PMI’s organizational project management maturity model
John Schlichter, Managing Director, The Project Management Group, Inc.
(and volunteer OPM3 Program Director, PMI)
When we begin to view and perform the work of an organization as multiple projects, we begin to understand project management as a holistic system that spans an enterprise. Projects interact and change in a web of dynamic priorities and deliver the work that enacts organization strategy. In this context, project management is more than project implementation. It also covers a strategic domain encompassing more than the multiple project delivery systems of program management, spanning both activities that align projects to strategic priorities and infrastructure that enables the project environment. It is thought that capabilities across this spectrum of areas distinguish organizations that can translate organization strategy repeatedly and reliably into project success from those that cannot. Capabilities must be developed and improved incrementally, and the steps must be planned.
An increasing number of organizations that are managing by projects (either in part or as a whole) are interested in learning about and developing a maturity model that shows how to enhance and maintain an organization's ability to translate organizational strategy into the successful and consistent delivery of projects. Recent reports have explored the relationship between the maturity of the organization and project success. Many have linked project management competence to project management effectiveness. Yet standards describing organizational project management capabilities and their relationship to organizational success have been lacking until now. Indeed, many maturity models already exist, yet none shows a step-by-step method of developing and maintaining an organization's ability to translate organizational strategy into the successful and consistent delivery of projects.
In May 1998 the Project Management Institute (PMI) approved a group of projects organized as the Organizational Project Management Maturity Model (OPM3) Program to create a maturity model accredited as a PMI standard. The exposure draft of the maturity model is due to be published during the second quarter of 2002. At the time of the writing of this paper in April 2001, over 100 volunteers are developing the maturity model standards that will describe how an organization can grow the capabilities necessary to derive the benefits of organizational project management. This paper explains organizational project management, its relevance to organizations today, and what it means to “model” organizational project management maturity.
What is Organizational Project Management?
Expanding the context of project management to its organizational environment invites a variety of ideas: company-wide emphasis, systematic improvement, process orientation, customer focus, employee involvement and development, and cross-functional management—meat and potatoes of an old management recipe called Total Quality Management (TQM) that sat better with some than others. Yet organizational project management is not a management fad. Organizational project management simply refers to the processes and practices necessary to execute a firm's strategies via projects. It is new as a discipline only insofar as it is codified in emerging yet actionable standards that capture the experience of hundreds of project management practitioners vis-a-vis the form and function of management by projects. The purpose of PMI‘s OPM3 Program is to articulate the standards of this discipline and to specify how an organization can implement them, thereby enhancing the organization's ability to execute its strategies through the successful, consistent, and predictable delivery of projects.
When we begin to view and perform the work of an organization as multiple projects, we begin to understand project management as a holistic system that spans an enterprise. Although I have taken liberties in my narration of the principles of organizational project management, the essential ideas belong to and represent the opinions of many project management practitioners captured in a series of structured surveys as part of an international standards development program. A separate paper deals with the research methodology of the effort (Cooke-Davies, Schlichter, Bredillet, 2001).
One of the foremost tenets of organizational project management is commitment to the project management process. This is manifest in company policies and shared beliefs, values, and behaviors as well as the training and reward systems for people within the project hierarchy. Executives understand and buy into project management and have open dialogue about project effectiveness. Effective decision-making occurs regarding the multiple projects that the organization can undertake as well as their relative importance.
Predicated on management commitment, functions and systems must exist to align and prioritize projects to the organization's strategic priorities. How does this manifest itself? Measurable strategies of senior management are clearly communicated. The projects that support the organization's strategic priorities are clearly identifiable and arise from business requirements. The organization assesses the value of the projects it selects and how its projects are linked to organization strategy. With project success being linked explicitly to the organization's success, criteria for the continuation or termination of projects are developed and used. Project success criteria are defined when projects are chartered, as are criteria for terminating projects early. Project scope, quality, and schedule goals are mutually attainable and consistent.
