Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Royal Mail: Are sponsors 'for Christmas' or 'for life'?, 15 May 2018

216 views

Published on

Are sponsors ‘for Christmas’ or ‘for life’? Have your say
Journey Assurance Royal Mail presentation created by Peter Horsted, and on the evening presented by Ashley Cox

evening event by the APM Governance Specific Interest Group
Tuesday 15 May 2018

Event write up:
https://www.apm.org.uk/news/are-sponsors-for-christmas-or-for-life-have-your-say/

Published in: Education
  • Easy and hassle free way to make money online! I have just registered with this site and straight away I was making money! It doesn't get any better than this. Thank you for taking out all the hassle and making money answering surveys as easy as possible even for non-techie guys like me! ●●● https://bit.ly/2Ruzr8s
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

Royal Mail: Are sponsors 'for Christmas' or 'for life'?, 15 May 2018

  1. 1. Journey Assurance Peter Horsted RPP HONFAPM Programme Manager
  2. 2. Terms of Reference – our scope There are four strands to Journey Assurance: Sponsor Design Ops Portfolio Operations To raise awareness through engagement the challenges faced when delivering sponsorship accountabilities To offer collective and individually targeted support to sponsors to enable enhanced delivery of their business case, blended with internal and external buddying, mentoring and coaching To provide project managers with the knowledge and confidence to understand sponsorship accountabilities and how they can better support and guide them To design and develop a framework by which a project can be reviewed more fully from a people’s perspective To ensure the impacted audience is comprehensively assessed, considered and engaged with from an early stage in the project lifecycle To design and implement a post- deployment review process with a robust feedback loop To further raise awareness of business change and the value it brings to the deployment and realisation of business case benefits To expand the use of the Journey Assurance framework across the portfolio with tangible support and guidance through a network of change champions
  3. 3. Sponsor Quadrant
  4. 4. Purpose of session…. • A huge amount of change has been delivered in recent years. • Accountabilities of sponsors are wide- ranging and it takes up a significant amount of time for those involved. • Today is about progressing the conversation around how we can make good, better. The challenge we face is how much accountability a sponsor has for each business case, as part of the overall day job. We have an opportunity to examine the change load of business cases to sponsors and begin to nurture the sponsors of tomorrow.
  5. 5. Being a Sponsor • Sponsors need to: • champion the project and own the specification • own the benefits and ensure they are delivered • lend weight when the project comes up against obstacles • ‘fight the corner’ of the changes when necessary, creating the ‘headspace’ needed for themselves and others to deliver the change • Sponsors need to: • own the approach to change • lead by example • Ensure that the project is assured through the Gateway checks – Concept, Design, Deployment, Review • Actively participate in Steering Groups, constructively and in an integrated fashion to improve the delivery performance of the project Sponsorship requires time. Time to understand the change and challenge it where necessary. Time to support the change and empower the people driving the change. We have reflected on our approach and the external view to develop our proposal
  6. 6. Change Load Issue To Address - proposition to consider • Existing L&N sponsors to retain the role of Executive Sponsor for ALL projects in their area/function of accountability • Review who in their structure has, or could be equipped with, the skills to undertake day-to-day sponsorship accountabilities on projects • Each example is different so we need to explore how we appoint each sponsor which should be at the discretion of the Executive Sponsor (ES). For example, the ES might sponsor all GOLD projects but if there are currently no gold projects, then they would hands on direct SILVER projects. This should be examined on case-by-case basis and also flow through to Bronze & BAU • The ask: give consideration to who could pick up day-to-day sponsor requirements across projects - – this could highlight some tangible & broader development opportunities for people in your teams
  7. 7. Change Loading
  8. 8. Processing PAT Projects Gold • Collection Hub Optimisation and Enhanced Mail Preparation • Parcels Automation Silver • Integrated Mail Processor Control Refresh • AutoMIS and IWT database hardware migration Bronze • Workplace Organisation Best Methods Phase 2- Conveyors • Workplace Organisation Best Methods Phase 2- Tugs and Trailers Other • Loss Opportunity Model • CILA • Gravity Conveyors • MEARS Contract Renewal • Machine Critical Continuity • Visual Management i.e. Tablets • Keys & Tabs Automation • Weekend Operations Review • Postbox Strategy 2 • Continuous Improvement • 2 x NDA/USPA5 Continues as sponsor Delegates sponsor responsibilies to appropriate team member Retainsexecutivesponsorship 18 business cases £X million investment £X million incremental benefits
  9. 9. Tailored individual support available Individual one-to-one conversations with sponsors, led by Peter Horsted with Fiona Gilbert, to understand experiences of being a sponsor Use this conversation to highlight key areas of focus Tailored plan to support sponsors own identified requirements Access to external guidance, support, potential buddying with sponsors from other organisations The results will further improve the way we deploy our projects into the RM L&N operation by time, cost and quality but more importantly, improve the way we take our people with us on the journey. The focus on change load may result in an increased number of sponsors, which we will build into this solution. Contact: Peter Horsted, Field Ops Programme Manager or Fiona Gilbert, Journey Assurance (L&N) Project Manager
