how can you influence your board to adopt good governance of project / change management?
TRANSCRIPT
How can junior project
members be empowered to
influence their Board to adopt
good governance of project /
change management?
1
APM Governance SIG
Governance SIG
Objectives
Be the UK focus
Advance understanding
Contribute to good practice
Influence national and
international standard making
authorities
Influence those operationally
responsible
Develop ambassadors and
exemplars of excellence
2….in the governance of project management (change)
Activities
Engagement – CxO level
as well as APM members
Conferences and Seminars
Publications
Influence of, and
contribution to, standards
Directing Change
2nd edition 2011
3
Co-Directing Change
2007 (being updated)
Sponsoring Change
2009
Free to APM members at www.apm.org.uk/memberdownloads
GovSIG Publications
Agile Governance
(being developed)
To get involved
http://bit.ly/apm-agile-governance-preregister
Don’t forget our annual
conference on 1st October
See www.apm.org.uk for details
5
APM Governance SIG
How can junior project members be empowered to influence their Board to adopt good governance of project / change management?
Scott Bryce, Matt Foley & James Beck16th September 2015
PwC
Objectives for the session
Discuss the challenges and consequences of organisations failing to operate good governance for project / change management
Identify how junior project team members can influence their seniors to adopt good governance of project / change management
7
PwC
4th Global PPM Survey
Do those who commission change get what they want?
View the full survey results here:
http://www.pwc.com/gx/en/services/advisory/consulting/portfolio-programme-management/global-ppm-survey-2014.html
8
PwC
To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?
14
18
13
3
4
3
44
41
46
9
20
24
Decision making across the portfolio issupported by objective criteria and quality
data to ensure alignment to the organisation'spriorities
There are clear decision accountabilities(RACI) within the programme/project that
enables delivery
There is an appropriatesponsor/client/leadership representation on
programme/project steering committees
(%)
Neither/ nor
DisagreeStrongly disagree Strongly agreeAgree
Don’t know
9
Base: 1,774
4th Global Portfolio and Programme Management Survey
The survey highlighted the importance of effective governance, through appropriate leadership representation at committees, clear RACI, and decision making supported by quality data
13%
16%
23%
1%
1%
7%
PwC
Which factors do you consider to be the top three contributors to programme/project delays?
10
4th Global Portfolio and Programme Management Survey
Base: 1,774
0
4
3
6
6
8
10
11
12
15
15
21
23
24
27
30
39
41
Don't know
Other
Lack of management information
Ineffective procurement/ supplier…
Change in environment
Change in strategy
Not the correct skillset
Poorly designed/ executed governance
Inadequate risk planning
Lack of executive sponsorship
Lack of Change control management
Weak project planning
Poorly defined goals/ objectives
Lack of stakeholder involvement
Poor communication
Insufficient resources
Poor estimates in the planning phase
Change(s) in scope mid-project
(%)
Poor governance is a root cause contributor to programme / project delays
PwC
Regular verbal updates/presentations and clear exception based documented status reports are the most popular ways in which C-suite respondents like to be briefed
11
4th Global Portfolio and Programme Management Survey
4
31
36
37
37
41
46
63
Other
Live 'portal' to seeprogramme updates
A plan on a page
A 'RAIDD' log*
Financial reports
Data driven reporting
Clear exception baseddocumentated status
reports
Regular verbal updates/presentations
2
20
16
17
10
8
18
10
1
15
15
14
15
10
16
15
1
7
8
7
12
14
30
22
Other
Data driven reporting
Financial reports
A 'RAIDD' log*
A plan on a page
Live 'portal' to seeprogramme updates
Regular verbal updates/presentations
Clear exception baseddocumentated status reports
Rank 1 Rank 2 Rank 3
% ranking% ranking 1st, 2nd or 3rd
81.74
80.12
80.0
76.81
68.57
70.14
67.31
71.43
Mean score
NB. Only C-Suite answered this question*Risk, Assumptions, Issues, Dependency log and Decision Register
Base: 193
PwC
Analysis of the PwC PPM Global Benchmarking Tool highlights that governance is one of the top priorities for successful portfolios and programmes in seven industries
12
1 2 3
Aerospace and Defence Clear Scope Smart Financing Managed Risk
Banking and Capital Markets Governance Enabling Managed Risk Smart Financing
Communications and Technology Smart Financing Delivery Enabling Integrated Support
Energy, Utilities and Mining Agile Change Governance Enabling Clear Scope
Entertainment and Media Integrated Support High Performance Smart Financing
Governance, Education and Enterprise
Governance Enabling Clear Scope Engaged Stakeholders
Health, Pharma and Life Sciences Governance Enabling Managed Risk Clear Scope
Industrial Products Governance Enabling Clear Scope Smart Financing
Insurance Governance Enabling Clear Scope Smart Financing
Retail and Consumer Goods Integrated Support Governance Enabling Smart Financing
• Governance is one of the strongest themes emerging from the Benchmarking Tool, appearing in the top three for seven of the industries analysed
PPM Global Benchmarking Tool
PwC
Case study: the cost of poor governance
About:
BP is Britain's largest producer of oil and gas. It is an integrated oil and gas company which operates in more than 80 countries around the world. BP's oil rigs are run as the equivalent to a portfolio of projects.
