1. 

Author: Stewart Rapley 18-Mar-22 Page 1
© Paraclete Consulting Ltd 2010

THE SUCCESSFUL PROGRAMME MANAGER’S MINDSET
INTRODUCTION
Over the past 30 years of involvement in projects and programmes I have
become conscious that I am on a continuing journey of discovery and
learning. All of us yearn for the success of the projects we run, but history
continues to remind us that success is still more elusive than we would like.
This paper is offered, not as a conclusive statement of ‘what is’, but rather
as a piece of ‘work in progress’ as I feel my way forward on this life-long
journey. It was used as the basis for an article published in Project
magazine in June 2007 and a presentation at the BPUG conference of
October 2007.
I have observed that one possible key to success is the mindset of the
programme/project manager (PM) as the coordinator of interactions and
transactions between the external and internal environments of the
programme.
Often I am ‘called in’ by a client because stakeholders have confidence
issues. Investigation usually reveals that good work is being done, but that
the overall picture is not being articulated in a way that helps the
stakeholders to answer questions in their ‘world’; such as, “Are we getting
there, are we going in the right direction?”
The PM operates between the worlds of the stakeholders and the team and
has a unique role in interpreting each to the other. Once PMs adopt this
mindset it becomes easier to solve many common problems.
Below I describe the programme management mindset and I then show
how adopting this mindset helps the PM deal with four key problems.
THE PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT MINDSET
A programme has two environments, internal and external. The following
diagram shows these environments and how programme management
operates between them.

2. 

Author: Stewart Rapley 18-Mar-22 Page 2
© Paraclete Consulting Ltd 2010












The external environment
In the stakeholder world discussion is likely to be of ‘the journey’. It is
understood that a transforming change may take years.
Stakeholders have varying (often conflicting) objectives and interests, but
share an “investment mindset” – that is they are interested in what needs to
be ‘put in’ and what will be ‘delivered by’ the programme. They often have
no need to understand detailed programme tasks.
The internal environment
The programme team is focused on what needs doing and how to do it – a
“work/ delivery” mindset. Often the work content is complex - the number of
deliverables can be large and there may be many dependencies and
governance requirements.
By its nature the internal environment demands a single view of the world to
secure effective team work. Differences of understanding on this are
potentially destructive.
The role of the PM
The PM operates between these two worlds, translating between them.
Experience suggests that this role is not well understood. It creates a layer

3. 

Author: Stewart Rapley 18-Mar-22 Page 3
© Paraclete Consulting Ltd 2010

between the stakeholders and the programme team that can be perceived
by some as ‘bureaucracy’. The effective PM, however, will create a
framework that makes life clearer for both the stakeholders and the team.
Failure to understand this model, the external and internal environments of
the programme, can lead to some common problems which are addressed
in this article.
CONNECTING VISION TO THEPROGRAMME WORK
The top team plans its vision workshop - two days off-site. The hotel is
booked, a facilitator is hired and documentation is circulated.
Day 1 is spent discussing ‘what sort of organisation we want to be’. On the
second day a good session is held drafting a vision statement. By lunch
everybody is happy with this.
The final section of the workshop is devoted to writing a list of initiatives that
are needed to deliver the vision. This list is refined to create ‘a new
programme’. All that remains is to identify owners and managers for the
initiatives and to agree how they will be launched.
Three months later these initiatives have started. A status report gives
each one a RAG (Red, Amber, Green) status. As time progresses several
initiatives get dropped, new ones added and others change. Stakeholders
wonder, “Are we getting there?” The RAG report often fails to answer such
questions.
Here the ‘work/delivery perspective’ has taken over and the management
information provided speaks from that perspective – not about ‘the journey’.
Reports therefore often become increasingly meaningless to the external
stakeholder community as time progresses.
To address this the PM needs to create a planning framework that is
capable of connecting the vision journey with the initiatives and their
associated deliverables.
First; the journey must be broken down into smaller journeys, each with its
own destination or ‘stopping-off point’. These are then defined in terms of
the major components needed to construct the business model at that
point.

Next; the PM needs to conduct an assessment of the various initiatives and
the deliverables that will result. These deliverables need to be related to
those generated by the previous analysis of the stopping-off points.

4. 

Author: Stewart Rapley 18-Mar-22 Page 4
© Paraclete Consulting Ltd 2010












Finally; a programme plan is produced by matching the top-down and
bottom-up elements (see diagram above). It is now possible for the PM to
represent the interests of either party to the other using this plan.
GETTING THE STAKEHOLDERS ALL PULLING IN THE SAME
DIRECTION
Often stakeholders are concerned to be ‘clear’. Clarity is critical. On its
own, however, clarity is not sufficient to provide a good steer. Disconnects
at senior level are often transmitted to teams working on behalf of the
stakeholders making the job of the PM impossible as deliverables become
incompatible with one another (see diagram below).

