Published: November 23 2009, 08:40 AM | 1 Comment(s)
by Steve Romero

In my last blog post, I talked about the link between Business Strategy and project success. My post was inspired by a CIO Magazine online post that cited some good research, making it well worth the time http://bit.ly/2xi1zs.

I mentioned my frustration over the obviousness of the link between business strategy and potential project success. Though I admitted it might just be me, there was another aspect of the post with which I strongly disagree.

The article suggested the Project Manager is responsible for ensuring the project stays connected to the business strategy and does not "veer from its original intent." Yes, I want my PMs to understand (if not insist) on the connection between business strategy and the projects they manage. But asking them to ensure the connection is maintained is a tall order. I insist that the same Executive Steering Committee that approved the project has responsibility for the oversight and monitoring of project progress to ensure it maintains its alignment to business strategy - including changes in business strategy that occur during a project's progression.

In addition to the "Go/No-go" decision, and the seldom accomplished "Benefits Realization", the "Kill/Fix" oversight is an essential responsibility of the Executive Team chartered with project governance. I've mentioned it before, but it warrants repeating. This group's work continues beyond the project investment decision. Approved investments should be managed actively on a continuing basis and not considered just when approval is sought. This requires continued analysis of the portfolio, monitoring each investment for its relative contribution to enterprise strategy versus other portfolio investment. The team must continually answer the fundamental question: Is the investment decision still valid?

The validity of this investment is predicated on two dimensions:

• Is the project performing below expectations? (schedule or cost overruns, benefit erosion)
• Is the project still aligned to business strategy?

I don't think it is reasonable to assume or insist that the Project Manager has the insight necessary to ensure the project stays aligned with business strategy. In addition to the correct interpretation of this alignment, business strategy and associated business objectives constantly change. The Executive Steering Committee is far better positioned to know and apply business strategy understanding to determine if a project is still on-track to realize the goals of the strategy.

Who monitors project alignment to business strategy in your organization? If indeed it is the Project Manager, I would love to hear about your methods and how they are working.

But until I become aware of a rational and reasonable approach for the PM to accomplish aim, I will continue to look to the Executive Project and Portfolio Management (Project Governance) team to ensure projects stay aligned to business strategy.

Steve Romero, IT Governance Evangelist

Share this post:  Email

Share

Published: November 20 2009, 02:16 PM | no comments
by Steve Romero

SF3XHPC7WX2J

I recently read an online CIO Magazine Article about studies showing the link between project success and business strategy http://bit.ly/2xi1zs. The upshot is that business strategy is the best determinant of project success.

When I saw the title of the article my initial responses was, "OF COURSE projects tied to business strategy will be more successful." While I am pleased there is specific research (excellent data in the CIO article) to support the connection between business strategy and project success, my pleasure was tempered by an inescapable frustration caused by the prospect that there are folks in need of this fundamental insight. As I read the post I found myself becoming more and more incredulous as I noted one obvious conclusion after another.  

As my heart-rate rose with each passing paragraph I was rescued by a closing observation: that the connection between business strategy and projects (investments) is fostered and assured through Portfolio Management (which I refer to as Project and Portfolio Management, or PPM). Oh joy! I'm not being sarcastic. I found myself saved by those words. I could feel my blood pressure returning to normal as I reflected on my favorite of all IT Governance processes.

When I deliver my PPM presentations, I list "connection to business strategy" as the most critical criteria for project approval and subsequently, potential project success. Certainly there are many more criterion organizations can and should use when reviewing and potentially approving project requests. But first and foremost is always the investment's connection to defined business strategy. It is the primary question the PPM Investment Governance Committee should ask of any project requestor. "What? You don't know what business strategy your request supports? NEXT!"

OK, I admit, it is happening yet again. I am sitting on a flight from Chicago to San Francisco and I am getting worked up once more. And I think that is the point of this post. Is it me?!?

Are my expectations to high? Is my view askew?

Now don't get me wrong, I have been evangelizing IT Governance and PPM for over 3 years now (see my last post), so I don't need a reality check. I have visited well over 100 companies and I have now talked to thousands of people around the world in forums of every shape and size. I know firsthand how immature IT Governance and PPM processes are in most organizations. I am glad to patiently and thoroughly help folks understand these essential and critical disciplines. I point them to incredible research, insights and thought leadership available from MIT's Center for Information Research (CISR), Gartner, Forrester, the IT Governance Institute, PMI, itSMF, and the list goes on.

