Going from PMO to Enterprise-wideMO (EMO)

The term Project Management Office (PMO) is a well understood term but the application and implementation can vary from being a supportive PMO, a directive PMO or a consultative PMO. Likewise, should the ‘P’ stand for Project, Program or Portfolio? My view is simple, a PMO should do all of the above and strive to get to calling itself an Enterprise Management Office (EMO). Let’s not fool ourselves, to go from inceptions (which is generally a Directive Project Management Office) to an EMO, can take up to 5 years. This is startling given the fact that recent surveys have shown the lifetime of a standard PMO is 2 ½ years.

Traditionally, PMOs have been departmentally based and effective only within their own departments or silos of responsibility. To execute an efficient EMO, this is one of the major barriers, an Enterprise-wide MO must be seen (by the organisation) as a method of transmitting project management information and encouraging company-wide procedures and tools bringing costs down and improving performance. Should you transition from a thinking of departmental PMO to an Enterprise-wide MO? My answer is simple … this should be the objective of every PMO, whether it is the reality is a very different subject.

Look at your organisation and determine if some of these changes might benefit how you look at project delivery:

1. Is an alignment between project delivery and strategic goals required versus an alignment between project delivery and specific department goals (IT, HR, etc.)? 
2. Is a need to understand business drivers / prioritisations required versus a ‘who shouts loudest mentality?
3. Is there a need for a multi-function project data leading to comparison and knowledge sharing of resources, facilities, etc. versus a reliance on tools (reports and software) and methodologies (contract and people management) to manage the enterprise?
4. Is there a need for project competency development across the organisation versus a focus on who is best placed to deliver projects completed on-time, within budget and to customer’s satisfaction? 
5. Is there a need to understand risk across that organisation rather than ask the projects to fight the losing battle of risk assessment and mitigation?

If you are answering YES to any of the above, then let’s start to talk about the need to transition from a PMO to an EMO. The next question you might ask is how to do it. Well like everything, you need support and you need to business case this to ensure your management team understand the rationale to visibly support the PMO and its new approach to project management governance. Stay tuned for detailed steps on how to transition from PMO to EMO.

 

Why We Pick Leaders with Deceptively Simple Answers

In the Harvard Business Post from May 2016, Gianpiero Petriglieri, wrote an article on Why We Pick Leaders with Deceptively Simple Answers. He opened the question. Mr. Petriglieri makes the point that a growing amount of recent research shows that the more uncertainty we feel, especially about our identities, relationships, and future, the more vulnerable we are to the reassuring appeal of leaders peddling the simplest and most dangerous of narratives.

So what the article really says is that we, as human beings, are drawn to people who give simple, clear and concise messages. That is a truth but also can be vouched for as in 2015, the Harvard Business Review voted Lars Sørensen, the CEO of Denmark-based Novo Nordisk, as the world's top chief executive due to his company's high ranking for both its financial metrics and its performance on environmental, social and governance issues. Why did Mr. Sørensen get this accolade over some of the more notable, marquee-named and controversial CEO’s in the world?

Lars Sørensen came from the operational side of the business. As a CEO and leader his first principle was to change his perspective - to be less operational and more involved in setting the direction of the company. He had to focus more on establishing the tone and the values and personally communicating with those around him. In an interview with Harvard Business Review in Nov 2015, he admitted that was a big transition as he was more comfortable running the business, selling stuff and manufacturing stuff. Now his job is to sell the business to his shareholders and those around him. You could argue that Lars Sørensen is a man that changed his view from the detail of what needs to get done to the objective of keeping his message simple and effective.

 

So for Project, Program and Portfolio management, what can we take from the messaging of Why We Pick Leaders with Deceptively Simple Answers. For me there are five things:

1. Think about your top three priorities to communicate rather than the noise around you
2. Sell the value and talk about value rather than delivery
3. Be interested about those around you and think about those personal relationships
4. Believe in what you are doing and show that. Stick with your guns
5. Take time out and chill out and relax… your value is in being constructive and not exploding

Turlon & Associates (www.turlon.com) have a very successful workshop on the Hidden Skills of a Project and Program Manager which discusses the traits needed for successful leadership in pressurised environments.