Write a 25 page research paper in project management by using agile methodology

Overcoming Challenges of Implementing PMO

Project Management Office (PMO)is a common phenomenon in many organizations. Many of these firms are confronted with the challenge to manage multiple competing projects successfully which is possible through the incorporation of PMO. In this regard, firms are ratcheting up their governance structure and corporate culture by implementing PMO. However, many existing anecdotal pieces of evidence indicates that PMO enforcement is quite an uphill task. This research highlights the main challenges involved in implementing PMO and the possible ways that can be applied by organizations to overcome the difficulties. The research addresses issues such as: Why do organizations implement PMO? What are the challenges of implementing PMO? What measures are put in place to deal with the challenges involved? The project, basically, analyzes the existing literature on PMO and how to overcome challenges associated with it. It also helps in ranking the challenges in order of importance. Thirdly, the literature is critical in discovering how various top-level organizations have overcome the major challenges of PMO. Some of the major PMO challenges highlighted in the research include; (1) lack of experienced personnel to manage the PMO software, (2) Poor PMO leadership, (3) inappropriate change management strategy, (4) rigid corporate culture due to the organization’s resistance to change. The research also addresses various mitigation measures that can be undertaken to overcome the challenges associated with PMO. The actions include, among others, hiring experienced project managers and personnel to help in the proper implementation of the PMO. Besides, the organization needs a flexible change management strategy that is in tandem with the implementation processes. Other measures include efficient utilization and allocation of resources, standardizing process before the PMO implementation stage, hiring the most talented project managers to manage the implementation team, having strong PMO champion and opinion leaders who can demonstrate the value of PMO. Lastly, the research acknowledges the difficulty in implementing PMO tools and calls for proper project management and planning culture to mitigate the challenges.

project manager, Project Management, Implementing PMO, Project Management Office (PMO)

Table of Contents

Contents Abstract 2 Key Words: 3 Introduction 5 Problem Statement and Justification 7 Problem Statement 7 Research questions 7 Justification 8 Hypothesis 10 Literature Review 10 Definition and History of PMO 10 The Changing Roles of PMO 13 Challenges of implementing PMO 15 Conclusion 17 Proposed Solution Approaches to the Challenges 17 Conclusion and Summary 22 References 24

Organizations are faced with many challenges including the challenge of PMO to deliver value to the organizations. Regardless, the Project Management Office (PMO) plays a critical role in spearheading the success of a project by improving its overall productivity, performance, and profitability. In this regard, the main reason for implementing PMO is to empower the organization to thrive. The world is now more advanced, and IT-enabled innovations are taking center stage of many organizations focusing on the execution of the organizational projects. The Standish Group report of 1994 cited only 16% of successful IT projects within the stipulated time and budget (Aubry & Hobbs 2011). In 2006 Standish report found out that the estimated success rate of IT projects varied from 35% to 67% in a survey of over 400 project managers (PMs) (Letavec 2006). The statistics create a clear impression that about 33 to 65% of projects are somehow less successful. Such a scenario results in both cost and time overruns. It also causes a deficiency in features and function prompting the organization’s failure to meet customer expectations.

Aubry & Hobbs (2011) note that many large-scale organizations are confronted with the challenge to manage IT projects due to increasing organizational complexities, technological complexity and size of projects that continue to grow over time. Most of the project failures can be attributed to inadequate skills, knowledge, and expertise in project management discipline. Therefore, the organizations must initiate appropriate measures to address the challenges causing the project failures. In that regard, the organization should first address its software capability before implement any project management discipline. The assumption is that organizations with higher software capabilities yield the most successful project outcomes. A firm’s software capability can be accessed by either OPM3 (Organizational Project Management Maturity Model) or CMMI (Capability Maturity Model Integration) models. OPM3 and CMMI are products from the Project Management Institute (PMI) and Software Engineering Institute respectively. They focus on testing the maturity of the process involved in project management.

