THE PROJECT OFFICE (PO) is a gigantic building block for making Enterprise Project Management (EPM) bloom into reality in an organization. It fulfills roles that range from planning and tracking to internal consulting and strategic project alignment. The PO is a focal point aimed at ensuring that projects are performed within procedures and in line with the organization's strategies.
EPM is an organizationwide managerial philosophy based on the idea that company goals are achievable through a web of simultaneous projects, which calls for a systemic approach and includes corporate strategy projects, operations improvement and organizational transformation as well as traditional development projects. This means that companies view marketing programs, ad campaigns, promotional events, new product launches, software development, change management, continuous improvement, as well as traditional design and construction of new facilities, all as projects, using project management approaches to bring them to completion. Virtually everything can be dealt with as a project under the EPM concept.
The project office provides this “systemic approach” to make sure that projects are supported within the organization from the viewpoint of methodology, best practices, and information flow. Since EPM is based on the premise that “everything in organizations is a project or is project-related,” this central point for concentrating and disseminating project management expertise is vital for an organization to reach its goals and implement its strategies.
Paul C. Dinsmore, PMP, PMI Fellow, is the author of seven books, including Managing Organizations by Projects: Winning Through Enterprise Project Management [Amacom, 1998]. He is president of Dinsmore Associates, affiliated with Management Consultants International Group, with headquarters in Rio de Janiero, Brazil. Reach him by e-mail at [email protected]. Send comments on this column to [email protected].
Scoping Out the Project Office. Expectations vary regarding the scope of project offices. One set of expected outputs points to constituting a “project support office” (PSO) that provides services or internal consulting such as:
■ Planning and scheduling
■ Tracking
■ Contract preparation and administration
■ Administrative and financial services
■ Scope change administration
■ Project management tools
■ Project metrics
■ Document management
■ Asset tracking
■ Status audits.
These services are either provided from a centralized pool or resources are temporarily farmed out to projects.
Another slant on the project office calls for those capabilities to be developed within each project, with the project office standing in the background as the champion for boosting excellence in project management. Organizations such as IBM have called this approach the “Project Management Center of Excellence” (PMCOE). The PMCOE focuses on:
■ Training
■ Process standardization
■ Internal consulting
■ Competency enhancement
■ Identification of best practices
■ Project prioritization
■ Tool definition and standardization
■ Enterprise or portfolio reporting
■ Advocacy of the project management cause
■ State-of-the-art benchmarking.
This PMCOE is less aimed at providing operational support and more concerned with making sure that up-to-date methodologies and competencies are in place. The term “program office” is also sometimes used to describe the same scope of work.
Can these two concepts (support and excellence) be joined under one roof? Can the aims of the project support office be joined with those of the project management center of excellence? Although there is a sizeable difference in thrust between the two POs (the PSO's internal-operational objective vs. the strategically focused PMCOE goals), they can be combined under special circumstances where the project office leader has the profile to maintain the dual focus (operational vs. strategic). Joining the support and strategic functions, however, presents the following challenges: (1) maintaining balance between operational and strategic needs, and (2) conciliating the fact that most major companies need multiple support offices as opposed to only one center of excellence.
Exhibit 1. A poorly designed project office will ultimatily give flawed performance. When designing the project office, consider all the variables that could impact its performance.
Staff vs. Line. Should the project office be considered a staff function or a line role with formal project authority? Both situations are addressed in the literature and are practiced in hundreds of organizations. Here are two “line variations” of the project office concept:
Program Management Office (PMO).
This version puts the project office in charge of projects and includes resource assignment, recruiting, developing project managers, project selection and prioritization, alignment with business strategies, portfolio reporting, methodology and project management processes, accountability for programs or projects, human process change management, and coordination of the project managers.
Chief Project Officer (CPO). This concept takes the project office to the top of the organization and provides central authority over projects similar to the operational, financial, and information-management roles of the COO, CFO and CIO. Here are the responsibilities of the CPO: involvement in the business decisions that result in new projects; strategic project planning; setting priorities and negotiating resources for projects; oversight of strategic project implementation; responsibility for an enterprisewide project management system development of project management awareness and capability throughout the organization; periodic project review, including the decision to discontinue projects; and top-level stakeholder management, facilitation and mentoring.
Building a Project Office. Since no one-size-fits-all project office accommodates the characteristics of all organizations, several angles need to be considered. Here are questions designed to raise fundamental issues prior to initiating project office design:
What is the size of the organization that the project office is to serve? Is it global or otherwise geographically widespread? Or is it local and concentrated? Or is the target audience only a part of the entire organization?
What are the desired outputs of the project office? Information for management? Support and internal consulting for projects? Standardization of methodologies? Implementation of cutting-edge technologies? Stakeholder articulation?
What are the probable roadblocks to actually implementing the concept in the organization? Lack of upper-management support? Strong grass-roots resistance? Underestimating of change management necessary to implement the concept?
What is peculiar about your organization that will facilitate or hinder the PO concept? Is the company project-driven by nature (construction, software development) or is it product-driven (consumer products)?
Reader Service Number 030
Detailed Design Variables. Once the underlying issues are raised through the questions listed above, a detailed approach is called for. This means analyzing the dozens of variables that affect project office design and the subsequent performance of the PO. A list of those variables is given in Exhibit 1.
After project office design parameters are pinned down, they must be formally defined. This is conventionally registered in the form of written documents: charter; internal organization and external interfaces; policies and procedures; roles, responsibilities, and position descriptions; competency and training requirements.
Just as in the case of any other project implementation, starting up a project office requires a logical sequence of actions. The project involves not only technical issues but also challenges of a behavioral and political nature:
Assessment and Conceptual Design. Assess current project management practices and development of a concept that will be coherent with the company needs.
Detailed Design and Solution Development. Develop each part of the solution, including the methodology and processes, the software and system requirements, and the organizational aspects.
Pilot Testing. Test the solutions proposed on a specific project to obtain buy-in and improve the solutions.
Implementation. Initiate use of the solutions on a broad scale. This phase includes the behavioral side of change management as well as technical implementation.
Maintenance. Manage the processes implemented to ensure optimum performance and maintain training to develop full engagement.
INDEED THE PROJECT OFFICE is an enterprisewide solution for tracking multiple projects and for maintaining focus on company strategies, yet designing a PO presents sizeable challenges because of the number of variables involved. The PO function varies in scope from purely strategic to operational support to full line responsibility for completed projects. The PO's physical size may range from miniscule to grandiose and the operating philosophy may often be more virtual than real. The success of the final design is measured by the degree to which the PO shines a powerful spotlight on project management in the organization and ensures that projects perform within procedures and in line with the organization's strategies. Meeting that goal requires customization, based on the design questions and parameters outlined. Unquestionably, custom tailoring is the way to go, since in the case of the project office, one size does not fit all! ■
Reader Service Number 057