The competence of project participants must be assessed and developed. The workforce must be appropriately skilled and motivated for each project-related role. Organizational project management naturally requires project sponsors and managers that are knowledgeable of project management and have experience relevant to the projects they sponsor or manage respectively. The environment should allow project participants to experience their competence frequently, and the organization's culture must be based on teamwork. Teams commit to their promises, earn and maintain trust, and are recognized and rewarded. The culture thrives on effective communication, trust, and cooperation.
In the organizational project management environment, project management methods and processes must be standardized and integrated. A common language is understood and used by all project participants throughout the organization, and systems exist for managing project managers. Resource allocation to the projects of the organization is effective, efficient, and consistent with the organization's strategies. Flexibility to redeploy resources is built into the organizational infrastructure.
Project management metrics are necessary to establish and monitor levels of organizational performance. Projects should be measured against a standard planning baseline. Processes, structures, systems, and practices allow the organization to assure and monitor the quality of products delivered through projects and the degree of customer satisfaction achieved. A continuous improvement approach is adopted, and learning from projects is translated into the corporate approach to project management.
Hence, organizational project management spans organizational commitment, business alignment and prioritization processes, the use of success criteria for the selection or termination of projects, standardization and integration of project management methods, development of project related roles, teamwork, performance measurement at multiple levels, and a continuous improvement approach.
Why is Organizational Project Management Relevant?
It is thought that capabilities across this spectrum of areas distinguish organizations that can translate organization strategy repeatedly and reliably into project success from those that cannot. It is possible to articulate how these capabilities manifest themselves as organizational routines, and making these routines explicit allows us to expand the benefits of the project management process and structure to the firm as a whole. Adaptability, flexibility and adroitness can be built into the infrastructure of the organization, and ultimately this amounts to an organization's ability to act on its environment and convert opportunities into improvements to the bottom line.
Organizational project management should be relevant to executives everywhere if we agree with explanations for why CEO‘s fail given by Charan and Colvin. They say “You'd never guess it from reading the papers or talking to your broker or studying most business books, but what's true at (one company) is true at most companies where the CEO fails...” It is not that they lack good strategies but that they execute strategies badly. Organizational project management is essentially the core competence to execute organization strategies successfully. Simple logic may dictate that project management success (including successful cultivation and execution across the breadth of areas described above) promotes project successes, in turn promoting the success of the firm that executes its strategies via projects. But only the logic is simple. Execution is hard, especially in a world that changes more rapidly and grows more complex and unknowable than ever before.
One need only recall the companies sited by the authors of In Search of Excellence (Peters & Waterman, 1982), whose secrets to excellence in 1980 did not save them from poor performance during the following decade. “A universal key to excellence does not exist—it must be permanently remodeled according to the environmental developments, counteracting the habits which fix organizations in the deep sleep of rigidity” (Godet, 1991). Organizational strategy formulation must account for external opportunities and internal competencies, and strategies must be translated into the work of the organization with agility, flexibility, and adroitness. Capabilities must be developed to economize the use of resources intensely and profitably. Such capabilities will never become obsolete, and although they take time to develop, they are a source of competitive advantage that is difficult to transfer or steal. Embedded in the culture, processes, and systems of an organization, they are difficult to imitate or transfer.
What is a Maturity Model?
Maturity is a term that can have either positive or negative connotations, but in the context of maturity models, it is always desirable. In fact, this one thing is true of all maturity models: they describe a process whereby something desirable can be developed or achieved, i.e. capabilities. The use of the word “maturity” implies that capabilities must be grown over time. The Random House College Dictionary defines “maturity” as full development or perfected condition. “Maturity” also connotes understanding or perception of why success occurs and ways to correct or prevent common problems. The Random College House Dictionary also defines the word capability as “(1) The quality of being capable; capacity; ability, (2) the ability to undergo or be affected by a given treatment or action. (3) Usually, capabilities, qualities, abilities, etc. that can be used or developed.” There is the related “term of art” used in manufacturing engineering, “capability of a process, Cp,” where capability describes a mathematically calculated value that characterizes a process's ability to repeatedly meet its requirements. A maturity model can identify an ordered set of capabilities that an organization acquires as it embarks on its deliberate program of incremental improvement.
