Post on 03-Nov-2014
description
03-23-05Juni 2011
page 1 • view on reporting
project – programme – portfolio management – view on project – programme – portfolio management – view on reportingreporting
Presented by Jan Biets
Jan_biets@hotmail.com +32(0)477 32 90 11 Mechelen - Belgium
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 2 • View on Reporting
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting
• What is the purpose:
– Increase success rate of -strategically- projects;
– Decrease failure rate of -strategically- projects
– Improve - visual- reporting data;
– Improve baseline information to take decision upon;
– Improve communication, also to ‘non project management’-skilled audience , i.e. top management;
– Increase effort in strategically supportive projects; define metrics for measuring progress/success/quality of balanced scorecards;
– Order (go / kill ) strategically important projects;
• Very often lack of right information to be used by stakeholders to have a clear understanding of the project status, progress , and ‘forecast’.
• Reason to take drastic, but un-rightful decisions, which can endanger outcome of organisation’s strategy;
note:
•It is not the author’s intention to be aligned with whatever existing methodology, nor framework;
•‘projects’ – in this presentation, ‘projects’ can mean projects, programme, or portfolio
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 3 • View on Reporting
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting
Abbreviations:
PMO - project management office
• it does not matter who takes up the initiative to implement ‘View on Reporting’ in your Organisation:
– Project manager
– PMO
– (executive) Management
– Stakeholder(-s)
– Project board ( steering committee )
– Or other
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 4 • View on Reporting
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting
• Remarkable observations (after + 20 years of professional project experiences):
– Quality of project planning is very poor.
– Project planning is a specialty!
– Reporting and PM-‘understanding’ is very poor;
– Risk management:
• less loss of effort;
• Less loss of time;
• Less loss of money;
• Less loss of missed deadlines;
• Less loss of window opportunities;
• Improve awareness of ECV of project;
– Aligning (more) all initiatives (programmes, projects):
• Compose a roadmap with all required investment data
Abbreviations:
ECV - expected commercial value
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 5 • View on Reporting
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting
• Improving the planning quality;
• Reducing the risks, or at least identify the potential risk for organisation’s strategy;
• Improving the resource capacity management (aligning);
• Improving the reporting (aligning);
• Improving alignment of projects & master plan;
• Aligning ‘initiatives’ / projects according the pre-set strategy, thus avoiding loss of effort , focus, money and business opportunities (window of opportunity);
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 6 • View on Reporting
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting
• Inform all stakeholders (e.g. operations, management, team leads, pm’s, business, PMO,…);
• Obtain better mutual understanding of ‘needs’:
– business leads the projects, IT is a service provider!;
• Planning:
– approach & policy;
– naming conventions, other;
– capacity (specialised staff)
– quality;
– tool;
• Project process flow
– use of PM-tool, or ‘manual’- processes?;
• Information / instructions:
– written instructions, information, education;
• And lots of “Good-willing”.
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 7 • View on Reporting
Project management – view on reporting Project management – view on reporting
• Reports , on progress, risks, resources (next skills);
• Updated project planning;
• Alignment of programmes / projects;
• Alignment of planning approach:
– Planning policy,
– Avoid typical errors of planning;
• Alignment of reports, EVA (earned value analysis), finance;
• Improvement of Business & ICT project performances.
