How can junior project

members be empowered to

influence their Board to adopt

good governance of project /

change management?

1

APM Governance SIG

Governance SIG

Objectives

Be the UK focus

Advance understanding

Contribute to good practice

Influence national and

international standard making

authorities

Influence those operationally

responsible

Develop ambassadors and

exemplars of excellence

2….in the governance of project management (change)

Activities

Engagement – CxO level

as well as APM members

Conferences and Seminars

Publications

Influence of, and

contribution to, standards

Directing Change

2nd edition 2011

3

Co-Directing Change

2007 (being updated)

Sponsoring Change

2009

Free to APM members at www.apm.org.uk/memberdownloads

GovSIG Publications

Agile Governance

(being developed)

To get involved

http://bit.ly/apm-agile-governance-preregister

Getting Involved with GovSIG

APM GovSIG

Blogging

Research

Committee

4

Don’t forget our annual

conference on 1st October

See www.apm.org.uk for details

5

APM Governance SIG

How can junior project members be empowered to influence their Board to adopt good governance of project / change management?

Scott Bryce, Matt Foley & James Beck16th September 2015

PwC

Objectives for the session

Discuss the challenges and consequences of organisations failing to operate good governance for project / change management

Identify how junior project team members can influence their seniors to adopt good governance of project / change management

7

PwC

4th Global PPM Survey

Do those who commission change get what they want?

View the full survey results here:

http://www.pwc.com/gx/en/services/advisory/consulting/portfolio-programme-management/global-ppm-survey-2014.html

8

PwC

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?

14

18

13

3

4

3

44

41

46

9

20

24

Decision making across the portfolio issupported by objective criteria and quality

data to ensure alignment to the organisation'spriorities

There are clear decision accountabilities(RACI) within the programme/project that

enables delivery

There is an appropriatesponsor/client/leadership representation on

programme/project steering committees

(%)

Neither/ nor

DisagreeStrongly disagree Strongly agreeAgree

Don’t know

9

Base: 1,774

4th Global Portfolio and Programme Management Survey

The survey highlighted the importance of effective governance, through appropriate leadership representation at committees, clear RACI, and decision making supported by quality data

13%

16%

23%

1%

1%

7%

PwC

Which factors do you consider to be the top three contributors to programme/project delays?

10

4th Global Portfolio and Programme Management Survey

Base: 1,774

0

4

3

6

6

8

10

11

12

15

15

21

23

24

27

30

39

41

Don't know

Other

Lack of management information

Ineffective procurement/ supplier…

Change in environment

Change in strategy

Not the correct skillset

Poorly designed/ executed governance

Inadequate risk planning

Lack of executive sponsorship

Lack of Change control management

Weak project planning

Poorly defined goals/ objectives

Lack of stakeholder involvement

Poor communication

Insufficient resources

Poor estimates in the planning phase

Change(s) in scope mid-project

(%)

Poor governance is a root cause contributor to programme / project delays

PwC

Regular verbal updates/presentations and clear exception based documented status reports are the most popular ways in which C-suite respondents like to be briefed

11

4th Global Portfolio and Programme Management Survey

4

31

36

37

37

41

46

63

Other

Live 'portal' to seeprogramme updates

A plan on a page

A 'RAIDD' log*

Financial reports

Data driven reporting

Clear exception baseddocumentated status

reports

Regular verbal updates/presentations

2

20

16

17

10

8

18

10

1

15

15

14

15

10

16

15

1

7

8

7

12

14

30

22

Other

Data driven reporting

Financial reports

A 'RAIDD' log*

A plan on a page

Live 'portal' to seeprogramme updates

Regular verbal updates/presentations

Clear exception baseddocumentated status reports

Rank 1 Rank 2 Rank 3

% ranking% ranking 1st, 2nd or 3rd

81.74

80.12

80.0

76.81

68.57

70.14

67.31

71.43

Mean score

NB. Only C-Suite answered this question*Risk, Assumptions, Issues, Dependency log and Decision Register

Base: 193

PwC

Analysis of the PwC PPM Global Benchmarking Tool highlights that governance is one of the top priorities for successful portfolios and programmes in seven industries