Another approach of improving organizational project management is by establishing PMO strategy into its operations (Letavec 2006). The focus of this revolves around identifying the obstacles that impedes PMO implementation. Many existing literature advocates for the implementation of PMOs to improve the performance and outcome of projects. One of the most regularly mentioned significance of PMO is the training and mentoring of project managers and personnel. PMOs are also instrumental in developing standards for project management and delivery of the project’s objectives. PMO would also facilitate the development of best project management practices in an organization, i.e., appropriate planning and resource allocation. Most companies are in the dilemma of choosing the approach that would successfully implement the PMOs. Without an appropriate approach, the PMO initiatives are futile. Hence, the challenges must be identified and evaluated to curb their threat on the implementation of PMO. Project coordinators and managers must be guided on how to overcome the challenges they are likely to encounter during the implementation exercise of PMO. Therefore, more research needs to be conducted to help in understanding the challenges associated with PMO implementation and the best possible ways of addressing the problems.

The paper is thus organized into other four sections which include (1)problem statement and justification, (2)review of the relevant literature relating to PMOs, (3)proposed solution approach and (4)conclusion.

PMO is a relatively recent phenomenon having lasted for about 10 to 15 years only. Nevertheless, it is emerging as a prominent feature in many organizations engaged in multiple and sophisticated projects. For many organizations, PMO is applied as a centralized unit for planning and overseeing project management. Despite, the positivity of PMO, many organizations continue to face challenges in implementing PMO as part of project management. The problems are so ingrained that the organizations sometimes opt to abandon the use of PMO. Due to the challenges in implementation, PMO has not been successful in realizing the kind of improvements that project stakeholders hoped to achieve. The challenges range from incompetent personnel and project leaders to inefficiency in resource allocations for the successful implementation of PMO. In most cases, the project managers are clueless about matters about PMO; thus, making the whole project unattainable. In such a scenario, the managers lack the requisite guidelines on how to tackle any potential challenges associated with PMO implementation.

The research questions guiding the research include the following:

· What are the Main challenges in PMO implementation in project management?

· Do the challenges have any significance?

· What measures should organizations adapt to curb the challenges associated with PMO?

· What is the role of PMO in project management?

PMO has become a common phenomenon in many organizations. Most companies encounter numerous problems in handling multiple projects simultaneously; hence, they could not finish the projects within the stipulated time. In addition to time wastage, the projects become unnecessarily costly, in terms of resource utilization and failure to meet the expected objectives. Therefore, most companies have opted to incorporate PMO to help them in proper planning, management and implementation of projects. Dai & Wells (2004) describes PMO as an organizational body or entity assigned various tasks relating to a given project intended to be accomplished by an organization. PMO has a direct influence on the management process of a project, i.e., it facilitates project management functions.

Despite any existent Work Breakdown Structure (WBS), PMO implementation is still challenging, especially when it comes to maintaining standard in project management. Since it is the PMO that is responsible for defining and maintain project management process, any slight problem in the department (PMO) is likely to alter the whole project. Such a problem impacts negatively on the overall budget and schedule of the projects. As a result, the organization experience delays in the completion of the project. Besides, the quality of the project is altered and eventually harming the image and reputation of the company. The problems can also occur due to lack of proper change management mechanism. According to Aubry & Hobbs (2011), a proper change management model is an effective remedy to challenges associated with PMO. The problems are also necessitated through a lack of a prioritization during the project. Activities are supposed to be placed or performed in order of priority throughout the project management exercise (Hornstein 2015).

The world is more technologically advanced; hence, businesses must tighten up to be relevant in the competitive corporate world. Some of the things that make organizations stand out in the market are how they manage and conduct their projects (Aubry & Hobbs 2011). Often, organizations are striving to be more innovative and technologically advanced. Therefore, such organizations are confronted with multiple complex projects. As such, PMO becomes the only viable solution to help in handling the tasks associated with the project. Unfortunately, there exist challenges in PMO implementation which must be addressed for the organizations to achieve its objectives. Companies that implement PMO expects positive improvements in the success of the project. However, without proper redress of those challenges, the improvements expected by project-oriented companies remains an unachievable dream.

The significance of this research is anchored on its main objective, “to overcome challenges associated with PMO implementation.” The use of PMO is inevitable, especially, in this era of advanced technology, whereby companies are confronted with complex projects that require proper planning and initiation,” (Aubry & Hobbs 2011). PMO is a collection of management, planning and review process involved in a project. It is useful in clarifying performance metrics and the responsibilities of oversight and accountability. Project managers must be competent enough to identify and find a solution to any challenges that would hinder the successful implementation of PMO in project management. It is important to utilize resource efficiently while performing any project. Most projects fail due to limited resources and incompetent project stakeholders. This study helps in understanding the nature of problems that PMO face during project management. It also accesses the probable cause of the challenges and the best possible measures to undertake in addressing them.

