Ppm Solutions For It Governance, The User Perspective


Published on

White paper presenting the results of a survey into the use of PPM solutions.

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Ppm Solutions For It Governance, The User Perspective

  1. 1. the way we see itPPM solutions forIT GovernanceThe user perspective
  2. 2. the way we see itPPM solutions for IT GovernanceThe user perspectiveTjie-Jau ManErwin Dunnink
  3. 3. Table of ContentsForeword 31 PPM – Achieving Governance 52 Are users satisfied? 113 Getting the max out of PPM 174 About the Survey – Intention and Method 19Appendix A 23
  4. 4. the way we see itForewordAchieving goals through Besides adopting various methodo­ the time to share their experiences logies, such as PRINCE2 and MSP, and opinions with us. Our reportprojects and business organisations also consider the imple­ offers value to the vendors of PPM(improvement) program- mentation of software tools to be an solutions (some of the functions and important enabler for the improve­ features of their solutions are barelymes is popular. ment of their project portfolio man­ used) as well as ideas on strategies agement (PPM) performance. which user organisations might con­Organisations operating sider when they seek to enable theirin various industry sectors We define PPM as the discipline PPM processes with a supporting focusing on the strategic alignment, solution.strive to professionalise prioritisation and governance ofthe way in which they initiatives, projects and programmes. The survey was conducted by Erwin Dunnink (erwin.dunnink@capgemini.manage these temporary The purpose of this survey is to explore com) and Tjie­Jau Man (tjie­jau.man the views of leading organisations on @capgemini.com), both fromendeavours. the use of PPM solutions as a means Capgemini in the Netherlands. to improve their (IT) Governance. How are PPM solutions used? What We hope this publication stimulates business processes are being enabled thoughtful discussions on the usage by these tools? Are the users satisfied? of PPM solutions. What are the objectives of leading organisations in implementing such Utrecht, spring 2008 tools? What lessons can be learned from these organisations? Rudolf Laane Vice President The survey is based on responses from 32 organisations, from 5 countries, re­ presenting all major industry sectors. It is the latest publication in Capgemini’s Project Performance Improvement series, which sets out our point of view on project­based management. This user survey is an excellent complement to our 2005 solution study, in which we created transparency in the market for PPM solutions. In order to assist organisations with the professionalisation of their PPM processes and the implementation of supportive tools, Capgemini offers skilled support through its global network of Project Performance Improvement (PPI) practices. We would like to express our sincerest thanks to all participants for taking
  5. 5. the way we see it1 PPM - Achieving GovernancePPM asks the critical After focusing on project efficiency, it menting software solutions to improvequestion: “Are we doing is now time for organisations to step their PPM processes. The figure below beyond it and glance at the effective­ shows that between 2004 and 2007the right things?” ness of the projects they are undertak­ the number of PPM implementations ing and adapt a governance approach at our respondents has grown rapidly to the complete portfolio of projects. (Figure 1). Although they are called The impact of projects has become PPM solutions, they also provide func­ enormous over time and organisations tionalities in support of other IT cannot afford to waste any of their Governance processes. limited resources. This is the main reason why organisations must no Based on our experience, we have longer consider ‘if’ they should apply chosen to focus on the following pro­ PPM but rather ‘when’ and, most im­ cess areas in this survey, as they are portantly, ‘how’ they should do so. the most relevant to project­based management: PPM is about prioritising and facilitat­ ing all running projects/programmes n Portfolio management to maintain their effectiveness. In order n Programme management to take these decisions, organisations n Project management require information. Besides the col­ n Resource management lection of decision­critical informa­ tion, organisations also have to find the means to manage it.PPM is here to stay In recent years, organisations have begun to see the benefits of imple­ Figure 1: PPM software implementations 100% 80% % of respondents 60% 40% 20% 0% before 2000 ’00 - ’03 ’04 - ’07