• Aligning all kind of efforts , to enable the strategy , market position;
– Harvesting all initiatives, projects
– Based on business case , (financials, and strategic fit/match, ROI , ‘what if we not?”-assessment (reference to balanced scorecard ‘product selection’);
– Compose order of importance (necessity of good outcome per project
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 8 • View on Reporting
Project management – view on reporting : SET UP Project management – view on reporting : SET UP BSC BSC
•Measuring is knowing;•Define what information is required to be able to assess your project on ‘total project quality management’?;•A ‘best’ tool is Balanced Scorecards (Kaplan/Norton);
•Good defined BSC allows a in-depth view on the projects, thus:•Increasing organisation’s benefits of outcome of project (application);•Increasing lessons learned for other project initiatives; your organisation will improve project-ability behaviours;•Decreasing failure rates of projects, and consequently , negative impact on organisation’s strategy;
Reference to ‘Project Management Dynamics” @ SLIDESHARE.net
Abbreviations:
BSC - Balanced Scorecards (Kaplan & Norton)
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 9 • View on Reporting
view on reporting – some interesting PM criteriaview on reporting – some interesting PM criteria
• There is a lot of –valuable - information available when executing a project, but some interesting data has to be excavated, you have to know where to find it, and what to do with;
– Time:• Schedule (overall, per phase;)
• Schedule performance index [SPI]
– Finance• How are we going against budget;
• Cost performance index [CPI];
• Earned value analysis [EVA/-M];
• Return on investment [ROI];
• Net present value [NPV];
• Expected commercial value [ECV];
criteria that constantly emerge (1/2) :
Abbreviations:
SPI - schedule performance index
CPI - cost performance index
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 10 • View on Reporting
view on reporting – some interesting PM criteriaview on reporting – some interesting PM criteria
• There is a lot of –valuable - information available when executing a project, but some interesting data has to be excavated, and you have to know where to find it;
– Resources• How much time are we spending on the project,
• How many resources we need (globally, per IT department, roles);
• Do we use the available resources;
– Scope: Is the scope [creep] in line with expectations (?)/ (!);
– Quality (total quality project management – TQPM)• Is the plan realistically built-up;
• Number of issues reported;
• Are we reviewing and fixing quality problems;
criteria that constantly emerge (2/2) :
note:
An organisation with project tradition, has advantages when building up a project minded attitude and a benchmark data-warehouse to assess the projects and improve the project’s success rate, thus organisation’s strategy outcome.
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 11 • View on Reporting
view on reporting - TIMEview on reporting - TIME
Time: How are we going against schedule;
– Progress on schedule;
– Number of tasks late started;
– Number of tasks overdue (not closed);
– Number of open tasks;
– Metrics & status : traffic light
– Define : (these are default values)
• number : 1 – 2 : orange
• number : 2+ : red
– Explain reason:
• E.g. technology, resources, errors, training, management
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 12 • View on Reporting
view on reporting – Finance & COSTview on reporting – Finance & COST
Cost: How are we going against budget schedule
– Earned value management (and assessment)
– Progress on schedule (€);
– Cash flow;
– ROI , pay-back time;
– ECV;
– Metrics & status : traffic light
– % : orange
– %+ : red
– Define reason to understandAbbreviations:
ECV - expected commercial value
ROI - return on investment
NPV - net present value
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 13 • View on Reporting
Abbreviations:
SPI - schedule performance index
BCWP - budgeted cost of work performed
BCWS - budgeted cost of work scheduled
view on reporting – SCHEDULE : SPIview on reporting – SCHEDULE : SPI
• Indication for quality of schedule / planning
• Metrics & status :
SPI value should be 1
SPI <1 means project is behind schedule
• Define reason (e.g. over-/ under-estimated tasks, wrong schedule techniques,
CPI & SPI
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
-25 -15 -5 5 15 25
variance SPI index of 1.0 or greater is on/above target and considered satisfactory
varia
nce
CP
I
delta CPI %
delta SPI %
Note:
Figure is a combined graphic, both CPI and SPI
“How is schedule against schedule”
SPI = BCWP / BCWS
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 14 • View on Reporting
view on reporting – EVA - COST : CPIview on reporting – EVA - COST : CPI
• The CPI shows the ratio of budgeted (or baseline) costs of work performed to actual costs of work performed, up to the project status date or today's date.
CPI = BCWP / ACWP
• Metrics & status :
CPI value should be 1
Variances:
CPI < 1 means project is over
budget
• identify reason(-s) (e.g. over-/ under-estimated costs, wrong cost expenditure techniques,
CPI & SPI
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
-25 -15 -5 5 15 25
variance SPI index of 1.0 or greater is on/above target and considered satisfactory
varia
nce
CP
I
delta CPI %
delta SPI %
Abbreviations:
EVA - earned value analysis
CPI - cost performance index
BCWP - budgeted cost of work performed
ACWP - actual cost of work performed
“How is cost against cost”
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 15 • View on Reporting
view on reporting – EVA - COST & SCHEDULEview on reporting – EVA - COST & SCHEDULE
• The CSI shows the ratio of budgeted (or baseline) costs of work performed to actual costs of work performed, up to the project status date or today's date.
