The Program Management Maturity Model-
How mature is your program?
Geoff Reiss
Independent uncoordinated projects
Program - planned
Program - controlled
Program Mgt support environment
Program leadership
Program Management Maturity Model
Program Leadership
Agreed plans - all know what should happen
Control mechanisms – current status known
Forward looking – risks and issues anticipated
Stakeholders fully aware and co-operative
Confidence to plan proactively
Time to lead
The Programme Management Maturity Model
Background to PMMM?
Data collected to date and sample results
Conclusions
Where do you go from here
4
History of the PMMM
First idea: based on study of e-programme management techniques
Beta version of PMMM and questionnaire developed
Tested with selected users, customers and colleagues
Revised questionnaire
Sponsored by ProgM – programme management SIG
Launched at PMI 2001 – London
Improved guidance on questionnaire
Nearly 10 years old - more data – more confidence
5
PMMM Initial Questions
Please indicate your overall rating of the program’s maturity by indicating which of the
Following statements best describes it. Please tick only one box in this section for the statement
that best describes the overall state your program.
1. The program is primarily a collection of projects with few “program level” functions and little co-ordination.
2. The program is planned as a co-ordinated entity, although “program level” plans are not fully implemented and there is little effective co-ordination between projects or control at the “program level”.
3. There is a significant degree of co-ordination between projects and of control at “program level”, although further could be achieved if there were more resources or tools at “program level”.
4. There is a high degree of co-ordination between projects and “program level” control of projects, with all necessary “program level” tools and resources available, although although there is scope for further leadership at program level.
5. There is a high-degree of co-ordination of projects and program level control; program management have all the visibility and control that is required and are pro-actively leading the whole program, to the benefit of the client/user.
Managing Successful Programseight principles
1. Program management organisation
2. Program planning
3. Benefits management
4. Stakeholder management
5. Issue management & risk management
6. Quality management
7. Configuration management
8. Audits
Managing Successful programmes is available from the UK Office of Government Commerce (OGC) at
www.ogc.gov.uk
PMMM10 aspects of program Management
1. Program management organisation
2. Program planning
3. Benefits management
4. Stakeholder management
5. Issue management & risk management
6. Quality management & audits
7. Configuration management8. Internal communication9. Management of accounts and finance10. Management of scope and change
PMMM Questionnaire – a typical section
Please answer the following questions about quality management & auditing within the
program. Please tick one box for each question.
The quality requirements of all deliverables are defined and agreed.
Component projects have defined and agreed plans for verifying and validating the quality of all their deliverables.
The projects’ quality plans are effectively implemented and the program has a defined and agreed plan for confirming the quality of all deliverables.
Effective audit arrangements are in place to verify the conformance of all parts of the program to agreed plans, processes and quality requirements.
The quality performance of all parts of the program is measured, monitored, reported and used as a basis for initiating on-going improvements in program performance.
None Part All
Ratings for Programme No 42
0
1
2
3
4
5
Aspect of Programme Management
Rati
ng
Individual Rating this Prog
Ave Rating
A PMMM Profile
Rating given to aspect
Average for this program
Overall perception for this program
The PMMM database
>200 programs in database
UK, USA, Netherlands, Australia, Canada, Sth Africa, Russia, Switzerland, China..
All data held in confidence
Sponsored by ProgM with support of Logica UK Ltd
Ratings for Programme No 42
0
1
2
3
4
5
Aspect of Programme Management
Rati
ng
Individual Rating this Prog
Ave Rating
Ave all results
Comparing Programs
Average ratings for all programs in database
Sample Results
13
Sample Results – Database Averages
14
Average ratings from database)
0
1
2
3
4
5
man
agem
ent
orga
nisa
tion
plan
ning
bene
fit m
anag
emen
t
stak
ehol
der
man
agem
ent
issu
e an
d ri
skm
anag
emen
t
qual
ity m
anag
emen
t&
aud
iting
conf
igur
atio
nm
anag
emen
t
inte
rnal
com
mun
icat
ion
prog
ram
me
acco
untin
g &
fina
nces
Sco
pe &
cha
nge
Ove
rall
ratin
g
Aspect of Programme Management
Ra
tin
g
Individual ratings
Mean
Typically well developed aspects
Average of all aspects
Rating for project overall
Typically less well developed aspects
Rating for elements
Sample Results – Database Averages
15
Average ratings from database(with +/- 1 std deviation marked)
0
1
2
3
4
5
man
agem
ent
orga
nisa
tion
plan
ning
bene
fit m
anag
emen
t
stak
ehol
der
man
agem
ent
issu
e an
d ri
skm
anag
emen
t
qual
ity m
anag
emen
t&
aud
iting
conf
igur
atio
