of
performing all analytical needs. Some
of the most well-known PPM tools don’t
even include the most basic algorithms
to conduct “what if” analysis for use in understanding impact to the current project portfolio.
The Gartner “golden quadrant” tools do not have all the capabilities many PPM functions need.
Make sure to complete a thorough tool evaluation that’s based on clear requirements.
• ROI• Portfolio impact• Value• Capacity• Risk• Demand
7 ©2016 WGroup. ThinkWGroup.com
Underleveraged
We’d like to see PPM tools used for more than time tracking against projects, but they are
often underleveraged for only this use. PPM tools are fully leveraged when governance teams
require PPM analytics for decision making; resource managers are using the tool proactively
as a means to better manage their resources; and team members are seeing the value, often
when decisions that impact them can be sourced
from the PPM tool and improve their work-life balance
and make a positive impact on the company.
The previous two pitfalls can become root causes
for underleveraged PPM tools. When PPM Tools are
purchased and implemented before the process is
defined and accepted, this opens the door for the tool
to become an unneeded expense if the function is not
adopted. Similarly, when incorrect expectations are set
for the tool and not reached, staff will reject its use.
Poor integration with the corporate finance function
PPM tools traditionally integrate with financial systems and/or act as a repository
for project and program financials. From time to time, we see PMO’s that fail
to plan to integrate with the finance organization as a key stakeholder.
This will more often than not lead to a disgruntled and powerful stakeholder who
also is an influencer in supporting new functions. When you consider that project
scope often changes (along with project financials), having a strong influencer from
finance will be critical in creating a smooth change-management process.
8 ©2016 WGroup. ThinkWGroup.com
3. Corporate strategy and cultureThe processes that drive the direction of the
company and identify markets/businesses in
which the company competes are the linchpin to
successful PPM and project success rates.
While we have touched on aligning decision-making criteria and creating a level of formalization,
it should be clear that the ability to align with a strategy is dependent upon the clarity of the
corporate strategy. Its corresponding objectives must be formally defined and measured.
For organizations that have full-time corporate strategists and may be advanced to a level
of strategy management, such as balanced scorecard or others, a key factor in successful
PPM is in place. For organizations that are informally managing strategy, we recommend you
take steps to formalize the process before getting too far down the path on PPM. A formal
strategy-management process drives the organization to provide clarity and prioritization
of corporate- and division-level objectives that are already aligned to the strategy.
Common pitfalls
“Very few organizations (9%) rate themselves as excellent on successfully executing initiatives to deliver strategic results. Consequently, only 56% of strategic initiatives meet their original goals and business intent.”
– Pulse 2014
Many times with the bottom-up
approach to PPM, clients attempt to
build strategy as a part of the PPM/
governance function. This can
work for some organizations, but
can also lead to confusion and
frustration because projects that turn
out to be out of strategic alignment
have already left the station.
• Alignment• Demand
management• Risk management• Change
management• Decision criteria
9 ©2016 WGroup. ThinkWGroup.com
Confusing project-selection criteria with product-selection criteria
We sometimes see project governance teams filling the gap for product assessment. Projects
to implement products should be initiated after the product assessment is completed.
Lumping project prioritization in with project sequencing
Project prioritization is the act of weighing one project against decision criteria and other projects to
determine their level of priority for execution. Project sequencing is the process of determining the
optimal fit for the project in the current portfolio.
In other words, just because the project is priority
one does not necessarily mean it gets done first
when there are other projects in the portfolio.
Unintended consequences may occur if the opposite
is true, including increased costs and potential staffing
issues. A portfolio impact assessment should be
completed in advance to guide executive decision-
making regarding the sequence of the project.
Failing to evaluate strategic risk
In many instances, obvious elements such as demand management and capacity come
into play in the management of project risks, but strategic risk is often over looked.
Strategic risk can take the form of brand tarnishing, negative impact to core products
and services, or loss of market share. Considering the number of “black swan” projects,
strategic risk should be a significant element in management of the project portfolio.
There are several other common pitfalls:
10 ©2016 WGroup. ThinkWGroup.com
No formalized plan to manage culture and behaviors
Technology and process don’t solve project failures. People do. Some clients step
their toes into the water as a substitute for a concrete plan to change behaviors in the
organization. We advise our clients to recognize that their people are being reinforced a
certain way (either purposely or accidentally) to perform the “current state” of their job.
Performance expectations are commonly missed when PPM is introduced into the
organization because it is seen as somebody else’s job. The fallacy of this view is seen in
the fact that project work is people work. The staff members have a stake in the project’s
outcomes and commonly work in a matrixed environment across different departments.
Therefore, PPM is everybody’s job. Yet it is easy to see how many would want to pass
PPM over the fence as it involves complex and mature practices (demand management,
resource management, etc.) and requires staff to adopt new skills and types of work.
Failing to plan to change behaviors guarantees at minimum a difficult
transition and at most failure to adopt PPM long term.
Failing to “chunk” the project work
Whether it be the use of Scrum or Waterfall, breaking projects down into manageable
chunks has been proven to increase project success rates, but it is a challenge for many
clients. Behaviors have been ingrained in executives over the years to be “pleasers”
and that often results in the executive sponsor reporting out a project finish date before
a project assessment has even been completed. Consider a whole portfolio of projects
with end dates established in this manner and you have a very inaccurate portfolio.
Conditioning away from this behavior to a set of deliberate
PPM steps, to include finish date estimates on phases of the
project work is difficult and should be considered a strategic
activity for the organization. Why? Companies that improve
project delivery (or better yet, project productivity) create a
sustainable competitive advantage over companies that do not.
