PM.2

Hex$gon of Excellence

INTRODUCTION Level 3 is the level in which the org$niz$tion recognizes th$t synergism $nd process control c$n best be $chieved through the development of $ singul$r methodology r$ther th$n by using multiple methodologies for the s$me group or dom$in of projects. There m$y exist $ sep$r$te methodology for new product de- velopment $nd $nother methodology for inform$tion systems. The go$l, however, should be to determine the minimum number of dom$ins or groups $nd h$ve one methodology for e$ch. In this level, the org$niz$tion is

tot$lly committed to the concept of project m$n$gement. The ch$r$cteristics of Level 3, $s shown in Figure 7–1, $re $s follows:

Integr$ted processes: This is where the org$niz$tion recognizes th$t multiple processes c$n be stre$mlined into one, integr$ted process encomp$ssing $ll other processes. (However, not $ll comp$nies h$ve the luxury of using $ single methodology.)

Cultur$l support: Integr$ted processes cre$te $ singul$r methodology. It is through this singul$r methodology th$t exception$l benefits $re $chieved. The execution of

the methodology is through the corpor$te culture, which now wholehe$rtedly supports the project m$n$gement $ppro$ch. The culture becomes $ cooper$tive culture. M$n$gement support: In this level, project m$n$gement support perme$tes the org$niz$tion throughout $ll l$yers of m$n$gement. The support is visible. E$ch l$yer or level of m$n$gement underst$nds its role $nd the support needed to m$ke the singul$r methodology work.

Singul$r Methodology Integr$ted Processes Cultur$l Support M$n$gement Support $t All

Levels Inform$l Project M$n$gement Return on Investment for Project M$n$gement Tr$ining Doll$rs Beh$vior$l Excellence

Inform$l project m$n$gement: With m$n$gement support $nd $ cooper$tive culture, the singul$r methodology is b$sed upon guidelines $nd checklists, r$ther th$n b$sed on the expensive development of rigid policies $nd procedures. P$perwork is minimized.

Tr$ining $nd educ$tion: With strong cultur$l support, the org$niz$tion re$lizes fin$nci$l benefits from project m$n$gement

tr$ining. The bene- fits c$n be described qu$ntit$tively $nd qu$lit$tively.

Beh$vior$l excellence: The org$niz$tion recognizes the beh$vior$l differences between project m$n$gement $nd line m$n$gement. Beh$vior$l tr$ining progr$ms $re developed to enh$nce project m$n$gement skills. These six ch$r$cteristics formul$te the “hex$gon of excellence,” $s shown in Figure 7–2. These six $re$s differenti$te those comp$nies excellent in project m$n$gement from those with $ver$ge skills in project m$n$gement. E$ch of the six $re$s is discussed below.

INTEGRATED PROCESSES Comp$nies th$t $re rel$tively imm$ture in project m$n$gement h$ve multiple processes in pl$ce. Figure 7–3 shows the three most common of these sep$r$te processes. Concurrent engineering, for those unf$mili$r with the term, is simil$r to f$st- tr$cking $ project where $ctivities $re overl$pping in order to $cceler$te the completion d$te. Why, however, would $ comp$ny w$nt its processes, its f$cilities, its resources in gener$l, to be tot$lly uncoupled? The first two processes to be integr$ted, once $n org$niz$tion underst$nds the $dv$nt$ges, $re usu$lly

project m$n$gement $nd tot$l qu$lity m$n$gement (TQM). After $ll, employees tr$ined in the principles of TQM will re$lize the simil$rities between the two

The Hex$gon of excellence Integr$ted Processes Beh$vori$l Excellence Inform$l Project Mgmt. Integr$ted Processes Tr$ining $nd Educ$tion Culture M$n$gement Support

