To print: Click here or Select File and then Print from your browser's menu

This story was printed from silicon.com, located at http://www.silicon.com/

Story URL: http://www.silicon.com/research/specialreports/programme/0,3800004583,39121116,00.htm

Brunel University's Business Class: A programme management primer
Don't confuse it with project management...

By Brunel University

Published: Friday 04 June 2004

Professor Robert Macredie and Dr Mark Lycett seek to clearly define 'programme management' with a view to smashing two assumptions - that it is simply a scaled-up version of project management and that a 'one size fits all' approach will work.

Much has been written on the dos and don'ts of project management - and rightly so. It continues to be a vital requirement for today's IT manager. However, when managing multiple projects which often overlap, there is little by way of anecdotal evidence to guide today's IT executive.

Programmes exist to create value by improving the management of projects in isolation. A standard approach is now beginning to emerge, based on the fundamental approach of project management, i.e. hierarchy of roles, linear lifecycle and a set of defined activities. However, if businesses are to benefit from the true value of programme management, it's essential that it's not confused with project management and the idea that a standard approach or formula will work every time is eliminated.

Office relationships
Programme management is defined as the integration and management of a group of related projects with the intent of achieving benefits that would not be realised if they were managed independently. It offers a means to build a strong relationship between individual project delivery and organisational strategy.

By overseeing projects at a strategic distance, it makes it easier to direct them towards achieving the wider business objectives. Very much like an orchestra conductor encouraging relationships between the various instrument sections - creating a harmony when they work together as opposed to separate blocks of sound when playing in isolation.

Relationships are key. The success of a programme is dependent on the successful management of multiple relationships: that of programme manager and project managers, of the different individual project managers within the programme and of the projects in relation to the wider business context.

Programme managers need to think about programmes not simply from a control focus but rather from a coordination and relationship focus. For example, they should be mindful of the difficulties that are found at the interface between projects themselves.

Competition, for example, is a natural feature of a multi-project environment and manifests itself in terms of rivalry to achieve high priority status and/or strong competition to secure the resources available. This is often detrimental to the programme as a whole. Perhaps better deadline setting and management should be looked at so the project as a whole is a priority, not just the individual elements.

Effective programme management should try to form a collective ethos, paving the way for open communication between the various project managers - ensuring that positive actions are duplicated where relevant and that mistakes are learnt from and (hopefully) not made twice.

Our ongoing study has identified that very few companies have developed effective means of transferring learning and experience from project to project. Knowledge transfer is normally only given a cursory reference in the context of current views of programme management. A programme manager must provide the impetus behind information sharing across projects. Sharing and learning from the experience of the different project managers should be the cornerstone of programme management.

Control freak
Finding a balance between bureaucracy, control and level of detail can be hard to achieve. If you look at programme management in use, there are a number of issues that exist: their focus is primarily on control; they tend not to display flexibility in the context of evolving business strategy; and there is limited co-operation on projects within a programme.

Standard approaches to programme management strive to obtain an inappropriate level of detail driven by a desire to exercise an inappropriate degree of control. This tends to lead to the creation of systems and programme planning and control that are too complex almost to the point of becoming unmanageable.

It can be very difficult to achieve an appropriate balance between excessive control and insufficient control in a multi-project context. From our experience, excessive bureaucracy and control has a tendency to create inflexibility, bureaucratic overheads and in extreme circumstances relegate programme management to little more than a reporting mechanism.

Environmentally conscious
In today's business world, it's critical that programme managers maintain a strategic overview, identifying synergies between projects, highlighting where resources can be pooled for efficiency and at the same time remaining acutely aware of the strategic goals of the business - constantly aligning the programme to the strategic needs of the evolving business environment. It is not only about control but also about coordination. An insular or modular view of the projects negates the value of programme management from the outset.

Organisations have a tendency to apply programme management as a scaled-up version of project management - a 'do what we currently do but do it bigger' mentality. This one-size fits all approach is often inappropriate.

Standard approaches to programme management largely neglect the need to shape, embed and align programmes with wider business objectives. Standard approaches also focus on a more linear type of programme lifecycle. The underlying assumption is that the programme can be defined in detail at the outset and then carried through to a defined closure point.

In this context, activities such as adjustment of the direction of the programme or addition of new projects to the programme only occur by exception. Although, in theory, it's possible to evolve the programme in response to a changing business environment, the focus on definition and control of programme scope severely restricts programme flexibility. In essence, an insistence on tight definition and clear boundaries negates part of the value of having a programme in the first place.

Get with the programme
In combination, these observations can be used to provide grounding for a fundamentally different approach to programme management designed for flexibility, enabled for adaptability in a changing business environment and focused throughout on effective relationship management.

The weaknesses of standard programme management techniques can be traced back to two erroneous assumptions, namely that project management and programme management are essentially equivalent and that a single standard approach to programme management is applicable in all circumstances.

If these assumptions are broken down, businesses can then begin to harness the true benefits of effective programme management - helping to ensure IT projects throughout an organisation work together to meet the wider business objectives.