Improving project success rates not only makes a company
more competitive, it improves the company’s bottom line.
11 ©2016 WGroup. ThinkWGroup.com
How WGroup can helpWGroup has helped numerous clients design, build, and manage the discipline of project
portfolio management. While our approach is robust in implementation, it is also pragmatic
and anticipates the common pitfalls we have seen in our extensive experience.
For clients with a PPM function in place we can help by evaluating the client’s strategy
and project governance model, project analytics, culture, and behaviors to build the
roadmap to optimize PPM benefits and ROI. And for clients just starting out, we can help by
building the strategy and roadmap for PPM implementation specific to your company.
We employ our deep expertise in constructing sophisticated financial models and bring up-to-date
insights about industry best practices and potential vendor tools to drive tangible business results.
We provide our clients with comprehensive advice down to the design and implementation of
detailed PPM processes. We leverage the rich experience in hands-on portfolio optimization from
our pool of senior consultants who are all former CIOs, IT managers, and business leaders.
Ultimately, we drive business value, which is above and beyond
establishing resource allocation or prioritization processes.
WGroup PPM Transformation Approach
Build PPM Strategy
& Roadmap
Implement PPM
Governance
Define Formalization
& Behaviors
Implement PPM
Process
Optimize PPM
Process
12 ©2016 WGroup. ThinkWGroup.com
Scot Hanley is a senior technology executive
with an exceptional record of success in
the development and crisp execution of IT
strategy with over 25 years of experience.
He has the proven ability to facilitate
revenue growth and market penetration by
delivering business and technology solutions
to meet business and market needs. The
foundation blocks of his career include
innovation, relationship building, and focus
in strategy & execution, including excellence
in Project & Program Management.
His passion lies in orchestrating the
transformation of companies into market
share leaders & innovators and he
has 15 years of leadership experience
specifically in strategies related to IT
Transformation and Modernization.
Scot is an innovative entrepreneur and
consultant with a demonstrated ability to
influence the C-Suite, launch new ventures
and transform organizations. He is skilled at
building and leading top performing teams
and producing enterprise level strategies
that transform capabilities, improve efficiency
and drive down costs. Named “Kerzner
International Project Manager of the Year by
PMI & IIL in 2008” he has special expertise
in PMO startups, Project Management,
leading divestitures and technology and
business process implementations. He is
a trusted consultant that harmonizes the
business and IT strategy into a winning
composition via business alignment.
He is a champion in helping companies
pioneer new ways to harness technology
and execute strategic plans to drive
differentiation in the market via delivery
excellence. He has held a wide variety of
leadership roles including start-up experience
with Hamilton-Ryker Consulting, VP level
roles with BCBS and Synovus Financial
and Executive level consulting roles with
Ernst & Young as well as CapGemini.
Author: Scot Hanley, PMP, CSM, ITIL, MCP
13 ©2016 WGroup. ThinkWGroup.com
Scot has experience across the Finance, Healthcare, Telecommunications, and Travel industries
with special expertise in Data Warehousing, Big Data, and Analytics including hands-on
technology experience. His patent-pending technique in project management, “Project Behavioral
Coaching” TM, has been widely acclaimed as an innovative and disruptive force in project
management that recognizes the assessment of human behavior as critical to the success of all
projects and his article on same have been featured in LinkedIn’s online “Pulse” magazine.
Scot’s market analysis of consulting firms in the southeastern US, pro-forma for a differentiated
management consultancy and plans for revenue streams, social/digital media marketing presence and
presentations convinced Hamilton-Ryker, the largest privately held staffing firm in the southeast, to
invest in his concept to launch a consulting firm with strong competencies in improving IT delivery.
He led the strategy for startup of the consulting organization and managed operations of the
company. He was responsible for ensuring the firm delivered superior results to the client,
which included everything from staffing & recruiting coordination for turn-key client projects,
to research and development for our methods, techniques, and supporting technology.
Scot’s work at Blue Cross Blue Shield of Alabama as VP of Technology, was primarily focused
on delivering strategy for the modernization of IT, development of COEs, as well as shared
responsibility with App Dev & Infrastructure to successfully deliver on systems and application
delivery projects across a $120M (annual) project portfolio. As Vice President Technology at
Synovus, Scot led the effort for the “TSYS Spin Off” – divestiture. With TSYS (largest credit
card processor world-wide) he acted as the Executive Program Manager while leading the IT
Professional Services Office at Synovus (TSYS holding company) reporting to the CIO. Additionally,
Scot has held senior positions at CapGemini and Ernst & Young where he drove success for
corporations through alignment of technology and business to achieve strategic goals.
Scot graduated with a BA in English Language and Literature from Columbus State University
as well as a Commission as a US Army Officer. He is a Desert Storm veteran and holds
certifications PMP, ITIL, and CSM. He has spoken at numerous conferences on the topics of project
management and human behavior, innovation, and successful change management in IT.
Drive Your Business
Founded in 1995, WGroup is a technology management consulting firm that provides Strategy,
Management and Execution Services to optimize business performance, minimize cost and create
value. Our consultants have years of experience both as industry executives and trusted advisors
to help clients think through complicated and pressing challenges to drive their business forward.
Visit us at www.thinkwgroup.com or give us a call at (610) 854-2700 to learn how we can help you.
150 N Radnor Chester Road Radnor, PA 19087
610-854-2700
ThinkWGroup.com