The acceleration of innovation, which we have known for several years now, has led to strong transformation challenges for companies, which is reflected in an explosion of transversal projects and transformation projects, especially digital ones.
This multiplication of projects has highlighted the structural and cultural difficulties companies to innovate effectively and/or carry out all these transversal projects successfully by ensuring the profitability of the projects without generating dysfunctions within business verticals.
Of course, many of these projects ended up in the cupboards or in the trash, because ensuring the company's fundamental operations (production) comes first.
However, these transformation projects are essential for the future of the company, the need for project managers and PMO have, in fact, increased a lot to carry out these projects successfully, but this has created other problems, such as their management and conduct, leading to a painful observation: around 70% of projects fail.
Bertran Ruiz (CEO of Airsaas) summarizes these challenges very well:”I have been lucky enough to have been able to talk to five CIOs or processing directors per week for over 2 years now. Here is one of my beliefs born from these exchanges:
The big change in business transformation comes from the fact that 90% of projects are cross-cutting.
As a result, the transformation, which is structuring for the future of the company, unstructures the organization in the short term ... ”
Among the impacts of this overload of projects, we find, to name but a few:
Many of what are still sometimes considered “new technologies” have now reached a sufficiently high maturity threshold to no longer be considered “exotic”; they are proven, industrializable and accessible (price). Creating a significant overall demand, reducing their acquisition costs.
Today, companies can only see these technologies as an opportunity to create differentiators or as a major competitive challenge in order to maintain their market shares and not become an obsolete player in a few years.
The current big difficulty is no longer knowing if the technologies work but know how to adopt them effectively.
All these technologies are now available in plethora of solutions which address problems that are more and more specific and adapted to a wide range of needs.
However, for each need, there is a solution (often digital) and therefore a potential project.
Technology is now predominant in everyone's life, every day. And access to this technology, in the personal sphere, has led employees to be more and more “tech savvy”, to know that they understand and master new technologies better and better. Those that could still be scary not so long ago, are now present everywhere and, knowing it or not, everyone uses Saas platforms, apps, connected objects etc.
This technological acculturation, facilitating many processes in personal life, has led to a stronger demand and desire in the professional sphere, at all levels, to adopt solutions that improve business processes and create new services.
At the same time, theoretically, this makes employees very likely to adopt new solutions easily. Theoretically because, today, technology is not the problem, but as is often the case, what scares or irritates is change and the way in which it is carried out.
.jpeg)
Many businesses encounter the same problems leading to the same findings: A single business department alone cannot transform the entire business. It is a challenge and a collective effort that requires everyone to be able to adapt.
The majority of companies established before this period of accelerated innovation are still siloed or still often carry the stigma of companies organized in silos, becoming a structural problem for transformation.
90% of transformation projects have a digital aspect and when they are carried out in isolation in each department, we realize a waste of resources, whether financial or in terms of time spent by the teams. We find projects carried out in duplicate by several services, sometimes simultaneously.
In addition, in the management of projects in silos, there is no No real feedback between services who could help adopt solutions more effectively and benefit from the experience gained by others on similar projects.
Then, we realize a lot of projects which are being conducted in the test phase, are finally Abandoned in the industrialization phase because when the project enters the company's processes, we consult the other departments too late to realize that it is not in compliance, when everything could have been avoided earlier.
Finally, when a department takes charge of the management of transformation projects without properly involving the other departments, we enter into a “techno push” dynamic where we do not really leave the choice to the professions, and where we take a very big risk of not having fully understood their problems and of facing strong resistance to change.
As a result, projects carried out “in silos” often end in failure, generating frustrations and a feeling of wasting time, which does not spread a good dynamic for the continuation of transformation in the company and does not favor the commitment of employees in this type of project.
The other failure of silo projects lies in the inability of the various departments to collaborate together. Business knowledge is essential to lead the transformation, and projects will end up taking time for businesses no matter what.