12

1 2 3

Aerospace and Defence Clear Scope Smart Financing Managed Risk

Banking and Capital Markets Governance Enabling Managed Risk Smart Financing

Communications and Technology Smart Financing Delivery Enabling Integrated Support

Energy, Utilities and Mining Agile Change Governance Enabling Clear Scope

Entertainment and Media Integrated Support High Performance Smart Financing

Governance, Education and Enterprise

Governance Enabling Clear Scope Engaged Stakeholders

Health, Pharma and Life Sciences Governance Enabling Managed Risk Clear Scope

Industrial Products Governance Enabling Clear Scope Smart Financing

Insurance Governance Enabling Clear Scope Smart Financing

Retail and Consumer Goods Integrated Support Governance Enabling Smart Financing

• Governance is one of the strongest themes emerging from the Benchmarking Tool, appearing in the top three for seven of the industries analysed

PPM Global Benchmarking Tool

PwC

Why do organisations fail to operate good governance and what are the consequences?

13

PwC

Case study: the cost of poor governance

About:

BP is Britain's largest producer of oil and gas. It is an integrated oil and gas company which operates in more than 80 countries around the world. BP's oil rigs are run as the equivalent to a portfolio of projects.

In April 2010, BP’s Deepwater Horizon oil platform exploded in waters off the Gulf of Mexico, killing 11 men and unleashing an estimated 176m gallons of crude into the water. After settling federal and state claims totalling $18.7 billion, the total pre-tax charges associated with the spill for BP amount to $53.8 billion.

US district Judge Carl Barbier found that BP made decisions during the drilling of the well that led to the deadly blowout. “These instances of negligence, taken together, evince an extreme deviation from the standard of care and a conscious disregard of known risks.”

"A large number of decisions were made that were highly questionable and

potentially contributed to the blowout of the Macondo well... . ”

Prof Donald Winder, Chairman of the National Academy of Engineering investigation

14Note: this case study is based on analysis of publicly available information only

PwC

What are the key indictors of poor governance?

15

Unclear roles and responsibilities

Lack of delegated authority

Information overload from programme teams to leadership

Lack of clear sponsorship / sponsors unclear of their role and responsibilities

Culture prevents juniors engaging with leadership for fear of doing something ‘career-limiting’

PwC

The APM guidance on Directing Change makes the case for the benefits of effective programme governance, as well as highlighting the consequences of poor governance

The APM has found that poor governance of portfolios, programmes and projects leads to:

Lack of a clear link with key strategic priorities.

Lack of clear senior management and, in government projects, ministerial ownership and leadership.

Lack of effective engagement with stakeholders.

Lack of skills and proven approach to project and risk management.

Lack of understanding of, or contact with, supply industry at senior levels.

Evaluation of projects driven by initial price, rather than long-term value for money.

Too little attention to breaking down development and implementation into manageable steps.

16

PwC

How can junior project members be empowered to influence their Board to adopt good governance of project / change management?

17

PwC

Case study: Influencing upwards in a transformation environment

Conditions for success:

Leadership courage to challenge the Board

Data backed justification of the ‘art of the possible’

Organisation creates the right culture for constructive challenge

Leaders listen to their subject matter experts

Provide explicit opportunities, both formal and informal, for people to have their voices heard

“I will always challenge my senior managers to deliver, it is up to them to prove to me that I am asking the

impossible”CEO

18

“I have seen change ‘done’ to organisations by senior leadership and

it rarely ‘sticks’. Involving staff and empowering them to contribute to the

change secures better buy in and a greater probability of success”

Director of Transformation

Learning Points

Be clear with staff what is expected of them

Have a very clear narrative for what change will deliver – and how people will benefit

Organisation creates the right culture for constructive challenge

Leaders listen to their subject matter experts and use them to co-create solutions

PwC

Case study: start with the end in mind

About:

The client is a major UK banking player with international links. The bank is currently restructuring its operations in the United Kingdom and worldwide, involving significant jobs cuts in an attempt to reduce costs and improve profitability.

