Published: August 02 2010, 12:17 PM | no comments
by Steve Romero

Consider this question, "Say, Ms. or Mr. Project Manager, would you rather follow the heavy PMO methodology or the lite PMO methodology?" Can you guess the answer?

I just received a copy of the Corporate Executive Board Company's "State of the PMO: 2010" report. It is a "compendium of PMO and Project benchmarks" produced by the PMO Executive Council in their Information Technology Practice. I am not providing any link because you have to be a subscriber to get a copy and I don't want to tacitly promote a membership-required forum. I leave any engagement you may desire entirely to you.

Here are the key findings listed in the Executive Summary:

1. Continued Budget Pressure-Only a quarter of PMOs expect to see any increase in their budget in 2010, while 61% expect further cuts. This continues the trend of declining budgets, as the median PMO budget fell by 17% between 2008 and 2009.

2. A Year of Flat Staffing-Following significant cuts in 2009, PMO heads report that there will likely be no staff increases in 2010. Sixty-five percent of PMOs say that there will be no change in the number of project and program managers in their organization, and 61% say that non-PM staffing levels in the PMO will remain flat.

3. A Lack of Long-Term PMO Stability-The average tenure of the existing PMO is only five years, and the average tenure of the current PMO director is only three years.

4. An Increasingly Complex Project Portfolio-The project portfolio is growing more complex. More than half of projects involve deployment in multiple locations, 40% of all projects involve more than two external partners, and only 19% of project teams are co-located.

5. A Trend Toward Reduced Methodology-The median number of deliverables in the standard project management methodology is 30. Thirty-five percent of PMOs indicate they want to reduce the number of mandatory deliverables across the next two years.

6. The Continued "Mainstreaming" of Program Management-Ninety-one percent of PMOs categorize projects into programs, up from 83% in 2008. The most common criteria used to group projects into programs include resource requirements (65% of PMOs), common end users (65%), and common project management deliverables or artifacts (55%).

It is an interesting report despite the lack of anything earth-shattering. (Yes, this includes the lack of long-term PMO stability. PMOs continue to come and go.) The one thing that got my attention and inspired this post was finding #5, "A Trend Toward Reduced Methodology."

For those of you who know me, you are aware of the huge place in my heart for process and methodology. I fell in love with process at the beginning of my IT career (go figure) and spent my earliest days as an inflexible and intolerable process lunatic. Fortunately, the years that followed provided me the needed education, experience, insights and beat-downs to temper my fanaticism and I am no longer an advocate of process for the sake of process. I constantly strive for the correct fit and flavor and balance between too much and too little process while under the influence of a relentless obsession to serve customers and the business.

Given my passion for process, finding #5 in the State of the PMO Report peaked my interest and made me hopeful. I assumed "a trend toward reduced methodology" meant PMOs were intent on eliminating unnecessary process activities, steps or tasks. I assumed it meant PMOs were going to ensure their processes and methodologies were reasoned and rational and right for the business they served. I assumed it meant they were devoting themselves to good process management and the inevitable resulting optimization of their processes and methodologies. Then I saw this little ditty inside the report:

• 47% said establishing a "PMO-Lite" was a priority

ARGH! I say "Argh" because that bullet makes me want to scream! PMO-Lite? As opposed to what, PMO-heavy?" The only thing worse than a "lite" process is a process fast-path (implying the alternative is the slow path).

Process is neither lite nor heavy. Process paths are neither fast nor slow. Process is either right or wrong. Business applicability and required flexibility and adaptability need to be addressed in the design, implementation and management of a process. Variations in process business requirements result in either multiple processes or multiple decision-points in a single process. A process with fewer steps isn't a "lite" process, it is the right process! An exception to a process is not the "fast path," it is the "risky path."

I applaud the fact that almost half of the PMOs intend to address their process and methodology, but the idea of "PMO-Lite" gives me a stomach ache. The key is not fewer project management methodology deliverables. The key is the right deliverables to delight the customer and make the work required to do so possible and practical. Establishing the correct methodology deliverables requires an acute of understanding of the process management discipline (design, implementation and management). I believe it is the lack of this understanding that results in lite process vs. right process. This is why I tell all PMO practitioners and leaders they must be process masters. It is why I will continue to do so.

Steve Romero, IT Governance Evangelist