Standalone PMOs enable organisations to run large programs of work efficiently. As programs end, how can EPMO leverage the learnings from PMO?
Standalone PMOs enable organisations to run large programs of work efficiently. PMOs create and manage the controls and standards around project delivery, assist with portfolio management and provide a single point for reporting requirements.
Typically, when a program concludes, there is no need for the program PMO to continue. However, there still remains a need for an Enterprise PMO (EPMO) to manage steady state projects.
These projects are:
- Often focused on compliance and BAU
- Do not have the same risk, cost and complexity profile of large transformational programs; and
- Require a different set of PMO resources and controls.
Organisations that have completed a large-scale program of work either do not have an equivalent EPMO or if they did, it has often been downgraded in terms of resources, structures and importance due to the large program that has been in train.
In these circumstances, the organisation has an opportunity to leverage the structure of the program PMO to take forward as the organisation’s EPMO.
How is a Program PMO Different to an EPMO?
A program PMO is different to an EPMO in a number of subtle yet important ways. It’s important for an organisation to understand these differences and take steps to modify the structure and charter of the outgoing program PMO if it is morph successfully into a EPMO for the organisation.
We have listed below a number of differences that should be taken into consideration during this process.
Understand scale – An organisation just completing a large transformational program may have a reduced slate of future project activity with less risk and complexity. In this instance, the new EPMO should be scaled accordingly, with potentially lighter project controls, resourcing and reporting requirements to ensure it is fit for purpose.
Annual master planning exercise – Typically a large program has its high-level scope and cost understood and quarantined upfront. With an EPMO there may be a requirement to have a regular master planning exercise to identify and agree the type and sequencing of the annual project activity.
The EPMO should be modified to ensure it has the ability to help facilitate a regular master planning exercise mapping back to strategy as well as meet any portfolio management requirements.
Is the governance fit-for-purpose? Typically, the program PMO would be underpinned by a complex governance structure and a well-defined business engagement model.
The new EPMO may need to have some additional controls in place if the new governance is lighter on due to the less critical nature of the slate of projects. New business stakeholders will need to be identified and the relationships understood and included as part of a revised business engagement model.
Is assurance still fit-for-purpose? Often with large programs the project assurance is heavily skewed towards gate reviews and lengthy and costly point in time health checks.
With smaller, less critical compliance and BAU projects this type of assurance may no longer be fit-for-purpose. Steps should be taken to ensure the external assurance meets the new requirements. This could mean less large, formal reviews and shorter, reviews like start up reviews and targeted PIR’s.
The above list is not meant to be exhaustive but an indicator of a few of the key areas organisations need to consider if they intend to embark on leveraging a program PMO into an EPMO.
We believe that quality thought leadership is worth sharing and encourage you to share with your colleagues. If you’re interested in republishing our content, here’s what’s okay and what’s not okay.
To speak to our team about how we can help your business deliver better projects, please contact us.