Why some (or maybe many) Project Management Offices, PMO fails? What are the gaps in PMO implementation that could be contributing to their failures? What is the organizational impact? Why a failed PMO might damage project management in the organization or at least dilute its value? Many questions we are posing here to open the discussion.
For the answers, continue to read.
Disclaimer
We start by stressing that we do not have all of the answers. We do not have any scientific evidence. Although there have been some global studies on this subject, and we in SUKAD did a survey also in West Asia and North Africa. Therefore, what we post here is our views and professional opinion, derived from observations and interactions with numerous organizations in additions to the studies.
Stakeholders Alignment Gaps
Many project management practitioners are familiar with one version or another of the following image. We cannot credit the source of this image since unfortunately we do not know the source.
Stakeholders Alignment: Failure in defining, scoping, planning, and implementing a project due to lack of stakeholders alignment
Our hypothesis is that the challenge organizations face when they implement project management offices (PMO) is the same kind of challenge presented in the above illustration. For now, focus on the last frame, first, then the first frame.
So what are the challenges of PMO implementation?
In the prior two articles, we did provide some explanation on what is a PMO and how we differentiate between different types of PMO; please refer to these articles for a quick review.
In today’s article, we will discuss:
- The Executive Factor,
- The Consultant Factor, and
- The Suggested Solution.
The Executive Factor
The Hypothesis & Scenario that trigger PMO Implementation
Our hypothesis is that despite the fact that PMO’s have been around for many years, they are still misunderstood, especially by executives who do not have project management expertise or proper awareness.
Here is a scenario.
- Let us say company Z have had some issues, challenges, or even failures in implementing projects.
- Company Z executives have been hearing about project management and the value of project management.
- They also hear about this thing called “PMO”.
- They hear about these things maybe from a professional journal, an employee, or a consultant eager to sell services.
With the above scenario executives decide to implement a PMO.
What do the executives want?
If we go back to the last frame in the above illustration, what do the executives really want? Do they want a PMO (a project management office; i.e. the office) or do they want to improve the performance of their organizational projects? In other words, begin with the end in mind, what is the ultimate results that executives want?
Is there a difference?
Absolutely, as we will explain below. In our humble opinion, effective executives are after organizational performance and not just adding an office. The office (PMO) can be a facilitator, a bystander, or a leader … it all depends.
What will the executive ask for?
Now let us go back to the illustration and focus on the first frame, “what to executives ask for?” Typically the answer is a PMO Implementation.
Why?
Because they think (or are sold the idea) that the PMO will lead the performance transformation.
The fundamental issue here is that executives are asking for PMO … thinking … that they will have improved projects’ performance. In other words, the requirements are for a PMO but the expectations are improving performance. As you know, there are differences between expectations and requirements.
The executives’ gaps and results
What executives do not realize is that just by implementing a PMO (the office) with 1, 2, or more employees, in reality, they are only structuring an office for project management. This office might end up being responsible for reporting or a bit more. In other words, this office becomes another layer between management and project managers. In direct terms: more bureaucracy, or worst, policing force; which is a turn-off.
The consequences
With the above months later or maybe a year or two later, the organization might accomplish improved reporting. However, projects performance might not improve; or only marginal improvements. If the executives are patient enough and understand project management (partially) they might assess the situation and see if a change in the PMO could solve the problems. If they are not patient enough, they will likely dismantle the PMO.
What could be worst?
Executives losing trust in the domain of project management. The consequences: lost opportunity, wasted effort, and a damaged reputation, or leading to potentially more projects failing or challenged.
The Consultant Factor
We will not expand on this factor much today, one of our Guest Authors have an article on this topic that we will share later.
The main point that we want to raise here today is the difference between expectations and requirements. Traditional management and project management teaches us to focus on requirements and deliver our projects per the requirements; the what. Since a PMO implementation is a project than consultants comply with the requirements and implement a PMO. In this case, the consultant focus is on the “office” since no one asked them to do more.
The reality is: a good consultant must drill down for the root cause of the request in order to identify the client’s expectations; the why. By drilling down we might find out that the client is not interested in another layer but for a PMO to lead the transformation. We know that some consultants will jump now and say this is not our job, the client has to provide clear requirements. We say otherwise since as the illustration shows: executives might have one expectation but what they ask for is requirements, expecting that an experienced consultant will guide them through the maze.
The Suggested Solution
We derive the suggested solution from the last paragraph. In SUKAD, our first guideline in the Quality Management System is to insist on our business consultant when they work with prospective clients is to drill for the expectations and not just follow the requirements.