In April 2010, BP’s Deepwater Horizon oil platform exploded in waters off the Gulf of Mexico, killing 11 men and unleashing an estimated 176m gallons of crude into the water. After settling federal and state claims totalling $18.7 billion, the total pre-tax charges associated with the spill for BP amount to $53.8 billion.
US district Judge Carl Barbier found that BP made decisions during the drilling of the well that led to the deadly blowout. “These instances of negligence, taken together, evince an extreme deviation from the standard of care and a conscious disregard of known risks.”
"A large number of decisions were made that were highly questionable and
potentially contributed to the blowout of the Macondo well... . ”
Prof Donald Winder, Chairman of the National Academy of Engineering investigation
14Note: this case study is based on analysis of publicly available information only
PwC
What are the key indictors of poor governance?
15
Unclear roles and responsibilities
Lack of delegated authority
Information overload from programme teams to leadership
Lack of clear sponsorship / sponsors unclear of their role and responsibilities
Culture prevents juniors engaging with leadership for fear of doing something ‘career-limiting’
PwC
The APM guidance on Directing Change makes the case for the benefits of effective programme governance, as well as highlighting the consequences of poor governance
The APM has found that poor governance of portfolios, programmes and projects leads to:
Lack of a clear link with key strategic priorities.
Lack of clear senior management and, in government projects, ministerial ownership and leadership.
Lack of effective engagement with stakeholders.
Lack of skills and proven approach to project and risk management.
Lack of understanding of, or contact with, supply industry at senior levels.
Evaluation of projects driven by initial price, rather than long-term value for money.
Too little attention to breaking down development and implementation into manageable steps.
16
PwC
How can junior project members be empowered to influence their Board to adopt good governance of project / change management?
17
PwC
Case study: Influencing upwards in a transformation environment
Conditions for success:
Leadership courage to challenge the Board
Data backed justification of the ‘art of the possible’
Organisation creates the right culture for constructive challenge
Leaders listen to their subject matter experts
Provide explicit opportunities, both formal and informal, for people to have their voices heard
“I will always challenge my senior managers to deliver, it is up to them to prove to me that I am asking the
impossible”CEO
18
“I have seen change ‘done’ to organisations by senior leadership and
it rarely ‘sticks’. Involving staff and empowering them to contribute to the
change secures better buy in and a greater probability of success”
Director of Transformation
Learning Points
Be clear with staff what is expected of them
Have a very clear narrative for what change will deliver – and how people will benefit
Organisation creates the right culture for constructive challenge
Leaders listen to their subject matter experts and use them to co-create solutions
PwC
Case study: start with the end in mind
About:
The client is a major UK banking player with international links. The bank is currently restructuring its operations in the United Kingdom and worldwide, involving significant jobs cuts in an attempt to reduce costs and improve profitability.
