final paper

Running head: A PROJECT MANAGEMENT MATURITY MODEL 1

The Probability of Success Using a Project Management Maturity Model

Robert Haskins

BUS 697: Project Management Strategy

Dr. Shawn Milligan

27 October 2014

A PROJECT MANAGEMENT MATURITY MODEL 2

The Probability of Success Using a Project Management Maturity Model

In 2013, the Project Management Institute produced a report on the status of the project

management profession and found an astonishing fact; organizations lose an average of $109

million for every $1 billion spent on projects (Project Management Institute, 2014). This figure

comes as a surprise with experts in the consulting industry publicizing the importance of

integrating organizational strategic planning with project management. Organizations must shift

from top-level management micromanaging projects and focus on strategic planning, leaving the

task of strategy implementation to middle management. An organization will need to discover

where its project management capabilities are. Thus, a project management maturity model

(PMMM) establishes a structural process to bring the organization to various levels of project

management maturity.

An examination of PMMM reveals the five levels of maturity in project management.

These levels are common language, common processes, singular methodology, benchmarking,

and continuous improvement. An analysis of project quality and earned value analysis are given

to understand key components to a successful project. Another pertinent factor in PMMM is

communicating during the project’s lifecycle because it allows stakeholders to be aware of past,

present and future activities or events. Lastly, the integration of the organization’s strategic plan

with the project management method is essential for the success of the product. The PMMM is

effective at implementing the strategic plan because the model ensures project quality, promotes

effective communication to all stakeholders, and integrates organizational strategy with project

management.

The Project Management Maturity Model


The first objective for any organization is to achieve profitability. The strategic plan is a

process the organization formulates to help put into effect decisions that puts it on a path towards

profitability. The development of an effective project management plan is a process the

organization uses in its strategic planning. However, many companies do not properly use

project management. An assessment of the organization’s project management capabilities and a

structure to implement continuous improvement towards achieving excellence is needed. The

PMMM gives five levels of maturity to deliver the strategic outcomes in a predictable,

controllable, and reliable manner (Project Management Institute, 2013a). These levels are

common language, common processes, singular methodology, benchmarking, and continuous

improvement.

Common Language

The first level of PMMM is the point in which the organization realizes the significance

and potential of project management. Although recognized at this level, management does not

support project management. The organization may occasionally use project management but

there is no real investment in it. However, if the organization decides to move from the first

level to the next, it must address the ignorance of project management with education. Once the

organization puts into action a fortified effort in learning about the principles of project

management under a common and systematic approach, it will realize the significance and

potential of project management.

Common Processes

When the organization accepts common terminology, educated principles, and

philosophies in project management, it moves into the second level of maturity. The second

level characteristics include consistently using project management for the organization’s


projects, recognizing tangible benefits, creating changes in corporate culture, organizational

commitment, and the development of a project management curriculum (Kerzner, 2005, pp. 67-

68). To achieve success in level two, a five-phase lifecycle produces effective results.

The first and second phase is called the embryonic phase and executive management

acceptance, respectfully. The embryonic phase involves senior management recognizing that

project management is needed for survival (Kerzner, 2005). The second phase will require

senior management support and cultural change throughout the organization. The next phase is

educating the middle management on the benefits of project management and amasses support

for change. The fourth phase is the most important for two reasons. First, this phase cannot

begin without the first three being complete. Secondly, it is the beginning of formulating an

organization wide project methodology. The last phase is called the maturity phase because of

the creation of a cost/schedule control system and development of a system to educate and

support project management skills (p. 71). The completion of the second level lifecycle will

propel the organization into level three of the PMMM.

Singular Methodology

The third level of project management maturity occurs when the organization accepts a

singular methodology over a multitude of processes. A commitment from everyone in the

organization is required for this level including managerial and cultural support, an integrated

process, training and education, less rigid policies, and recognizing the differences between

project management and line management (Kerzner, 2005). These attributes sets apart those

organizations that have truly committed themselves to excellence in project management and

codifies the next level of PMMM in benchmarking the successes of the organization when it uses

a singular project management methodology.


Benchmarking

The fourth level of the PMMM begins once the organization has established a singular

methodology and decides to use valuable internal and external knowledge to make improvements

in the project management process. Kerzner (2005) described the fourth level of PMMM as the

level where the organization realizes that its existing methodology can be improved upon (p.

100). However, the approach to attain and comprehend a process to bring about the

improvement needs examining.

The first step in an effective process of continuous improvement via benchmarking will

require establishing a project management office (PMO). The PMO will create certain criteria to

include in the benchmarking process including qualitative and quantitative benchmarking.

Moreover, the PMO manages the lessons learned and exhibits a commitment to improving the

project management process by comparing its benchmarking with other organizations from

within and outside of its industry. Continuous benchmarking will give way to continuous

improvement.

Continuous Improvement

The final level in the PMMM is to assess the benchmarking information, conceive new

ideas, and implement them to improve the project management methodology. However, once

those ideas are implemented benchmarking will need to continue in examining the effects of

those new ideas. Doing so determines if the new ideas are effective and contribute to continuous

improvement. Therefore, documentation of the lessons learned from one project to the next is

paramount in the exchange of knowledge.