CSI = CPI x SPI
• Metrics & status :
CSI value should be 1
Variances:
CSI <> 1 means project is less likely to be ‘recoverable’
CPI & SPI
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
-25 -15 -5 5 15 25
variance SPI index of 1.0 or greater is on/above target and considered satisfactory
varia
nce
CP
I
delta CPI %
delta SPI %
Abbreviations:
EVA - earned value analysis
CSI - cost schedule index
BCWP - budgeted cost of work performed
ACWP - actual cost of work performed
“How is cost against cost”
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 16 • View on Reporting
view on reporting – budget milestones (or phases)view on reporting – budget milestones (or phases)
Every milestone (or phase) has a budget (baseline), vs actual budget (€ , man-days)
Rationale:
•quality check of budget planning;
Explanation:
•close follow up of milestone budget, planned (baseline) vs actuals
•A possible understanding why (when) project budget has deviations vs baseline
•Explanation: a prognosis of total budget spent (at completion)
Milestones budget tracking
0% 0% 9%
97%
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
InitiateDefineDesignBuildImplementClosePhase / Milestone
Man
Day
s0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
% v
aria
nce
planned manhrs
spent mandhrsvariance
note:
phases - typical naming by Prince 2
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 17 • View on Reporting
view on reporting – budget man-days vs man-daysview on reporting – budget man-days vs man-days
project progress : mandays
0
5
10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
reporting cycle
num
ber st
aff
baseline (abs)
Baseline planned man-days vs actual man-days
Rationale:
•quality check of planning: most realistic plannings have a specific wave-profile:
•Explanation: unrealistic growth (variations) of staff on project
•A possible understanding why project has deviations vs baseline
•Explanation: planned resources vs actual resources
•Identifies reason of ‘late’ of project : not enough man-hours ‘produced’
•Reason of deviations have to be identified and explained
project progress : mandays
0
5
10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
reporting cycle
%
baseline (abs)
actual (abs)
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 18 • View on Reporting
view on reporting – budget man-days vs man-daysview on reporting – budget man-days vs man-daysBaseline planned man-days vs actual man-days
Planned (Man Hrs / week)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
45033 36 39 42 45 48 51 2 5 8 11 14 17 20 23 26 29 32 35 38 41 44 47 50
Planned (Man Hrs)
Manhrs Week
Rationale:
•quality check of planning: most realistic plannings have a specific wave-profile:
•Explanation: unrealistic growth (variations) of staff on project
•A possible understanding why project has deviations vs baseline
•Explanation: planned resources vs actual resources
•Identifies reason of ‘late’ of project : not enough man-hours ‘produced’
•Reason of deviations have to be identified and explained
project progress : mandays
0
5
10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
reporting cycle
num
ber st
aff
baseline (abs)
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 19 • View on Reporting
view on reporting – budget milestones (or phases)view on reporting – budget milestones (or phases)Baseline budget (€ or man-days) vs actual value (cumulated , %)
Rationale: Tracking of progress (man-days, % complete, €, and other) vs baseline
Explanation: visual follow up, easy to understand, and to communicate;A possible understanding why project has deviations vs baseline
Explanation: using other tools, understand why project has deviations
project progress : mandays (cumulative)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
reporting cycle
%
baseline
actual
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 20 • View on Reporting
Metric – cost / schedule variance trendsMetric – cost / schedule variance trendsCost / schedule variance trends
€
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 21 • View on Reporting
Open tasks
0
2
4
6
8
10
mrt/11 apr/11 mei/11 jun/11 jul/11 aug/11 sep/11 okt/11
reporting cycle
# o
pen
tas
ks (
late
)
closed (ETC=0)
open (0<actuals>100%)
not started (late)
Metric – total quality project management: open Metric – total quality project management: open taskstasks
Description:
• Activities too early started (according baseline schedule);
• Activities started, prior to closing predecessor tasks;
• Activities started but unfinished (stays “open”/ <100% work complete)
activities started
0 5 10 15 20 25
actual this w eek
activitiesstarted
Follow up the planned activities vs the actual started activities;
Follow up open / non finished tasks, time that these tasks stays un-finished/ open;
Rationale:
quality check of project progress and project management
Explanation:
typically, in a troubled project, tasks start, without finishing predecessor / prior tasks;
Graphical view on number of tasks started on time, late, or still open after due date (according planning)
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 22 • View on Reporting
Metric – EVA : budget at completion Metric – EVA : budget at completion
Rationale:
•Visual quality status check of project progress (man-days and €)
•Explanation: in an eye blink, a status report to communicate;
•A projection of estimated budget at completion is available;
•Additionally, contingency (both € and man-days) can be added on chart; and if used, it can be shown as a decreasing line.