Exhibit 1. Logical Model
Many maturity models already exist. There are models for organizations that want to increase their capabilities to develop and manage software, systems engineering, integrated product teams, system security, and systems acquisition. Another model serves to develop human resources. Another has been developed that integrates the models just mentioned. An early model indicated steps necessary to increase the organizationwide quality of manufacturing firms. Many of these models are based on human life span models that identify, chronicle, and sequence human social and mental development. Many of the existing models mention project management and some of the existing models are organizational project management maturity models. Yet none shows what is arguably more desirable than any of these examples: a step-by-step method of developing and maintaining an organization's ability to translate organizational strategy into the successful and consistent delivery of projects.
Maturity models proliferated in the 1990s because of US Department of Defense requirements for qualifying vendors. Businesses’ need for assessment persists, but qualifying vendors may not be the main driver of future viable maturity models aimed at improving organization performance. The focus has shifted to customer satisfaction, which is a quality concern, and creation of shareholder value, which many believe is achieved through a higher volume + lower inventory = shareholder value equation. However, many approaches might solve this equation, all of which lead to hyper-competition if they do not create a competitive advantage. The two fundamental needs common to all organizations who want to survive and thrive in the future include the need for the ability to reinvent themselves through new strategies and the need for the ability to execute those strategies successfully. Thriving organizations will develop core competencies in the execution of organization strategies through projects. An organizational project management maturity model that guides development of such core competencies could be a singular source of competitive advantage.
What Does it Mean to “Model Organizational Project Management Maturity”?
In 2000, we began dialogue within our teams about what constitutes organizational project management in a mature organization; see appendix A. This was a structured exercise using a modified “Delphi” approach (Cooke-Davies, Schlichter, Bredillet, 2001). Many of the elements of a mature organization that were identified contained multiple ideas, and we tried to parse them so that each element contained only one unique idea. This resulted in the further division of 59 elements into 146, and several elements still could be and probably need to be divided further. This “Delphi” dialogue was important because it jump-started the process of capturing input from a wide and diverse group of project management practitioners, which is precisely what we must do to develop professional standards.
We took the results of that dialogue and grouped the 146 elements that had been identified into 10 categories that we called “clusters” of elements, recognizing that some overlap still existed in the subject matter across clusters. We mobilized ten teams of volunteers and assigned one team to each cluster of elements. Each team was asked to organize the elements assigned to them. Recognizing that an organization or firm would not be able to implement all of the Delphi elements overnight, we asked our teams to articulate the steps that an organization would need to take in order to implement each element. The teams articulated the steps in terms of the incremental capabilities that an organization would need to develop and the corresponding outcomes or benefits that an organization could expect from exercising each capability. The number of steps necessary to implement any given aspect (or element) of organizational project management varied from team to team.
The result in January 2001 was that we had ten teams or Design Cells developing their own paths or steps to maturity for their own sets of elements of a mature organization, many of which overlapped conceptually or depended on elements from other Design Cells. Some elements contained multiple ideas. Also, teams were not using a standard format to document their work. Solutions to these problems were agreed upon in a leadership meeting in Atlanta in February 2001. Team leaders agreed to perform a detailed exercise that would document general relationships among all elements, which would result in a comprehensive element-to-element mapping (Cooke-Davies, Schlichter, Bredillet, 2001). This exercise is important because it enables identification of the elements that exert the most influence on all other elements, specifically those elements that drive organizational project management maturity. Leaders also agreed to standardize on spreadsheets to document their clusters of elements and the paths to maturity that they had begun to develop in January. The kinds of objects that would compose the maturity model and logical relationships among maturity model objects were agreed upon; see Exhibit 1 developed by OPM3 Engineering Team Co-lead Bill Wright.
At the time of the writing of this paper, capabilities across the domains of all Design Cells have not been grouped into the chronological phases (or levels) that an organization would undergo in its quest for maturity. All of the initial capabilities that an organization would need to establish will be grouped in a first phase or level, followed by all of the capabilities of the next phase, etc. As we group these capabilities, we will consider the results of the element-to-element mapping analysis begun in February, ensuring that we have adequately articulated what an organization needs to do in order to implement the “driving” and “linking” elements of organizational project management.