The research aims to test the following hypothesis based on analysis of different existing literature on PMO:

· The challenges in implementing PMO cause of project failure.

· PMOs are catalysts of positive project outcomes

· Inefficiency in resources hinders the successful implementation of PMO

· Incompetent Project Managers impedes the functionality of PMO and overall project completion.

The review of the relevant literature about PMO follows a theoretical framework. The literature outlines the meaning of PMO and the various perspectives that project stakeholders should keep in mind before implementing PMO into an organization’s project framework. In this case, the goal of the literature review is to assess the meaning and significance of PMO. It also discusses the main challenges in the implementation of PMO.

According to Kwak & Dai (2000), the use of PMO can be dated back to 1930s. Today, PMO is a popular aspect of many project-oriented organizations. The project office long-term vision is to facilitate an organization’s projects to success. Kwak & Dai (2000), provides two key definitions of the Project Management Office. The authors describe PMO as an organizational entity that helps project managers and other project stakeholders on the strategic issues about the project in question. The project teams are advised of the functional entities in the organization to help them in implementing the project management principles, practices, tools, methodologies, resources, and techniques. Secondly, the authors, Kwak & Dai (2000), attributes PMO to the entity vital for managing a given project headed by project managers.

The article, ”The project management office as an organizational innovation,” by Hobbs, Aubry & Thuillier (2008) views PMO as a formal, centralized layer of control that facilitates the information sharing amongst projects teams which include senior management, staffs and project management. PMO provides the opportunity for centralized integration within an organization (Aubry, Hobbs & Thuillier 2007). For instance, PMO is a crucial source of knowledge that is instrumental in the effective and efficient enforcement of organizational projects, such as IT project or a marketing project. Other researchers such as Singh, Keil & Kasi (2009); Παπαχαραλάμπους & Papacharalampous (2017), (Aubry, Hobbs & Thuillier 2011), and Hornstein (2015) views PMO implementation as fundamental part of the organization. As an administrative mechanism, PMO harness project activities and procedures with the policies and cultures of the enterprise. Therefore, successful implementation of PMO reflects the organization’s maturity and advancement in project management.

Παπαχαραλάμπους & Papacharalampous (2017), argues that PMO’s is to ensure corporation amongst teams and groups within an enterprise; thus, PMO ensures that team coordinates well and working as planned. The author further provides insights into the project office’s role in facilitating the functionality of project teams. However, Hauck (2007) insists that PMO is the most valid approach for the simultaneous management of multiple projects in a multi-functional setting. Letavec (2006) and Hornstein (2015) argue that PMO ensures the efficient utilization of finite organizational resources. It rejuvenates an organization’s growth by facilitating the parallel efforts involved in a multi-sectoral business environment. Through PMO, the project teams and managers are aware of their roles in the project. Every organization wants to fulfill its mission in providing goods and services that meet the market demand and customer specifications. The organization must also ensure that it realizes increased sales to create enough profit for the shareholders. The organization, therefore, must adopt the best practices in project management by ensuring that its projects are properly planned and executed Hornstein 2015).

The Project Management institute defined PMO as a firm’s entity assigned various roles based on the types of projects under the organization’s domain (PMI 2015). In this regard, the implementation of PMO, undoubtedly, poses significant change in the culture and structure of any given organization. Hauck (2007) asserts that every institution has a unique culture due to the different individuals sharing common work ethics and values. Hence; PMO must facilitate the structural development of a system that supports systemic, repeatable and documented processes. As argued by Hobbs, Aubry & Thuillier (2008), PMOs must be geared towards conduct projects in the right way. In that sense, the most fundamental functional groups of PMOs are monitoring and control of projects. According to Hobbs & Aubry 2007, the role of PMO in enhancing project management competencies include: PMO helps in reporting the status of the project to the senior management. Secondly, it critical in the development and implementation of standard methodologies and metrics for measuring the success of a project. Fourth, PMO mentors and guides project managers are improving their functionality. Fifth help in monitoring of project performance. Sixth, it documents the training and development of personnel. PMOs also monitor the project information system and maintain the project scoreboard.