  10. 10. Design Quadrant Core Change Questions (RM L&N) August 2017
  11. 11. Core Change Questions • Where does the project sit on the strategic roadmap? Customer focused Agile and efficient Flexible & engaged workforce • Who is the sponsor? How does this fit with change load? • Has the project sponsor given evident public support to the change? Have they clearly articulated the case for change? • What is the case for change? Why do we need to do this? How will the need for change be communicated? Have the key impacted groups/stakeholders been engaged with? • Have all stakeholders been identified and analysed? Is there an engagement plan in place? Have you agreed the sponsor’s role and accountabilities? • What is the impact on the affected audience? • Change Load: how much other change/increase in workload is hitting those affected at the same time? Design
  12. 12. Ops Portfolio Quadrant
  13. 13. Want to know more? Contact Fiona Gilbert on 07725 826340 or Peter Horsted 07808 390970 for more information Passionate about people? Already involved in deploying projects into operations? Journey Assurance (Letters & Network) Interested in being part of a network across the portfolio? Keen to share your own experiences and knowledge with others? Want to develop your skills? Attracted to Change Management? Fancy a development opportunity alongside the day job? Interested in sponsorship, design, our ops portfolio and operations?
  14. 14. Operations Quadrant Post Deployment Reviews
  15. 15. Deliverables for the ‘Operations’ strand Operations Design a set of questions to be used post- deployment to measure change effectiveness Develop a repository to hold all post-deployment feedback with a robust feedback mechanism into both Ops & the project teams Hold familiarisation sessions with individuals who will run post-deployment feedback sessions to ensure consistency and effectiveness
  16. 16. Post Deployment Reviews • We deploy change in the operation but that change is not always successfully embedded into the BAU ways of working to successfully deliver benefits and achieve long-term engagement • We consistently score low against the “we manage change well” question on the Employee Survey • This is the opportunity for us to do something to contribute to the improvement of that metric • A virtual team will seek informal meetings with frontline managers and colleagues for feedback on how that change has been received and whether the engagement was sufficient and if the training (where relevant) was appropriate
  17. 17. The Process •Analyse national change load tool to point us to detailed timing of deployment •Overlay with locations of our virtual team •Engage with Delivery Leaders/ Ops Managers to confirm involvement when appropriate •Informally run through a set of questions with willing colleagues on the floor Feedback •Robust feedback in place – “you said we did” process •Feedback to both unit and project team •Make sure we say thank you – recognition process •Overlay with other ‘people’ metrics to identify trends •Lessons learnt to influence future deployments •SharePoint to collate responses.
  18. 18. The talking points • When did you learn of the change? • How was it communicated to you? • Who communicated it? • Was the message right? • What did it mean to you? • How was the change managed? • What would have made it better? • What was the impact on you (positive or negative?) • What opportunity have you had to feedback? • Do you think the change is taking us in the right direction? • How have customers reacted? Does it benefit them? • Do you have anything else to add?
  19. 19. Good system but I don’t feel like I’m managing the work flow at our unit any more Really made to feel part of the change It would have been better if we could have had…… Didn’t want to change to Sunday but understood why Didn’t make much difference to me Had the opportunity to input Everyone knows what is expected of them Time given by project team is insufficient for BAU teams Good early life support Not enough focus on delivering benefits – just ‘get it in’ Good communications and straight- forward change Key Fleet Booking Sunday Offices Traffic Trans LLWS RDC Mech Didn’t explain why our site was chosen as the pilot Want it to work but don’t feel like we can influence how it evolves Wrong people were trained – DOMs rather than DLMs Training felt rushed Kit saved the day at Christmas – can we have another? Secondary handling reduced which is a big bonus Training could be improved by targeting the right people More notice before conveyors installed would be good Examples of feedback gathered….
  20. 20. What’s next? • Still early in our journey but confident the sum of the parts will have a positive impact • Invite us back in 12 months for an update • For us tactical is good – Does not have to rocket science with loads of bells and whistles • What’s your view on buddying sponsors up? Would you want to get involved in this? • Do we need a sponsorship club to bring this group together a couple of times a year? • Would you like to see some kind of accreditation for sponsors (Badge of Honour)?
  21. 21. Contacts Journey Assurance / Sponsorship Club / Buddying Up peter.horsted@royalmail.com Fiona Gilbert – Journey Assurance Project Manager fiona.gilbert@royalmail.com Presenting on behalf of Peter Horsted was Ashley Cox ashley.d.cox@royalmail.com
  22. 22. This presentation was delivered at an APM event To find out more about upcoming events please visit our website www.apm.org.uk/events

×