When we begin to view and perform the work of an organization as multiple projects, we begin to understand project management as a holistic system that spans an enterprise. It is thought that capabilities across a spectrum of areas distinguish organizations that can translate organization strategy repeatedly and reliably into project success from those that cannot. Because the number of organizations that are managing by projects (either in part or as a whole) continues to grow, there is increased interest in learning about and developing a maturity model that shows how to increase and maintain an organization's ability to translate organizational strategy into the successful and consistent delivery of projects. The convention of a maturity model is useful as an organization change paradigm for developing the core competencies that underpin the successful execution of organization strategies. The effort to capture the principles of organizational project management and to develop a maturity model standard is underway at the time of the writing of this paper. Contact email@example.com with questions.
Archier, G., and Serieyx, H. 1984. L‘enterprise du 3eme type. Paris, Seuil.
Charin, R., and Colvin, G. 1999. Why CEO‘s Fail. Fortune Magazine, June.
Cooke-Davies, T., Schlichter, J., and Bredillet, C. 2001. Beyond the PMBOK® Guide. PMI ‘01 Annual Symposium, Nashville.
Godet, M. 1994. From anticipation to action: a handbook of strategic prospective. Paris: UNESCO Publishing.
Peters, T., and Waterman, R. 1982. In Search of Excellence. New York: Harper & Row.
01 Standardization and Integration of Methods and Processes
• A common language (terms, concepts, equations/calculations, reports, graphs, etc.) that is embraced, understood and used by all people involved in projects throughout the organization.
• A common set of processes that is used consistently for the management of individual projects and for the integration of multiple projects throughout the various divisions and levels of management.
• A PM Office.
• A system for managing project managers.
• Adherence to a methodology, processes, and procedures.
• Capabilities in collecting, developing, implementing, and using, industry related “best practice” methods and tools.
• Full integration of all of the nine functions of project management from the PMBOK® Guide.
• Processes, structures and practices that allow individual projects to be managed and controlled effectively.
• Project tools and other corporate systems (such as financial reports or timesheets) that are integrated, automated and that support a project view of the organization. There is minimal manual collection and dissemination of data across the organizational systems.
02 Performance and Metrics
• A formal performance system that deals with the classical aspects of cost-time-quality measurement applied to both the product(s) of a project (effectiveness) and to the processes to deliver the product (efficiency). This is the source of the reward system both for individuals and project teams.
• A policy for training and development integrated with a series of measures that check the effectiveness of project personnel.
• A set of measures that demonstrate the level of customer satisfaction is established and maintained.
• A standard planning baseline expressed in units that are the same for all projects, that are captured at specified stages in the project's life cycle, and that are approved and recorded according to a specified process.
• A standard presentation format for information regarding decisions about course corrections and killing/terminating projects that covers a balance of different measures, both operational and financial, e.g., project dashboards.
• A system that provides historic, real-time and predictive measures and indicators of how projects, portfolios/programs, and the organization as a whole is performing relative to its plans/current baselines and especially as compared to its criteria for success (project success, portfolio/program success, and organizational success).
• A track record illustrating that over time projects have been delivered to schedule, within budget, and to scope/specification, with minimum scope change, and without disrupting the ongoing business of the company.
• Ability to set and monitor levels of organizational performance.
• An organizing framework containing a series of initiatives (projects) with defined objectives, incentives to improve, and an effective communication plan that heralds all the factors and criteria needed in order to achieve maturity.
• Comparison and validation of organizational performance against external “best in class” measures.
• Determination of organizational effectiveness through a series/set of measures that includes delivery of projects (how well they are delivered).
• External performance measures that indicate a need to improve project performance.
• Formal processes and/or procedures that are used to assess performance.
• Measurement for compliance to the defined corporate process and for process improvements.
• Measurement of each project against a standard planning baseline.
• Mechanisms that demonstrate whether projects are delivering a planned and satisfactory return on investment.