Based on the literature reviews, it is evident that PMOs plays a crucial role in the management of an organization. Therefore, PMOs can be viewed as part of the organizational innovation that improves project management practices resulting in the transformation of an organization. Since its inception in the 1930s, PMO has been reported in numerous fields including business entities, healthcare organizations, aerospace, telecom, and defense industries (Kwak & Dai 2000). Today, there is a widespread interest in the establishment of PMO as a means of improving the performance of IT projects in different organizations. The aim is to limit issues of project failure and overall failure in the organizations’ performance. Most PMOs were established in the mid-1990s as a means to oversee IT-related project, e.g., the Y2K project. However, some of the organizations opted to disband their PMOs on completion of the IT projects. Other companies retained the PMOs by expanding their scopes to perform other projects. PMO is now a popular phenomenon in most organizations and has been instrumental in the management and execution of projects.

PMO is not only helpful to the project manager but also a relevant aspect of every organization. It helps in the understanding of professional practices involved in project management (Dai & Wells 2004). It also facilitates the integration of business interests with the efforts of project management. Letavec 2006 suggests four different roles facilitated through proper implementation of PMO, i.e., consulting, management of knowledge, the setting of standards of doing the project, and hands-on implementation of the program. Otherwise, PMO has many other different roles all of which aims at improving the overall success of the project. The many different roles have contributed to the configurations of a wide spectrum of different PMOs. On one spectrum is PMO-light which plays a rather passive role in facilitating project managers. In such configuration, the PMO features very minimal staffs and does not have direct control over the management of projects.

Nonetheless, such PMO still helps in creating standards for implementation of the project and acts as a repository for project information. On the contrary, PMO-heavy offers more direct control over the project and project teams. In such a configuration, PMO plays a more proactive role and is responsible for the overall outcome of the project. The two configurations of PMO are set such that they facilitate the project management (Hobbs, Aubry & Thuillier 2008). First, PMO offers a consulting opportunity for Project managers through training and guidance on the best project management practices. Secondly, the centralized version which involves the guidance of temporary staffs loaned out to business units to perform certain organizational projects. Organizations need to focus more on the PMO-Heavy model more than the PMO-Light Model. According to Hauck, C. (2007), PMO-Light model of configuration exhibits little resistance to change. Nevertheless, the model occupies just a supporting role of PMO. It also has minimal influence on the project execution implying that it cannot be directly liable for the failure of the project. The model is highly criticized for its limited impact on the project execution.

Besides, the PMOs’ role in the organization depending on the configuration adopted by the enterprise, i.e., PMO-Heavy or PMO-Light. Above all, the structure and functionality of PMO are continuously evolving depending on the organizations changing needs and capability (Dai & Wells 2004). The PMO competency and associated roles and abilities can be highlighted as follows:

Image 001: The changing roles of PMO.

Source: (Singh, Keil & Kasi 2009).

The figure indicates how PMO and organization achieve more maturity. The PMO plays the basic project oversight role. It also acts as a formidable epicenter of excellence that is in a strategic position to meet organizational business goals. In that regard, PMO establishes itself as a basic ingredient of achieving organizational competency.

Stanleigh (2006) argues that the implementation rate of PMO is very low, i.e., most of the project-oriented organizations have been unsuccessful in implementing PMO. Stanleigh conducted a survey of 750 organizations to test the implementation rate of PMO into their system. Based on the survey, Stanleigh (2006) discovered that over 75% of the companies that adopted PMO initiative abandoned it citing failure to meet its intended purpose. The organizations shut down the PMOs after realizing no added value to their ongoing and prospective projects. A similar conclusion was made by Hobbs, Aubry & Thuillier (2008) upon the survey of over 500 project managers. The researchers noted that most of the PMOs are too expensive and has very minimal contribution to the project and organizational performance. Based on the researchers’ findings, the outcome of PMOs is often unpredictable. They (PMOs) are unstable structures, i.e., companies waste too much time and resources in reconfiguring the PMOs every time they malfunction or fail to meet their intended purpose. The findings are also backed up by Singh, Keil & Kasi (2009) and Dai & Wells (2004) who considers the implementation of PMO as the most difficult task of an organization.

