These results all point to the one major challenge with project governance: the worse your executives are at governance, the less likely they are to be aware of what they don't know, and therefore, the less likely they will be to recognize the need for education and support—a “catch-22” (a no-win situation).
In addition, many executives that requested training only did so because they believed that there must be more to the role they have in the project. The request wasn't based on their realizing that they lack knowledge.
At a minimum, executives need to learn the following:
1. The true measures of project success.
Because of the “on-time and on-budget delivery” mantra of most businesses, many governance teams are “seduced” (fooled) into measuring success using this as a gauge rather than using the delivery of measurable business outcomes, benefits, and value within the time and cost constraints. Indeed, in a benefits management survey of 57 projects, none of the governance teams had actually defined their projects' measures of success in business terms.
The governance (and project) team needs to understand and agree on what the business measures of success are so that every dimension of the project can be considered and debated against these measures.
2. The roles of the governance team.
I remember one program management office (PMO) manager being quite embarrassed when he presented to me his organization's governance accountabilities—about 10 lines on a page.
It seems amazing that this is still a subject of debate. Depending on your governance role (investment approver, sponsor, steering committee member), your accountabilities should be clear and known—not only to you, but to your project team and peers as well.
I liken being a sponsor, for example, to teaching your child to drive. Your car, insurance, and life are in his hands, and he has control of the car. Your role is to ensure that you arrive at your defined destination safely and on time. Once sponsors understand this, they get the idea of what they are accountable for.
3. The measures of governance team success.
Although the success of the governance team is frequently measured, doing so by simply holding and attending governance meetings is not enough. The ultimate measure of governance success is the business results achieved. But waiting until the end of the project to gauge these results is too late.
First, executives need to know the measures—their critical success factors, impediments to success, leading indicators of failure, the cash burn rate vis-à-vis plan, and so on. If executives are not in touch with and informed about their project, they're not likely to be successful.
Secondly, executives must take appropriate action to ensure the project's success. If they're “fiddling while Rome burns” (wasting time with unimportant issues when they should be handling the more serious problems), the project will not be successful. Executives should not only be reactive to the project manager's requests, but proactive in ensuring no unnecessary obstacles exist.
4. The governance actions and inactions that cause projects to succeed or fail.
It often comes as a great surprise to executives that governance inaction can destroy a project as easily as wrong action can.
At Project Sponsor.com, executives are usually given a booklet titled Understanding Project Governance, which spells out 24 dimensions of governance and explains, for each one, how inaction or wrong action can destroy the project or its value. You can almost see these executives sitting up straighter and paying more attention once they know how easily they can destroy the project from their positions.
5. The necessary interactions and relationships with the project manager and the project.
The project manager is the governance team's agent. The governance team, first of all, needs to trust him or her (if the project manager loses the team's trust, they're all finished—the project is practically guaranteed to fail). The project manager also needs to keep the team informed of what is happening with the project.
Conversely, the governance team needs to keep the project team informed of what is happening in the organization (and sometimes in the market) that could have an impact on the project or its successful implementation. Many governance team members forget this.
But most importantly (and perhaps most controversial), the governance team is a resource for the project manager. It is there to sort out problems in the business, remove obstacles, take pre-emptive action to prevent risks, manage critical success factors, and champion the project through to successful business adoption.
Only when these essential dimensions (although there are others) are known and understood, and when the necessary supporting and enabling processes and materials are in place, can the business executives effectively lead, contribute to, and govern their projects.
In addition, many executives that requested training only did so because they believed that there must be more to the role they have in the project. The request wasn't based on their realizing that they lack knowledge.
At a minimum, executives need to learn the following:
1. The true measures of project success.
Because of the “on-time and on-budget delivery” mantra of most businesses, many governance teams are “seduced” (fooled) into measuring success using this as a gauge rather than using the delivery of measurable business outcomes, benefits, and value within the time and cost constraints. Indeed, in a benefits management survey of 57 projects, none of the governance teams had actually defined their projects' measures of success in business terms.
The governance (and project) team needs to understand and agree on what the business measures of success are so that every dimension of the project can be considered and debated against these measures.
2. The roles of the governance team.
I remember one program management office (PMO) manager being quite embarrassed when he presented to me his organization's governance accountabilities—about 10 lines on a page.
It seems amazing that this is still a subject of debate. Depending on your governance role (investment approver, sponsor, steering committee member), your accountabilities should be clear and known—not only to you, but to your project team and peers as well.
I liken being a sponsor, for example, to teaching your child to drive. Your car, insurance, and life are in his hands, and he has control of the car. Your role is to ensure that you arrive at your defined destination safely and on time. Once sponsors understand this, they get the idea of what they are accountable for.
3. The measures of governance team success.
Although the success of the governance team is frequently measured, doing so by simply holding and attending governance meetings is not enough. The ultimate measure of governance success is the business results achieved. But waiting until the end of the project to gauge these results is too late.
First, executives need to know the measures—their critical success factors, impediments to success, leading indicators of failure, the cash burn rate vis-à-vis plan, and so on. If executives are not in touch with and informed about their project, they're not likely to be successful.
Secondly, executives must take appropriate action to ensure the project's success. If they're “fiddling while Rome burns” (wasting time with unimportant issues when they should be handling the more serious problems), the project will not be successful. Executives should not only be reactive to the project manager's requests, but proactive in ensuring no unnecessary obstacles exist.
4. The governance actions and inactions that cause projects to succeed or fail.
It often comes as a great surprise to executives that governance inaction can destroy a project as easily as wrong action can.
At Project Sponsor.com, executives are usually given a booklet titled Understanding Project Governance, which spells out 24 dimensions of governance and explains, for each one, how inaction or wrong action can destroy the project or its value. You can almost see these executives sitting up straighter and paying more attention once they know how easily they can destroy the project from their positions.
5. The necessary interactions and relationships with the project manager and the project.
The project manager is the governance team's agent. The governance team, first of all, needs to trust him or her (if the project manager loses the team's trust, they're all finished—the project is practically guaranteed to fail). The project manager also needs to keep the team informed of what is happening with the project.
Conversely, the governance team needs to keep the project team informed of what is happening in the organization (and sometimes in the market) that could have an impact on the project or its successful implementation. Many governance team members forget this.
But most importantly (and perhaps most controversial), the governance team is a resource for the project manager. It is there to sort out problems in the business, remove obstacles, take pre-emptive action to prevent risks, manage critical success factors, and champion the project through to successful business adoption.
Only when these essential dimensions (although there are others) are known and understood, and when the necessary supporting and enabling processes and materials are in place, can the business executives effectively lead, contribute to, and govern their projects.
No comments:
Post a Comment