project progress : budget [€] & mandays
0
50
100
150
200
250
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
reporting cycle
0
5
10
baseline [€]
actual [€]
baseline budget
baseline [md]
actuals [md]
reserved budget
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 23 • View on Reporting
TQPM – staffing managementTQPM – staffing management
Rationale:
•quality check of resources planning
•Explanation: based on available resources , vs assigned resources; the number of ‘man-days’ available and the number of man-days assigned , and planned. This should be done per role or function; “too many/ not enough staff (specific role) for a certain project , or certain timeframe”
•Resources management:
•When well managed, in combination of the project plans (and roadmap) an early warning system for hiring / firing staff;
•Upfront check if sufficient resources according the scheduled needs.
staff: capacity vs scheduled
0
500
1000
1500
jan/00 jan/00 jan/00 jan/00 jan/00 jan/00 jan/00 jan/00
reporting cycle
mo
nth
ly h
ou
rs
pm
developper
business analyst
tester
business representative
developper (scheduled)
business analyst (scheduled)
tester (scheduled)
business representative (scheduled)
pm (scheduled)
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 24 • View on Reporting
TQPM – staffing management (per role / function)TQPM – staffing management (per role / function)
Level:
•Project
•Programme
•portfolio
staff: capacity vs scheduled
0
500
1000
1500
mrt/11 apr/11 mei/11 jun/11 jul/11 aug/11 sep/11 okt/11
reporting cycle
mo
nth
ly h
ou
rs
Rationale: Resources planning:
•Explanation: based on pipeline (projection) a clear view on expected variances on resources (function) for the next phases (in time).•Better ‘serieux’ of overall planning;•Better ratio on successful outcome of project (assigned staff) , and outcome of programme / strategy;•Better understanding of cashflow (actual fiscal year) , cash reservation (for next fiscal year);
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 25 • View on Reporting
Rationale: An important project quality success indication is the number of met requirements.This can be: Functional requirements , tangible and intangible, operations, up-time , availability, mean time between failures, matching with technology policy, …
•Define clear user requirements•Identify , quantify , ‘name it ! ‘•List requirements;•Build metrics;•Test or assess during review meetings;•Report;•Validate the met requirements versus the requirements defined;•Prioritise the application / project outcome;•PDCA (plan-do-check-act);•Set up improvement project.
TQPM – TQPM – meeting functional requirementsmeeting functional requirements
What is the scope of the project?!
What is quality / success rate of the project?
What is to be assessed during the project review meetings/process?
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 26 • View on Reporting
Rationale: An important organisation’s quality success indication is the number of skilled / trained staff to meet the required technology skills ?This can be: Technology, skills, tangible or intangible, …
•Define clear skills requirements (technology, other skills), based on defined strategy;•Identify , quantify , ‘name it ! ‘•List requirements;•Build metrics;•Test or assess during review meetings;•Report;•Validate the met requirements versus the requirements defined;•Prioritise the training initiatives (or hire the required skills);•PDCA (plan-do-check-act);•Set up improvement programme.
TPQM – TPQM – meeting competency modelsmeeting competency models
What is the applied or to be technology of the project / organisation?!
What is the competency level of our staff / organisation?
How measuring? Certificates rate? Number of staff certificated?
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 27 • View on Reporting
Abbreviations:
CPM – Critical Path Method
FQT – final qualification testing
FAT – factory acceptance test
POC – proof of concept
logic planning composition
Critical Path method (elapsed time)
Rationale:
•quality check of planning
Explanation:
•optimising or reducing elapsed time
by logically flow of milestones.
view on reporting – ‘Logic’ - diagramview on reporting – ‘Logic’ - diagram
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 28 • View on Reporting
Metrics: Metrics: progress (cumulative)progress (cumulative)
• Schedule: How is actual against baseline (cumulative)
• Metrics & status : indication how actuals are evolving against baseline ;
• % variance (+ / - )
Period late or early;Indication of % deviation, or better, time of deviation (ahead or late vs baseline schedule);
Use other diagrams to examine reason (e.g. over-/ under-estimated tasks, insufficient # staff,…
project progress : mandays (cumulative)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
reporting cycle
%
baseline
actual
% behind
# cycles late
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 29 • View on Reporting
Metrics: Metrics: progress (cumulative)progress (cumulative)
• Schedule: How is actual against baseline (cumulative)
• Metrics & status : indication how actuals are evolving against baseline ;
‘late’ due to insufficient # of man-days ‘produced’.