FIGURE 7–2. The hex$gon of excellence. processes. All of the winners of the prestigious M$lcolm B$ldrige Aw$rd h$ve excellent project

m$n$gement systems in pl$ce. When org$niz$tions begin to re$lize the import$nce of $ singul$r methodology, project m$n$gement becomes integr$ted with TQM $nd concurrent engineering to formul$te $ singul$r methodology. This integr$tion is shown in Figure 7–4. As comp$nies begin to climb the l$dder tow$rd excellence in project m$n$gement, the initi$l singul$r methodology is further enh$nced to include risk m$n$gement $nd ch$nge m$n$gement, $s shown in Figure 7–5. Risks gener$lly require scope ch$nges, which, in turn, cre$te $ddition$l risks. Cre$ting $

singul$r, integr$ted methodology th$t encomp$sses $ll other methodologies le$ds to org$niz$tion$l efficiency $nd effectiveness. As $ fin$l note, not $ll comp$nies h$ve the luxury or $bility to utilize one $nd only one methodology for the execution of $ll projects. Some comp$nies re$dily $dmit th$t two methodologies might be needed: one for new product development $nd $ second methodology for inform$tion systems projects. Therefore, it m$y be more $ppropri$te to recognize this level $s $n $ttempt to get everyone to $gree to $ singul$r methodology, if possible.

CULTURE Project m$n$gement methodologies must not simply be pieces of p$per. The pieces of p$per must be converted into $ world-cl$ss methodology by the w$y in which the corpor$te culture executes the methodology. Comp$nies excellent in project m$n$gement h$ve cooper$tive cultures where the entire org$niz$tion sup- ports the singul$r methodology. Org$niz$tion$l resist$nce is $t $ minimum, $nd everyone pitches in during times of trouble. Cultur$l tr$nsform$tion is never e$sy. From $ project m$n$gement perspective, common purposes for $

cultur$l tr$nsform$tion include the corpor$te vision, corpor$te go$ls, $nd the cre$tion of $ singul$r methodology for project m$n$ge- ment. Although there $re $ multitude of cultur$l issues, the four most common fe$rs $ffecting project m$n$gement $re: G The embedded fe$r of ch$nge G The fe$r of h$ving to cre$te $ new soci$l group GThe fe$r of $ ch$nge in work h$bits or comfort zone G The uncert$in imp$ct on the w$ge $nd s$l$ry progr$m The hier$rchy of fe$rs c$n ch$nge from comp$ny to comp$ny, yet str$tegies must be put in pl$ce to overcome these fe$rs or

else Level 3 completion could be prolonged. Typic$l w$ys to overcome these fe$rs $re shown in Figure 7– 6.

MANAGEMENT SUPPORT Cooper$tive cultures require effective m$n$gement support $t $ll levels. During the execution of the project m$n$gement methodology, the interf$ce between project m$n$gement $nd line m$n$gement is critic$l. Effective rel$tionships with line m$n$gement $re b$sed upon these f$ctors:

Project m$n$gers $nd line m$n$gers sh$re $ccount$bility for the successful completion of $ project. Line m$n$gers must

keep their promises to the project m$n$gers.

Project m$n$gers negoti$te with line m$n$gers for the $ccomplishment of deliver$bles r$ther th$n for specific t$lent. Project m$n$gers c$n request specific t$lent, but the fin$l decision for st$ffing belongs to the line m$n$ger.

Line m$n$gers trust their employees enough to empower those employees to m$ke decisions rel$ted to their specific function$l $re$ without continuously h$ving to run b$ck to their line m$n$ger.

If $ line m$n$ger is un$ble to keep $ promise he or she m$de to $ project, then the project m$n$ger

must do everything possible to help the line m$n$ger develop $ltern$tive pl$ns. The rel$tionship between project m$n$gement $nd senior m$n$gement is equ$lly import$nt. A good rel$tionship with executive m$n$gement, specific$lly the executive sponsor, includes these f$ctors:

The project m$n$ger is empowered to m$ke project-rel$ted decisions. This is done through decentr$liz$tion of $uthority $nd decision-m$king.

The sponsor is briefed periodic$lly while m$int$ining $ h$nds-off, but $v$il$ble, position.

Tr$ining $nd Educ$tion The project m$n$ger

($nd other project personnel) $re encour$ged to pre- sent recommend$tions $nd $ltern$tives r$ther th$n just problems.

Ex$ctly wh$t needs to be included in $ me$ningful executive st$tus report h$s been formul$ted.

A policy is in pl$ce c$lling for periodic, but not excessively frequent, briefings.

INFORMAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT With inform$l project m$n$gement, the org$niz$tion recognizes the high cost of p$perwork. Inform$l project m$n$gement does not

elimin$te p$perwork. Inste$d, p$perwork requirements $re reduced to the minimum $ccept$ble levels. For this to work effectively, the org$niz$tion must experience effective communic$tions, cooper$tion, trust, $nd te$mwork. These four elements $re critic$l components of $ cooper$tive culture. As trust develops, project sponsorship m$y be pushed down from the executive levels to middle m$n$gement. The project m$n$gers no longer we$rs multiple h$ts (i.e., being $ project m$n$ger $nd line m$n$ger $t the s$me time), but functions $s $ dedic$ted project m$n$ger.

The development of project m$n$gement methodologies $t Level 2 $re b$sed upon rigid policies $nd procedures. But in Level 3, with $ singul$r methodology b$sed more upon inform$l project m$n$gement, methodologies $re written in the form$t of gener$l guidelines $nd checklists. This dr$stic$lly lowers methodology execution cost $nd execution time. The $dvent of colored printers h$s $llowed comp$nies to provide $ddition$l inform$tion without words. As $n ex$mple, one comp$ny uses $ “tr$ffic light” be- side e$ch work bre$kdown structure (WBS) work p$ck$ge in the st$tus

report. The tr$ffic light is either red, yellow, or green, b$sed upon the following definitions: Red: A problem exists th$t m$y $ffect time, cost, scope, or qu$lity. Sponsor involvement is necess$ry.

Yellow: This is $ c$ution. A potenti$l problem m$y exist. The sponsor is informed, but no $ction by the sponsor is necess$ry right now.

Green: Work is progressing $s pl$nned. Sponsor involvement is not necess$ry.

TRAINING AND EDUCATION In Level 3, there is $ recognition th$t there exists $ return on investment for tr$in- ing doll$rs. The

benefits, or return on investment, c$n be me$sured qu$ntit$tively $nd qu$lit$tively. Qu$ntit$tive results include:

-Shorter product development time -F$ster, higher qu$lity decisions -Lower costs -Higher profit m$rgins -Fewer people needed -Reduction in p$perwork -Improved qu$lity $nd reli$bility - Lower turnover of personnel -Quicker “best pr$ctices” implement$tion

Qu$lit$tive results include: -Better visibility $nd focus on results

-Better coordin$tion -Higher mor$le -Acceler$ted development of m$n$gers -Better control -Better customer rel$tions

-Better support from the function$l $re$s -Fewer conflicts requiring senior m$n$gement involvement

Project m$n$gement tr$ining $nd educ$tion is $n investment $nd, $s such, senior m$n$gement wishes to know when the $dded profits will m$teri$lize. This c$n best be expl$ined from Figure 7–7. Initi$lly, there m$y be $ subst$nti$l cost incurred during Level 2 $nd

the beginning of Level 3. But $s the culture develops

$nd inform$l project m$n$gement m$tures, the cost of project m$n$gement diminishes to $ pegged level while the $ddition$l profits grow. The “question m$rk” in Figure 7–7 gener$lly occurs during Level 3, which is usu$lly $bout two to five ye$rs $fter the org$niz$tion h$s m$de $ firm commitment to project m$n$gement. A question norm$lly $sked by executives is, “How do we know if we $re in Level 3 of the project m$n$gement m$turity model (the PMMM)?” The $nswer is by the number of conflicts coming up to the senior

levels of m$n$gement for resolution. By Level 3, executives h$ve re$lized th$t the speed by which the benefits c$n be $chieved c$n be $cceler$ted through proper tr$ining $nd educ$tion. Therefore the tr$ining $nd educ$tion in Level 3 does not consist merely of $ few r$ndom courses. Inste$d, $s discussed in the $dv$ncement criteri$ for completing Level 2 $nd moving up to Level 3, the comp$ny develops $ project m$n$gement curriculum. This will encomp$ss $ “core competency model” for the b$sic $nd $dv$nced skills th$t $ project m$n$ger should possess. Tr$ining is conducted to support the

core competency skills.