We supported a multi-year transformational change programme, leading a number of work streams, supporting others, and having no involvement in other areas. We noticed that a key work stream was not contributing to the desired outcome. However, the reporting was showing positive progress and the sponsor insisted everything was alright.
In a catch up 18 months later, the client revealed that the work stream in question had delivered little in the intervening time, despite positive progress reporting throughout.
“While project teams are good at delivering processes and activities, all too often people are unclear about the outcome required from the project.
As a result, a project team can deliver and yet still close without having achieved its objectives.”
PwC Partner
Learning Points
Good governance should review progress against delivering the outcomes/objectives and remind teams to focus on this, and not focus on delivery of the outputs and activities
To support this, reporting should be against outcomes/objectives rather than activities as is the norm
Junior team members need to be empowered through clear MI and data, with a clear escalation process to reach senior stakeholders
Rather than just receiving a report, to support good governance leaders should move away from formal channels to get under the skin of the programme – and give their people a clear view of what good looks like
Programme managers need to have delegated authority and be held accountable for delivering the desired outcomes
19
PwC
Observations from the banking sector and portfolio management experience
Common Key challenges to good governance
Ineffective and often opaque governance model
Poor quality of reports including limited traceability along with fear of bad news –avoidance of ‘red risks’
Spans of command often too broad, complex or ill-defined – i.e. poor scope
Resource management – particularly of key personnel – often overlooked
Perceived challenge is in balancing value add activities (portfolio planning, dependency identification, thematic risk management, etc.) with control activities (quality control, investment & benefits management, change management, etc.)
Stakeholders often asked PfMO to translate ivory-tower standards into project management realities. There is strong appetite to share best practice
Learning Points
Governance structures, with cleared terms of reference, that get the right voices heard and provide the necessary intelligence to the right decision making boards
Team charters and portfolio, programme and project mandates – that can be revised!
Management of key resource supported by a clear resource strategy and plan
Deliberate and holistic continuous improvement plans contribute to establishing effective and stable teams over the long term
“The trick is to separate the change agenda from the day to day business creating organisational capacity to
deliver both”
CEO
PwC
Portfolio Capability: Framework
21
The 12 Elements of Portfolio and Program Management Excellence are underpinned by four outcome-orientated principles: Insight, Alignment, Control and Efficiency
Connect execution with the organisation’s strategic direction driving aligned investment priorities across all key parts of the bank unifying goals and expertise across functions. Review and recalibrate the portfolio where necessary as plans change and ensure projects are aligned with enterprise architecture
Well calibrated reporting that allows effective progress tracking of all strategic change initiatives with effective communication to all key stakeholders. Key performance indicators are accurately reported to the relevant governance body board at an appropriate level of detail.
Mature, and consistent, portfolio and program management
delivering controlled implementation in agreed
timelines. Risk management is effective with risks identified
owned and managed. Changes to plans are transparent and
controlled..
Optimized delivery across the portfolio to identify and
eliminate overlap or duplication and exploit
synergies leading to efficiencies and savings. Efficiency
enhanced by use of standard best practice project
management processes and common tools.