Use other diagrams to examine reason : lack of staff staff (not assigned , illness,…)
project progress : mandays
0
5
10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
reporting cycle
# m
and
ay /
rep
ort
ing
cyc
le
baseline (abs)
actual (abs)
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 30 • View on Reporting
Metrics: Metrics: progress (cumulative)progress (cumulative)
• Schedule: How is actual against baseline (cumulative)
• Metrics & status : indication how actuals are evolving against baseline ;
‘late’ due to insufficient # of man-days ‘produced’ : development staff.
Use other diagrams to examine reason : lack of staff staff (not assigned , illness,…)
project progress : 'development' - mandays
0
5
10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
reporting cycle
# m
and
ay /
rep
ort
ing
cyc
le
baseline (abs)
actuals 'development' staff
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 31 • View on Reporting
Metrics: Metrics: progress (cumulative)progress (cumulative)
• Schedule: How is actual against baseline (cumulative)
• Metrics & status : indication how actuals are evolving against baseline ;
• 3 given data involved: work to be done (scheduled), # available/assigned resources, realised work by the assigned resources (actuals)= NEED TO BE BALANCED
• ‘late’ due to insufficient # of man-days ‘produced’ : development staff. • Use other diagrams to examine reason : lack of staff staff (not assigned ,
illness,…)
staff: capacity vs scheduled
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
mrt/11 apr/11 mei/11 jun/11 jul/11 aug/11 sep/11 okt/11
reporting cycle
mo
nth
ly h
ou
rs
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
development (planned work)
development (assigned staff - maxmanhours)development actuals (manhours/week)
developpment ( # assigned staff)
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 32 • View on Reporting
Metrics: Metrics: progress (cumulative)progress (cumulative)
• Schedule: How is actual against baseline (cumulative)
• Metrics & status : indication how actuals are evolving against baseline ;
‘late’ due to insufficient # of mandays ‘produced’ : functional analyst.
Use other diagrams to examine reason : lack of staff staff (not assigned , illness,…)
project progress : 'functional analyst' - mandays
0
5
10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
reporting cycle
# m
and
ay /
rep
ort
ing
cyc
le
baseline (abs)
actuals 'functional analyst' staff
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 33 • View on Reporting
Metrics: Metrics: progress (cumulative)progress (cumulative)
• Schedule: How is actual against baseline (cumulative)
• Metrics & status : indication how actuals are evolving against baseline ;
• % variance (+ / - )
• Period late or early;
– Indication of % deviation, or better, time of deviation (ahead or late vs schedule);
Rationale:
•quality check of project progress and project management
•Explanation: typically, in a troubled project, tasks start, without finishing predecessor / prior tasks;
•Reporting of progress to ‘all’ stakeholders , eventually with coloured ‘deliverables’;
project progress : mandays
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
reporting cycle
%
baseline
actual
• Use other diagrams to examine reason (e.g. over-/ under-estimated tasks, wrong schedule techniques, EVA
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 34 • View on Reporting
TQPM – TQPM – Finance / ROIFinance / ROIRationale:
•Quality check of project ROI
•Important to be defined in ‘project charter’ (financial feasibility).