nm
anag
emen
t
inte
rnal
com
mun
icat
ion
prog
ram
me
acco
untin
g &
fina
nces
Sco
pe &
cha
nge
Ove
rall
ratin
g
Aspect of Programme Management
Ra
tin
g
Individual ratings
Mean
Typically well developed aspects
Average of all aspects
Rating for project overall
Typically less well developed aspects
+- 1 std deviation
Rating for elements
Sample Result – Finance Sector IS Programme
16
Ratings for Programme No 14
0
1
2
3
4
5
man
agem
ent o
rgan
isatio
n
plann
ing
bene
fit m
anage
ment
stake
holde
r man
agem
ent
issue
and
risk
man
agem
ent
qual
ity m
anag
emen
t & a
uditin
g
conf
igura
tion
man
agem
ent
inter
nal c
omm
unica
tion
prog
ram
me
acco
untin
g & fi
nanc
es
Scope
& c
hang
e
Overa
ll rat
ing
Aspect of Programme Management
Ra
tin
g Individual Ratings
Ave Rating this Prog
Ave all Programmes
Well developed aspects
Less developed aspects
Average of peers
Sample Result – Utilities IS Programme
17
Ratings for Programme No 12
0
1
2
3
4
5
man
agem
ent o
rgan
isatio
n
plann
ing
bene
fit m
anage
ment
stake
holde
r man
agem
ent
issue
and
risk
man
agem
ent
qual
ity m
anag
emen
t & a
uditin
g
conf
igura
tion
man
agem
ent
inter
nal c
omm
unica
tion
prog
ram
me
acco
untin
g & fi
nanc
es
Scope
& c
hang
e
Overa
ll rat
ing
Aspect of Programme Management
Ra
tin
g Individual Ratings
Ave Rating this Prog
Ave all results
Externally managed
Managing scope change maintains profit
Independent External Audit
Sample Result – Immature Programme
18
Ratings for Programme No 48
0
1
2
3
4
5
man
agem
ent o
rgan
isatio
n
plann
ing
bene
fit m
anage
ment
stake
holde
r man
agem
ent
issue
and
risk
man
agem
ent
qual
ity m
anag
emen
t & a
uditin
g
conf
igura
tion
man
agem
ent
inter
nal c
omm
unica
tion
prog
ram
me
acco
untin
g & fi
nanc
es
Scope
& c
hang
e
Overa
ll rat
ing
Aspect of Programme Management
Ra
tin
g Individual Rating this Prog
Ave Rating
Ave all results
All ratings below peer group average
S.Africa – Utilities Programme
19
Ratings for Programme No 46
0
1
2
3
4
5
man
agem
ent o
rgan
isatio
n
plann
ing
bene
fit m
anage
ment
stake
holde
r man
agem
ent
issue
and
risk
man
agem
ent
qual
ity m
anag
emen
t & a
uditin
g
conf
igura
tion
man
agem
ent
inter
nal c
omm
unica
tion
prog
ram
me
acco
untin
g & fi
nanc
es
Scope
& c
hang
e
Overa
ll rat
ing
Aspect of Programme Management
Ra
tin
g Individual Rating this Prog
Ave Rating
Ave all results
Growing interest in benefit management
A Gap here
Well developed aspects
Programme Rescue - Before
20
Ratings for Programme in May
0
1
2
3
4
5
1.0
man
agem
ent o
rgan
isatio
n
2.0
planni
ng
3.0
man
agem
ent o
f ben
efits
4.0
man
agem
ent o
f sta
keho
lders
5.0
issue
and
risk
man
agem
ent
6.0
quality
mana
gem
ent &
aud
iting
7.0c
onfig
urat
ion m
anag
ement
8.0i
nter
nal c
omm
unica
tion
9.0
progr
amm
e ac
coun
ting
& fina
nces
10.0
Sco
pe & c
hang
e
11.0
Ove
rall r
atin
g
Aspect of Programme Management
Rat
ing Individual Ratings
Ave Rating this Prog
Ave all Programmes
Programme Rescue - After
21
Ratings for Programme in August
0
1
2
3
4
5
1.0
man
agem
ent o
rgan
isatio
n
2.0
planni
ng
3.0
man
agem
ent o
f ben
efits
4.0
man
agem
ent o
f sta
keho
lders
5.0
issue
and
risk
man
agem
ent
6.0
quality
mana
gem
ent &
aud
iting
7.0c
onfig
urat
ion m
anag
ement
8.0i
nter
nal c
omm
unica
tion
9.0
progr
amm
e ac
coun
ting
& fina
nces
10.0
Sco
pe & c
hang
e
11.0
Ove
rall r
atin
g
Aspect of Programme Management
Rat
ing Individual Ratings
Ave Rating this Prog
Ave all Programmes
Programme Rescue - Comparison
22
Changes to Ratings - May to August 2001
0
1
2
3
4
5
Aspect of Programme Management
Rat
ing
May Rating
Aug Rating
Industry Ave
IT v Non-IT Programmes
23
Ratings for IT and Non-IT Programmes
2.63 2.77
2.69
0
1
2
3
4
5
Rat
ing IT Ratings
Non-IT Ratings
IT Average Non-IT Average
Database Average
IT v Non-IT Programmes
24
Ratings for IT and Non-IT Programmes
0
1
2
3
4
5
man
agem
ent o
rgan
isatio
n
plann
ing
bene
fit m
anage
ment
stake
holde
r man
agem
ent
issue
and
risk
man
agem
ent
qual
ity m
anag
emen
t & a
uditin
g
conf
igura
tion
man
agem
ent
inter
nal c
omm
unica
tion
prog
ram
me
acco
untin
g & fi
nanc
es
Scope
& c
hang
e
Overa
ll rat
ing
Aspect of Programme Management
Ra
tin
g IT Ratings
Non-IT Ratings
Ave all results
IT Programmes generally better than non IT
IT Programmes generally worse than non IT
Conclusion & where do you go from here
25
What happens next?
1. Take PMMM questionnaire2. Complete all questions for your
program (current or most recent program)3. Independent Expert or self
assessment?4. Return to ProgM5. We will analyse tonight6. You will receive back your program
profile with comments7. Plan Improvements using the Program
Maturity Improvement Model (PMIP) from the Gower Handbook of Programme Management.
Conclusion
Helps to understand characteristics of programmes
“At a glance” results command attention from senior management
Provides good basis for benchmarking
Plan improvements in key areas step by step
Repeat study to demonstrating improvements
27
To analyse your Programme
Questionnaire available on www.e-programme.com
Anyone can download and submit their own completed questionnaire
Submitters then receive their own data compared with the overall average profile
Consider expert independent studies
Plan and implement improvements
28
Top Related