The 12 Elements of
Delivery Excellence
Efficiency
• Programs generally struggle to obtain and maintain resource e.g. SME time, and stable IT teams
• Lower performing programs generally have lower levels of process automation through tools
• Most PMOs are distracted from delivery through excessive manual reporting and ad hoc low value administrative requests from central functions
• Multiple examples of under-resourcing were identified across the programs
Findings & observations: Programme management
22
Alignment
• At the program level there is a lack of visibility of the Group strategicobjectives
• Most programs focus on deliverables and not benefits
• At the program level it is difficult to determine the aggregated businessimpacts given lack of visibility and poor interdependency management
Stronger areas of program management tend to be early lifecycle and oversight activities e.g. Governance, and Stakeholder management. Benefits management stands out as an area where perceptions are higher than industry but PwC rating is lower; to a lesser extent this applies to Scope management and Planning
Insight
• Program level teams in most banks struggle to implement common standards & processes and instead reactively develop bespoke practices
• Lower performing programs tend not to be adequately engaged with governance structures and/or have lower capacity to engage stakeholders
• The most effective programs have high quality plans, reporting and engaged leadership
Control
• Half of the client’s peers have focussed efforts on more robust program / project controls
• PMOs across most peer groups find it hard to formally control quality and avoid surprises
• Across all peers, programs experience a lag between the implementation of appropriate governance, central standards & systems and increased performance and benefits delivery
Alignment Insight Control Efficiency
Average Maturity
2.4 2.5 1.9
Describes recommendations around portfolio and program management policies, frameworks and underlying processes such as risk and issue management, planning, cost control, portfolio prioritization, benefits management and quality to enable central control and efficient delivery of the portfolio
Standards & Processes
Describes recommendations for enabling and supporting the people change agenda related to portfolio and program management capability across the organization (e.g. career models and training) to enable effective ways of working across the change organization
People, Capability & Culture Describes recommendations relating to
organizational structures, governance and team roles including the GSCM functional responsibilities and how it interacts with the other change teams/functions across the bank to achieve an effective and efficient holistic model
Organization & Interfaces
Summary recommendationsRecommendations are presented by operating model component touching upon policies and processes as well as the underlying information models and tools that support Portfolio and Program management. The recommendations also highlight the ‘softer’ change considerations critical to achieving sustainable results
Organization & Interfaces
People,Capability &
Culture
Standards & Processes
Comms &Brand
Systems & Technology
Operating Model Components
Reporting& MI
Describes recommendations relating to configuration, prototyping, build and rollout of portfolio and program management systems and other technology such as collaboration and knowledge sharing tools, to support efficient coordination, workflow, information and delivery
Systems & Technology
Reporting & MI
Describes recommendations relating to communications between GSCM and the wider change community across the bank. The communications plan also highlights how GSCM needs to clearly communicate their mission and values to interact effectively with other change functions in the bank
Communications & Brand
Describes recommendations relating to decision making and how that is enabled by effective reporting and data standards and processes
23
PwC
Overall approach The maturity of Executive Board reporting varies greatly across industry. Within Financial Services CEOs and Executive Boards, given the new pressures on margin are increasingly ‘shining a light’ on their ‘change the bank’ spend but the underpinning systems to provide high quality data are still evolving.
24
• Understanding the purpose of, and audience for, reporting and who needs what
• Aligning the reporting with required governance to accelerate decisions and defining the level of reporting required at each level
1• Refocusing reporting in line
with the required decisions
• Creating the reporting designs, including key metrics and dashboard designs required at Investment / Executive Board level
2• Creating a flexible delivery
model which evolves and flexes to the business need
• Ensuring information is timely and robust and with helpful supporting analysis
Reporting delivery model (data, process, systems, people)
3• Establishing the critical
attributes required to drive appropriate behaviours and informed actions
• Addressing the capability gaps
4
Governance and reporting alignment
Insights and metrics
Reporting use, education and behaviours
…understanding the audience for the reporting…
…defining what is important to that
audience…
…defining the decisions for each audience…
...defining what the audience will receive…
…how the data and analysis will be created…
…how reporting is presented…
…understanding where education is needed…
…and which behaviours need to change…
PwC 25
Download our PPM Global Survey Report at
www.pwc.com/ppmsurvey
Scott Bryce
Thanks for your time
Connect with us
www.linkedin.com
Matt Foley
James Beck
Don’t forget our annual
conference on 1st October
See www.apm.org.uk for details
26
APM Governance SIG
pwc.co.uk
This publication has been prepared for general guidance on matters of interest only, and does not constitute professional advice. You should not act upon the information contained in this publication without obtaining specific professional advice. No representation or warranty (express or implied) is given as to the accuracy or completeness of the information contained in this publication, and, to the extent permitted by law, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, its members, employees and agents do not accept or assume any liability,responsibility or duty of care for any consequences of you or anyone else acting, or refraining to act, in reliance on the information contained in this publication or for any decision based on it.
© 2015 PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. All rights reserved. In this document, "PwC" refers to PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (a limited liability partnership in the United Kingdom), which is a member firm of PricewaterhouseCoopers International Limited, each member firm of which is a separate legal entity.