It is clear from my work in the area of PMO startup and development that there are three key stakeholder groups that determine the PMO’s value. They are the─
- Executive(s) under whose organization the PMO function and responsibility reside
- Project and program managers who either directly report to the PMO or who are heavily influenced by it
- Clients (internal or external) who are serviced by the project and program managers who deliver the new product or service resulting from their effort
What does each group value?
The key question each PMO Head has to answer is “what do each of these groups value?” In other words, what are they looking for from the PMO to facilitate their work and provide contributions to the organization? In my experience, PMO Heads often fail to answer this question either because they think they know what each group needs, or, they assume that all key stakeholder groups’ needs are the same. In fact, this is not the case.
The needs of the executive are entirely different from those of the project and program managers; in fact, the executive’s perspective is actually more aligned with those of the clients than with the project and program managers whose view tends to be somewhat more focused on the work effort itself rather than broad organizational goals and outcomes. Thus, this difference of perspective is where we can look to gain helpful insight into ways that the PMO Head can boost not only his or her own value in the organization, but the PMO’s as well. In fact, the two are generally considered inseparable.
Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.
Which group is the most important?
PMO Heads must always keep in mind that the most important stakeholder, at least in many peoples’ mind, is the executive; after all, it is the executive who supports the notion that a PMO is an important organizational asset and who provides the needed funding so that the PMO can hire the professionals necessary to its operations as well as invest in tools, processes, and methodologies to support organizational project management. It goes without saying (but I’ll say it anyway) without executive support, the PMO would not exist.
While the executive group “calls the shots” and provides funding for the PMO, this group can be strongly influenced by the comments and opinions of the other two groups as well. For example, if certain business unit heads begin to seriously question the value of the PMO the executive must be concerned about what the PMO is, or is not doing. If there is a sufficient groundswell of protest the first action would be to remove the PMO Head; and perhaps the second would be to terminate the PMO itself. This, in fact, is done all the time.
ESI studies have shown that the average life of a PMO is roughly four years. Clearly they are not going out of existence because their work is done! They’re going out of existence because they’re not doing what the executive or other stakeholder groups needed them to do. One key question to consider is the root cause or causes of why PMOs are not as effective as the organization needs them to be. There’s always more than one reason.
With this as our context and perspective, over the next several posts I will review the 5 ways a PMO Head can increase value to the organization while boosting his or her own value at the same time.