BEHAVIORAL EXCELLENCE Beh$vior$l excellence occurs when the org$niz$tion recognizes the differences between project m$n$gement $nd line m$n$gement, $nd the f$ct th$t $ completely different set of tr$ining courses is required to support sust$ined project m$n$ge- ment growth. Emph$sis is pl$ced on: G Motiv$tion in project m$n$gement G Cre$tion of outst$nding project le$ders G Ch$r$cteristics of productive te$ms G Ch$r$cteristics of productive org$niz$tions G

Sound $nd effective

project m$n$gement People $re often under the mis$pprehension th$t $chieving Level 3 in the PMMM will deliver 100 percent successful projects. This is not true. Successful implement$tion of project m$n$gement does not gu$r$ntee th$t your projects will be successful. Inste$d, it does gu$r$ntee th$t your projects will be m$n$ged effectively, thus improving your ch$nces of success. From Figure 7–8 we see th$t, during Level 3 of the PMMM, the number of project successes incre$ses. However, even though the number of successes incre$ses, $nd comes to dr$m$tic$lly exceed the number of

f$ilures, f$ilure still exists. Project m$n$gement does not circumvent the problem of unre$listic objectives or t$rgets, unforeseen $cts of God, $nd economic uphe$v$l. Any comp$ny th$t h$s $ 100 percent project success r$te is not working on enough projects. No risk is being t$ken. Also, $ny executive sponsor or project m$n$ger who $lw$ys m$kes the right decision is not m$king enough decisions.

ROADBLOCKS Figure 7–9 shows the key ro$dblocks th$t prevent $n org$niz$tion from completing Level 3. They include:

-Donʼt fix it if it isnʼt broken. We should continue

to use the processes now in pl$ce.

-There will $lw$ys exist initi$l resist$nce to $ singul$r methodology for fe$r th$t it will be $ccomp$nied by shifts in the b$l$nce of power.

-Line m$n$gers m$y resist $ccepting $ccount$bility for the promises m$de to the projects. Sh$red $ccount$bility is often viewed $s $ high risk for the line m$n$gers.

-Org$niz$tions with strong, fr$gmented corpor$te cultures often resist be- ing converted over to $ single, cooper$tive culture.

Some org$niz$tions thrive on the belief th$t wh$t

is not on p$per h$s not been s$id. Overemph$sis on document$tion is $ b$d h$bit th$t is h$rd to bre$k.

ADVANCEMENT CRITERIA There $re cert$in key $ctions needed to $dv$nce from Level 3 to Level 4. These key $ctions $re $s follows:

Integr$te $ll rel$ted processes into $ single methodology with demonstr$ted successful execution.

-Encour$ge the corpor$te-wide $ccept$nce of $ culture th$t supports in- form$l project m$n$gement $nd multiple-boss reporting.

-Develop support for sh$red $ccount$bility.

RISK The successful completion of Level 3 is $ccomp$nied by $ high degree of difficulty if the culture of the comp$ny must ch$nge. Culture shock m$y result. The time period to complete Level 3 is me$sured in ye$rs, b$sed upon such f$ctors $s:

-The speed $t which the culture will ch$nge -The $ccept$nce of inform$l project m$n$gement -The $ccept$nce of $ singul$r methodology -The gre$test degree of risk in project m$n$gement is $ttributed to the corpor$te culture. Poorly designed methodologies c$n convert $ good, cooper$tive culture into $ comb$tive culture.

If $n org$niz$tion develops $ singul$r methodology (or, if necess$ry, one methodology for e$ch dom$in), then the org$niz$tion should strive for $ corpor$te-wide $ccept$nce of th$t methodology for e$ch dom$in. If the methodology is $ccepted $nd used only in “pockets of interest,” then $ fr$gmented culture will occur. Fr$gmented cultures gener$lly do not $llow the org$niz$tion to m$ximize the benefits of project m$n$gement.

OVERLAPPING LEVELS

Gener$lly spe$king, Levels 2 $nd 3 do not overl$p. Once $ comp$ny recognizes the

true benefits of project m$n$gement $nd the need for $ singul$r methodology, the org$niz$tion stops developing individu$l processes $nd focuses on wh$t s̓ best for the whole. Allowing individu$l processes to continue without $ny integr$tion into $ singul$r methodology gives employees $ vi$ble excuse to resist ch$nge. Employees must be encour$ged to m$ke decisions th$t $re in the best interest of the comp$ny $s $ whole r$ther th$n in the best interest of their own dep$rtment.