management support, PM library, project management forums, and PM funda- mentals training. Then they measured participation on a monthly basis, and worked to improve the level of service through analysis of this data. They also ran an end-user sur- vey on a quarterly basis. One thing this report revealed was the high volume of demand for documentation and proposal generation, support, and PM method- ology support. No demands for PM mentoring and coaching were realized. Status of the Local PMO. Bucero proceeded in a step-by-step process to staff the PMO. He started with two people, then added two more at one-month intervals until he reached six people. He could increase the number of people because their actions demonstrated added value to the organization. They all focused on the DMS (managing and elaborating proposals, presentations, methodology forms, and templates). As soon as project managers felt supported and relieved of those tasks, they indirectly began selling PMO services to the whole organization. Face- to-face feedback also provided a valuable mechanism to sell high-performing PMO services. Currently there are ten people on the team (five DMS specialists, two tool specialists, one Quality specialist, and two trainees). The focus going forward is to get more project managers involved in PMO activities and able to mentor and coach junior PMs. One key success factor has been to create a knowledge-shar- ing culture inside and outside the PMO. Project retrospective analysis is an on- going and helpful activity for sharing case studies among project managers and team members. The forecast is to have two full-time project managers working with the pro- gram manager in the PMO delivering project management consulting services inside and outside the organization. The PMO Evolution Project management offices were started in different sites and countries but with- out common objectives. However, the HP Consulting organization as a whole un- derstood the tendency in the project business was to be more and more global. Reinventing the wheel every time in each country was not effective. They were creating project offices in each country but not able to share things because of dif- ferent approaches. They needed to define a common approach to move forward. They had a lot of professional project managers with a lot of experience, a Project Management Initiative, a Quality Initiative, a Knowledge Management 188 Creating the Project Office Initiative, and the need to share real cases and experiences was a reality. How to manage that puzzle? How to fix all the parts? From their Project Management Initiative (PMI) meetings, people were es- calating local problems with PMO implementation. Then a task force was cre- ated and managed by one of the upper managers. This professional organized the first meeting in California, asking PMI leaders to participate. Ideas were col- lected before the meeting from PMOs around the world so basic ideas could be shared. PMO leaders from different countries participated, sharing their opinions and validating both the idea and potential structure for the Program Manage- ment Office. During the meeting they discussed the content, services, roles, responsibili- ties, and priorities for a proposed Global Program Management Office. At the end of the meeting they had an action plan for moving forward. After this meet- ing, the manager heading the initiative delivered the proposal in a presentation to the upper-level management team at the corporate office. The team also orga- nized monthly teleconferences to keep in touch. Status was shared among the team by e-mail. Some weeks after the first meet- ing the idea of a Global Program Management Office was accepted by upper management and other organizations joined in. Two months later, the organiza- tion changed. The leader retired. Then the initiative was stopped for some time. Since the HP and Compaq merger, the new Consulting and Integration Services is being redesigned around the PM Compaq methodology. As of late 2002, the PMO leaders are expecting movement about the Global Program Management Office implementation. So far the focus has been on practical experience to implement a local PMO, but additional efforts are in place to manage different project office implementa- tions for each location depending on the needs and project requirements, the project culture maturity level, the resources and type of projects, and the business. When an organization wants to become project-oriented, a common model is needed. The team of PMO leaders identified the factors listed in Figure 7.8 as essen- tial to support the project office evolution. Bucero adds, The team documented the following unifying assumptions: To implement this model a Program Management Office structure needs to be created and im- plemented at multiple levels. To successfully implement this mode we need top management sponsorship and all stakeholders must be involved. That requires a cultural change and measures and metrics that need to be changed in our organization. Implementing the Project Office 189 We will focus on our customers, covering all phases during the project life cycle according to the PMBOK. We will demonstrate to our customers that all parts of the organization support the project manager along the complete project life cycle to achieve customer requirements. We will implement a quality assurance process along our whole organi- zation, convince people of the added value of this process, and be aligned with customer needs, values, and culture. We will have a common approach from all organizations inside our com- pany. Each department, organization, or division should work together with common objectives and think about customer satisfaction. There should not be different projects for the same customer inside our organization. This com- mon approach must be agreed upon as the strategic plan for the company as a whole. The quality assurance process they developed is outlined in Figure 7.9. Bucero goes on to note, The Program Management Office consolidates all project support activities that have resided in the different company organizations or departments. It supports the local implementation of a common model based on processes, skills, and project management development, coaching, and mentoring, pro- viding a structured monthly project status report. The proposed model should have a Global Program Management Office established that defines all processes, practices, and tools associated with the common model. This organism must manage and support complex and global 190 Creating