The real question today is how to avoid PMO failures?
Closing Comments
In our professional opinion, what we really need is to combine PMO implementation with the organizational project management system implementation. By organizational project management system, we do not mean IT System or Tools, we mean the full system from governance and strategic aspects, adding project management methodology, down to the processes, professional development, and competency. In our learning solutions, we offer two separate programs, one is about Building the Project Management Office and the other is Building the Project Management System. We do this to emphasize the need for both.
In future articles, we will discuss a failed implementation. We will also share a maturity model that we developed to help avoid the risk of failures.
What do you think about what we present here?
Do you have an opposing opinion to share?
We would love to hear from you!
I liked the fact that the PM office should help clients translate their expectations into plans.
I would also suggest you don’t generalize as some industries like construction are project driven and project management is not an option , it is their only way to stay in business
Regard
Dear Mr. Assaf – thank you for your feedback.
Unless I missed something I do not believe we generalized in this article. We are talking about organizations that are implementing PMOs. In that case, most organizations who are involved in capital projects … and engineering or construction companies – are indirectly excluded from this article since these organizations would not be implementing PMO for the fact that they are likely to already have PM Departments since, as you said, for these companies PM is not a option but a necessity.
Interesting read…thank you!
thank you for sharing this article.
This comment was posted on LinkedIn PMLink – Project Management Link – Project, Program & Portfolio
Managers, PMP, PMBOK, PMO group by Steve Canfield
https://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?view=&gid=59531&item=5944062956726665217&type=member&commentID=discussion%3A5944062956726665217%3Agroup%3A59531&trk=hb_ntf_COMMENTED_ON_GROUP_DISCUSSION_YOU_CREATED#commentID_discussion%3A5944062956726665217%3Agroup%3A59531
I agree with your observation that PMOs are
often implemented simply because a company is struggling to complete projects
successfully. The “right” PMO can certainly help address this, but it
takes work. To implement a successful PMO you need upper management support,
understanding, and buy-in, and you need a strong educational plan for the
project managers and project teams. That takes time to build. If executive
management hopes to implement a successful PMO but doesn’t allocate resources
(e.g., “Go build a PMO in your spare time but keep doing your other
work.”) they will have set the PMO up for failure.
This comment was posted on LinkedIn PMLink – Project Management Link – Project, Program & Portfolio
Managers, PMP, PMBOK, PMO group by Mitchell Rodriguez
https://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?view=&gid=59531&item=5944062956726665217&type=member&commentID=discussion%3A5944062956726665217%3Agroup%3A59531&trk=hb_ntf_COMMENTED_ON_GROUP_DISCUSSION_YOU_CREATED#commentID_discussion%3A5944062956726665217%3Agroup%3A59531
Hello to all. I have
read this “study” and found it too be interesting, In my opinion and
I believe everyone knows what they are like a PMO needs to be both a
Facilitator and a Leader that is a PMO. The Executives are usually looking at
the Bottom line and nothing more. That is Business. That being said the PMO
should be doing the same for the good of the Company if likes what He or she
does.
Mitch.
This comment was posted on LinkedIn ISO 21500 Project Management group by Michael Huy
https://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?view=&gid=96642&item=5944062172140163074&type=member&commentID=discussion%3A5944062172140163074%3Agroup%3A96642&trk=hb_ntf_COMMENTED_ON_GROUP_DISCUSSION_YOU_CREATED#commentID_discussion%3A5944062172140163074%3Agroup%3A96642
A) Lack of upper management buy-in, initially
B) Lack of
commitment or persistence from upper management
C) Lack of
awareness of effects of actions by upper management
D) Lack of
awareness of effects of actions by the leading proponent of the activity
E) Lack of
awareness of effects of actions by the project manager
F) No timeline
associated with project plan
G) Lack of a sense
of urgency in executing said plan
H) Doers and action
people don’t partake in the planning meetings and feel that any input that they
may have will not be included
I) Doers and action
people have been given other priorities from Upper Management that directly
contradict this activity, so they don’t do the activities associated with the
new project
J) Doers and action
people are already so busy with current activities as to not have any
enthusiasm for a new job/project.
What do you think
of this list? Can you think of others?
Which are the most
common, in your experience?
My experience has
found that the most common are D, G, and J.
This comment was posted on LinkedIn ISO 21500 Project Management group by Filippo Larceri
https://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?view=&gid=96642&item=5944062172140163074&type=member&commentID=discussion%3A5944062172140163074%3Agroup%3A96642&trk=hb_ntf_COMMENTED_ON_GROUP_DISCUSSION_YOU_CREATED#commentID_discussion%3A5944062172140163074%3Agroup%3A96642
I tend to agree with Michael. Most of the points he mentioned can be then clustered in another issue: is there a clear, shared and understood definition of the mission of the PMO ? This is a key point. When it is not the case, failure probability is pretty
high.