  6. 6. Only 19% of organisations Portfolio management The majority of the organisations douse a PPM solution to Portfolio management concerns the not use software tools to support their identification, selection, prioritisation, portfolio management processessupport portfolio financing, monitoring and maintenance (Figure 2). However, around 25% ofmanagement of the desired set of projects or pro­ the respondents cited portfolio man­ grammes, in order to meet organisa­ agement as one of the process areas tional goals. It is about control of in­ which they wish to support with soft­ vestments (i.e. projects/programmes) ware in the near future. This reflects to gain maximum performance. the increasing awareness of the impor­ Portfolio management is a cyclic itera­ tance of aligning projects and pro­ tive process, comprising four steps: grammes with the business strategy and goals. In 2005, PPM solutions n collect all relevant project or pro­ were found to show low functionality gramme initiatives coverage1 scores for some portfolio n analyse the various portfolio scenarios management processes. The studied n decide which scenario to favour and solutions scored 60% and 40% for the n effectuate the decisions by adapting ‘analyse portfolio scenarios’ and ‘adapt the portfolio. the portfolio’ processes respectively, which was relatively low compared toIncreased awareness Figure 2: Usage of portfolio other portfolio management processes.of Business Strategy management This limited functionality support may be one of the reasons why organisa­alignment tions seem to be slow in adopting portfolio management. Programme management 19% On a lower abstraction level than portfolio management, programme management focuses on the realisation of the business vision and strategy, 56% 19% involving significant business and IT changes, multiple projects and services across various business areas. 6% Adopting the processes defined in Managing Successful Programs Use PPM solution (MSP)2, programme management Use other tool(s) comprises the following activities: Use combination of PPM and other tools n identifying a programme Don’t use tools n defining a programme1 A functionality coverage score is the n governing a programme percentage of functionalities covered n running a programme and by the studied solutions on average for specific processes. When looking at the complete project n closing a programme.2 Managing Successful Programmes is an portfolio of the respondents (20,764 approach to programme management projects), it is found that only 25% In contrast to portfolio management, developed by the Office of Government of the projects are governed as a port­ more than half of the participating Commerce (OGC) in the UK. folio using the PPM solution. organisations indicated that they use PPM solutions for IT Governance
  7. 7. the way we see ittheir PPM solutions to support their most of the studied solutions offered More than half of theprogramme management processes the basic functionalities and more for organisations use PPM(Figure 3). The functionality coverage project management. They scored par­score of the solutions for programme ticularly high for functionalities sup­ to support programmemanagement was 64%. porting the definition of projects and management managing project capabilities (72.5%). Figure 3: Programme management support As depicted in Figure 4, most orga­ nisations use their PPM solutions to support their project execution man­ agement processes. Figure 4: Project execution 70% use PPM to support management support project execution 35% management 53% 10% 6% 10% 6% 10% Use PPM solution Use other tool(s) 70% Use combination of PPM and other tools Don’t use tools Use PPM solutionFrom a solutions point of view, pro­ Use other tool(s)grammes and projects are very much Use combination ofalike. It is therefore surprising to see PPM and other tools Don’t use toolsthat 35% still do not use PPM to sup­port programme management.Project management The most surprising aspect of FigureProject management in this study 4 is that 10% of the organisationscovers the processes in the following do not use their PPM solutions tothree process areas: support project execution processes. Further examination showed that or­n Project execution management ganisations within this 10% use PPMn Project cost management to support portfolio management,n Control alerts management resource allocation management and project cost management processes.These areas are part of the core compo­nents of a typical PPM solution. The Tracking the progress by expendituressolutions study in 2005 showed that and physical scope accomplishments
