I received the P3O guidance book over the weekend and wanted to share a few things from each of the chapters. In this post I look at the introduction which sets the scene.
A promising start to the guidance by clearly setting out the differences between portfolio, programmes and projects and the corresponding PMO models (Portfolio Office, Programme Office and Project Offices – as well as the Centre of Excellence). Everyone who works within the field of PMO knows that the type of set up is very much dependent on the type of organisation you’re working within and what the nature of the programmes and projects are and I think each PMO professional picking up this book will be able to nod their head in agreement with the definitions of the above models. So far so good!
It’s quite nice to see written down in a concise sentence why simply putting in place a model like P3O doesn’t guarantee success, how many of these critical success factors have you griped about over the years: “effective sponsorship, accountability, competent/motivated staff, quality of leadership and demonstrated value” and ensuring the PMO reports to the board, “no commitment” and “insufficient influence”, lead to an ineffective PMO. I think the sponsorship and accountability factors are the two main areas I hear PMO professionals talking about the most.
There’s some good text in there to help PMO professionals think about the value of the Portfolio Office, especially useful when thinking about the benefits in readiness for selling those benefits to the organisation., for e.g., “ensure ongoing alignment of programmes and projects with strategic objectives”
The P3O History section should get most of you nodding your head in agreement, especially if you’ve been working in this field for a while, how many of you have worked within a PMO without a clear vision, scope? Worked in a PMO staffed by anyone available as opposed to with the right skillset? “…endlessly having to justify their existence”?
One thing that resonated with me is how many of the PMOs in existence today started with one individuals take on the world and what the PMO within their organisation should do and what it should look like, but how many would argue that sometimes its not necessarily the right person with the right ideas. Hopefully the guide will provide other individuals in this position with some guidelines to follow rather than floundering.
The guide does state that the “best P3Os are led by a senior P3RM (portfolio, programme, project and risk management) or a strategic /business planning professional” with “influence, experience and credibility to gain commitment from all levels in the organisation”. Couldn’t agree more, and this type of person comes with a renumeration and benefits package to match, so will we start to see PMO Manager roles in the higher brackets? Organisations wanting the best PMOs need to look at the statements above – what makes a good PMO and who do we need to have in place to lead it.
Chapter 2 – Why have a P3O? More later on the next chapter….
It all looks like a good start! Keep the summaries coming Lindsay