Strategy

Top Secret! Successful Program Management In Government

| Jeremy Brien

Case Study Review: Milestones To Efficiency and The Factors That Influence Program Success In U.S. Federal Agencies

Formal project and program management has not been as diligently applied in government agencies relative to their counter-parts in private industry. This is alarming, as a large percentage of organizations, both public and private, are unable to deliver their projects successfully — “nearly 56 percent of strategic initiatives meet their original goals and business intent” (PMI, 2015). As a result, organizations are “losing $99 million for every $1 billion invested in projects and programs” (PMI, 2018). That’s roughly 10 cents per dollar spent on a project initiative. This article is aimed at summarizing the case study performed by the Project Management Institute (PMI) in 2015. The full case study can be found here.

Using Organizational Project Management — OPM

Just over a third of government agencies report that they “fully understand the value of project management” (PMI, 2015) and this case study examines three Federal Agencies to demonstrate what “successful Organizational Project Management (OPM) looks like in government” (PMI, 2015) in the:

  • Social Security Administration (SSA)
  • Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)
  • Federal Aviation Administraiton (FAA). 

Success Factors

While the specific mission and goals of each agency are unique — they all strive to effectively manage their budgets and spend tax payers money wisely, serve their constituents, and adopt and realize the benefits of OPM within their respective programs and projects. Below is a list of the success factors all three agencies report as

  1. Strong Leadership Capabilities: Hands on leadership from program managers effectively support project management activities, better engages stakeholders, and “serves to increase camaraderies and confidence within the team (PMI, 2015).”
  2. Commitment to OPM: Each agency had a subject matter expert (SME) available or leading the adoption of OPM; investment in training and certification made “formalizing principles and practices” (PMI, 2015) much easier and the appetite for change outweighed risk & avoidance. 
  3. Executive and Senior Level Support: Executives budgeted for training and were called upon when their influence was needed to remove project impediments — signaling a “strong sign of commitment to lower echelons” (PMI, 2015) of the organization. 
  4. Effective Training Programs, Ongoing Coursework, & Certifications: Training and experience go hand and hand; critical employees were afforded training and certification opportunities to better serve their constituents.

    “For the team involved in the Bureau of Indian Affairs program, to lower violent crime rates, Indian Country police officers received sensitivity training. This familiarized them with Indian cultures and customs, helping officers to avoid cultural missteps. This in turn helped promote acceptance of the program.”

  5. Transparent and Effective Communication: Regular communication, both formal and informal, were highly effective as they fit the needs of stakeholders and the programs, resulting in “identification of problems that could be pre-empted — reducing the likelihood of escalation” (PMI, 2015). 
  6. Team building and Stakeholder Engagement: Coalesced communication, training, and agency buy-in culminates into shared “understanding and respect among parties, which helps avoid resistance and misunderstanding that can lead to delays” (PMI, 2015). 

Common Obstacles

Each agency identified obstacles that were unique to their programs and mission, however, two common obstacles were identified:

  1. Lack of Understanding: Specifically, understanding the value of a project or program management.
  2. Limited Funding: Resources are finite and government agencies must carefully budget and distribute their funds across multiple portfolios, programs, projects, and operating activities. 

Lessons Learned

The Project Management Institute has not performed a study on the adoption of Organizational Program Management in Government Agencies prior to this case study. The case study servers as a baseline for future research and the impetus for other agencies to collectively learn and increase adoption of OPM.

Lessons Learned By Agency

  1. Social Security Administration: “Project and program career development benefits the entire organization” (PMI, 2015).
  2. Bureau of Indian Affairs: “Project and program management practices can be implemented to fight crime and promote better understanding between police and the community, thus creating efficiency and lowering the violent crime rate” (PMI, 2015). 
  3. Federal Aviation Administration: “Greater reliance on standardization of processes transforms program management at the FAA” (PMI, 2015). 

I’d love to hear your thoughts on OPM or any experience you’ve had with program and project management you’ve seen in government. If you’d like to have a discussion, leave a comment below or contact me. I’d love to connect on social media as well!

Photo Credit: Pixabay

 

References

Project Management Institute. (2014). PMIs Pulse of The Profession: The High Cost of Low Performance 2014. Project Management Institute Global Operations Center. Newtown Square: Project Management Institute.

Project Management Institute. (2015). Milestones to Efficiency: Factors That Influence Program Management Success in U.S. Federal Agencies. Project Management Institute Global Operations Center. Newtown Square: Project Management Institute.

Project Management Institute. (2018). PMIs Pulse of The Profession: Success in Disruptive Times. Project Management Institute Global Operations Center. Newtown Square: Project Management Institute.

The People And Process Balancing Act

| Jeremy Brien

The Agile Manifesto Teaches Individuals and Interactions Over Processes and Tools

There’s a common misconception, especially among those new to Agile, that the relationship between people and processes is one of friction — that it’s a dichotomy. The subtlety of the language used, “individuals and interactions over processes and tools” implies that both need to exist. The framers of the Agile Manifesto even state, “while there is value in the items on the right (Processes and Tools), we value the items on the left more (Individuals and Interactions).” I agree with this and would also argue that processes and tools are an input to productive interactions among individuals. We know what is more valuable according to the Agile manifesto but, which one is most important? People or Processes? Maybe we’re thinking about it all wrong?