• Metrics summarize the recorded performance of schedule, cost, scope, commercial safety and customer satisfaction for every project undertaken by the organization. These metrics might include, for example, the mean, median, best and worst performance against plan for all projects completed during the previous three months.
• Processes, structures, systems and practices that allow the organization to assure and to monitor the quality of products delivered through projects, and the degree of customer satisfaction achieved.
• Repeat business that is obtained from satisfied customers and attributed by them to effective management of projects.
• The ability to structure performance assessment, pay and rewards according to project structures, achievements and timescales which do not necessarily align with calendar cycles. (This may involve both team-based and individual rewards.)
• The capacity to integrate appropriate project management standards (methods, tools, processes), e.g., DoD, NASA, industry related standards, PMBOK® Guide, IPMA Competency Baseline, APM BOK, BS6079, etc.)
03 Commitment to the PM Process
• A Board of Directors that is involved in setting project management policies with specified goals.
• A common framework that is understood and used by all project stakeholders for conceptualizing, designing, planning, executing, managing, and closing-out all project-based work.
• A common PM culture, with all people involved in projects sharing congruent beliefs, values and behaviors that support effective project working.
• A focus on promoting the cause of project management.
• A management-by-projects ethos that is developed and embraced by the organization.
• A project management framework containing policies that the PM community understands, embraces, and follows for the conduct and control of the project commitment. Policies include roles, responsibilities, limits of authority, accountability, and so forth.
• A structured program of training and development (offered via a variety of media) to raise the skill levels of the people involved in delivering change through projects.
• A training policy that addresses both the roles of people within the project hierarchy (such as the project sponsor) and organizational issues such as the effective management of task forces, matrix organizations, and the operation of project offices.
• Application by the PM community and throughout the organization of a system that provides information for decisions about course corrections and killing/terminating projects.
• Appropriate mechanisms within the project management community for recruiting, supporting, assessing, rewarding, and developing its members.
• Business operations that utilize project management principles. All work in the organization is managed in a project-like manner.
• Executives who are educated as to the benefits of project management.
• Internal communities that support project management expertise (formal and/or informal networks).
• Membership of external communities that support project management expertise, i.e. professional associations or initiatives.
• Open dialogue between the project community and the top team (senior mgmt.) about project success, and organizational effectiveness.
• Open-mindedness, e.g., participation in professional associations.
• Practitioners and stakeholders within the organization who willingly apply the processes that surround the delivery of change through projects.
• Recognition by top management that the need for improved project management is an essential organizational requirement.
• Recognition that Organizational Project Management Maturity is part of organizational improvement and that it is essential to the future of the enterprise.
• Strong executive level support of the project management process.
• Values that are defined and employees who consistently live them.
04 Business Alignment and Prioritization
• A clearly identifiable set of projects that support the organization's strategic aims.
• A measure that compares the organizational resources applied to projects that support each major corporate strategy with the importance of the strategy to the organization.
• A project delivery resource that embraces long term objectives spanning more than one project.
• A project delivery resource that has a clear, specific and measurable strategy.
• A project delivery resource that is mobilized behind its agreed set of initiatives.
• A reporting system that supports multiproject management and the organizational framework for project management.
• A strategy and objectives embraced by a senior management that is capable of and willing to share and communicate them.
• A system including a strong and effective communication component that is in place to assure that the strategy and objectives of senior management is shared continuously.
• A system that provides information for decisions about course corrections and killing/terminating projects.
• Ability to manage the level of risk to which the organization is exposed.
• Ability to provide necessary finance and deliver returns on that finance.
• An understanding of “programs” that includes program definition and its relationship with business strategy.
• An understanding of multiproject management on both of its aspects: (a) a set of related projects to achieve a coherent business objective, and (b) a set of unrelated projects to optimize resource utilization and the achievement of individual project objectives.
• Decisions that are based on the best interest of all stakeholders.
• Effective decision-making processes that enable the organization to decide how much project work it can undertake, the profit level required to return, and the timeframe in which returns are required.
