Executing, Controlling & Closing Projects - Research Paper Example

EXECUTING, CONTROLLING & CLOSING PROJECTS 0 Introduction In big international conglomerates, the performance of large-scale, long term and intricate programs is contingent to the success and efficacy of the project, program and portfolio (P3) management community of practice. The Project Management Office (PMO) is tasked with the essential objective of laying down and developing principles of practice, administration and decision-making. In fact, PMOs were instituted due to various needs in project management, but in general, all these PMOs had a common goal: to facilitate administrative and decision-making process so that projects can have better outcomes. As a result, there have been various studies, which evaluate the examined the various stages of development of maturity are PMO and P3 Management practices particularly in the Organizational Development (OD) sphere. According to Hobbs and Aubry (2007, p. 74), there is a momentous difference in the structure, the responsibilities, the perceived world as well as the various stages of development of maturity is PMOs. 1.1 Problem Statement Maturity models, particularly, have become a fundamental in the evaluation of organizations’ contemporary aptitudes and assisting them to execute change and enhancements in a controlled manner. These models are composed of a hierarchical compilation of facets which explicate the attributes of effective procedures. As a corollary, maturity models can be used to facilitate organizations in endeavours aimed at garner the advantages that accrue to an organization as a result of enhanced competence. However, most PMOs fail to recognize the significance of the maturity models. This can be detrimental to the efforts aimed at comprehending who the PMO’s clients are, what their wants/desires are, and the manner in which these wants/desires can be appropriately be met by generating comprehensive and abundant merits and generating discernible and measurable worth in the organisation 1.2 Scope Of The Study This paper consequently seeks to compare case study papers on Project Management maturity, and to evaluate P3 maturity models as well as their impact on project delivery success. The paper will use the COMAU Case study by Kerzner, (2010) as the basis for reflection and critical evaluation. After evaluation the methods employed in Kerzner, (2010) as well as other case studies, the paper will suggest options for further improvement and for achieving PMO excellence and maturity. 2.0 Literature Review 2.1 The Operating Philosophy of a PMO A PMO is beyond doubt a service provider in any given business; especially because service providers usually have their contracts terminated at any time if they fail in their task of adding sufficient value to the business. Just like other service providers in an organisation, a PMO can inadvertently lose support form the organizations principals if it is incapable of generating value and discernible merits that substantiate its existence. As a result, a PMO that is determined to endure through the vicissitudes of the organization and the market should see itself as a contracted service provider, which has consumers whose wishes must be completely fulfilled. A PMO develops as the organization in which it works matures, because its clients start having diverse and generally more sophisticated desires and wishes (Dai & Wells, 2004, p. 524). As Aubry et al (2008, p. 43) identified while evaluating the history of four PMOs, PMOs usually undergo a multifaceted and intricate phenomenon of transformation bi-annually, on average, as a result of either the evolution process the organisation or from instability of the organization. This means that the success of a PMO entails its aptitude to comprehend who its clients are, what their wants/desires are, and the manner in which these wants/desires can be appropriately be met by generating comprehensive and abundant merits and generating discernible and measurable worth in the organisation. The maturity process of a PMO entails acquiring the skills needed to meet the new wants/desires of its clients, by introducing services tailored to counter the new wants/desires, and making the new service more sophisticated so as to counter the wants/desires in the most appropriate way possible. 2.2 The Maturity of PMOs The level of PMO maturity is contingent to the extent to which it can produce value for its clients and for the organization in which it operates (Kerzner, 2005). In 2010, Kerzner came up with a book, “Project Management: Best Practices, Achieving Global Excellence,” which conducted a case study on COMAU to establish how PMOs operate. Kerzner, (2010) evaluated sophisticated project management topics and asserted that “the concept project management has advanced from a simple cluster of procedures that used to be regarded as ‘nice’ to scenario where project management is a structured a sophisticated methodology that must be followed if the an organisation wants to survive in this cutthroat world.” This assertion by Kerzner, (2010) implies that if a PMO wants to improve its maturity the methodologies/frameworks used are very important in determining the level of maturity that will be attained by the PMO. This makes the methodologies/frameworks adopted and implemented by PMOs a very important subject of this paper. The Methodologies/Frameworks adopted determine the level of PMO maturity. The various levels of PMO maturity are illustrated in the figure below (Source: Building4Business, 2013) 2.3 PMO Methodologies/Frameworks In the field of business, many different organizations have espoused divergent methods and disciplines in terms of the management and completion of the P3s. To deal with the different, sophisticated and ever-changing wants/desires of their clients the governance of PMOs is tasked with the duty of are identifying and establishing overarching Project Management Methodologies/Frameworks that are capable of endowing the organization with consistent project management practices. These Methodologies/Frameworks must be fashioned to fit the organisations programmes and objectives. As a result, they should cover areas such as the governance of projects, project Lifecycle management, hoe the project’s stakeholders are handled, how changes in the project or management is handled, how the finances of the project are handled, how the employees are managed among others. 