Chinks In The Armor

Asking, “what’s more important, people or processes?” is a fair question to ask when you’re new to Agile. Especially since most organizations looking to “go Agile” start with Scrum (by the way, practicing Scrum does not mean you are Agile. It’s a great start as long as the leadership team continues to stay open minded and doesn’t limit the organization to just Scrum). Usually, a handful of developers, project managers, business analysts and line of business managers are sent to a two-day class scrum class; they receive a certificate dubbing them newly minted “Certified Scrum Masters/Product Owners/Developers” and are given a small project to show a “proof of concept” with the

storm trooper
Scrum Reveals The Chinks in the Armor

new framework. It’s chaotic and exciting at the same time; however, the organization’s weaknesses begin to show up (Scrum has a way of shedding the spot light on the problems that have existed in the organization for a long time). I call these the “chinks in the armor.”

The biggest chink I’ve seen most teams discuss in their retrospectives are the People vs Process Dependencies. Invariably, team members and managers dig in their heels about which one is better. This is because people default to what they know best. They use what has worked for them in the past. Change is hard, even when there’s clear evidence that what they’ve been doing will not work anymore because of changes in the business environment.

As a coach, it’s important to understand the pros and cons of the people and process dependencies. It should be explained clearly with not only your teams but, with the management team too. The organization will have to move past striking a balance and figuring out which areas need the most improvement. Instead, they should assess the parts of each dependency and figure out what works best for them today. Below are some extreme examples of each dependency to illustrate the pros and cons of both.

People Dependency

Pros

  1. It gives workers satisfaction – employees feel satisfied when they know they are valued
  2. Flexible – employees are empowered to perform work in the way they feel is best
  3. Adaptable – the ability to pivot and make changes is the hallmark of business agility
  4. Efficient – unnecessary steps in a process are avoided
  5. Helps to retain high-achieving, confident, people – people stick around because they know they are important and are good at their job

Cons

  1. Less repeatability – changing processes are not repeatable and leads to waste
  2. Makes customers nervous – customers feel comfortable when there’s visibility on the process
  3. Can provide a “false sense” of a high degree of control – processes are measurable. What get’s measured gets done. When managers rely solely on the self-reporting, certain messages may get filtered and there is no data to verify.
  4. Turnover impacts are much greater – institutional knowledge can walk out the door or get hit by a bus
  5. Higher risks – for the reasons listed above

Process Dependecy

Pros

  1. Repeatability – repeatability helps with predictability
  2. Easier to improve – a documented process is easier to improve with less risk to the organization
  3. Less people dependent – automation of easily repeatable tasks frees up resources for more value added activities
  4. Predictability – it can be measured objectively and relied on as a lever for control in the organization
  5. Brings new personnel up to speed faster and with less risk of poor performance

Cons

  1. Paperwork can overshadow the task – processes that are overly complex distract from value added work
  2. Resources must be spent enforcing or ensuring compliance – managerial debt is incurred. Managers spend less time removing impediments and more time micromanaging processes.
  3. Someone must own and manage the process
  4. Less “thinking” is needed – employees and managers can become complacent if there’s no impetus for process improvement. This leads to waste. 

Processes Come First But They Should Not Be Valued

I know I’m going to rub a few people in the Scrum community the wrong way (and probably piss of a few of the business process analysts too) But, processes should come first but they should not be valued in the same way we value our people and interactions. It’s easy for managers to regard processes as instruments for control. Some managers finely craft their business processes. They labor over them and build complex systems for the organization. But only effective processes facilitate people. Not complex ones. If you require a practical rule of me, I recommend you murder your darlings.

“Whenever you feel an impulse to perpetrate a piece of exceptionally fine writing, obey it — whole-heartedly — and delete it before sending your manuscript to press. Murder your darlings”

— Arthur Quiller-Couch,

On the Art of Writing

vintage scale.jpg
People and Processes Are Not Equal

I argue that people and processes should not balance each other. Many representations of this balancing act builds a false dichotomy. It implies that they are of equal value. Like the framers of the Agile Manifesto, I do not value them the same way.

Processes should support our people and facilitate their interactions. Processes are either operational, supporting, or management oriented. If they do not provide value. Murder them. It’s up to the teams to decide which processes they need most and which ones can be forgotten. Each organization is different. Each darling should be judged accordingly — but retain the ones that still add value. Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water. Don’t assume that just because you’re “doing Agile” that processes no longer needed to exist. No, processes are still important. They unlock your people’s ability to work at a higher level. But it’s time to end the love affair with processes and value your people.

Share your thoughts in a comment below. If you’d like to have a discussion, please contact me or connect with me on social media!