  8. 8. PPM cost management: is also essential. Assessing the prog­ the most suitable resources to taskswell supported, barely ress allows the manager to adjust the (within the constraints of availability). project approach and the environment Recording personnel and administer­used within which the project or programme ing their competences were processes is being conducted. for which the PPM solutions scored relatively high (70.7% and 72.9% The highest functionality coverage respectively). Organisations in the score was found in the project cost Manufacturing sector appear to favour component of PPM solutions (76.6%). PPM solutions most in supporting Nevertheless, a significant number of these two processes. 60% of the re­ organisations indicate that they are spondents in this group indicated that using other tools (in combination these two processes are supported by with their PPM solution) to support their PPM solution. More than 30% this process area (Figure 5). This of the organisations use other tools could be explained by the fact that to manage their human resources. In integrations with financial systems many cases an interface is realised are often realised to cover functional­ with an HRM solution. ities for project cost management pro­ cesses. Processes relating to the allocation of registered resources are well support­ Figure 5: Project cost management ed by solutions. On average, more support than 60% of the organisations use PPM solutions to support their re­ source allocation activities (Figure 6). Figure 6: Resource allocation 13% management support 23% 48% 16% 16% 6% Use PPM solution 16% 62% Use other tool(s) Use combination of PPM and other tools Don’t use tools Use PPM solution Use other tool(s)Over 30% use multiple Resource management Use combination of From a solutions point of view, the PPM and other toolssolutions for resource Don’t use tools key is being able to register the infor­management mation needed to allocate and assign PPM solutions for IT Governance
  9. 9. the way we see itWhen combining the figures of the The core PPM2005 solutions study with the 2007 functionalities areuser survey, we can see that mostparticipating organisations use PPM used extensivelysolutions to support project execution,resource allocation, project cost andprogramme management. As for theremaining four areas we investigated,few organisations appear to use PPMsolutions to support them, despitethe broad coverage of functionalitiesoffered. Figure 7: Software support usage and functionality coverage Project execution mgmt Project cost mgmt Resource allocation mgmt Programme mgmt Resource mgmt Portfolio mgmt Control alerts mgmt Knowledge mgmt 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Use of PPM solution to support process area (2007 user survey) Functional coverage (2005 solutions study)This figure shows that many functionsand features available in solutions arenot used by the respondents.On the other hand, it is interestingto note that 43% of the organisationsindicate that they use other tools tocomplement the functionalities of themain PPM solutions.
  10. 10. the way we see it2 Are users satisfied?Top 3 PPM implementation An important aspect in user satisfac­ The respondents were also askedobjectives: tion is the extent to which the objec­ about the benefits of using PPM tives of implementing a PPM solution solutions in terms of cost reduction. Planning Controln were met after the implementation. About half of the respondents an­ Standardisationn swered this question, and it emerged Transparencyn When the organisations were asked that more than 90% of them did not to state the three most important achieve any reduction in costs. In objectives for implementing their addition, none of the respondents PPM solutions, most of them selected provided precise figures. This might ‘Planning control’, ‘Standardisation’ be due to the fact that IT investments and ‘Transparency’. This corresponds are one of the most difficult types of to a trend mentioned in 2005, where­ investment in which to determine the by organisations seek enterprise­wide payoff. One important reason for this project transparency and control. is that IT investments often entail sig­ Aside from the ‘Other’ category, the nificant changes in business processes achievements of these three objectives and communications between depart­ are also the highest compared to other ments and employees. Expressing the objectives, with average percentages value and benefits of these changes in around sixty. This category includes monetary terms has proved to be very ‘gaining insight into supply and de­ difficult for organisations in general.Cost reduction is not mand’, ‘replacing a dysfunctional solu­ Looking at Figure 8, we see that cost tion’ and ‘integrating the back­office reduction was not even one of thethe main reason for teams in India with the front­offices most important reasons for imple­implementing PPM early visibility of potential overruns’. menting a PPM solution. Figure 8: Objectives of PPM implementations and achievement after implementation Planning Control Transparency Standardisation Coordination Communication Cost reduction Time-to-market Other Quality Control 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % respondents selecting this objective % achieved after software implementation 11