This comment was posted on LinkedIn ISO 21500 Project Management group by Tony Milsom
https://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?view=&gid=96642&item=5944062172140163074&type=member&commentID=discussion%3A5944062172140163074%3Agroup%3A96642&trk=hb_ntf_COMMENTED_ON_GROUP_DISCUSSION_YOU_CREATED#commentID_discussion%3A5944062172140163074%3Agroup%3A96642
When considering a question such as this I like to recall a very simple formula which states that ‘time = work / …
This comment was posted on LinkedIn ISO 21500 Project Management group by SUKAD Group
https://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?view=&gid=96642&item=5944062172140163074&type=member&commentID=discussion%3A5944062172140163074%3Agroup%3A96642&trk=hb_ntf_COMMENTED_ON_GROUP_DISCUSSION_YOU_CREATED#commentID_discussion%3A5944062172140163074%3Agroup%3A96642
Dear All – thank you for the feedback
Michael – quite a good list. In our experience one of the leading factors for PMO failure is not adding real value to the organization. Value in term of improving performance
This comment was posted on LinkedIn ISO 21500 Project Management group by Dave Rochford
https://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?view=&gid=96642&item=5944062172140163074&type=member&commentID=discussion%3A5944062172140163074%3Agroup%3A96642&trk=hb_ntf_COMMENTED_ON_GROUP_DISCUSSION_YOU_CREATED#commentID_discussion%3A5944062172140163074%3Agroup%3A96642
Great comments. I would add lack of the right skills in PMOs- especially stakeholder skills, PMO should be treated as a project ie should have a charter plan and business case and should be central-at the heart of the business and involved in strategy development,change management and implementation.
This comment was posted on LinkedIn ISO 21500 Project Management group by Ken Ritzman
https://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?view=&gid=96642&item=5944062172140163074&type=member&commentID=discussion%3A5944062172140163074%3Agroup%3A96642&trk=hb_ntf_COMMENTED_ON_GROUP_DISCUSSION_YOU_CREATED#commentID_discussion%3A5944062172140163074%3Agroup%3A96642
A primary issue I have encountered over the years with our PMO is a lack of direction from PMO management. The sense from that group is that they are responsible for ensuring the paperwork is complete (plans, schedules, etc.) when in fact they can bring much more value and potential for success if they work with the project areas to instill an understanding of project steps, success points and pitfalls. A strong management team is needed to provide clear direction and assistance when working with project teams. This starts at the concept phase through to final cutover and completion of the project
This comment was posted on LinkedIn ISO 21500 Project Management group by Michael Huy
https://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?view=&gid=96642&item=5944062172140163074&type=member&commentID=discussion%3A5944062172140163074%3Agroup%3A96642&trk=hb_ntf_COMMENTED_ON_GROUP_DISCUSSION_YOU_CREATED#commentID_discussion%3A5944062172140163074%3Agroup%3A96642
Great comments.
The comment about “clear, shared, understood definition of the [PMO’s] mission” is especially poignant. Ken’s comment that the group members, responsible for ensuring the paperwork is complete, are SO,SO much more important than they may let on. Those paperwork pushers have the data and they can give themselves so much more influence if they allowed themselves that freedom. A strong management team must encourage these paperwork pushers to become strong guiders in their own light. (I ended up using guiders when I had first used the word managers when I realized that guiders may or may not manage people and that that word has less connotations associated with it.)
I have difficulty with stating that projects have to “add value” or have “importance.” All projects are important to some people, less important to others. (Here is a little
rant: all items on my action list are important in some perspective. In some
way, maybe an action item is important to my health, another is important to my
job, etc. Importance is difficult to measure, because many different aspects of
your life have their own importance, contradicting with other “important.”
It is the same aspect with driving. 95% of all drivers think they are good
drivers, because they are evaluating using their own criteria. One may say,
“Safety in driving is the most important. I give myself a 90% in safe
driving, so I am a good driver.” Another may say, “Attentiveness in
driving is important. Sure, I may drive quickly, but I am alert. I am always
attentive, so I am a great driver.” These two drivers would think the
other driver is a terrible driver. Why? Because of the different criteria in
measuring importance.)