Photo Credit: Pixabay

Related Posts

The 5 P Pyramid Model. Assessing Policy, Process, Procedure, People and Personalities In Scrum

Improving Agile Retrospectives With SMART Goals

Six Elements of An Effective Strategy

 

 

 

Six Elements Of An Effective Strategy

| Jeremy Brien

Back to Basics: The Six Elements Of An Effective Strategy

Developing a strategy ready for execution is one of the most difficult tasks facing organizations. Global commerce is no longer reserved for the “titans of industry.” Small to medium sized enterprises are now operating in the global economy and other than resource constraints, the playing field is generally even for anyone with quality services and products. Understanding the basics of an effective strategy is more important than ever.

“Going back to basics strengthens your foundation”

Money, people, and time are finite resources and should be used wisely. When developing a new strategy or enhancing an existing one, leaders must understand there are three value areas that a strategy should address before proceeding.

  1. Improving Operational Performance
  2. Improving Customer Service
  3. Exploiting New Opportunities

Understanding the three value areas enables leaders to establish priorities based on business goals. Additionally, as a new initiative is developed and acted on, the tactical needs must be met while the organization continues moving forward. Long story short, understand your business needs & do not disrupt operations. 

The Six Elements Of An Effective Strategy

Element 1 – Continuation Of Policy

Formulating an effective strategy means understanding the landscape you operate in and and those affected by your decisions. Policies are both external and internal.

  • External policies are the laws and industry standards your organizations must follow. External policies mandate what an organization must adhere to and can include international, federal, and state laws.
  • Internal policies are an organization’s vision and mission. They must be aligned with an organization’s core competencies and value chain. Internal policy should be easily understood by everyone in the organization. A good litmus test is, “can our policy be described in three sentences or less and does it address the way we operate, how we treat our customers, and capture new markets?”

Element 2 – Overcoming Adversarial Competition

Understand those who operate in your market and either directly or indirectly oppose your progress. Leaders need to understand their competition, their internal policies, and value stream. Leaders should be honest when assessing the weaknesses of their own organizations and compare themselves as objectively as possible. Weaving fantasies about the competition or the competencies of your own organization leads to bad decision making. Entrepreneurs of small to medium sized organizations are especially prone to fantasy based thinking. While optimism is a good quality for successful entrepreneurship, it is not the basis for effective strategy formulation.

“If from your strategy you can’t identify anything that you would say no to, it’s probably not a good strategy.”
– Karl Scotland

Element 3 – Account For The Talent Gap

Organizational leaders and tactical managers must understand the skills required so the policy can move forward and succeed. An actionable strategy accounts for the talent gap. Unfortunately, HR departments lack the ability to close the skills gap — either through recruitment & retention efforts or training & development. Leaders must develop a roadmap for developing & recruiting the required skills for strategy execution.

Element 4 – Impetus & Focus

Firm understanding of the corporate culture and the attitudes required of those operating internally of the organization helps leaders gauge how well employees and the tactical management will readily adopt the strategy. Experienced leaders understand culture and attitudes are not specifically ‘defined’ — they evolve over time and accumulate based on whom the organization hires. The following considerations should be made when creating your strategy and roadmap.

  • Who are our external customers?
  • How well do our employees treat our external customers?
  • How well do we treat our employees?
  • When we’ve implemented change in the past, does the leadership team “walk the walk” or just walk around with a “big stick?”
  • Is company culture a strong consideration when hiring new employees?
  • Do we invest enough in training and fostering the growth of our talent?
  • How well do we on-board our new hires?
  • How well do we evaluate performance and customer satisfaction?
  • Do we provide opportunities for growth?
  • Do our employees feel empowered to make decisions and take ownership of the issues or are there silos in our organization?

Element 5 – Communicate The Guiding View Into The Future

Everyone wants to understand where their organization is moving and what the organization wants to accomplish. This has a strong influence on the decisions, priorities, and the way work is accomplished from day-to-day. Return to the internal policy established in the first element and re-write it in a way that everyone in the organization can easily understand. Fold in your vision statement in a way that makes sense and adopt it as the organization’s mantra. Consistently communicate the mantra across all mediums. It’ll eventually stick and influence your culture.

“The mantra should describe the way we operate, how we treat our customers, and communicate the guiding view into the future”

Element 6 – Measure

The above elements are all aimed at creating a strategy that can respond quickly to change. Many refer to this as business agility — starting with intention and pivoting over the long-term as internal or external factors require. Leaders should track what was intended, what emerged, and what was realized and adjust their strategy accordingly. The company culture and your talent gap will most likely cause you to lag behind emergent strategies, however, measuring the progress over time is useful because it can help you refine your strategies in the future. The below figure illustrates my point. Each black dot represents an environmental change and the green lines are the emergent strategies (E1, E2, E3). The red line lags behind, this is what is realized.

PlannedVsEmergentStrategy

The outcomes that should be measured are:

  1. Operational Performance
    • Time to Produce
    • Cost Savings
    • Quality
  2. Customer Service
    • Time to Delivery
    • Value Delivered to Customers
    • Customer Satisfaction
  3. New Opportunities
    • Time to Market
    • Return on Investment
    • Addressing Unserved Needs

Leave your thoughts on strategy in a comment below or if you’d like to have a discussion, please contact me or connect with me on social media!

Photo Credit: Pixabay

Related Posts
Sources