  11. 11. PPM solutions contribute Of course, there were good reasons the PPM solution itself (Figure 9). Thisto organisational maturity for the organisations to implement a may explain why organisations use a PPM solution, although the benefits combination of the PPM solution and were not fully quantifiable. When other tools to support their PM pro­ considering the professionalisation of cesses. The complementary tools men­ project management, the concept of tioned most often are Microsoft Excel maturity is often cited as an important and home­grown applications. benefit. The agenda of every project­ based organisation includes the achieve­ Software quality ment of higher maturity in its project The respondents in the user survey management processes and skills. were asked to indicate the software This aim is based on the promise that quality as they perceive it. Three higher maturity leads to better busi­ characteristics of software quality ness performance. In this survey, were covered in the survey: respondents were asked subjectively whether they perceived any develop­ n Functionality ments regarding maturity after the im­ Does the solution provide the plementation, and the majority (69%) desired functionalities? Does it indicated that the use of a PPM solu­ perform in accordance with user tion does contribute to achieving a expectations? Does it adhere to higher project management maturity application standards? level. An important reason could be n Usability that organisations which use a PPM Is it easy to learn to use the solu­ solution usually have stricter gover­ tion? Is it easy to operate? Is it clear nance in place for projects. to the user what he/she can do with it?Most organisations Overall, respondents are satisfied with n Maintainabilityare satisfied with PPM the support provided by the software Is it easy to identify causes of fail­ they are using. The respondents rate ures? Is it easy to modify or clearsolutions their satisfaction with tools other than faults? Is it easy to (re)establish its their PPM solution higher than with running status? Figure 9: General satisfaction - PPM solutions and other tools 50% 40% % of respondents 30% 20% 10% 0% Very dissatisfied Very satisfied PPM solution Other tools12 PPM solutions for IT Governance
  12. 12. the way we see itEach respondent was asked to indicate Usability andthe extent to which he/she agreed with maintainabilitythe statements underlying these threeaspects. need to be improved Figure 10: ‘PPM solutions do well in terms of...’ Functionality Usability Maintainability 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Agree DisagreeAfter aggregating the results, we foundthat most respondents agree that PPMsolutions fare quite well in terms ofthe functionality aspect. When dis­cussing software usability, opinionsare divided equally. Finally, it appearsthat with regard to the maintainabilityof PPM solutions, user organisationsbelieve there is a lot of room for im­provement (Figure 10). The PPM so­lutions have very low scores for main­tainability. Since we have investigatedoff­the­shelf solutions, the respon­dents are partly dependent on thevendors’ ability to solve deficienciesin the software which affect maintain­ability. This is because there is a de­pendency between this aspect of soft­ware quality and solution vendors.Two interesting findings in this partare the 20% of respondents statingthat their solutions do not offer thedesired functionalities and an evenhigher percentage of respondents 1
  13. 13. Additional functionalities indicating that it is not performing in view of a number of the respondentsare needed accordance with users’ expectations. It on PPM solutions. Despite the possi­ is therefore not surprising that 59% of bility of configuring PPM solutions to the respondents give positive answers fit the situation within organisations concerning the need for additional as far as possible, more than 90% of functionality. This score seems to the respondents indicate that there are point to a well­known ‘disadvantage’ implemented functionalities which of off­the­shelf software: it will never they do not use. There is a need for be completely aligned with the needs greater adaptability in existing solu­ and wishes of every individual organi­ tions. One way to do this is by devel­ sation. oping a ‘light’ version of a PPM solu­ tion, as was requested by one of theComplexity undermines The purpose of introducing PPM solu­ respondents.maintainability tions is to provide an integrated soft­ ware solution for the different yet The implementation process related processes underlying project­ Most of the respondents indicated based management. A certain degree that achieving the objectives is to a of complexity in these solutions is large extent related to how the imple­ therefore inevitable. However, not all mentation of the software was han­ organisations are ready or find it nec­ dled. An interesting coherence was essary to implement the full­blown found when we examined the rela­ offering of functionalities embodied tionship between the scores given by PPM solutions. The well­known for the support provided after imple­ phrase ‘Less is More’ appears to be ap­ mentation and satisfaction with the propriate to describe the present­day software in general. Figure 11: Importance of support after implementation Excellent Implementation support rating Poor Very dissatisfied Very satisfied Software satisfaction14 PPM solutions for IT Governance