• Processes for the management of individual projects and for the integration of multiple projects that link from the business to project initiation (through all phases of the project life cycle and project delivery) and back to the business cycle.
• Project work and deliverables that align with organization strategy and objectives.
• Projects arise from a business requirement as opposed to some entrepreneurial activity within the organization.
• Techniques of program management that are used for the evolution of program objectives and for the control of the program of work and its resources.
• Understanding of the relative importance (not sequence) of work packages (and activities) between and within projects.
• Willingness to set and accept priorities stemming from an effective strategic process and an adequate skills database.
05 Continuous Improvement
• “Lessons learned” that are stored in an accessible location for project teams to minimize failed strategies.
• A change program or a framework organizing a series of projects aimed at developing or achieving maturity exists.
• A documented plan to achieve where the organization wants to go, and the ability to measure current project performance, create a target performance level, and identify the steps needed to get there.
• A process to capture and disseminate lessons learned from projects.
• A quality system (procedures) for Project Management and Project Portfolio Management, e.g., meta-rules, ISO 10006, etc.
• Evidence of the capture/dissemination process and the reuse of information in subsequent projects.
• Learning from projects that is translated into the corporate approach.
• Learning that takes place in all of its dimensions (individual, team, organizational).
• Lessons learned that are capitalized.
• Maturity that is demonstrated through an externally accredited quality management system.
• Recognition and acceptance of the need to improve project performance against external benchmarks to achieve target levels.
06 Success Criteria for Continuation or Culling
• A means of identifying and selecting the projects to be undertaken that includes elements such as mechanisms for the assessment of the worth/value of projects to the organization.
• A means of identifying and selecting the projects to be undertaken that includes the identification of the investment (human and financial) it wishes to make available to projects and the balance of investment it wishes to make across different types of projects.
• A means of identifying and selecting the projects to be undertaken that includes evaluating how projects are linked to strategy (at either business unit or corporate level).
• A project prioritization process that is integrated with a review and reprioritization process.
• Measurement of project portfolio performance using metrics that reflect the definition of success, to include perspectives of different stakeholders.
• Processes, structures and practices that allow the interactions between projects to be controlled in an optimal way when change occurs.
• Project goals such as scope, quality grade, time-to-produce and total cost at completion that are mutually consistent and attainable.
• Strategic objectives of projects that include explicit goals in addition to project time, cost and quality metrics.
• Success criteria that are defined at the start of the project and managed and visible throughout the project.
• Success criteria that include “triggers” to “kill a project” as well as criteria for the acceptability of the project's deliverables.
07 People and Their Competence
• A formal competency assessment mechanism that provides the ability to assess the level of competency of people involved in key project roles.
• A project management community containing all jobs that are necessary for the effective management of the total project portfolio, i.e., project sponsors, program managers, project control officers, and project managers.
• A project management community that provides sufficient competent resources to manage the organization's total project portfolio.
• A workforce possessing the right level of competence to provide appropriately skilled, competent and motivated people for each project-related role.
• Ability to provide requisite technical skills.
• An environment in which each person finds it easier to more frequently experience his or her competence. Examples of ways the organization does this are through equitable compensation, rewards, recognition, creating a workspace/environment conducive to thinking, sharing, creating, innovating, learning, and community.
• Appropriate technical and administrative support.
• Continuous training in the use of tools, methodology, and deployment of knowledge into practice.
• Employee retention: A measure of an organization's ability to be the “employer of choice”
• Individuals who are integrated into project teams, managed formally through the lifecycle of projects, and managed in transition from one project to another.
• Managers and professionals who are knowledgeable and competent in project management.
• Mechanisms, systems, and processes that provide professionally qualified project managers and able and committed project team members.
• People that feel good about themselves and what they do—and that get closer to reaching their potential—because they experience their competence as frequently as possible.
• Personal development including training, coaching and mentoring that recognizes the temporary nature of projects and the elements of team building and working essential to project success.
• Project managers who are sufficiently knowledgeable of the undertaking, the processes involved, and their associated risks.
• Project managers who are the project delivery team's primary representative and who make all decisions that affect project scope with the Sponsor.