the Project Office FIGURE 7.8. KEY SUCCESS FACTORS. Project Office Success Common processes, metrics, and methods Project estimating, budgeting, and reporting Tools and systems Project management skills Structure and visibility projects, lead the project management learning communities, and produce periodic project status reports. On the other hand, the local Program Man- agement Offices must support local implementation of the common model established, manage the local project portfolio, lead project managers, be re- sponsible for local project management, and sponsor development programs. The charter of the Program Management Office is to ensure that the processes, practices, capabilities, tools, and systems are in place to effectively support the project business and thus establish the foundation for improving the maturity level of the organization. Geographic PMO Responsibilities The main responsibility for the geographic PMOs is managing the project port- folio. This entity is responsible for reviewing portfolio reports and providing business management with recommendations. It also ensures follow-up and implementa- tion of decisions made by upper management. The geographic PMO is measured and accountable for planned versus actual gross margin for the project portfolio. Implementing the Project Office 191 FIGURE 7.9. A COMMON QUALITY ASSURANCE PROCESS. Quality Assurance Reviews Performed locally • Customized locally • Following global rules • Being shared globally • Sales • Support • Legal • Administration • Marketing • Decision to invest • PM and sponsor assignment • Decision making • Project risk versus opportunities Depending on project size and complexity Results All the company organizations working together Standard process defined It is responsible for driving knowledge creation and reuse according to defined processes. It ensures that project managers are well skilled by leading PM train- ing, coaching, mentoring, and professional certification. The geographic PMO conducts sponsorship training and mentoring for business managers and deploys the necessary processes, practices, capabilities, tools, and systems. Resource planning is another key responsibility tied to business planning, po- tential deals, and the existing portfolio. The geographic PMO plays the role of project sponsor for projects as necessary and provides bid management support to geographical area projects—collecting client references, generating proposals, managing the bid, and providing quick quote service, project planning, and pro- posal review facilitation. The geographic PMO provides these services: • Snapshot and retrospective analysis facilitation • Customer surveys • Quality audits • Methodology support • Schedule management • Cost management (overall tracking and control) • Time management (WBS development and support) • Risk management (overall tracking and control) • Communication management • Procurement management • Document management support • Technical writing support Global PMO Responsibilities The Global Project Management Office leads the PMO Council formed by global and geographic PMO leaders to determine the processes, practices, capabilities, tools, and systems that will be implemented by the geographic PMOs. The Global PMO reviews company project portfolio reports at the global level, provides business man- agement with recommendations and drives follow-up on those recommendations, and conducts global analysis on trends to determine good practices and training and process improvements. One key responsibility is to support international opportuni- ties and projects during selling and delivery phases, conducting project reviews and recommendations, supporting resources and staffing, assessing the risk, escalating problems when needed, conducting local team start-up and on-the-job training, and conducting sponsorship training and mentoring for business managers. 192 Creating the Project Office Project Reporting Information Several key elements are involved in the report generation activities: the financial system, the status provider, the client status, the history and trends, and the project manager. Each of the items mentioned is consolidated for project report genera- tion. The PMO facilitates the necessary infrastructure (methods, processes, and tools) to help the project manager have all information as up to date as possible. Critical Success Factors Because of different behaviors, local needs, and culture, some key factors are crit- ical to the PMO evolution: • Upper-level management sponsorship (from all departments, divisions or organizations) • Local management team involved and measured through defined business parameters • Changes in the measurement system to be consistent across a business • Adoption of reward and incentive system • Sponsorship capability development Addressing these factors means changing the culture of the organization. What Has Changed The PMO evolution is not complete. Some of the steps are covered—HP has a global PMO and have some global standards defined in terms of processes, meth- ods, and tools. The local deployment is coming slowly and it is planned to hap- pen in the next year. The main objectives for the current year are focused on project management skills development and sponsorship culture within the com- plete organization. Upper-level managers better understand the sponsorship concepts and needs, and all departments are beginning to work together, discussing global decisions before acting. Bucero says, “After the last two years of experience implementing a local PMO, I really believe the organization has learned that the PMO is wor- thy—because our customers appreciate that we work as a unique organization with common methods and tools and common objectives, not as separate de- partments with different visions and objectives.” Implementing the Project Office 193 Lessons Learned The PMO cannot be successful without upper-level management support. Stake- holder analysis is fundamental for success. In addition, despite the time required for PMO planning and organizing, it makes a big difference to create an identity and communicate through multiple channels. Every PMO team needs time for the traditional stages of forming, storming, norming, and performing. Priorities definition is a must-do step. Most of the work of the project office is like educating children—trying to convince people they will have better results if they change their way of doing things. A key difference, however, is not to create a parent-child relationship but to develop trust and collaboration among colleagues. People