We supported a multi-year transformational change programme, leading a number of work streams, supporting others, and having no involvement in other areas. We noticed that a key work stream was not contributing to the desired outcome. However, the reporting was showing positive progress and the sponsor insisted everything was alright.

In a catch up 18 months later, the client revealed that the work stream in question had delivered little in the intervening time, despite positive progress reporting throughout.

“While project teams are good at delivering processes and activities, all too often people are unclear about the outcome required from the project.

As a result, a project team can deliver and yet still close without having achieved its objectives.”

PwC Partner

Learning Points

Good governance should review progress against delivering the outcomes/objectives and remind teams to focus on this, and not focus on delivery of the outputs and activities

To support this, reporting should be against outcomes/objectives rather than activities as is the norm

Junior team members need to be empowered through clear MI and data, with a clear escalation process to reach senior stakeholders

Rather than just receiving a report, to support good governance leaders should move away from formal channels to get under the skin of the programme – and give their people a clear view of what good looks like

Programme managers need to have delegated authority and be held accountable for delivering the desired outcomes

19

PwC

Observations from the banking sector and portfolio management experience

Common Key challenges to good governance

Ineffective and often opaque governance model

Poor quality of reports including limited traceability along with fear of bad news –avoidance of ‘red risks’

Spans of command often too broad, complex or ill-defined – i.e. poor scope

Resource management – particularly of key personnel – often overlooked

Perceived challenge is in balancing value add activities (portfolio planning, dependency identification, thematic risk management, etc.) with control activities (quality control, investment & benefits management, change management, etc.)

Stakeholders often asked PfMO to translate ivory-tower standards into project management realities. There is strong appetite to share best practice

Learning Points

Governance structures, with cleared terms of reference, that get the right voices heard and provide the necessary intelligence to the right decision making boards

Team charters and portfolio, programme and project mandates – that can be revised!

Management of key resource supported by a clear resource strategy and plan

Deliberate and holistic continuous improvement plans contribute to establishing effective and stable teams over the long term

“The trick is to separate the change agenda from the day to day business creating organisational capacity to

deliver both”

CEO

PwC

Portfolio Capability: Framework

21

The 12 Elements of Portfolio and Program Management Excellence are underpinned by four outcome-orientated principles: Insight, Alignment, Control and Efficiency

Connect execution with the organisation’s strategic direction driving aligned investment priorities across all key parts of the bank unifying goals and expertise across functions. Review and recalibrate the portfolio where necessary as plans change and ensure projects are aligned with enterprise architecture

Well calibrated reporting that allows effective progress tracking of all strategic change initiatives with effective communication to all key stakeholders. Key performance indicators are accurately reported to the relevant governance body board at an appropriate level of detail.

Mature, and consistent, portfolio and program management

delivering controlled implementation in agreed

timelines. Risk management is effective with risks identified

owned and managed. Changes to plans are transparent and

controlled..

Optimized delivery across the portfolio to identify and

eliminate overlap or duplication and exploit

synergies leading to efficiencies and savings. Efficiency

enhanced by use of standard best practice project

management processes and common tools.

The 12 Elements of

Delivery Excellence

Efficiency

• Programs generally struggle to obtain and maintain resource e.g. SME time, and stable IT teams

• Lower performing programs generally have lower levels of process automation through tools

• Most PMOs are distracted from delivery through excessive manual reporting and ad hoc low value administrative requests from central functions

• Multiple examples of under-resourcing were identified across the programs

Findings & observations: Programme management

22

Alignment

• At the program level there is a lack of visibility of the Group strategicobjectives

• Most programs focus on deliverables and not benefits

• At the program level it is difficult to determine the aggregated businessimpacts given lack of visibility and poor interdependency management

Stronger areas of program management tend to be early lifecycle and oversight activities e.g. Governance, and Stakeholder management. Benefits management stands out as an area where perceptions are higher than industry but PwC rating is lower; to a lesser extent this applies to Scope management and Planning

Insight

• Program level teams in most banks struggle to implement common standards & processes and instead reactively develop bespoke practices

• Lower performing programs tend not to be adequately engaged with governance structures and/or have lower capacity to engage stakeholders

• The most effective programs have high quality plans, reporting and engaged leadership