• Project managers who are willing to undertake their projects.
• Project managers who have dedication, commitment, tenacity, and authority to ensure project success.
• Project managers who have skills and experience relevant to the projects they manage and the technology of their projects.
• Project managers who manage the projects and lead project delivery teams.
• Project managers who, with the help of the team, develop appropriate project strategies and tactics, plans, and controls to convert resources into required deliverables.
• Project sponsors who are sufficiently knowledgeable of the undertaking, the processes involved and their associated risks, and are willing to undertake the challenge (project).
• Project sponsors who have skills relevant to the project, including its technology, as well as experience, dedication, commitment, tenacity, and authority to ensure the project's success.
• Project sponsors who provide resources (money and/or goods and services) and general direction to all the projects undertaken by the organization.
• Qualification standards and training for project managers, that address the PMBOK® Guide, people-related attributes and skills, and experience with projects.
• Sponsors who make sure that the best interests of both the customer and the company are recognized.
08 Allocating People to Projects
• Acceptance of priorities between projects by the PM community, (particularly the Sponsors, Project Managers, Line or Functional Managers and Customers) so as to allow the efficient and effective allocation of resources.
• Efficient redeployment of resources from projects that have been terminated prematurely to others that are consistent with the organization's strategic priorities.
• Means of assigning human, information, logistics, materials, and financial resources to projects, and recording that they are deployed on those projects.
• Resources that are allocated consistently with the organization's strategy.
09 Organizational Fit
• A clearly defined project team structure with defined roles and responsibilities.
• A corporate approach tailored to the needs of the organization and to the management of projects that acts as a route-map for all concerned as to what should be happening (in planning and control terms) at any point of the project's life cycle.
• A corporate approach to project management that identifies the structure of and interactions between project processes, stakeholder satisfaction processes, innovation and development processes, supply processes, and operational processes.
• A culture that thrives on effective communications, trust, and cooperation.
• A means of implementing strategy through the delivery of projects that is appropriate to the organization structure, the types of project undertaken, and the management ethos.
• A multimanagement level reporting structure.
• Processes for the management of individual projects and for the integration of multiple projects that are applied with flexibility so as not to create an excessive amount of bureaucracy for different types and sizes of projects.
• Recognition of the extent to which the organization is project driven or nonproject driven.
• The ability to adapt/evolve PM techniques according to the situation at hand.
• The ability to select and apply PM techniques appropriately according to the situation at hand.
• A culture that is based on teamwork and establishes high levels of innovation and creativity in work groups.
• Cooperation that is the norm and that takes place without formal intervention of authority. Team members know the right thing and do it.
• People in different roles and functions throughout the organization who collaborate to define and agree on common goals.
• Teams that are committed to the work they do and the promised they make.
• Teams that are recognized and rewarded for creativity.
• Teams that create an environment that allows team members to have an excellent experience of themselves and satisfaction with their work.
• Teams that do not have hidden agendas.
• Teams that earn and maintain trust.
• Teams that have a clear understanding of where the organization is going and what it is about.
• Teams that have a propensity to take risks.
• Teams that share information freely and are consistently open and honest with each other.
• Teams that trust each other and are loyal to each other and the company.
• Use of teamwork.
Proceedings of the Project Management Institute Annual Seminars & Symposium
November 1–10, 2001 • Nashville, Tenn., USA
Hurricane Katrina decimated thousands of buildings in New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, in 2005, including a U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical facility that served approximately 40,000…
Federal Project and Program Management Community of Practice (FedPM CoP) – How Sharing Best Practices Can Lead to Success
Recognizing the value of a community focused on project practice capability and how such a community could help improve the performance of departments across the U.S. federal government, the leaders…
Developing a Project Management Office in the Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration
This case example, a supplement to the report, PMIAA: Strengthening the Government Delivery Foundation, highlights project and program management capability building within The U.S. Energy…
Commissioned and supported with research from PMI, MIT’s Consortium for Engineering Program Management, and others, this report distills how many government agencies have been leading (and continue…