There exist many factors that impact on the success of PMO implementation. Such factors include the agreed upon structure and whether the organization’s corporate culture is conducive for the development of PMO (Παπαχαραλάμπους & Papacharalampous 2017). Other factors are the scope of governance and mission of the organization. Hauck (2007) argued that with a clearly defined mission, structure and scope of governance, the likelihood of the PMO failing is very high. Stanleigh (2006) also stresses the importance of PMO being part of the companies’ corporate culture. He suggests that project management exercise must reflect, an organization’s corporate culture.

According to Aubry & Hobbs (2011), the possible major causes of failure in implementation of PMO are as follows: (1) In cases where there is no clearly defined value proposition for PMO, the project, definitely, fails to meet its objective. ( 2) The PMOs might lack the ability to consolidate and utilize resources effectively leading to many wastages. (3) Incompetent program managers who have not idea on how to implement PMO. The implementation of PMO also becomes a challenge in situations where PMOs become too authoritative and starts to micromanage organizational projects. In some scenarios, PMOs create unnecessary overhead costs making the organizational project very expensive (Aubry, Hobbs & Thuillier (2007). Besides, today’s business landscape is continuously changing, and PMOs are typically struggling to achieve the desired objectives.

Other challenges include the failure of the project planners to develop a PMO based on specific needs of the company and lack of commitment by stakeholders in implementing the common methodologies and tools of PMO. Thirdly, an inadequate support system from the senior management and PMO stakeholders. Besides, the organizers of the project can have trouble in identifying the most suitable and experienced personnel to occupy the PMO. In some cases, there is no specific training and communication mechanism on how to implement PMO. Sometimes, the project manager may fail to align the PMO implementation strategy with that of the organization. The implementation challenge further persists due to poorly designed scope and size of PMO.

The literature review provides an elaborate illustration of PMO and the challenges associated with its implementation. The publications assert that the main reason why organizations incorporate PMOs into their system is to facilitate project management. The project manager must ensure that all the tasks associated with a project are handled within the stipulated time frame. Successful completion of a project is a vital component for enhancing organizational growth and success. The main challenge associated with implementing PMOs is the case of a rigid corporate culture and the firms’ resistance to change. The lack of competent and experienced project managers and PMO leadership is also an impediment to successful implementation of PMO. In a nutshell, successful implementation process requires that the role, responsibility, and authority of PMO is simple, clear and coherent.

The challenges highlighted in the previous chapter of this research are manageable. The failure of a company to implement PMO can directly derail the overall performance of the company; hence, the need to establish the necessary measures to facilitate the PMO implementation exercise. For instance, the challenges can be addressed by empowering organizations to develop an appropriate and flexible change management strategy that match with the needs of the organization. As noted by, Hornstein (2015), there are several approaches that organizations can apply to improve project management practices. PMO remains a suitable approach for managing organizational projects and incorporating them with the firm’s strategy and goals. Despite the extensive use of PMO, evidence from various publications and literature, reveal that organizations are struggling with the implementation of PMO. Based on the theoretical reviews of existing articles and publications in the previous chapter of this essay, there are some key findings on the possible solution approaches to the challenges associated with PMO implementation. This approach provides answers to the research question, “What measures should organizations adapt to curb the obstacles to PMO implementation?

The research acknowledges that organizational resistance to change is one of the key obstacles to the implementation of PMO. All that PMO needs to thrive is a conducive corporate culture that would help in reducing any organizational resistance to change. Put differently, PMO thrives well where there is goodwill, i.e., successful implementation of PMO needs a strong champion who identifies well with various opinion leaders in the organization. The opinion leaders support and favor the enforcement of PMO. Therefore, the organizational stakeholders must promptly transform their firms into flexible entities that are ready for a change. The PMO champion educates the prospective team members of the value of PMO. Lastly, the project manager should consider citing earlier successes of PMO to demonstrate an evidence-based value of project office.

Another challenge that hinders the PMO implementation process is the lack of experienced PMO leadership and project managers. The implementation of PMO requires competent, experienced and knowledgeable project managers. An experienced manager understands the culture of the organization. Hiring such project staff powers relationships amongst project stakeholders during the execution of the project. The manager and teams work in a complex business environment which features numerous multi-stakeholder projects. In such cases, the experiences gathered from previous engagements always very critical in planning and executing current and feature projects. Therefore, the project-oriented organization must hire competent staffs with the requisite knowledge about the organization’s corporate culture. The knowledgeable staffs are best placed to comprehend the power relationships within the organization.

