Published: April 28 2009, 10:48 AM | 1 Comment(s)
by Steve Romero

My colleague Gail Meadus just notified me of that the Standish Group's just-released its latest Chaos report, "CHAOS Summary 2009" http://www.standishgroup.com/ . The news is not good.

I am looking into obtaining a copy. In the meantime, here are some high-level points from the summary on their website.

This year's results show a marked decrease in project success rates,

• "32% of all projects succeeding which are delivered on time, on budget, with required features and functions" says Jim Johnson, chairman of The Standish Group,
• 44% were late, over budget, and/or with less than the required features and functions
• 24% failed - cancelled prior to completion or delivered and never used
• This year's results represent the highest failure rate in over a decade

I am sure I will have more to share after I read the full report.

Steven Romero, IT Governance Evanagelist

Share this post:  Email

Share

Published: April 24 2009, 07:55 AM | no comments
by Steve Romero

Are you realizing value from your investment in technology?

In my experience, most organizations have difficulty answering this question. I have also found I need to take care when asking the question.

In my last post I noted how IT should create value and I received some savvy comments from Bill Monroe, Chief Collaboration Officer. Bill noted that IT in and of itself does not "create value. He noted that IT is a tool that enables value. Semantics aside, I think we were in violent agreement.

Upon reflection, what I really want to ensure is that I am realizing business value from IT. I talk about this lofty goal constantly as it is a major principle of IT Governance. A recent ISACA survey of 255 non-IT Executives found that "value creation" was the #1 reason enterprises are dipping their toes in the IT Governance waters (having thankfully relegated "Managing Risk" to the #2 reason).

And realizing this value from IT is all the more complicated by the fact that study after study shows that at least 50% of our IT projects are failing (and here's another plug for Michael Krigsman's "IT Project Failures" http://blogs.zdnet.com/projectfailures/ ). I responded to a recent blog post from Toni Bowers http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/career/?p=733  (who also plugged Michael's blog) agreeing that the failure of these projects is rarely due to problems with the technology. I noted, "In my experience the greatest challenge is understanding, changing and managing the related business processes and human behavior."

My answer to this intolerable quandary is IT Governance. I am a major subscriber to the teachings of the IT Governance Institute and I am a major proponent of their ValIT Framework. This past July they published their second version and in its quest to realize enterprise value, the framework sagely notes, "Realizing business value is not about acquiring technology, but about using IT in conjunction with associated changes in the nature of the business, business processes, individuals' work and competencies, and organizational structures."

I embraced the first version published in 2006 and a recent tweet by @kcaretta, editor of SearchCIO-Midmarket.com motivated me to finally read Version 2 in its entirety. Kristen was asking if anyone was using ValIT which resulted in our scheduling some time on the phone to discuss my views on the topic.

We had a great conversation and I now have to temper the almost limitless resulting inspiration and blog fodder and choose one thing to share with you in this post. I settled on a tidbit I think gets squarely to the subject of the inordinate number of IT project failures and our associated inability to deliver appropriate value to the business.

The newest version of the ValIT Framework includes an excerpt from John Ward's article in the Forum, the Monthly Newsletter of the Information Systems Research Center at the Cranfield School of Management - August 2006, ‘Delivering Value From Information Systems and Technology Investments: Learning From Success'. Their study identified a number of characteristics typical among initiatives that meet success in delivering value:

• Programs are selected based not just on their desirability but also on the organization's ability to deliver them.
• Having methodologies in place is less important than whether business managers and specialists use them.
• Robust and realistic business cases are used and, if possible, include benefits for all stakeholders.
• Benefits are managed over the entire investment life cycle through consistently applied practices and processes.
• Integrated planning addresses benefit delivery as well as organizational, process and technology changes.
• Business ownership and accountability are assigned for all benefits and changes targeted.
• Investments and their results-in terms of whether benefits are realized-are systematically monitored and reviewed.
• Lessons learned are consistently gleaned from both successful and unsuccessful programs -and used to improve the planning and management of new ones.

Though aspiring to these characteristics may be quite daunting, I hope you find this list as inspiring as I did. Send me a comment if your enterprise has achieved any of these characteristics or if you are challenged in your quest to accomplish them. If so, I am sure I have much to learn from your experience.

Steven Romero, IT Governance Evangelist

Share this post:  Email

Share

Published: April 21 2009, 12:24 PM | 5 Comment(s)
by Steve Romero

I struggled with the title of this blog. I first called it, "PMO as a Partner in Success" which I then changed to, "Getting More Value from Your PMO." Though I firmly believe in each of these propositions neither of these labels worked for me.

So I spent some time reflecting on the inspiration for this post. It was a recent exchange I had with Demian Entrekin of IT Toolbox fame http://it.toolbox.com/people/dentrekin/ . Demian wrote a post titled, "In English please..." In his post he wrote, "Statements like ‘Transforming IT' may sound pretty but don't always provide a whole lot of meaning." Demian then went on to provide his interpretation of transforming IT which prompted me to share some of my ideas on the subject. In one of his responses to my responses Demian wrote:

"Steve, I just had a great conversation with the CIO of Forbes, and his view is that the PMO can (and should) act as a change agent. In other words, rather than simply running the PMO as the project police, the folks in the PMO actively look for ways to create more value for the organization as a whole, using IT as a leverage point. This certainly supports your point."