2.4 Review the COMAU Case study in Kerzner, (2010) Kerzner, (2010) reckons that organizations are beginning to comprehend that their general business activities can be looked at a sequence of projects. He continues to assert that companies that are regarded as outstanding (e.g., Italy’s conglomerate, Consorsio Macchine Utensili, otherwise known as the COMAU) in the field of business usually manage their business activities as projects. Kerzner, (2010) stipulates that project management is apparent in almost every activity in an organization and for the best result of these activities, the organization must capture and adopt the best project management practices and view them as intellectual assets. Kerzner, (2010) affirms that one of the best ways of capturing best project management practices in an organization is benchmarking (i.e. Comparing a company’s procedures and performance metrics against the procedures and performance metrics from other companies in the same industry) On the issue of PMOs, Kerzner, (2010) strongly reckons that the purpose of a PMO is to make sure that the principles and procedures of project management are aligned in a manner that facilitates achievement of success of projects and the realization of the organization’s goals and vision.” This implies that a company, regardless of its size can gain from a PMO because it enables better outcomes for the company and augments the efficacy and competence of both profit and non-profit ventures. Kerzner, (2010) holds the opinion that a PMO could very well be the most imperative project management element in the contemporary world On the issue of PMO excellence and maturity, Kerzner (2010) asserts that the maturity of a PMO can be evaluated by its looking at the extent to excel in its efforts on managing the organisation’s activities and achieving the goals and vision, especially in favour of the clients. Client centricity, being a natural factor of an organizations activity, should address the issue of satisfaction and loyalty of the clients (Kerzner, 2010). This consequently implies that organisations should re-examine their project management methodology, i.e. taking into consideration the issue of client centricity. Kerzner’s, (2010) assertions about PMO excellence and maturity leaves the impression that the methodology (IEs) adopted by an organisation should be very supple and to be tailored in a manner that enables the organisation met its clients’ wants/desires. As a corollary, the dashboards of PMOs should be customizable so that they can reflect the client’s ever-changing needs 2.5 Comparison Between Kerzner’s (2010) Study And Other Studies On PMO Maturity The point where Kerzner’s (2010) veiws differs from other academics regarding PMO maturity and management pertains to changes in projects and risk management. Most researchers and academics correspondingly link the issues of changes in projects to issues of risk management in an organisation (i.e. changes in projects and risk management in an organisation happen simultaneously). As a result, they support the assertion that alterations or modifications to the projects goals, extent, and implementation are the biggest risk factors in an organisation. If, therefore, a PMO is aware of prospective alterations or modifications to certain elements of the project during the commencement of the project should include those prospective alterations or modifications in the risk management strategies. Just like Kerzner (2010) most researchers and academics (e.g. Datta & Mukherjee, 2001; Heldman & Heldman, 2007; Meredith and Mantel, 2006) agree that the methodologies used in the management of change and risk management have to be associated and synchronized. Heldman & Heldman (2007) goes ahead to note that risk can also arise due to insufficient management and documentation of changes. These undocumented changes are usually referred to as hidden changes. The difference in opinions between various researchers and academics is usually based on the role which PMOs should play in handling changes and risk management. According to Frame (2003), the role of a PMO to anticipate for change, so that the changes do not surprise the management team and cripple the whole project. Charvat (2003) like Frame (2003) stipulates that PMO methodologies aim at studying the project’s environmental impacts so as to get the information during the planning phase so that the management team can anticipate changes of the project. Kerzner (2010) on the other hand, asserts that the role of a PMO in risk and change management is to decrease or alleviate any cases of surprises during the project rather than anticipating for the changes. Thomsett (2002) and Young (2000) articulate opinions similar to those of Kerzner (2010) pertaining to the role of a PMOs in risk and change management in an organisation. 