  14. 14. the way we see itA significant, positive correlation was Do not underestimate thealso found between the rating given for implementation processthe quality of support after implemen­tation and the contribution of the soft­ware to achieving the objectives of theimplementation. This clearly showsthat managing the organisationalchange is an important factor for thesuccess of the implementation. Therespondents also indicated that supportby a third party is seen as highly valu­able in this regard (Figure 12). Figure 12: Implementation satisfaction - by support party Satisfied Dissatisfied Implementation Organisational Support after support change implementation By software suppplier By third party By both 1
  15. 15. the way we see it3 Getting the max out of PPMThe findings show a Most users do not require broader n Success of the implementation functionality but are looking for an depends to a large extent on sup­gap between users’ improvement in existing functionality port of end­users during and afterexpectations of PPM and usability. The users’ message to implementation. the vendors is clear: they must make n Implementing a PPM solutionsolutions and the func- sure that: improves the PPM maturity of n user­friendliness is improved by an organisation.tionality offered. This offering user­focused functionality;creates an opportunity n clients must be able to use modules PPM is a business area that is impor­ without having to implement the tant in today’s business. Many effortsto bridge this gap over full­blown functionality; are managed in a project­based way.the next few years. n project management methods are Alignment of approaches, setting up clearly supported by offering solu­ a supporting organisation and imple­ tions with the appropriate termino­ menting a solution are equally impor­ logy on the screens; tant to enable an organisation to im­ n core functionality must be suppor­ prove on its project­based management. ted in greater depth before additio­ nal (non­core) functionality is con­ This survey again stresses the impor­ sidered. The respondents indicated tance of a well thought­out approach that they primarily use the core to implementing PPM solutions. functionality and are not (yet) The solutions available offer a broad interested in other functionality. range of functionality. The challenge in implementation projects is how to Where the vendors have one item to make the best use of the possibilities focus on, i.e. functionality, the user offered. A combined approach of survey presents a more varied picture processes, organisation, people and a of users. The main topics are: supporting PPM solution are essential n Not all functional areas are imple­ in this regard. mented, although the functionality is present. This offers a big opportu­ nity for users to extend the existing implementation focused on project and cost management and resource allocation to other adjacent areas such as portfolio management and resource management. In this way additional benefits will be achieved. n PPM implementation offers broader benefits than anticipated by many users. The main goals defined prior to implementation are planning control, transparency and standar­ disation. In most cases these three goals are attained, together with goals in other areas such as cost reduction, quality and control and time­to­market. 1
  16. 16. the way we see it4 About the Survey - Intention and Method When conducting a study of the use Telco Consulting n of PPM solutions, it is important to This group consists of telecommu­ explore first the backgrounds of the nications organisations and those user organisations. We therefore col­ operating in the consultancy sector. lected some key figures relating to the characteristics of projects and the allo­ Some of the results in this report are cation of resources at the participating presented on the basis of these four organisations. sectors. The distribution of respon­ dents among these industry sectors is The participants in the user survey are shown below (Figure 13). classified into four industry sectors. These are: We trust the information presented in n Public services this paper will provide effective sup­ This group comprises governmental port for organisations planning to im­ organisations such as tax authorities, plement a PPM solution from scratch ministries and local government. or those who are planning to optimise n Manufacturing the implementation and extend the Manufacturing companies and retail support of the solution to other pro­ companies belong to this group. cesses. n Financial services This group covers banks and insu­ This report contains the results of the rance companies. user survey, which was based on an online questionnaire containing 51 Figure 13: Number of respondents by questions. It provides insights into the industry satisfaction with and use of PPM solu­ tions. A total of 32 user organisations (one participant each) were willing to share their experiences.400 new projects are 13% On average, the participating organi­initiated each year on sations initiate around 400 projects 25% each year. However, when looking ataverage the individual amounts, we observe large differences, with one organisa­ tion initiating only five projects and 40% 22% another up to 2,500 projects per year. Public Services Manufacturing Financial Services Telco Consulting 1