will support a project office (and communications in general) when they see its value and how it links directly to positive business impact. It is essential to constantly demonstrate that the organization is better off with the project office than without it. Summary The latest results of the “PMO services survey” were very good. The country manager showed the results to all employees to demonstrate improved PM effi- ciency using the PMO. Basically they found the following: • More bids are generated more quickly. • Quality reviews help the PMs and their supervisors detect project deviations (cost, time, scope) early in the project. • Project snapshots are very helpful to share project success and failures across projects, helping the organization to learn from the practice. • Project methodology use has grown to 85 percent. • Project managers felt supported and coached by the PMO. Generally, at a corporate level, project offices are regarded as project man- agement centers of expertise. HP decided that the professionals who staff these project offices should be experienced and trained in project management skills. At the local level, the project office can change the culture from reactive to project- oriented. This culture shift largely occurs by demonstrating or modeling the new behavior. The approach selected is to get results on a subset of projects initially, and use these successes as models for others to adopt the process. 194 Creating the Project Office Bucero says, “My final conclusion is that implementing project and program management offices takes time, commitment, sponsorship, and upper manage- ment support, along with leaders at all levels who want to get things done.” Author Comments Bucero encountered common forms of resistance to implementing a project of- fice. Initially the project culture was weak, even for an organization used to doing projects. Staffing was not plentiful, and he had to depend on outsourcing. This is not a preferred way to operate but can work if the people brought on board have the right skills. This case demonstrates another example of the implementation approach generally recommended in this book: start small and plan to expand. Bucero iden- tified current inefficiencies, developed a plan, and used ramped-up staffing, a mar- keting campaign, metric reports, and ceaseless communications to support expansion of the project office services. The political climate became manageable via stakeholder analysis. A stakeholder map was a valuable tool for identifying and positioning all key players according to power and level of concern, then using that diagnosis in working with them. Training plays a major role in creating a successful project office. Everybody learns what the plan is and what their roles are. Sponsorship turned from an un- known concept to full training on roles and responsibilities. The PMO manager further supported the training with real-time coaching. The effort toward establishing a global office benefited from a strong spon- sor. Then the sponsor left the organization, and efforts went on hold. Only the perseverance of dedicated program managers kept it moving. By having strong local PMOs, the organization was set to expand the effort worldwide and link the local offices under the umbrella of a global PMO. This facilitates extensive knowl- edge sharing—especially about work estimates, pricing, documentation, and ex- perience levels—that directly leads to increased shareholder and customer value. This case study demonstrates that it takes many small things done right to ac- complish the goal. Going to many meetings and publicizing the activities to get the word out finally paid off. Bucero still attends and participates in many PMI activities to constantly refresh his knowledge about project management and doc- ument his findings (Bucero, 2002). He is an exemplary model. Implementing the Project Office 195 This chapter tells Colonel Gary LaGassey’s story of a project office implementation within the U.S. Air Force. It describes a chaotic environment that had been operating for years without a project office and how it transformed to a new standard of excellence. LaGassey describes his ap- proach to the people, processes, and structures within an international, intercultural organiza- tional setting. Troubled projects become less the norm, replaced by the means to manage multiple projects and quickly respond to fast-moving programs. Here all the elements from earlier chapters get put into play to create outstanding results. 1. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Keep moving 9. 10. 11. Refreeze Change Unfreeze 2. Pathway to Organizational Change 197 CHAPTER EIGHT KEEP MOVING: GETTING YOUR ARMS AROUND CHAOS Colonel Gary LaGassey, USAF A n air base construction program provides an ideal case study. Like the Veneto plain surrounding the base, the program is a fertile ground where literally hun- dreds of lessons have been harvested. Many involve simply adapting well-known principles, while others involve developing entirely new ways of doing business. In early 1999, the U.S. Air Force (USAF) established the Aviano 2000 Pro- gram Management Office (PMO) at an Italian fighter base near the town of Aviano in northeastern Italy. The PMO’s primary task was to deliver a $530 mil- lion, 264-project base upgrade to support the USAF’s 31st Fighter Wing with its forty-two F-16 fighters, a military and civilian workforce of more than forty-five hundred people, and approximately four thousand family members. Aviano 2000 is the largest base infrastructure upgrade cosponsored by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the USAF. The operating envi- ronment includes multinational funding and project approval systems, interna- tional acquisition methods and pitfalls, bureaucratic systems of NATO, Italy, the USAF, and the U.S. Navy, and the interaction of construction designers and con- tractors from various NATO nations in different time zones. Each fiscal year the USAF submits projects to the Italian Defense General Staff for approval. Following initial review the defense staff farms the projects out to regional authorities for their review and approval based on environmental, cul- tural, and economic impact on the communities surrounding the base. Y . involved in the report generation activities: the financial system, the status provider, the client status, the history and trends, and the project manager help the PMs and their supervisors detect project deviations (cost, time, scope) early in the project. • Project snapshots are very helpful to share project