But we're talking CIO magazine here. They present the studies and their findings as if it is news. Again, I admit it might just be me. Maybe I do expect too much. Maybe I am too immersed in the discipline. The point of the post: the link to business strategy is "the best determinant." Maybe that is news. I should just be glad that CIO is providing this invaluable insight and the scope of their reach will make even more people aware of the connection between business strategy and project success.

At the very least, I should be thankful for the therapy. Reading the article and going through the emotional rollercoaster will hopefully have a cathartic effect. It might be the outlet I need to ensure I continue to accept the immaturity of IT Governance and more specifically, PPM. As I said in my last post, the most gratifying aspect of my job at CA is helping other people to succeed. I doubt I will be able to do so if I am shaking them by their lapels screaming, "Of course projects linked to business strategy are more likely to succeed!" (I have to confess, that little fantasy felt pretty good. I'm going to have to watch that.)

So, in recognition of the potential need for a reality check, I would love to hear from you. Do you think the connection between business strategy and project success if obvious? Can you identify the business strategy associated with each of the projects underway in your organization?

Consider your answers part of my therapy.

Steve Romero, IT Governance Evangelist

Share this post:  Email

Share

Published: November 09 2009, 11:48 PM | no comments
by Steve Romero

It is hard to believe that this past Friday marked my 3-year anniversary as CA's IT Governance Evangelist. It seems like just yesterday I was considering my first professional role outside of an internal IT organization. Before accepting this job at CA, I never imagined in a million years that I would ever work for a vendor, let alone a Marketing organization.

But here I am, marking my 3^rd year outside of IT. And though I work in the Marketing organization at CA, I still know very little about marketing, and even less about sales. This is all thanks to the brilliance of my boss Carl Landers, and his former and current bosses, David Hurwitz and Joanne Moretti respectively. I make a point of mentioning their names because I genuinely think of them as pioneers, leaders who advocated and continue to foster my incredibly unique position.

I say unique because I have yet to find another person who works for a vendor in a completely product agnostic position. My sole purpose at CA is to immerse myself in the discipline of IT Governance, and to evangelize its power and promise to CA's constituents. I still marvel at the number of planets that needed to be aligned to bring my passion for IT Governance together with the leaders at CA that shared my views, and imagined this position in the first place.

Somehow  we came together, and the result has exceeded all of our expectations. I have now delivered well over 200 presentations, in over 80 Field Marketing Events, 30 professional association conferences, a dozen Customer forums, 7 University Masters Programs, and for over 60 individual organizations. I am currently booked through the end of February 2010, and I already have speaking engagements scheduled into next June.

I have to admit, the travel is very arduous and difficult, mostly because I miss my wife and my two children so much. It is hard, but they support me and they are more involved with my professional life, and my company, than with any other position I have ever held. And visiting 2 to 4 cities every week is no walk in the park, especially considering air travel has never been more challenging and difficult.

I am constantly asked, "Why do you do it?" My answer is simple, because I passionately believe in the things I evangelize. I am certain IT Governance is the key for organizations to realize the full potential and value of their IT investments. I consider Project and Portfolio Management to be the most important IT Governance process, capable of creating incredible strategic advantage. I know that PMOs can break the cycle of, "now we have one, now we don't" by becoming partners in project success, proving their value to leadership, and by establishing a fraternity with Project Managers. And I will continue to help enterprises achieve these things by evangelizing the critical art and science of Process Management, and the necessity to master Metrics and Measures.

These are the things I believe in, and they are the things that launched me on my journey with CA. But I have found something else on my travels, and it is what sustains me most -helping people to succeed. I know it sounds hokey (especially if you know me because I have never been accused of being a people-person), but it's true. Helping people to succeed is the single best articulation of what I do. It is my purpose. It is the focus of each and every one of my efforts. I am continually energized by the enthusiasm and appreciation of my inspired audiences. I stopped counting the folks that have told me they had given up, but now had a renewed conviction to try again. It is unbelievably gratifying.

So I have started my 4^th year as an IT Governance Evangelist. It seems appropriate that I am writing this blog post on the road, having spent yesterday meeting with organizations in Melbourne Australia, and again today in Sydney. I will be traveling to Brisbane tomorrow, Canberra the next day, finishing my week back here in Sydney. I return home Saturday morning, and then I am off to Dallas and Cincinnati next week. My IT Governance Evangelism continues, and I sincerely hope my path crosses yours on my journey.

Steve Romero, IT Governance Evangelist

Share this post:  Email

Share