Project Management in Practice

Beyond the alphabet soup of PRINCE2, MSP, MoP, PMBOK, ITIL, Agile

Category Archives: Portfolio Management

Building PMO metrics


The Christmas and New Year is always a good time to take some time off the hurly burly of daily grind and reflect on how things are going. Towards the end of the year I did some work on what metrics would help us run our PMO more efficiently. Metrics are always difficult to establish, especially as they only tell a story once you have a baseline to measure against. This is probably a heavy topic for the first post of the year. Apologies for that.

Building-PMO-Metrics

While I see a pressing need for making decisions on evidence, I am also cautious against spurious interpretations of metrics, which can easily happen if taken out of context. You only have to look at statistics driven sports such as baseball or cricket where fans and officials will take diametrically opposing views of players or tactics using different statistics. Numbers are just that. What you interpret from them is what gives them meaning.

The first task was to explore what type of metrics would be useful for our business. I work for a IT professional services firm. It has unique challenges from other types of businesses. I did some research on what other similar organisations are doing. I found this compilation from OpenAir and excellent resource. There are three articles in this and the first one by Thomas Loh is by far the best. This was an excellent start. The key is not to go chasing every metric under the sun, but the ones that you need to measure. That is even more crucial when your PMO is lean and you are in the process of building its maturity. Capturing metrics and analysing them takes effort and time. You cannot afford to be spending either frivolously.

The standard metrics of utilisation, profitability, billing rate etc are quite easy to measure after the effect. We were looking at getting at least one forward looking metric that can help validate our decision making. We decided to invest in our effort in an area that is most challenging for a services business like ours – that is the pull between resource and demand.

Resource-vs-DemandIn services business you either have too much work or too many people. It is crucial to have a good handle of this to maximise profitability. The cycle of winning new business always takes time. If you have left your efforts to bring in new work too late, you will inevitably have periods of low revenue. Unlike products which you can sell at a later time and recoup some revenue, if not all, lost consulting time cannot be archived and sold. That is effectively lost.

To ensure an optimum work pipeline, we can use the charge rate to either stick to our margins, because work is plentiful or use discounting effectively to be more competitive than usual in tough market times. We want to be making a decision on them at the correct times (i.e., not stick to higher margins when market is tough or give away margins when not necessary). We are looking at using Backlog (total value of contracts yet to be executed) as a forward measurement for that.

The aim is to look at recording the backlog value three months out and updating the actuals at the end of the month. As we currently do not have a baseline, I do not expect us to be able to use this effectively in the next year. However, once we have built a picture, we should be able to predict with some confidence what it means to be at a certain point in our backlog and what that is likely to mean in terms of likely actual income.

Because we are looking at it three months out, we’re likely to have enough time to win new business to fill up the pipeline if it is looking less than promising. If pipeline is strong, we know we do not need to compromise on margins. There is likely a follow up on this topic this time next year on how this measurement plays out. Hopefully my challenge is not unique to me and the process is helpful for others to reflect on.

I am keen to understand what predictive measurements you have successfully implemented.

Image credit: communicationstuff.com

Enhanced by Zemanta

How do I balance competing investment priorities?


Organisations are forever grappling with the demand of competing investments that give a varying range of benefits. How do they go about prioritising these? Most organisations use business cases as a means to filter out the projects that deserve funding from the ones that have little or no merit. This then introduces a secondary problem of spending a lot of resources on going through a business case, which will never see the light of day. How do you make sure weak business cases do not get all the way before getting knocked back.

Example-ILM-Rail-Freight

Investment Logic Mapping (ILM) provides a good way to filter out some of these early investment dilemmas. This is part of the Investment Management Standard developed by the Victoria Department of Treasury and Finance in Australia. The main driver for the development of this standard was the number of complex investments that required compliance, but never articulated the benefits they were supposed to deliver.  Effectively what started as a mechanism to shape individual investments in 2004 has now matured into programme and organisation levels – including refocusing organisations and monitoring benefits.

The theory behind the standard is quite simple. Rather than a complex set of tools, it is centred around three key concepts

  1. The best way to aggregate knowledge is through an informed discussion that brings together those people with most knowledge of a subject.
  2. The logic underpinning any investment (the ‘investment story’) should be able to be depicted on a single page using language and concepts that can be understood by the lay person.
  3. Every investment should be able to describe how it is contributing to the benefits the organisation is seeking.

In Victoria it is now mandatory for most significant investments. In New Zealand the State Services Commission (SSC) mandates the use of ILM for High Value or High Risk (HVHR) projects as part of its Better Business Cases initiative. It must be remembered that ILM on its own is not the tool that will drive the investment. It is a tool to eliminate initiatives which lack merit.

I have just recently undertaken an Organisational ILM as part of a strategic review for an organisation. I have found it an excellent tool to bring out the challenges in an open forum and to agree on strategic responses. The two hour session was perfect to get enough senior leadership in one room to work through the organisational challenges. I also found it a good use of senior stakeholder time, as they are busy people and often trying to agree a course of action individually with all of them is a significant barrier to change programmes.

If you have used ILM before, I’m keen to know your experience. The only thing I had forgotten is being on your feet facilitating for two hours, while everyone else is seated discussing and having refreshments is quite tiring.

%d bloggers like this: