that establishing a Project/Program Management Office (PMO) carries with it great risks. Among those risks are increased IT costs, as well as a lack of significant improvement in processes. Jonathan was reporting on a study from the Hackett Group that looked at more than 200 organizations. Jonathan was kind enough to agree to a discussion and when we spoke about this, I stated that I agree with the study findings that if a PMO does not align itself with the strategic vision and values of the organization, it may very well fail its purpose.
Our discussion
When we finally had a chance to speak at greater
length, Jonathan mentioned several findings from the study that opened my eyes.
- The average lifespan of a PMO is under four years:
This is a shocking statistic, but the more I thought
about it, the more it made sense. A PMO is not a silver bullet that delivers
positive results just because an organization puts one in place. Similar to any
strategic initiative, it must be well defined and thought out. If it is treated
like a fad, then it will become a fad and fade out.
- My next question was "is Agile better suited for smaller organizations:"
Jonathan suggested, based on study findings, that this
is a resounding NO. I will admit in full disclosure that I have not worked in a
truly Agile PM environment. I will also admit that I was shocked that this
study found that in some cases, implementing an Agile process produces better
results than implementing a PMO. Jonathan stated that the reason why Agile may
succeed where a PMO does not is because there is less overhead.
- Our next agreement was that some organizations plan to fail:
One of the things that Jonathan and I agreed on
right away is that one reason Information Technology (IT) PMOs may fail is
because in PM practices, there is planning and forecasting for a period of time
that is unrealistic to plan and forecast properly. In other words, some PMOs
engender lying because forecasting too long for a specific implementation may
be unrealistic.
Business driven, nothing more, nothing less
Even though I have stated this before before, it is worth
repeating. The PMO must be focused on strategic projects that are driven by the
executive office: the C-Level Executive Suite, or as Jonathan put it, “the
C-Suite.” In other words, projects must be business driven. That is why I am a
proponent that a PMO should be an enterprise-driven group and could have
projects that are not IT projects. Whether their purpose is to improve the core
business of the organization, or to enhance a product, or to improve a
supporting process in a business, projects must be aligned with the strategy of
the organization. In his article, Jonathan mentions that if a PMO is put in
place and is only given lip service from the C-Suite, then the PMO is doomed
for failure, as is anything that an organization implements without the correct
support or resources.
A paradigm shift?
I hope that you understand that I still believe that a
PMO that is properly implemented and supported by senior management can be
successful. However, like any trend, it can be implemented for the wrong
reasons, and have the wrong individuals running it. A properly supported and
implemented PMO can drive an organization to excellence and have the
organization speak as one voice to its clients. I am convinced that the PMO
structure is a successful business strategy.
I am open to discussion at any time on these blogs or anything else related to project management you would like to explore. If you would like to comment about this blog, please do so by posting on this blog or by responding in an email at Benny A. Recine.You may inspire a blog article. I look forward to your comments.
I agree with your key point in your blog summary. The PMO needs to be well supported by senior management. At my former company, it wasn't.
ReplyDeleteMy company started a PMO in July 2011 and offered me the Senior PM roll. They said they were going to hire a PMO Director. At the time, I was very pleased with the opportunity.
Shortly after I started in the PMO, there was a management reorg. The Director position was put on hold. Project stakeholders and program managers did not see value in the PMO. In mid-February 2012, the PMO was eliminated.