You may be thinking that if you are in the
Information Technology (IT) space, that EVERYONE is in the services industry.
That may not be very accurate and the reason why is that if you are a project
manager (PM) in a large corporation’s IT group, you may not necessarily be in a
“services” group. We can argue that point of view during another blog. However,
what I would like to ask you is this: Do you believe a service organization is
a better place for a PM? What I mean is this: is a service organization more
like a consulting organization rather than a professional services organization,
and is it a better organization for a PM to use his/her skill set? In a service
oriented organization that has a strong Professional Service Organization (PSO)
the focus for the PM is a bit different than a Project Management Organization
(PMO).
It seems that service organizations need
good quality PMs because of the increased emphasis on project budget. A
downside may be the number of projects a good PM may have to manage at one
time. And let’s not forget resource scarcity. So let’s take this one at a time.
Budget Emphasis
In a service organization, the focus on
budget is intense, and not just for expenses. The reason a service organization
is in place is to provide specialized service for the client at a profit for
the service organization. So, like other projects, this project must be on
budget or under budget. If there is a possible budget over-run, the PM must
communicate that risk to the client and convince and commit the client to a
change request that adds to the budget and possibly the scope and timeline, while
keeping the project green.
This is not easy since this project is to
generate not only revenues, but most importantly, profits. The PM in a service
organization MUST know the difference between those two terms and must be in
line with the profit-generating mind-set. If not, that PM is looking at
possible failure within the project and most likely within the organization.
Project Resource Emphasis
Service organizations are historically
“lean and mean” to promote profits. That makes it additionally hard for a PM to
attain and keep project resources. I can’t tell you how many times a resource
manager has come to my desk in the middle of my project and said, “Oh by the
way Benny, we have to take Jane away from you for XYZ project.” If you hear a
scream, that is me. We can all say, “Then why doesn’t that organization staff
to the project?” Good question. Mainly because, the organization may go through
economic phases where they may have a good pipeline and times where they have a
very shallow pipeline. Some service organizations may staff with third-party
consultants. However, what service organizations don’t want to so is “home
grow” their competition. So having third-parties may be both a blessing and a
curse.
So how does a PM keep an important
resource? Make that resource important to the client they are servicing and
most likely that client will compliment the resource to the senior management
team of the service organization. In that case, the management team wants
“return business” from this client and the last thing they want to do is make
the client unhappy.
Number of Projects that a PM Manages
Service organizations historically are
known to keep their staff size small. So a PM in a service organization may
have to work on more than the desired number of projects (5-8 projects
depending on the size). However, in a service organization, that number may
jump to 10 projects. If that happens, it is up to the PM to discuss this with
management and provide input to the term “diminishing returns.” However, the PM
must be prepared when having this discussion. The PM must come with proof that he
or she has performed admirably in the past and now the PM's work is compromised
because of the quantity of projects, NOT because of the quality. Perception is
reality here and the PM must focus on the past quality of work to management so
that the quality of the PM's work is never in question.
I have used this term in the past and it
serves to repeat it: the PM walks a tight-rope in this situation because of
perception. Once the PM proves that he/she can do the work with the right staff
and number of projects, the PM has the ammunition to discuss issues with
management. However, if a PM is considering working in a service organization,
that PM must know going in that a
service organization is a challenging place to work because of budgets,
resources, and the number of projects.
Quality concerns are (or should be) especially high in a service organization. That's because the primary focus of such organizations is to satisfy clients. It's too expensive to such organizations to lose a client. Therefore, a good PM infrastructure can be very budget friendly by working to maintain high quality.
ReplyDeleteAll good points, Benny, and any CIO can relate as the same balancing act applies to their role.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete