Lately I have seen an increasing number of organizations who are interested in looking at project management as a strategic function within the organization. (Yes…project management is tactical; but it’s strategic too and it is time that organizations look at it from a strategic viewpoint.) When project management is seen as strategic, all projects are linked to the strategic goals of the organization – projects are chosen that meet the objectives of the organization and help the organization continue to thrive and prosper. There is a process and a methodology around choosing the right projects at the right time. Project managers are involved in these decisions and have an understanding of how the project is aligned to the strategic goals of the organization. They aren’t just tossed a project and told to complete it. These individuals also have an understanding of the business and its working parts; individuals who will be able to take on a leadership role in the future.
It’s more than program management; although that is a part of strategic project management too certainly. It’s being involved in strategic planning to make decisions on what projects support the long term goals of the organization. It’s being innovative and thinking outside the box about the most appropriate projects to take on to ensure the organization’s long term success.
For one organization that has recognized the value of looking at project management more strategically, the organization is working on development of a program focused on high potential project managers who are being groomed for future leadership roles within the organization – in various business units and functions. Additionally, project management will be another function within the organization – alongside Finance, Human Resources and Production/Manufacturing as an example. This is an organization that is mature in how it manages projects – with a governance structure in place and project management processes and procedures that have developed over time and are re-tested regularly to ensure they remain effective and efficient for the organization. Only those projects that will have a positive impact on the bottom line are selected to be completed and there is a formal selection process in place within the organization.
I’m aware that such companies are few and far between. Many companies – and frankly many project managers! – still see project management as being tactical and not strategic. But I state again…that has to change and I think we will start to see some changes begin to occur.
What are your thoughts? In what direction would you like to see project management head? Please share in the Comments field below. Thanks!
Thanks for the comment Alex. I’m not sure I would call it a contrarian view – I think it is a perfect perspective on the future of project management. In fact, my presentation at Simmons School of Management talked about this also. Additionally, separate from project management, at the consulting company where I am a partner, we are spending a significant amount of time talking with clients about leadership/management happening (key decision making as an example) throughout the organization- at all levels – not just at the senior level. This enables for faster action within the company.
This is such an interesting topic and conversations I have had with clients have been worthwhile and enlightening on both sides! I am definitely seeing a focus on looking at project management with a strategic viewpoint – no doubt you are seeing the same. I assume you have seen the book “Linking Project Management to Business Strategy” by Shenhar, Milosevic, Dvir and Thamhain. If you haven’t, check it out – I think you’d find it interesting.
I will respond more fully in your LinkedIn group (Strategic Project Managers) with some more details on how we have been looking at strategic project management with our clients. I look forward to continuing our conversation.
Best regards,
Gina
I will offer a “contrarian” view — “project management” might become so much a part of what everyone does that it disappears completely into the organization.
I think your predictions and the role of a “Chief Project Officer” is one possible outcome, and one that I would welcome. I also think it is possible for project management to become such an integral part of how a company operates that it would essentially disappear in the organization chart.
Imagine a company that is doing projects in every department. HR, IT, Finance, and other departments all have project managers. Perhaps some have PMOs reporting to the department heads, perhaps not. Either way, they are all aware of and tracking their projects.
When the executive team sits down to do strategic planning, they naturally talk about current and planned projects. Making go/no-go decisions on projects is just part of “strategic planning”. They do not need a PMO or formal project controls, because they cannot imagine doing strategic planning any other way.
I think it is possible for project management to become so much taken for granted by a company that the PMO, CPO, and other “official positions” for project leadership start to disappear. They are not needed, and when hiring or promoting managers, they look at project management competencies as a key leadership pre-requisite. I think a company operating this way is doing “strategic project management” just as much (if not more so) than a company with a “Chief Project Officer.”
David – spot on! I’m going to hook you into a blog post for me soon! 😉
Gina,
May I add one more thought, stimulated by your response?
The concept, “at the table,” suggests that as long as the CPO is left out, it falls to those at the table to relay new directives to him or her.
Relaying information means the CPO is receiving input that is not only second hand, but by its very nature interpreted, and thus shaped, by the one relaying it.
How different would the onset and scope of project management be if the initial decision were not filtered through an interpretive stage? If the CPO who designs and implements also participates as a colleague at the table, he or she can shape the design from inception, thus building in efficiencies not readily discernible by others, and reducing potential confusion that might have otherwise followed.
Hi David,
Many thanks for your comment which is thought-provoking! I couldn’t agree more with your thoughts. This is the basis for creating a strategic function for project management within an organization. The right person in place as a Chief Project Officer will have a seat at the table where his/her voice is heard on how to best implement projects to meet the organizational strategey. This reminds me of a company I am currently working with where our focus is to create a seat for project management at the table – ensuring that it is looked at as a strategic function – just like HR, Finance, IT, etc. In the past this client has undertaken numerous projects unrealistically with either the projects not be completed or not meeting the needs of the organization. The direction the client wants to take will help them address these issues. It isn’t a matter of the quantity of the projects, but rather the quality.
Thanks again for your comments – perfect!
Best regards,
Gina
Thinking of project management as a strategic function of business causes me to think of the nature of management systems. I have two thoughts:
First, how a company approaches time is critical. That is, projects, just like money, are functions of time. Too often managers want work accomplished yesterday, thinking it will create heightened efficiency and, thus, improved profits. But the downside is stressing those assigned the task with a distracting, unrealistic burden. By making project management a coordinated organization-wide function, the time sequencing can be made more humane, allowing for potential errors in judgment to be corrected before they are implemented.
The second item that comes to mind is a new sort of fluidity, as seen from the Chief Project Officer’s perspective. When projects are cast, if they are cast as live documents, then they may intentionally integrate an adaptable quality that comes into play if external conditions demand it. In other words, a certain resilience may be built into the overall implementation process. Rather than completing a three month project to the letter, spontaneously revising it to meet an emerging new trend in the marketplace can give a nimble organization a leg up on the competition.