Control

• Half of the client’s peers have focussed efforts on more robust program / project controls

• PMOs across most peer groups find it hard to formally control quality and avoid surprises

• Across all peers, programs experience a lag between the implementation of appropriate governance, central standards & systems and increased performance and benefits delivery

Alignment Insight Control Efficiency

Average Maturity

2.4 2.5 1.9

Describes recommendations around portfolio and program management policies, frameworks and underlying processes such as risk and issue management, planning, cost control, portfolio prioritization, benefits management and quality to enable central control and efficient delivery of the portfolio

Standards & Processes

Describes recommendations for enabling and supporting the people change agenda related to portfolio and program management capability across the organization (e.g. career models and training) to enable effective ways of working across the change organization

People, Capability & Culture Describes recommendations relating to

organizational structures, governance and team roles including the GSCM functional responsibilities and how it interacts with the other change teams/functions across the bank to achieve an effective and efficient holistic model

Organization & Interfaces

Summary recommendationsRecommendations are presented by operating model component touching upon policies and processes as well as the underlying information models and tools that support Portfolio and Program management. The recommendations also highlight the ‘softer’ change considerations critical to achieving sustainable results

Organization & Interfaces

People,Capability &

Culture

Standards & Processes

Comms &Brand

Systems & Technology

Operating Model Components

Reporting& MI

Describes recommendations relating to configuration, prototyping, build and rollout of portfolio and program management systems and other technology such as collaboration and knowledge sharing tools, to support efficient coordination, workflow, information and delivery

Systems & Technology

Reporting & MI

Describes recommendations relating to communications between GSCM and the wider change community across the bank. The communications plan also highlights how GSCM needs to clearly communicate their mission and values to interact effectively with other change functions in the bank

Communications & Brand

Describes recommendations relating to decision making and how that is enabled by effective reporting and data standards and processes

23

PwC

Overall approach The maturity of Executive Board reporting varies greatly across industry. Within Financial Services CEOs and Executive Boards, given the new pressures on margin are increasingly ‘shining a light’ on their ‘change the bank’ spend but the underpinning systems to provide high quality data are still evolving.

24

• Understanding the purpose of, and audience for, reporting and who needs what

• Aligning the reporting with required governance to accelerate decisions and defining the level of reporting required at each level

1• Refocusing reporting in line

with the required decisions

• Creating the reporting designs, including key metrics and dashboard designs required at Investment / Executive Board level

2• Creating a flexible delivery

model which evolves and flexes to the business need

• Ensuring information is timely and robust and with helpful supporting analysis

Reporting delivery model (data, process, systems, people)

3• Establishing the critical

attributes required to drive appropriate behaviours and informed actions

• Addressing the capability gaps

4

Governance and reporting alignment

Insights and metrics

Reporting use, education and behaviours

…understanding the audience for the reporting…

…defining what is important to that

audience…

…defining the decisions for each audience…

...defining what the audience will receive…

…how the data and analysis will be created…

…how reporting is presented…

…understanding where education is needed…

…and which behaviours need to change…

PwC 25

Download our PPM Global Survey Report at

www.pwc.com/ppmsurvey

Scott Bryce

Scott.bryce@uk.pwc.com

Thanks for your time

Connect with us

www.linkedin.com

Matt Foley

Matt.foley@uk.pwc.com

James Beck

james.beck@uk.pwc.com

Don’t forget our annual

conference on 1st October

See www.apm.org.uk for details

26

APM Governance SIG

pwc.co.uk

This publication has been prepared for general guidance on matters of interest only, and does not constitute professional advice. You should not act upon the information contained in this publication without obtaining specific professional advice. No representation or warranty (express or implied) is given as to the accuracy or completeness of the information contained in this publication, and, to the extent permitted by law, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, its members, employees and agents do not accept or assume any liability,responsibility or duty of care for any consequences of you or anyone else acting, or refraining to act, in reliance on the information contained in this publication or for any decision based on it.

© 2015 PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. All rights reserved. In this document, "PwC" refers to PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (a limited liability partnership in the United Kingdom), which is a member firm of PricewaterhouseCoopers International Limited, each member firm of which is a separate legal entity.