Author’s note: Although I have never worked for an organization that considered the

intricate details of the PMMM, I recognize the importance of such a process. As a land surveyor,


I worked with a small firm that was project-driven but never embraced specific methodologies of

managing projects. After looking back and learning the valuable lessons in this course, I see the

impact a PMMM would have on the firm. I anticipate a definite need for the PMMM in my

future endeavors.

Project Quality and Earned Value Analysis

Project Quality

The project manager’s priority is to deliver the requirements of the customer in time and

on budget. However, when it comes to defining quality, ambiguity creeps in and makes the

definition confusing and archaic. Projects come in all different sizes and scope, making what

should be a systematic process of producing customer satisfaction to project quality becoming an

art. Joseph Juran (1999), a pioneer in quality management, described quality as those features of

products that meet customer needs and free from deficiencies and errors that require work over

again, customer dissatisfaction, and customer claims (pp. 26-27). The project manager must

keep in mind the definition of quality when making trade-offs to the triple constraints of time,

cost, and scope to conform to customer requirements.

The triple constraint is a mixture of time, cost, and scope. These constraints act much

like the legs of a stool, if one fails the stool does not work. A careful balance of making trade-

offs helps to meet the objectives of the project. Quality is similar to scope because scope reflects

customer requirements, and thus the quality the customer expects. Another aspect of quality is

the project itself. Kenneth Rose (2005) explained that “Quality processes that maintain cost and

schedule constraints will ensure a quality project” (p. 6). Therefore, a quality project will contain

all the requirements and expectation of the customer. Although a growing consensus claims

quality ought to be a fourth constraint, a project manager should not be given a choice to trade-


off quality for anything else. An earned value analysis of two of the triple constraints, time and

cost, will help to create an environment where scope/quality has a chance of succeeding.

Earned Value Analysis

Getting the most out of the project to meet the requirements of the customer to create

quality, the project manager must monitor and control the performance using an earned value

analysis. This is the purpose of the earned value analysis. Establishing the earned value

cost/schedule system is a key move for the PMO. All the stakeholders in the project must

support earned value management. Quentin Fleming and Joel Koppelman (2009) explained that

if everyone has a rudimentary understanding of what the earned value management data means,

everyone connected to the project knows what everyone else is doing (p. 22). If the metrics in

measuring the performance of the project has a different meaning to other departments, projected

results will differ and project success or failure will mean differently to others. Establishing a

baseline metric is the beginning of such a system.

The reasons for a baseline are to monitor, control, and report on the progress of the

estimated cash flow. To begin such a system, the project manager establishes the earned value

(EV), the planned value (PV), and the actual cost (AC). The EV is a percentage of the

completed project multiplied by the budget. The PV is the cost estimate of the resources at that

point in the schedule. The AC is the actual cost of the work at that point in the schedule. These

three figures are the foundation to the earned value analysis. From these three figures, a cost

variance and schedule variance are created to determine if the project is on schedule or on cost.

Once there is a baseline a comparison to actual and planned schedule and costs will provide data

the project manager uses to determine the health of the project. An example of the successful

and/or failed implementation of the earned value analysis will illustrate the difference.


Case study

The Springfield Interchange Improvement Project (SIIP) is an example of a large-scale

project that, on the surface, resembled a success. The praise from the primary stakeholders (i.e.

commuters and taxpayers) indicates the project was a success. However, an assessment of the

mega-project proved successes in the areas of communications, scope, and procurement

management, and opportunities to improve existed in risk and quality management (Anbari,

2002). An analysis of each phase in the life cycle of the project showed strong support from the

Virginia Department of Transportation, but waned in the latter phases of the project. Continued

support from the project sponsor throughout the project would have avoided problems in risk and

communication management.

Project Communication Methods

Communication in the project is essential in bringing the team members to adhere to a

common set of goals and objectives. Without the focus of communication, the project is at

jeopardy with costs overruns, exceeding schedules, inconsistent metadata, and various other

issues. A study conducted by the Project Management Institute revealed that the most crucial

success factor in project management is effective communications to all stakeholders, a critical

core competency to all organizations (Project Management Institute, 2013b). In a business

climate that indicates uncertainty and low business performance, a low cost solution like

communication can become the competitive advantage an organization needs. The PMBOK

(2013) identifies three communication methods; interactive communication, push

communication, and pull communication (p. 295). Employing effective communication methods

with all the stakeholders involved will lead to successful projects.