Here are some known barriers that prevent collaboration:
Initially, the role that was given to the PMO was a role of head of project managers but without hierarchical links. He had to do project insurance and ensure that all project managers did their job well, in the manner desired. He is seen by project team employees as the project manager who leaves to show off in Codir/Comex by playing the role of inspector of finished works.
Without falling into low-level stereotypes, the positioning and controlling role given to the PMO does not promote commitment and good understanding, especially when project managers play this role in addition to their main activities.
We have therefore put these employees in opposition with PMOs, reducing dysfunctions to the poorly executed work of project managers, always in a top/down dimension that does not make employees want to invest themselves throughout a project.
To go further on the subject, check out our article on the PMO's relationship with the project manager.
In addition to the dysfunctions in team collaboration and commitment, many of these PMOs have a high cost, especially when they are sent externally.
The PMO spends his time monitoring, relaunching tasks and reporting activities as well as collecting information as well as applying a project formalism allowing portfolio visualization. If 50% of a PMO's time is to do a power point, PPT is expensive!
It is therefore a costly secretarial work and dissemination of information between departments, knowing that nevertheless many of these PMOs have a culture and project knowledge that can and should benefit everyone in transformation projects. To use this famous Chinese proverb:”If you give a man a fish, he will eat one day, but if you teach him to fish, [...] he will eat all his life.”
What if that was the right role of the PMO? help employees and the company to increase their skills.
With the growing number of projects and project managers, all these new activities escape the mechanics of silos. And these new investments are soaring, enough to make top management want to have more control over project management. As such, the path often taken is that of controlling tasks and actions, thinking that the secret to effective project management is mainly a question of organizing tasks and choosing project methodology (e.g. Prince2, Scrum etc.).
The biggest problem with the desire for “more control” is that it directly harms the commitment of employees in transversal projects, who are often solicited or volunteered in best effort mode.
Rather than adding an additional burden and relaunching employees to make them enter into a formalism that they are not always used to, the PMO can on the contrary be used by companies to train and relieve employees in the methodological management of projects and to remove most of the constraints imposed on them in terms of reporting and formalism by simple processes and tools so that project managers spend more time doing or learning to do better. rather than explaining what they font.
If we make the process easier, healthier and if we work to ensure that employees are more motivated by the projects (thanks to the SRR which will be discussed later in particular) then rest assured that the necessary information will be filled in.
On this theme Bertran (CEO of Airsaas) continues:
Here we cite only one example that may be responsible for dysfunctions in the organization and management of transformation projects. Not to be confused with the causes of the failure of a project, as the Journal du Net article on Airsaas reminds us:
According to the Project Management Institute's 2018 Pulse of the Profession study, 70% of projects tend to fail. The three main causes of project failure are:
The two biggest barriers to project success are communication (59%) and stakeholder accountability (29%).
A major shift is taking place in this PMO role, moving from controlling the execution of tasks, relaunching employees, and hunting for reporting, towards a role in setting up a project culture adapted to the company, making it possible to clarify and create an old-fashioned vision.
Alexandre Franchino, PMO at Efi Automotive explains it very well:
It is following exchanges like this that we realize the changes in the role of PMO, which is able to transform corporate culture from relationships of support functions (DSI/Inno etc.) to business partner relationships with businesses and thanks in particular to the transition from PMO control and task monitoring to a role. of animating a community.
When a new project culture is adopted by the company, such as that of transversal collaboration and multidisciplinary project teams in the service of the company's strategic objectives, we note a race to the top within the teams in terms of skills and business knowledge. All of these elements generate increased operational efficiency and increase the company's ability to transform quickly.
Learning to relearn and to adapt to technological developments is preventing the status quo from taking hold, a real poison in the face of the acceleration of innovation.
In a more concrete way, it allowsharmonize project approaches, to optimize efforts and resources, which leads to efficient and pragmatic project portfolio management. The solution lies largely in the involvement and commitment of all.
So how can the PMO now have a more positive impact on project culture and collaboration?
If a PMO that has a global vision of project portfolios, who is in contact with the employees of the various departments, comes to the conclusion that projects fail due to the lack of skills or investment of the project managers and that he has no power other than to report them to the management regularly, it is either that he is not in the right position in the company to act or because he does not show any leadership.
In a position like that of the PMO, for whom project management is intrinsically his job and his field of expertise, it is important to help others and to take responsibility for showing employees everything that could help them in their project management.
The PMO is there to make the organization grow.
As the majority of transformation projects today have a digital aspect, CIOs are often mandated to take care of this project. It has become almost all natural in the collective unconscious.
In reality, the best position for the PMO is to act from The company entity that is the most mature in transversal projects and that depends heavily on how the company has been structured up to now.
This position will be ideal for disseminating a good project culture, because the legitimacy of the project management department will make it possible to give credibility to the PMO's approach and will make it possible to be functional sooner, without going through a major restructuring and training of the service commissioned for the transformation.
.jpeg)
The new PMO takes a more important place in the strategic challenges of the company by playing a central role in transformation, we know that transformation generates resistance to change, and with change and resistance, ego wars can appear, the PMO must anticipate and adopt a posture and Define a position that will avoid these dynamics (communication that must be supported by top management).
To best help employees, he must know how to demonstrate Empathy, support project teams and be proactive. He must be identified as someone who is there to help, to move the tide in favor of project teams. It must also take into account the dynamics between employees and respect existing hierarchical relationships. It is not by undermining the authority of a collaborator that the PMO will be able to collaborate in a healthy way, even if they happen to be right.
Demonstrate pedagogy, knowing how to create a framework of trust that allows disagreements to be expressed while knowing how to form the form, we are not looking for consensus here, but simply to show consideration.
We have often heard business feedback that does not have a good relationship with CIOs or with PMOs : “Ah! There comes the one who will explain to me how I should do my job and what I should use”.
As a reminder, It is not up to the professions to adapt to the tools but it's up to the tools to adapt to the job, (even if tools can change jobs! ) the PMO must be a “enabler” of solutions and projects, but not a hindrance. And there is no room for the ego in the transformation.
Also, nowadays, the PMO can be inspired by Product culture, where Product Managers have fully understood that the only truth is the market, and the only ones who know, the users...
It is often said that one of the reasons that generate inertia in a large company is the cumbersome processes in place, they are often compared to the startup culture and its agility.
The operation of transversal projects set up by the PMO must allow you to get into action in a streamlined environment in terms of processes, culture and tools. Be inspired by the agile functioning of startups when you are in project mode and reduce the impact of industrialization by smoothing out the procedures throughout the project (hence the importance of creating a streamlined project vision)
The PMO must be able to assist businesses as a business partner to help them meet their problems and needs by facilitating the means for them to manage projects and create precedents through the first projects so that employees gain in efficiency and autonomy.
One main problem to manage When we start transversal and collaborative projects it is the commitment to “best effort” by key collaborators. And the PMO plays a role in helping to allocate, in agreement with management, time dedicated to transversal projects, as well as in parallel, to help set up an operation that makes it possible to limit cascading meetings and facilitate access to information for stakeholders.
Asynchronous work and collaborative tools are examples of ways to do this.
An important step towards a change in transversal culture is to promote the feeling of having an impact in the company for employees and that getting involved in a new project does not simply seem like a sum of additional constraints and formalism. You have to be able to have fun in these projects and invest in a positive dynamic where you value action and success, but also invest in the right to make mistakes, especially in the case of innovative projects.
To do this, it is necessary to free up time for project teams everywhere where the value of their involvement does not lie (such as manual reporting, cumbersome processes, cascading meetings, etc.) The PMO must put in place a suite of principles and tools that allow teams to focus on the core elements of the projects.