  17. 17. 650 active projects on In addition to the number of projectsaverage initiated each year, it is also interest­ ing to consider the number of projects that are active at a certain moment in time. The total amounts to 20,764, which is on average around 650 pro­ jects per respondent. This number in­ cludes the projects which continue for more than one year.Most projects are A closer examination of the projectcompleted within a year duration shows that in all four sectors the majority of projects are completed within a year (Figure 14). This is not surprising, since a shorter duration makes projects more manageable. It also reflects a trend we have identi­ fied among our clients, who wish to define projects with clear objectives to be achieved in a short time period in order to optimise the manageability of projects. Figure 14: Average project duration by industry Public Services Financial Services Telco Consulting Manufacturing 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% % of projects Less than 1 year More than 1 year20 PPM solutions for IT Governance
  18. 18. the way we see itThe participating organisations were 40% of resources work Figure 15: Average number ofasked to provide the percentages part-time in projects employees in a projectof employees working part­time inprojects. It emerged that fewer than50% of employees are allocated part­time to projects in all four sectors. 6%With regard to the number of emplo­ 13% Project team consistsyees usually participating in a project, 13% most often of 5-25the Public Services and Telco Consulting sectors are the two sectors resourcesin which organisations allocate more 29%than fifty employees to a project. Onaverage, most of the organisations al­ 39%locate between five and 25 employeesto a project (Figure 15). 5 5 - 10 10 - 25 25 - 50 50 21
  19. 19. the way we see itAppendix A About Capgemini PPI n PPI Solutions is focuses on Capgemini’s Project Performance optimising the Project Portfolio Improvement (PPI) practices are Management (PPM) processes in globally present in the Netherlands, an organisation with the support Belgium, Germany, Austria, Sweden, of the right tools. PPI Solutions has Poland, Spain, France, the UK, India thorough implementation know­ and the US. These practices serve ledge of the PPM solutions available project­based organisations with the in the market. professionalisation of executing and n PPI Global Services Centre is a governing projects, programmes and highly industrialised delivery centre portfolios. PPI is a full service provid­ for PPM­application management er in this market space: Consulting, and PPM reports and interface Technology, Outsourcing. development. The main business issue addressed For more information on PPI see by PPI involves organisations that are www.nl.capgemini.com/PPI/ (in not in control of the execution of their Dutch) projects, programmes and portfolios. n PPI Consulting offers services such as project managers’ assessments, organisation assessments (OPM3, CMMI), setting up or running Project Management Offices, imple­ menting PRINCE2, MSP and Project Portfolio management (PPM). 2
  20. 20. About Capgemini Capgemini, one of the and through a global delivery model world’s foremost providers called Rightshore®, which aims to offer of consulting, technology and outsourc- the right resources in the right location ing services, enables its clients to trans- at competitive cost. Present in 35 coun- form and perform through technologies. tries, Capgemini reported 2006 global Capgemini provides its clients with revenues of EUR 7.7 billion and employs insights and capabilities that boost their over 83,000 people worldwide. freedom to achieve superior results through a unique way of working More information is available at - the Collaborative Business Experience - www.capgemini.com Colophon Capgemini Nederland B.V. Postbus 2575 - 3500 GN Utrecht Tel. + 31 30 689 76 25 dr/8F-093.27/1000 Copyright © 2008 Capgemini. No part of this document may be modified, deleted or expanded by any process or means without prior written approval from Capgemini.24 PPM solutions for IT Governance
  21. 21. www.nl.capgemini.comCapgemini Nederland B.V.Papendorpseweg 100Postbus 2575 - 3500 GN UtrechtTel. 030 689 33 66