One of the challenges that a good friend and colleague of mine has is that while he is proud of many of his efforts in the business, he periodically wonders how his organisation compares to other similar ones. He is in charge of multiple programs and projects and is a seasoned and talented operator — and smart enough to know that he himself — and the organisation — needs to be continually learning and improving. Complacency is the enemy!
He would like an “independent” and non-biased view of the strengths of his company and his group and a view of the areas in which they can (should) improve.
Such an investigation would ideally focus both on how the organisation is achieving the proposed benefits of projects and on how the project processes are being handled.
But– importantly — he would obviously like this investigation to be confidential, understanding, constructive, done in a timely way and informing a short and long term “roadmap” for improvement over time.
The coverage of the investigation would include feedback from multiple team members — firstly on the outcomes to the organisation:
- Have the projects achieved the proposed benefits and outcomes (and have they well articulated!)?
- Is the business using as much of the functionality of the technology and software solutions as appropriate? Are the processes truly embedded in everyday business? Is there a roadmap for additional utilisation of untapped and value-adding functionality?
In terms of the processes of the conduct of projects, on a scale of 1 to 10 (with 10 being excellent conduct), how is the organisation handling each of the following:
- Project Approval & Governance (including strategic alignment)
- Project Integration Management
- Project Scope Management
- Project Time Management
- Project Cost Management
- Project Quality Management
- Project Human Resource Management
- Project Communications Management
- Project Risk Management
- Project Procurement Management
- Project Stakeholder Management
Luckily my colleague friend didn’t need a Sherlock Holmes to do this investigation — but he did need to use someone independent and someone he trusted. That trust is elemental, my dear Watson.