To support this culture, the PMO and business departments can rely on three methods and principles:
The Portfolio Project Management Is a approach to orchestrate and prioritize projects. This approach makes it possible to examine the risks/rewards of each project, the available budgets, the estimation of project time and the expected results/benefits.
It is in this group composed of company decision makers, led by the PMO, that directors and sponsors will assess the ROI, benefits and prioritization of each project to determine the best way to invest, capital and human resources of the company.
That said, following the numerous REXs, This functioning also undergoes mutations, and today it is a question of adding to this, project management through commitment and monitoring milestones and decisions, rather than micro monitoring of tasks and time spent.
The PPM strategy is a key issue in decision-making and communication and makes it possible to avoid many of the causes of project failures., it is essential to clearly define the principles of governance and the tools concerning the project portfolio because that is where things often go wrong.
The People-Process-Tools, (did you think we were going to talk about PowerPoint? ;(), often called “the golden triangle”, consists of a strategy to optimize relationships between employees, processes and tools.
You need employees to do the work, processes that make work more effective and tools that make work more efficient and participate in the automation of processes when it makes sense.
Feel free to read more about the PPT, which is a very well documented concept.
This concept (for Meaning - Role - Ritual), has a lot of benefits in changing the dynamic resulting from transversal projects: limiting the best effort, improving transversal collaboration, creating a positive and effective project culture and structuring this activity around commitment
For the tools, we can divide the implementation into two levels of actions and a few principles:
It is ineffective or even counterproductive to want to impose a specific project management tool or methodology on the entire company. Each profession can have an organization, sensitivity and workflow different from the others with a need for tools specific to their jobs and the important thing is that each department uses adapted methods and tools that they are comfortable with if you want them to be effective. For example, we will not use the same project management tools in marketing as in IT development.
For transversal project teams, the PMO has the choice between adopting a project management tool that is already known and used by the teams if it is adapted and collaborative or being a force of proposal on a task management tool, knowing that it will have to ensure that the information is entered as simple as possible.
On the other hand, it is at this level of information that there is a need to have standardized access to information. We know that decisions that take too long are among the causes of identified project failures. To facilitate cognitive decision-making by management, which often switches topics, it is necessary to give them the right level of information at the right frequency and especially in the same way.
In summary, it is better to let businesses choose their task and project management tools, and automate the feedback from these tools to a governance and macro reporting interface for project portfolios by highlighting key project information that management needs to know.
Airsaas was designed based on all these REXs from companies active in transformation in order to facilitate reporting and project governance, a tool perfectly suited to giving the necessary information to managers in a project portfolio without imposing too much formalism on employees. It was built around the principle that today project management must take place by promoting the commitment of teams and the ease of access to information for decision-makers.
For resources, you need to allocate time to the company's key talents and people, put the right resources into the project approach, does not always require staffing a new department or project profiles throughout the company.
This can also be achieved by freeing up time through the automation/improvement of certain business processes or by staffing expert profiles in business branches so that key people can get involved in transversal projects (ideal would be 10 to 20% of their time at the beginning) and disseminate the culture at a later time to the rest of the company.
Now this should only be a first step to limit the impact of best effort, the best way is to gradually and continuously train and disseminate this project culture in the company, so that all projects do not rely on these key people and so that the company as a whole becomes more agile.
At the executive level, we must also invest in this culture as a strategic issue and allocate time and bandwidth to ensure its proper development.
As you will have understood, the PMO plays a more important role than ever in transformation and in project culture. He is in contact with all business departments, in the field. He is involved in a lot of structuring and strategic decisions for the company. By nature, his position pushes him to an intellectual curiosity that will lead him to a better understanding of the overall functioning of businesses.
If he takes leadership in project culture and change management, if he knows how to manage without hierarchical relationships and if he impacts change, then it would not be surprising to see this kind of profile evolve in management, management and management positions.