PMO implementation fails where there is no well-developed strategy for change management. The successful implementation of PMO requires that organizations adopt flexible management techniques that identify well with organizational needs. The changing dynamics within the business environment is the reason for the requirement of a flexible management strategy that can be aligned with PMOs goals. As proclaimed by Aubry, Hobbs & Thuillier (2007), there exists no one-size-fits-all dynamic strategy. As such, every organization needs to create a flexible change management strategy that fixes all organizational needs. For instance, Englund, Graham & Dinsmore (2003) insists that most organizations have conducted the project standardization procedures before implementing PMO. However, in other cases, the companies implement PMO and then conduct the standardization of processes.

PMO can thrive where there is efficient utilization of resources and time allocated for the planning, execution, and completion of the project. The PMO must be cost friendly; its budget should not exceed the available resources, in terms of time, finances, or labor, in the organization. A costly project PMO would prompt the organization to seek other alternative means of funding. The additional costs are to blame for the rising costs of production in business. The rising production costs are the main cause of the increase in the price of goods and services, a phenomenon that scares away any potential customers. Every business aspires to maximize sales and profits; thus, project managers must streamline resources to facilitate the realization of this objective. Mature PMO teams strive to establish standardized practices for managing projects and portfolio to enforce compliance and efficient utilization of resources. Successful projects also consider employees hired to conduct the entire project work. The implemented PMO must be enforced through consistent standards that would enhance the productivity, performance and job satisfaction of employees. In that respect, the optimized PMO is expected to enhance business value and return on investment (ROI).

Before initiating the PMO strategy in its operations, the said organization must assess the suitability of the PMO tools to the process (Aubry & Hobbs 2011). Some of the common PMO tools are the portfolio management application and project management software. Before settling on the PMO tool to acquire, an organization must ensure that it possesses the requisite project management maturity to utilize the chosen tool.

Finally, the identification of probable challenges of implementing PMO is the first crucial step ensuring the proper working of PMO to achieve its objectives. The organizations must take prompt actions by designing basic strategies of overcoming the challenges. In this case, the researcher can conduct a preliminary study to identify the challenges and the real perception towards PMO. In this case, the literature reviewed acts as the source for secondary research. However, there is a need also to conduct the primary research to have first-hand information regarding the challenges associated with PMO implementation. In this regard, the research applies the Delphi method to collect primary data. The method relies on the results obtained from a distributed set of questionnaires to panel of experts (Skulmoski, Hartman & Krahn 2007). The questionnaires are structured such that they address the research questions guiding this study. The primary research focus is the understanding of challenges hindering the successful implementation of PMO. The Delphi approach is, therefore, appropriate as it allows the researchers to gain insight from the collective experiences and knowledge from the expert panel (Grisham 2009). Delphi also creates room for follow-up through a face-to-face interview with the panel understanding to seek clarification and a deeper understanding of fundamental research questions. Upon distribution of the questionnaires to the panel, each panelist is expected record, independently, what he/she thinks of the given problems and how it can be mitigated. In this case, the people selected to serve as members of the panel of experts include project managers, employee or consultant. The individuals are prioritized based on their initial experience in PMO implementation. The Delphi study must meet the following criteria; anonymity of responses. The responses are then presented to the experts’ panel for discussion and ranking until a consensus is reached.

In this case, phase 1 involves the brainstorming stage whereby each panelist indicates the challenges faced in implementing PMO – this process yields numerous challenges (Skulmoski, Hartman & Krahn 2007). The researcher evaluates the responses and consolidates them into one list by matching the duplicated items or grouping similar responses. In Phase 2, the consolidated list is narrowed down by selecting, say top ten challenges considered most important. Items are ranked first are the ones selected by the majority of the panelist. In Phase 3, the challenges are ranked in order of priority. The researchers engage the panelists through face-to-face conversations until they settle on an acceptable consensus.

The ranking is a vital undertaking, especially, where there are limited resources and time (Grisham 2009). It helps the project managers to use the limited resource to address the most critical challenge of implementing PMO. The limited resource can impede addressing all the challenges associated by PMO; hence, the ranking is necessary. Without ranking, the challenges appear too cumbersome to manage.