•Calculating the ROI , based on assumptions when defining the project charter (project investments , and operational costs (maintenance, and evolving maintenance) [forecast cash flows]
Return on Investment (2011 - 2014)
0
1000000
2000000
3000000
4000000
initial 2011- Q2
2011- Q4
2012- Q2
2012- Q4
2013- Q2
2013- Q4
2014- Q2
2014- Q4
Project / Application Life Cycle
cost
& b
enef
it p
rog
no
sis
costs (assued)
benefits (assumed)
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 35 • View on Reporting
TQPM – TQPM – Finance / ROIFinance / ROI
Rationale:
•quality check of project ROI
•Could be of importance when ‘re-assessing’ the desirability of the project outcome , by the stakeholder(-s). Stop of go decision
Return on Investment (2011 - 2014)
-1000000
0
1000000
2000000
3000000
4000000
initial 2011- Q2
2011- Q4
2012- Q2
2012- Q4
2013- Q2
2013- Q4
2014- Q2
2014- Q4
Project / Application Life Cycle
cost
& b
enef
it p
rog
no
sis
costs (assued)
benefits (assumed)
benefits (actual)
costs (actual)
Lineair (benefits (actual))
Lineair (costs (actual))
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 36 • View on Reporting
TQPM – TQPM – Metrics: Metrics: Finance / NPVFinance / NPV
project PV
(present value of future earnings)
Development cost
Commercialisation cost
NPV
(net present value)
Ranking based on NPV
decision
alpha 30 3 5 22 4 hold
beta 64 5 2 57 2 go
gamma 9 2 1 6 5 hold
delta 3 1 0,5 1,5 6 hold
echo 50 5 3 42 3 hold
foxtrot 66 10 2 58 1 go
scoreboard using NPV to rank and prioritise project selection
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 37 • View on Reporting
TQPM – TQPM – Metrics: Metrics: Finance / NPVFinance / NPV
scoreboard ranking projects according to the NPV-based productivity indexproject NPV development
costProductivity index =
NPV / development cost
Sum of development costs
decision
beta 57 5 11,4 5 hold
echo 42 5 8,4 10 hold
alpha 22 3 7,3 13 hold
foxtrot 58 10 5,8 23 drop
gamma 6 2 3 25 drop
delta 1,5 1 1,5 26 drop
Limit reached*
* : productivity index is used to rank projects until out of resources (€ 15 m) in development costs is reached.
* : value of the portfolio is NPV = € 121m from these 3 projects.
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 38 • View on Reporting
TQPM – TQPM – Metrics: Metrics: Finance / Finance / ECV ECV – determining the expected commercial – determining the expected commercial value of a projectvalue of a project
Abbreviations:
ECV – Expected Commercial Value
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 39 • View on Reporting
TQPM – TQPM – Metrics: Metrics: Finance / Finance / ECV - ECV - Determination of Expected Commercial Determination of Expected Commercial
Value (ECV) of Project – Use Decision Tree AnalysisValue (ECV) of Project – Use Decision Tree Analysis
ECV = [(PV x P - C ) x P - D]cs ts
Technical Failure
Pts
TechnicalSuccess
Yes
No
Pcs
€ C
€ PV
CommercialSuccess
CommercialFailure
Yes
No
Launch
Development
€ D
€ ECV
€ ECV = expected Commercial Value of project
P ts = probability of technical success
P cs = probability of commercial success (given technical success)
€ D = development costs remaining in the project
€ C = commercialisation (launch) costs (if not into project budget)
€ PV = present value of project’s future earnings (discounted to today)
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 40 • View on Reporting
METRICS : overall budget versus spent versus spent ‘reserved-’budgetMETRICS : overall budget versus spent versus spent ‘reserved-’budget
Planned & Forecast HRS
150
350
550
750
950
1150
1350
1550
1750
1950
Weeks
Baseline Forecast Actual
Planned & Forecast HRS
150
350
550
750
950
1150
1350
1550
1750
1950
Weeks
Baseline Forecast Actual
project progress : budget [€] & mandays
0
20
40
60
80
100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
reporting cycle
%
baseline [€]
actual [md]
baseline budget
baseline [md]
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 41 • View on Reporting
METRICS : financial - EVAMETRICS : financial - EVA
What?
• Measure of project progress;
• Forecast completion date and final cost;
• Provide schedule and budget variances:
• By integrating 3 measurements, EVA provides consistent, numerical indicator with which you can evaluate and compare projects.
Key:
• Where are we on schedule?
• Where are we on budget?
• Where are we on work accomplished?
Abbreviations:
EVA – Earned Value Analysis
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 42 • View on Reporting
METRICS : financial - EVAMETRICS : financial - EVA
How?
• It compares the ‘planned’ amount of work with what has actually been completed, to determine if COST , SCHEDULE, and WORK ACCOMPLISHED are progressing as planned
• Work is ‘EARNED’ as it is … 100% completed
EVA gives a uniform unit of measure: € or man-days
EVA provides an ‘EARLY WARNING” for prompt corrective actions
Example:
30% time spent
30% € spent
Equals 30% work performed ?
