by Paul C. Dinsmore
Aligning the company’s portfolio of projects so that
their contributions to the organization’s objectives are maximized calls
for formal coordination to ensure that each project’s actions move in
arrow-like fashion toward corporate targets. It requires more than the
old "grenade over the wall" approach, in which the business planning staff
identifies and characterizes the project and then tosses it to an uninformed
and uninvolved project management group that is supposed to complete the
project. As any primer on modern management says, folks have to "buy in"
-- everyone must be onboard before charging ahead.
The concurrent engineering approach to managing projects
is based on this theory of buy-in. Yet, the corporate-strategy-to-project
transition is sometimes overlooked, perhaps because of fine past performance
by both business planning people and project management people. Normally,
both groups do sterling jobs in their respective areas. But just think
what these talents could do if they interfaced effectively at transition
time!
Here’s a checklist of questions for senior executives
and sponsors to help make sure the corporate projects are aligned to corporate
strategy:
Is the corporation committed to using project management
strategically? In most companies, hundreds of projects are underway
at any given time---transformation projects, continuous improvement programs,
plant expansions, maintenance fix-ups, worker empowerment, resizing, outsourcing
and quality-of-life projects. Managers, who in the old days, supervised
people or acted as information brokers between lower and upper corporate
levels, now serve as project managers, or as managers of project managers.
Since the nature of a manager’s work has changed, there must be corresponding
corporate commitment to the art and science of managing projects. Things
have changed and corporate policies statements must reflect those changes.
The project policy statements might address timing (as in the case NCR)
or the use of principles and techniques.
Is there a policy of formally preparing project
charters? Since projects are the way corporate strategies are put
into effect, it is fundamental they be done in accordance with the original
corporate philosophy, strategy, and intent. Project charters are the instrument
for doing this. This charter, with the participation and approval of upper
management, should answer the basic question, "In what ways will the project
enhance overall corporate objectives?" The charter should also cover such
topics as objectives, relationships of stakeholders, methodologies, project
management philosophy, scope statement, principal interfaces and a brief
project management plan.
Is synergy created between the business group and
those responsible for project implementation? To avoid the grenade-over-the-wall-syndrome,
there needs to be early involvement by project implementation people.
While this principle may seem sound, the practice of it presents a challenge.
First, business planning people may prefer to plan without the help of
perceived "outsiders." Then, there’s a good likelihood that the right
project people might not be sitting about just waiting to brainstorm and
analyze the early stages of a business proposal. Finally, there’s the
effort required by senior management and sponsors to articulate the relationship
between the business planning people and the project management office.
How can senior management make sure that projects
don't wear away from the chartered objectives? Maintenance events,
programmed into the lives of a project, are a way to keep the project
aligned with corporate interests. One classic method is the two-day project
management audit. This audit typically compares on-site practice against
the project management plan, which is the road map for project implementation.
If the audit is expanded to include the project charter and senior management
sponsorship issues, this will ensure that questions of strategic project
alignment are addressed. The audit can also be used to pinpoint the need
for strategic adjustment, if some of the original premises have changed
as the project evolved.
Paul C. Dinsmore is president of Dinsmore Associates and is a highly
respected specialist in project management and organizational change.
Excerpted, with permission of the publisher, from Winning in Business
With Enterprise Project Management, by Paul C. Dinsmore. Copyright 1999,
Paul C. Dinsmore. Published by AMACOM, a division of American Management
Association.
|