3.0 Discussions 3.0 Improving PMO Excellence And Maturity Improving PMO excellence and maturity essentially refers to efforts directed at improving of the project management procedures. Several methods of improving PMO excellence and maturity have been identified by different the scholars, e.g. spiderweb model (Morris and Pinto, 2007, pp. 269). This paper postulates that efforts aimed at improving PMO excellence and maturity should consist of two stages: (1) the evaluation of the present stage of the project management and (2) the choice of the most appropriate and preferred level of maturity that should be adopted. As Kerzner (2010, pp. 533) stipulates, “A PMO should get acquainted with the context of the project for continuous improvement of the management of the project.” Drawing reference from this assessment, companies should endeavour to strengthen its management practices, and improve the processes that lack robustness so that they can alleviate weaknesses and improve their PMO excellence and maturity. There is no worldwide formula for improving PMO excellence and maturity because the steps of doing this are contingent to the organisation, and its goals and vision. This paper also endorses the several practices identified by Morley and Foley, (2006, pp. 481- 482) that can help in efforts aimed at improving PMO excellence and maturity. These include assessment of the environmental context of the project to get acquainted with the alterations or modifications to certain elements of the project, strong administrative and executive support to enhance successful risk and change management, alignment of strategic human resources management with the changes in the projects and organisation and finally linking the strategic and operational elements change 3.2 P3 Maturity Models And Their Impact On Project Delivery Success From the above in-depth coverage about P3 maturity models, it is evident that indeed the models improve the likelihood of delivery outcomes of projects being successful. The P3 models set a pathway through which organizations can evolve out of immaturity, where risks are high and qualities of projects are low, to maturity, where risks are immensely decreased and quality augmented. P3 models are responsible for enhancing value for money by improving the standards. The models achieve this through policy and process guidance, which in turn helps companies to improve their competence and aptitude to deliver successfully. P3 maturity models can also be used to assess an organisation’s current performance. There are several reasons why organizations might choose to use a maturity model to evaluate their performance. These reasons include rationalizing investment in P3 management enhancements, to gain recognition of quality service so as to support proposals, and to gain a superior comprehension of their potencies and flaws so as to facilitate improvement. Some P3 models usually offer a more holistic view of a company’s performance, by means of a broad spread of attributes. However, amid these success factors, it is essential for companies to understand the most favourable level of performance in their pursuit of achieving a maximum value for money and to have a pragmatic outlook of what they can accomplish. Not all companies have the aptitude to attain the utmost level of maturity and, for many, the middle levels of maturity may be sufficient to meet their needs and objectives. To reap the maximum benefits from P3 maturity models, performance enhancement should be seen as a long-term procedure, even though the achievement of performance enhancement in the short-term performance is also possible. 4.0 Conclusion This comprehensive evaluation PMOs and maturity models confirms that the field of P#3 and PMO management and maturity is intricate and diverse. It is evident that there is a need to provide a self-assessment tool to cater for the wide range of possible roles of PMOs in maturity models and management. This paper reviews the COMAU case study in Kerzner, (2010) and uses this case study as the foundation for reflection and decisive assessment. The methodologies in PMO maturities are investigating options are recommended for further improvement and for achieving PMO excellence and maturity. The paper goes ahead to evaluate how P3 maturity models affect the success of project delivery. 5.0 Reference List Aubry, M., Hobbs, B., & Thuillier, D. (2008), Organisational project management: An historical approach to the study of PMOs. International Journal of Project Management, 26(1), 38–43. Building4Business, (2013), Project Program and Portfolio Management (available at http://www.building4business.com.au/ppp.html accessed on 23 April 2014) Charvat, J. (2003), Project Management Methodologies - Selecting, Implementing, and Supporting Methodologies and Processes for Projects. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken. Dai, C. X., & Wells, W. G. (2004), An exploration of project management office features and their relationship to project performance. International Journal of Project Management, 22, 523-532. Datta, S. &Mukherjee, S. K. (2001), Developing a risk management matrix for eff ective project planning – an empirical study. Project Management Journal. 32 (2), 45-57. Frame, J. D. (2003), Managing projects in organizations: how to make the best use of time, techniques, and people (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Heldman, K. & Heldman, W. (2007), Microsoft offi ce Excel 2007 for project managers. Wiley Publishing, Indianapolis. Hobbs, B., & Aubry, M. (2007), A multi-phase research program investigating project management offices (PMOs): The results of phase 1. Project Management Journal, 38(1), 74–86. Kerzner, H. (2005), Using the project management maturity model: Strategic planning for project management. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Kerzner, H. (2010), Project management best practices: achieving global excellence; 2nd edition; Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons, Inc Morris, P. & Pinto, J. (2007), The Wiley guide to project program and portfolio management. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons, Inc Meredith, J.R. & Mantel, S.J. (2006), Project management: a managerial approach (6th ed.). John Wiley & Sons, New York. Thomsett, R. (2002), Radical project management. Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River. Young, T.L. (2000), Successful project management. Kogan Page, London. Read More