5. 

Author: Stewart Rapley 18-Mar-22 Page 5
© Paraclete Consulting Ltd 2010

The PM needs a steer that is both clear and agreed in order to be able to
manage the work done in the internal environment.
On one occasion I found one stakeholder arguing that ‘we must get this
right’, a second that ‘we must beat the competition to market’ and a third
that ‘we have only a fixed amount of money to invest’. All were clear, but I
needed to get an agreed sense as to which of these was the higher priority.
In the end the ‘quality view’ won the day.
The PM needs to understand that variances of interest are the natural
consequence of working with multiple stakeholders. Positive tension can
be constructive, helping to make sure that things are thought through.
I have never met a stakeholder who was seeking to do anything other than
help. Stakeholders can, however, provide surprisingly different messages
to those in the internal environment – but pulling together on a core set of
assumptions they enable a programme to make progress.
BUILDING IN A GENUINE COMMITMENT TO CHANGE
One of the problems that can occur in translating the vision into a plan is
that key elements required to deliver change get overlooked. At the start of
a programme everyone will confirm that it is culture-change that will deliver

6. 

Author: Stewart Rapley 18-Mar-22 Page 6
© Paraclete Consulting Ltd 2010

the benefits. This often gets lost in the move from the external to the
internal environment.
Culture change requires both difficult choices and grappling with
‘intangibles’ like leadership, stories, heroes and values. As a result the
thinking required by stakeholders in the external environment is often “put
off till later” and so drops out of the plan used to drive work. Added to this it
is easier to deal with more tangible items such as buildings and computer
systems, so attention gets focused on these (see diagram below). This
tendency is heightened by the fact that it is these items that usually account
for the majority of the cost in a programme.
Loss of focus on culture change can be disastrous and result in
investments being made with little in the way of benefits. The initial
commitment to change can rapidly be dissipated by the realization that
change requires painful, often personal, choices. One of the indicators that
change is being taken seriously is the level of budget included on the
business side to cover this. Once budget is in place people will often start
to identify the appropriate tasks.
The PM needs a supportive sponsor in order to be able to address this
effectively with stakeholders. If this is not done, then ‘stopping-off points’
risk becoming simply ‘rearrangements of the furniture’ and the journey will
be futile in terms of the initial expectation and enthusiasm.

An organisation is a reflection of the leadership it has. If the change
required by the vision needs different leadership behavior and attitudes and

7. 

Author: Stewart Rapley 18-Mar-22 Page 7
© Paraclete Consulting Ltd 2010

new skill sets in the workforce, then honest provision needs to be made in
the programme plan for addressing the real requirements for change.
TUNING PROGRAMME ORGANISATION AND PROCESSES FOR
SUCCESS
The final common problem that I have encountered relates to the use of
structured methods, such as PRINCE2®, within projects and programmes.
Often in-house implementations address only the agenda of the internal
environment.
Any management methodology within the programme should support
interactions between the internal and external worlds. For example,
PRINCE2®, uses product-based planning. This provides a ‘language’ that
enables a dialogue between stakeholders needing clarity about what is
being delivered and the team who need understanding about what they
have to produce.
ORGANISATION AND PROCESS NEED TO SUPPORT BOTH ENVIRONMENTS
Programme External Environment
Programme Internal Environment
Overall Co-
ordination and
Communication
• Stakeholder
Management
• Direction clarity
and agreement
• Team
Management
• Work/delivery
control
• Quality
Management
• Methods &
standards
• MI
• Monitoring
• Auditing
The PM will also need to make sure that the programme team is structured
and has competence in order to deal with management of both the external
and internal environments (see diagram above). Sponsor support needs to
be gained by the PM for this approach. The level of effort and engagement
required to manage the issues around the external environment is often
dangerously underestimated.

8. 

Author: Stewart Rapley 18-Mar-22 Page 8
© Paraclete Consulting Ltd 2010

CONCLUSION
Whilst attention is rightly paid to the use of structured methods in
programme management the requirement for the PM to have a good
understanding of the dynamics of programmes as defined by the
‘external/internal environments’ model, is often overlooked.
The development of this understanding will enable the PM to create a much
clearer correlation between the journey towards the vision and the content
of the programme plan. It will become possible to harness the positive
support of stakeholders more effectively, to ensure that the commitment to
change is translated into action and that the structures, processes and
controls used within the programme serve both the internal and the external
worlds.
The next step in my journey is to look more closely at how the various
stakeholder interests in a project/programme manifest themselves. This
concern has led to me looking at the role of ‘narrative’ and ‘stories’ in
projects and programmes.