Not necessarily !
Abbreviations:
EVA – Earned Value Analysis
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 43 • View on Reporting
METRICS : financial - EVAMETRICS : financial - EVA
Abbreviations:
EVA – Earned Value Analysis
BCWS – budgeted cost of work performed
planned cost of the total amount of work scheduled
to be performed by milestone date
ACWP – actual cost of work performed
cost incurred to accomplish the work that has bee done to date
BCWP – budgeted cost of work performed
planned (not actual) cost to complete the work that has been done
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 44 • View on Reporting
METRICS : financial - EVAMETRICS : financial - EVA
Some more abbreviations:
SV - Schedule Variance (BCWP – BCWS)
comparison of amount of work performed during a given period of time to what was scheduled to be performed
Negative variance means that the project is behind schedule
CV – Cost Variance (BCWP – ACWP)
comparison of the budgeted cost of work performed with actual cost
negative variance means that the project is over budget
Example:
Schedule Variance = BCWP – BCWS
Cost Variance = BCWP - ACWP
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 45 • View on Reporting
Total Quality Project Management : schedule sanity checkTotal Quality Project Management : schedule sanity check
Indication for quality of schedule;
• Slope is sinusoidal:
• Increase and decrease of number of team members in project is controlled manner;
project progress : mandays
0
5
10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
reporting cycle
num
ber st
aff
baseline (abs)
“How realistic is the schedule”
project progress : mandays
0
5
10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
reporting cycle
num
ber st
aff
baseline (abs)
Rationale:
‘Very’ Early warning
Explanation
A quality check for a realistic schedule. For example a project schedule with this curve is doomed to fail. The number of mandays is equal for both schedules.
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 46 • View on Reporting
Total Quality Project Management : Milestone chart (Deliverables Chart)Total Quality Project Management : Milestone chart (Deliverables Chart)
Rationale:
Early warning
Explanation
When a (first) milestone has been missed, very probably, following milestones will be delayed too.
Inclusive the closure milestone.
This chart will help to show and understand the moving milestones (pushed away in time) and indicates a new ‘closure’ date.
Purpose:
•Management communication
•Interdependencies communication
Deliverables Chart
nov/10
jan/11
feb/11
apr/11
jun/11
jul/11
sep/11
baseline 28/02/2011 31/03/2011 30/04/2011 31/05/2011
reporting cycle
De
liv
era
ble
s d
ate
s
Business Requirements
Functional Design
Coding & Testing
Launch
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 47 • View on Reporting
Total Quality Project Management : average costs of project team members , Total Quality Project Management : average costs of project team members , evolutiveevolutive
Rationale:
cost improvement
Explanation
Follow up of contract costs of IT staff, and potentially re-negociate contracts;
In case of increasing contract costs, it could have impact on project budget;
This chart will help to show and understand the evolution of average hiring costs of IT staff.
Purpose:
•Follow up of average costs of IT profiles;
•Influence contract negotiations of –external- IT staff ;
•Control of budget.Totaal
840
850
860
870
880
890
900
910
707 708 709 710 711 712 801 802 803 804
Astitel
Totaal
Average day rate (€) per month.
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 48 • View on Reporting
Total Quality Project Management : number of external project team Total Quality Project Management : number of external project team members , evolutivemembers , evolutive
Rationale:
cost improvement
Explanation
Follow up of contract costs of IT staff, and potentially re-negociate contracts;
In case of increasing contract costs, it could have impact on project budget;
This chart will help to show and understand the evolution of number of external staff, the hiring costs of IT staff. And more important , it could help to optimising resources, when done on programme/portfolio level: future needs of external staff
Purpose:
•Follow up of number of external project staff;
•Influence contract negotiations of –external- IT staff ;
•Optimising of available staff
internal versus external project staff
0
5
10
15
baseline apr/11 jun/11 aug/11 okt/11 dec/11
Project Life Cycle
# p
roje
ct
sta
ff
internal staff (#)
external staff (#)
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 49 • View on Reporting
Total Quality IT / asset Management : TCO of applications, infrastructure, and Total Quality IT / asset Management : TCO of applications, infrastructure, and maintenance related costs (existing IT-infrastructure)maintenance related costs (existing IT-infrastructure)
Rationale:
knowing when to make a technology switch (‘warning’)
Explanation
Assessing the existing technology applied in IT infrastructure (hardware and software);
List the known expenses for each of the configuration item;
Controlling the total cost of ownership of each configuration item;
Knowing at the right moment when to switch to other technology;
Plan(-ned) investment: less unlucky surprises;
Add to roadmap: know what resources will be needed (fiscal year, staffing, priority);
Purpose:
•Management decisions
•Optimising of portfolio, and asset management.