This comment was posted on LinkedIn ISO 21500 Project Management
group by SUKAD Group
https://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?view=&gid=96642&item=5944062172140163074&type=member&commentID=discussion%3A5944062172140163074%3Agroup%3A96642&trk=hb_ntf_COMMENTED_ON_GROUP_DISCUSSION_YOU_CREATED#commentID_discussion%3A5944062172140163074%3Agroup%3A96642
Dear All – please check this as a follow up to the points being raised herehttp://blog.sukad.com/20141015/is-building-a-pmo-the-right-answer-or-do-we-need-opm/
This comment was posted on LinkedIn PMO group by Janetta
McDiarmid
https://www.linkedin.com/groups/Why-Some-PMO-Fails-Are-106439.S.5944267229037158403?view=&gid=106439&item=5944267229037158403&type=member&commentID=discussion%3A5944267229037158403%3Agroup%3A106439&trk=hb_ntf_COMMENTED_ON_GROUP_DISCUSSION_YOU_CREATED#commentID_discussion%3A5944267229037158403%3Agroup%3A106439
PMO offices I have worked in have failed because the focus is on the short term report and how they look. There is little focus on real improvement of the actual quality (not just perceived) of the projects output.
This comment was posted on LinkedIn PMI Lebanon Chapter group by Rushdi
Marchan, PMP
https://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?view=&gid=1486547&item=5944384003036438531&type=member&commentID=discussion%3A5944384003036438531%3Agroup%3A1486547&trk=hb_ntf_COMMENTED_ON_GROUP_DISCUSSION_YOU_CREATED#commentID_discussion%3A5944384003036438531%3Agroup%3A1486547
Organizing the relationship between Clients and PMOs, understanding the responsibilities and duties of each other is a key factor
This comment was posted on LinkedIn PM Training Network group by Jacqueline
Benjamin Lwoki
https://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?view=&gid=2347661&item=5944062342483423233&type=member&commentID=discussion%3A5944062342483423233%3Agroup%3A2347661&trk=hb_ntf_COMMENTED_ON_GROUP_DISCUSSION_YOU_CREATED#commentID_discussion%3A5944062342483423233%3Agroup%3A2347661
Lack of join staff
communication strategy and plan
This
comment was posted on LinkedIn PMLink – Project
Management Link – Project, Program & Portfolio Managers, PMP, PMBOK, PMO
group by Anders
Mølløw Jensen,
https://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?view=&gid=59531&item=5944062956726665217&type=member&commentID=discussion%3A5944062956726665217%3Agroup%3A59531&trk=hb_ntf_COMMENTED_ON_GROUP_DISCUSSION_YOU_CREATED#commentID_discussion%3A5944062956726665217%3Agroup%3A59531
Important PMO is supportive and facilitating –
it must not just become another task and controlling stakeholder
This comment was posted on LinkedIn PMLink – Project Management Link – Project, Program & Portfolio Managers, PMP, PMBOK, PMO group by Hitesh
Thakkar,
https://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?view=&gid=59531&item=5944062956726665217&type=member&commentID=discussion%3A5944062956726665217%3Agroup%3A59531&trk=hb_ntf_COMMENTED_ON_GROUP_DISCUSSION_YOU_CREATED#commentID_discussion%3A5944062956726665217%3Agroup%3A59531
I myself being PM reporting and reviewing with PMO had experience and impression getting that I am talking to secretary of top management rather than PMO. Review meeting and action items are only one way PMO to PM as PMO.
With irony that, despite PMO reviews, steering committee meetings with customer officials have been always with confused updates from PMO and PM 🙂
I personally felt goals of PMOs need to be defined based on either CTB (Control The Business) or RTB (Run the Business) methodology to make the expectation clear.
This
comment was posted on PMLink – Project
Management Link – Project, Program & Portfolio Managers, PMP, PMBOK, PMO
group by Hitesh
Thakkar,
https://www.linkedin.com/groupItemview=&gid=59531&item=5944062956726665217&type=member&commentID=discussion%3A5944062956726665217%3Agroup%3A59531&trk=hb_ntf_COMMENTED_ON_GROUP_DISCUSSION_YOU_CREATED#commentID_discussion%3A5944062956726665217%3Agroup%3A59531
I myself being PM reporting and reviewing with
PMO had experience and impression getting that I am talking to secretary of top
management rather than PMO. Review meeting and action items are only one way
PMO to PM as PMO.
With irony that,
despite PMO reviews, steering committee meetings with customer officials have
been always with confused updates from PMO and PM 🙂
I personally felt
goals of PMOs need to be defined based on either CTB (Control The Business) or
RTB (Run the Business) methodology to make the expectation clear.