An interactive communication method will involve two or more parties engage in

conversing ideas, opinions, objections, or statements. This type of communication method is

used the most often since it contains messages that are transmitted from sender to receiver and

vice versa. Modes of instant response from the receiver will include face-to-face,

teleconferencing, videoconferencing, and text messages. A push communication method

happens when there is contact from a sender to other parties without any expectation of a

response. This communication method is used on a regular basis to convey a message to

stakeholders without any intention for feedback. Examples could include meeting notes, status

reports, and press releases. The pull communication method is less used as it relies on large

groups to access a large amount of information at their own discretion (Project Management

Institute, 2013b). The sender has a limited amount of interaction as this method entrusts the

respondents to interact with the information medium. Examples of this type of communication

are large databases or data warehouses. Each of these methods of communication has its place

and using these methods appropriately is important to the effectiveness of project

communication. Project communication, project quality, and earned value management are

important tools at integrating organizational strategic with project management.

Integration of Organizational Strategy and Project Management

Strategic planning is a process born in the boardroom made by executives to decide the

future of the organization. These decisions will determine the survival of the organization

because of its impact on processes to adapt to change. The two phases in developing an

organization strategy are formulation and implementation.

The first phase is the process to identify those elements that make the organization

competitive. A strength, weakness, opportunities, and threat analysis evaluates the available


resources and business environment to pursue the organization’s objectives. Moreover, the

organization determines the path towards creating value and satisfaction for its customers. The

formulation phase is conducted entirely from executive management. The second phase is to

implement the results of the formulation phase. “Implementation involves all levels of

management in moving the organization towards its mission” (Kerzner, 2005, p. 16). Since

implementation will require all levels of management, integration with the various departments

of the organization is also needed. This includes project management.

These past years has seen a rise in the development of PMMM’s as a way to link

organizational strategy with project strategy. However, a link between the two strategies will

require senior management to accept project management as a means to accomplishing its

strategic objectives rather than a top down approach to strategic implementation. Raju Rao

(2007) stated that current thinking on connecting strategy to projects rests on a structure of

considering project related work (Connecting Projects to Strategy section, para. 2). Integrating

PMMM into the strategic planning will connect the appropriate project to the need in the

strategy. A mature project methodology and an organized PMO will conclude with a successful

integration of the organization’s strategic objectives.

Conclusion and Lessons Learned

The implementation of the organization’s strategic plan using PMMM brings together

effective tools that create project quality, effective communication with all the stakeholders, and

integration of strategy with the principles of project management. The PMMM and its five levels

of maturity give an organization a structured format to build its PMO into an integral part of the

overall success of the organization. A byproduct of a prosperous project methodology is

satisfying the requirements of the customer and creating project quality. Moreover,


communication has proven to be a significant core competency of all the stakeholders in the

project. An effective communication plan will bring collaboration and cohesiveness among

everyone invested in the project. Integration of the organization’s vision and mission in creating

a product or service that brings profitability and a competitive advantage is made more

efficiently using the PMMM. Using all of these elements increases the probability of success

when the organization reaches excellence in project management maturity.

A maturity model will differ according to the organization and the industry. The PMMM

described in this report is not an end-all-be-all, but more of a generalization of a maturity model

an organization can build on. Every maturity model will conclude with a level of continuous

improvement. It is through benchmarking and continuous improvement that success is more

probable. Moreover, the organization will need to make the cultural changes that allow them to

accept the changes that will undoubtedly occur. Additionally, a library of best practices,

continuously assessed, ensures the transfer of knowledge to all levels of the organization.

Therefore, benchmarking and continuous improvement, accepting a culture of change, and

organizing the best practices of the organization will certainly increase the probability of success.


References

Anbari, F. T. (2002). Springfield interchange improvement project. The George Washinton

University. Project Management Institute. Retrieved from

http://www.marcoullis.com/PROJECTS/ANBARI/pdf/selected/Anbari_Research_Springf

ield_Interchange_Case_Study.pdf

Fleming, Q., & Koppelman, J. (2009). The two most useful earned value metrics: The CPI and

the TCPI. Cost Engineering, 51(3), 22-25. (Document ID: 1681065491). Retrieved from

ProQuest.

Juran, J. M. (1999). Juran's quality handbook (5th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill

Companies, Inc. Retrieved from http://www.pqm-online.com/assets/files/lib/juran.pdf

Kerzner, H. (2005). Using the project management maturity model: Strategic planning for

project management (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Project Management Institute. (2013). A guide to the project management body of knowledge.

PMI(5th). Newtown Square, PA, USA.

Project Management Institute. (2013). The high cost of low performance: The essential role of

communications. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute. Retrieved from

http://www.pmi.org/~/media/PDF/Business-Solutions/The-High-Cost-Low-Performance-

The-Essential-Role-of-Communications.ashx

Project Management Institute. (2014). PMI's pulse of the profession: The high cost of low

performance. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute. Retrieved from

http://www.pmi.org/~/media/PDF/Business-Solutions/PMI_Pulse_2014.ashx


Rao, R. (2007). Connecting organization strategy to projects--the missing link. PMI Global

Congress Proceedings. Hong Kong: Project Management Institute. Retrieved from

http://www.pmi.org/learning/connecting-organization-strategy-aligning-projects-7345

Rose, K. H. (2005). Project quality management: Why, what and how. Boca Raton, FL, USA: J.

Ross Publishing, Inc. Retrieved from http://www.ebrary.com

final paper

Documents