The limitation of the Delphi technique may arise where there is some degree of fatigue on the part of the panelists (Skulmoski, Hartman & Krahn 2007). The fatigue can arise due to the numerous steps of ranking and working towards a possible consensus. In such a case, the panelist may drop off from the research even before a final collective consensus is reached. In case of fatigue, the researcher might spend lots of time and resources calling and emailing to coax the fatigued panelist to consider continuing with their participation. The panelist’s refusal to consider their stand might limit the quality of the resultant findings.

PMO facilitates and enhances strict governance principles crucial in the management of multiple organizational projects (Englund, Graham & Dinsmore 2003). The business environment is demanding due to its multi-functional nature; thus, PMO remains a valid strategy that allows simultaneous management of numerous projects. In this regard, Aubry, Hobbs & Thuillier (2007) proclaimed that the business environment has many competing projects that call for the implementation of an effective governance structure to enhance the projects’ efforts. Therefore, such organizations must consider implementing PMO which will ensure proper planning, visibility and effective roadmap aligned to the organizations’ goals. As noted by, Hornstein (2015), “without proper implementation of PMO, the organizations endure poorly constructed project plans, eventually leading to losses. Effective PMO captures critical dependencies which entail proper utilization of resource and time as well as identifying the key milestones of the project.

Nevertheless, the emerging popularity of PMO is significant in the evolution of project management. However, the potential of PMO remains unfulfilled due to the numerous challenges associated with its implementation. The research identified the key challenges affecting the implementation of PMO as follows; (1) rigid corporate culture which causes resistance to adopting change. (2) Rigid or inappropriate change management strategy and (3) incompetent and inexperienced project and PMO leadership. Overcoming the challenges requires a strong PMO champion and competent project managers. Besides, there is a need to incorporate highly experienced PMO implementation team and project managers. There is a need to adopt a flexible change management strategy and lobby support from opinion leaders who have prior experience of PMO strategy. Above all, managers must establish the organization’s goodwill and project management culture before embracing any PMO tool.

Aubry, M., & Hobbs, B. (2011). A fresh look at the contribution of project management to organizational performance. Project Management Journal, 42(1), 3-16.

Aubry, M., Hobbs, B., & Thuillier, D. (2007). A new framework for understanding organizational project management through the PMO. International journal of project management, 25(4), 328-336.

Dai, C. X., & Wells, W. G. (2004). An exploration of project management office features and their relationship to project performance. International Journal of Project Management, 22(7), 523-532.

ENGLUND RL, GRAHAM RJ and DINSMORE PC (2003) Creating the Project Office: A Manager’s Guide to Leading Organizational Change. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., San Francisco.

Grisham, T. (2009). The Delphi technique: a method for testing complex and multifaceted topics. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 2(1), 112-130.

Hauck, C. (2007). How to choose the right project management office for your organization’s culture. Retrieved Jan 14, 2008.

Hobbs, B., Aubry, M., & Thuillier, D. (2008). The project management office as an organizational innovation. International Journal of Project Management, 26(5), 547-555.

Hornstein, H. A. (2015). The integration of project management and organizational change management is now a necessity. International Journal of Project Management, 33(2), 291-298.

Kwak, Y. H., & Dai, C. X. Y. (2000, June). Assessing the value of project management offices (PMO). In PMI (Project Management Institute), PMI Research Conference.

Letavec CJ (2006) The Program Management Office: Establishing, Managing and Growing the Value of a PMO. J. Ross Publishing, Fort Lauderdale, FL.

PMI (2015) A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge. Project Management Institute, Newtown Square, PA.

Singh, R., Keil, M., & Kasi, V. (2009). Identifying and overcoming the challenges of implementing a project management office. European journal of information systems, 18(5), 409-427.

Skulmoski, G. J., Hartman, F. T., & Krahn, J. (2007). The Delphi method for graduate research. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 6, 1-21.

Stanleigh M (2006) From crisis to control: new standards for project management. Ivey Business Journal (March/April), 1–4.

Παπαχαραλάμπους, Ι., & Papacharalampous, I. (2017). Responding to enterprise PMO implementation needs with change management methodology (Master's thesis, Πανεπιστήμιο Πειραιώς).