Sustaining the Value of Your PMO

During a recent conversation with a program manager, I was introduced to the concept of an opportunity model consisting of: Define Value -> Deliver Value -> Sustain Value. When I relate this model to a PMO, then I have to consider what happens once a PMO reaches the point where it must sustain value. If I ask myself that question, then I say that one of the key activities that help the PMO to be a sustaining force is in having a forum where project status is reviewed and discussed on a regular and timely basis.

A popular report format used to facilitate project status discussions is the 4-up report. The 4-up report is a one page format with defined sections highlighting project costs, schedule, and risks with a fourth section that fluctuates based on organizational preference. I have seen the fourth section be used for actions, assumptions, accomplishments, or to highlight needs. Successful status review sessions don’t review every project within a PMO, instead they prioritize reviews based upon a pre-defined criteria focused on project risk. Review meetings are hosted by a leader who holds project managers to be accountable, accurate and driven to resolve issues. Another useful quality is for the leader to be effective at elevating issues the project manager is unable to resolve on their own. Status review meetings that are used to keep projects focused, on schedule, within budget, and drive issues to resolution are at the top of my list for sustaining PMO value. What’s at the top of your list?




The views expressed on this blog are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views of my employer, Robbins-Gioia.

Independent Program Oversight (IPO)

I read an article written by a colleague of mine, Emory Miller, entitled “Could Independent Program Oversight be a new model for improving the success of IT programs?” (FCW.com, Published June 11, 2007 http://www.fcw.com/article102922-06-11-07-Print ) In the article Emory states “We fail because we don’t make good decisions.” His answer to failure is to begin “with the roles we play”. He applies oversight roles to a program management office (PMO) structured to provide informed decisions by utilizing multidisciplinary reviews, independent assessments and validation of project costs, schedules and earned value reporting to “speed up the time-to-decision cycle.” If we consider the purpose of a PMO, then the functions of Independent Program Oversight (IPO) as described by Emory are a logical and innovative use of a proven PMO structure. An IPO could provide needed visibility into an initiative as complex as an ERP system implementation. Consider having the ability to utilize an experienced neutral party to monitor progress and risk of the work being performed by another third party. Wouldn’t it be valuable to know, without bias, how a project is actually performing and then have the ability to utilize that information to make timely decisions that improve the outcome of the project? I am intrigued by the concept of an IPO, what do you thing?



The views expressed on this blog are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views of my employer, Robbins-Gioia.