Program Management Life Cycle (PMLC) processes should not be created for the sake of having more processes. Even if the processes are sometimes authored by the overly academic and may miss their mark by adding cumbersome overhead, the intent of PMLC governance should not be lost. There is an ongoing need for companies to safeguard their initiatives. Efficient and effective processes can be a foundation that ensures delivery.
The time has come when we must have some priorities with respect to the way we are allocating our steadily decreasing resources… – Senator William Stuart Symington (United States Senator from Missouri from 1953 to 1976)
Don’t miss the ongoing review
Many companies that I have counseled have had detailed portfolio selection processes for identifying and launching projects. However, once initiated, few had anything from an oversight and control standpoint. This oversight would ensure that projects maintained their health, followed the right course, and delivered the value that was promised at inception. These mistakes crystalize in the form of projects that are over budget, past due, or not aligned to customer needs. The approach of launching a project with a blank checkbook that won’t be reconciled until post-implementation should be disagreeable to the most casual observer of project management. Ongoing reviews and reconciliations are warranted.
The need for ongoing reviews came into sharper focus in the economic downturn in 2008. Companies concentrated and overcame some of their delivery challenges. The Economy is once again in recovery mode, and many signs are seen to be pointing to economic re-opening and healing post-Covid. However, that does not mean we should loosen our belts or ignore good advice. To paraphrase Professor Vicki Smith-Daniels of Arizona State University (who was quoted in PM Network magazine regarding the 2008 recession), corporations need to measure project performance while a project is underway, not just at the end.
The academic concept is easy: regularly review the state of a program or project. If a project cannot maintain its benefits, schedule, or overall cost basis, there should be a formalized way for the governing body to intervene. The operational implementation should be a gated process that releases incremental funds throughout the project’s life. Without such controls, companies run the risk of sinking additional effort and money into initiatives that have no hope of delivering against their plans. Worse yet, without interim checkpoints, a company may not realize its error until too late.
What can you do to optimize your processes?
Is your team, department, or company using a gated program management life cycle process? Do they have the framework in place to determine how healthy their initiatives are? Are the leading indicators in place to help predict what will happen further down the line? I work with my clients to put “detective controls” in place to help guarantee the value of a project. I help clients implement “preventative controls” that help to minimize downside risk. My past lives include IT Auditor where the language of “controls” was part of the vernacular. I make no mistake that project managers are not auditors; however, the language of controls and the value offered with project management processes can enable an organization to deliver better, more, and faster.
Senator Symington was addressing the potential destruction of the economy of the United States if there were not a prudent prioritization of resources. Without prioritization of resources, larger projects can have a big impact if they fail. But no matter the size, any failure that can be prevented is a victory! Put governance processes in place and ensure that you too are managing the scarce resources of your organization.