Ahhhh, this was music to my ears. And not simply because my point was being supported (though it is nice when that occasionally occurs). First, the statement supported my long standing assertion that technology should be leveraged for strategic advantage as opposed to being a cost that is managed. Second, I loved hearing about the role of the PMO at Forbes - the role of value creator.

I say loved because that was truly the feeling I had. I love IT Governance and the power and promise it provides. I love IT Governance processes that lead to reasoned and rationale decisions in the use of technology. And I love PMOs that enable aspects of the discipline, though I find they rarely do.

Almost every PMO I have ever encountered acts as project process enforcers and paper-pushers. Their role is simple, establish project management methodology and then report on the use of that methodology - ergo, the unenviable position of Project Police. Though just about everyone agrees (especially me) that sound project management practices are a good idea, these PMOs almost always degrade into something that Executive Management views as overhead, and PMs and project staff view as something that should be avoided.

Couple the doomed "Project Police" model with the fact that few PMOs are backed with sound enterprise-led PPM (Project and Portfolio Management) and it is no wonder so many projects fail. (Michal Krigsman has a blog dedicated to "IT Project Failure" that I highly recommend. http://blogs.zdnet.com/projectfailures/ ) Effective PPM is essential because it ensures the PMO is given a reasoned and rational portfolio of investments upon which to deliver.

If PMOs are to have any hope of aspiring to the vision and purpose of the PMO at Forbes they must be backed by good governance, good PPM processes and they must be chartered in the role of "value creator." In this circumstance PMOs will help to make work possible and practical. The will help to make people successful and they will be loved.

I travel the world on a quest to help enterprises aspire to this audacious goal. I have 5 presentations I deliver with great regularity and they all play a role:

• Understanding and Achieving Sustainable IT Governance
• Meeting Enterprise Goals Through Project and Portfolio Management
• Critical Components of Effective PMOs
• Enabling Stellar Performance with Process Management
• Meaningful Metrics

I love delivering these presentations and I do so in CA Field Marketing Events, at professional association conferences such as PMI, ISACA and itSMF, and at individual companies. And now CA is offering them in a series of webcasts. I delivered the IT Governance presentation this past Tuesday and if you missed it a recording is available at https://myclarity.webex.com/myclarity/lsr.php?AT=pb&SP=EC&rID=50767772&rKey=C0CA819947BD5CBF.

I will be webcasting the other four presentations every other Tuesday at 8:00 AM PST for the next two months. I invite you to join me by registering at:

Session 2 PPM:  https://myclarity.webex.com/myclarity/onstage/g.php?t=a&d=599166558

Session 3 PMO:  https://myclarity.webex.com/myclarity/onstage/g.php?t=a&d=591596258

Session 4 Process:  https://myclarity.webex.com/myclarity/onstage/g.php?t=a&d=596021503

Session 5 Metrics:  https://myclarity.webex.com/myclarity/onstage/g.php?t=a&d=591676154

I just finished delivering my PMO presentation to a Clarity User Group in North Carolina. I asked them if people "loved their PMOs." They all laughed. Though it was a nice lighthearted moment, I would have liked a different response. Together, I believe we can turn the answer to this question to "yes."

Steven Romero, IT Governance Evangelist

Share this post:  Email

Share

Published: April 13 2009, 08:46 AM | 2 Comment(s)
by Steve Romero

 This point was raised when I recently delivered my IT Governance presentation to a Master's class at San Francisco State University. I had completed the first half of the presentation that covers the principles and decision areas of IT Governance and launched into what I consider to be the major IT Governance processes.

The first process I discuss is "Integrated Business and IT Planning." I provided a high-level overview of strategic, tactical and operational planning and one of the students asked, "Technology changes so fast and frequently, what do you do when technology changes in the middle of your plans?"

I liked answering this question because it gets to the spirit of one of the main concerns I hear when it comes to advocating, fostering and establishing IT Governance, "Things are moving too fast and we don't have time." This question went beyond the time it takes to do the planning, it addressed the time it takes to "do the plan!" In many cases, technology changes before you have the time to complete your best laid plans.

My answer was simple, if not witty, "Plan on it." If you work in an environment faced with frequent and fast-paced changes in technology, then your IT Governance processes should accommodate and address this phenomenon.  How about a strategic planning process that includes technology checkpoints at regular intervals, with the anticipation that new technologies will be reviewed, evaluated and possibly adopted? All subsequent technology adoptions would then be incorporated into the strategic plan - with timely and appropriate decision-making.

And it just so happened that "Technology Evaluation and Adoption" is one of the IT Governance processes I advocate. The question helped illustrate the relationships and interdependencies between IT Governance processes and how these connections must be recognized and managed.

This question also underscored something in which I firmly believe. Good governance processes and mechanisms are not only unaffected by technology change, they ensure enterprises can deal with that change, if not exploit it. Technologies will come and go, but the need for rational and reasoned decision-making in the use of technology is here to stay.

Steve Romero, IT Governance Evangelist

Share this post:  Email

Share

Published: April 06 2009, 09:20 PM | no comments
by Steve Romero

Share this post:  Email

Share