•Strategic IT management
•TCO (total cost of ownership)
•Technology follow up (don’t stay behind the competition)
Not entirely in scope of this presentation , but….
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 50 • View on Reporting
TQPM : TQPM : Balanced scorecard Balanced scorecard (new product project selection)(new product project selection)
• Factor 1: strategic fit and importance
• Factor 2: product and competitive advantage
• Factor 3: market attractiveness
• Factor 4: core competencies leverage
• Factor 5: technical feasibility
• Factor 6: financial reward versus risk
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 51 • View on Reporting
TQPM : TQPM : Balanced scorecard Balanced scorecard (new product project selection)(new product project selection)
• Factor 1: Strategic fit and importance
– Alignment of project with business’s strategy
– Importance of project to the strategy
– Impact on the business
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 52 • View on Reporting
TQPM : TQPM : Balanced scorecard Balanced scorecard (new product project selection)(new product project selection)
• Factor 2: product and competitive advantage
– Product delivers unique customer or user benefits
– Product offers customer / user excellent value for money
– Competitive rationale for project
– Positive customer / user feedback on product concept (concept test results)
Driver:
ECV – expected commercial value
ROI – return on investment
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 53 • View on Reporting
TQPM : TQPM : Balanced scorecard Balanced scorecard (new product project selection)(new product project selection)
• Factor 3: Market attractiveness
– Market size
– Market growth and future potential
– Margins earned by players in this market
– Competitiveness – how tough and intense competition is
• Factor 4: core competencies leverage
– Project leverages our core competencies and strengths in:
• Technology
• Production / operations
• Marketing
• Distribution / sales force
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 54 • View on Reporting
TQPM : TQPM : Balanced scorecard Balanced scorecard (new product project selection)(new product project selection)
• Factor 5: Technical feasibility
– Size of technical gap
– Familiarity of technology to our business
– Newness of technology (base to embryonic)
– Technical complexity
– Technical results to date (proof of concept)
• Factor 6: financial reward versus risk
– Size of financial opportunity
– Financial return (npv , ecv)
– Productivity index
– Certainty of financial estimates
– Level of risk and ability to address risks
Abbreviations:
NPV – net present value
ECV – expected commercial value
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 55 • View on Reporting
TQPM : TQPM : Balanced scorecard Balanced scorecard (new product project selection)(new product project selection)
Some ‘play-’rules:
• Projects are scored by the gatekeepers (senior management) at the gate meeting using these six factors on a scorecard (0-10 scales);
• The scores are tallied, averaged across the evaluators, and displayed for discussion;
• The project attractiveness score (PAS) is the weighted or un-weighted addition of the scores, taken out of 100;
• A PAS score of 60/100 is usually required for a go decision.
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 56 • View on Reporting
TQPM : TQPM : Balanced scorecard Balanced scorecard (new product project selection)(new product project selection)
Some ‘play-’rules:
• Projects are scored by the gatekeepers (senior management) at the gate meeting using these six factors on a scorecard (0-10 scales);
• The scores are tallied, averaged across the evaluators, and displayed for discussion;
• The project attractiveness score (PAS) is the weighted or unweighted addition of the scores, taken out of 100;
• A PAS score of 60/100 is usually required for a go decision.
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 57 • View on Reporting
What is needed , what is to understandWhat is needed , what is to understand
• For all the shown graphical support tools, a proper planning is required, according to some applied planning guidelines;
• For all the shown graphical support tools, a proper follow up (progress capturing, man-days, financial data) is required;
• And proper project management (skills);
BUT:
• It is not necessary to have all these graphical analysis tools, use what is needed to execute your project, programme, portfolio.
Project management – view on reportingProject management – view on reporting Juni 2011 page 58 • View on Reporting
Time is up. Much more to talk about this interesting topic….
Questions ?
Linkedin Jan Biets - Jan_biets@hotmail.com - +32(0)477 329011
? ?????? ? ?