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.

Core P3M Data Model and Business Integrated (P3M) Governance – Data Model

36 views

Published on

The Core P3M Data Club was formed to create a data standard for portfolio, programme and project management. This enables us to more effectively deliver business integrated governance for Business as Usual and Change. This means our journey from Main Board objectives, targets and challenges can be delivered through portfolios, programmes and projects in the context of finance, management teams, support and assurance more easily and effectively. This will deliver more strategy outcomes, greater business agility, lower management overhead and efficiency benefits.

This document provides an introduction to harmonious data integration for business as usual and change governance, the need for data in the Model, Data Approach and the relation to the complete / recurring Main board to Delivery and Back again cycles, data sources, model details, technology discussion.
It also provides links to the data model and overview materials.
These will not make sense unless the related materials covering the governance models from Main Board, to Portfolio, Programme, and Project alongside Management Teams, Commercial and Finance, Support and Assurance have also been read.

For a high res version click here:
- Document - https://1drv.ms/w/s!AscRj7Bfp6vQgokKDmV7ecqfmQiUnw?e=oS2AjR
- PowerPoint - https://1drv.ms/p/s!AscRj7Bfp6vQgZVXlg8GjXcI6Sb0Ow?e=fjA4dY
- Spreadsheet - https://1drv.ms/x/s!AscRj7Bfp6vQgZVWdcLMZoIJwCt15g?e=qNeGKc

Find out more and collaborate here: https://www.linkedin.com/groups/13651399/

Published in: Leadership & Management
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Core P3M Data Model and Business Integrated (P3M) Governance – Data Model

  1. 1. Page 1 This work is licensed under a Creative CommonsAttribution-ShareAlike 4.0InternationalLicense.
  2. 2. Page 2 Core P3M Data Model Introduction Data, information,knowledgeandwisdom(DIKW) are neededtoprovide the ManagementInformation tosupportintegrateddecisionmakingneededforthe AccountabilityNodesdescribedinthe BusinessIntegratedGovernance model. Please note – this documentwill not make sense unless the related materials coveringthe IntroductionandFramework Overview andgovernance models(from MainBoard, to Portfolio,Programme,andProject alongsideManagementTeams, Commercial andFinance,Supportand Assurance) have alsobeen read. It iseither: - collatedmanuallyfromlocal datasources,whichistime consuming,expensive,questionablyreliable andinflexible.Thisleadsinevitablytopoor decisionmakingasinformationisplainwrong,or tono decisiontakenatall. or - derivedfromERP/ PPMsolutions whichdeliveralevel of efficiency. Unfortunately,PPMtools are notalways fullyeffective due tolackof sponsorship, adoptionsupportandpoorconnectiontothe organisation’s governance operation –andin manycases– no connectionbackto the originatingOpportunities, Threats, ImperativesandGoals(OTIGs) facedat Main Board level.Itisoftenthe case thatPPMsolutionsare usedasa pivotforall P3M data and mayhave data importsprovidedtocollate the largerpicture,butdon’t alwayscontainthe “whole picture”,andsome are notalwaysfunctional or reliable. Data CollationChoices If the data isto be compiledfromseveral sources,the choice is(simplistically) toset up and manage or utilise anexistingservice bus(SOA)toallowdatato transition betweentool APIsorfromdata store APIsintoa single datastore such as Data Warehouses(DWH).The choice of tool APIintegrationtocapture tool data intoa single DWH isdrivenbythe outcome of the requirements.If a
  3. 3. Page 3 central place isneededforreportingonlythanusingaSOA to capture data fromAPItoolsintoa single DWH andthenprovisionreportsandbusiness intelligence onthissingle source of data.If the requirementsforanoperational integration-basedoutcome,i.e.datafromone tool isneededoperationally by anothertool to provide the outcome,thenaprovisionof tool APItotool APIviaa SOA is required.Ineithercase bothgenerate asingle placeof datathat can be usedtobuilda centraliseddataplatform.There are manyoptionsfor howtoachieve this,includingtool APItotool API(viaaSOA tool) whichcopies data betweentoolsandtherefore providingnearreal-time synchronisedoperationaldata.Orcapturingdata fromtool APIintoa centraliseddatalake or data mart whichcan drive a single DWH.Data lakescan be usedto capture the operational dataandshouldbe consideredif the dataisverylarge and frequentlychanged: Source Source Source Source System Process Experience Orchestration Engine Tool Tool Tool Tool Joining- connectedthroughintegration SOA –to maintaina picture of the source data. Thispresentsanattractive option,butthere isa sustainmentimplicationinthatthe connectionsneedtobe setupand presentedthroughanAPIexperiencelayerandnotto use the out of the box systemAPI’s.Done correctlythiswill allowchangesof tools withminimal disruptiontodata. The diagram to the leftillustratesthisdatacanbe providedto Artificial Intelligence,businessintelligence and management informationsystems,andcanalsobe supportedatthe tool level with machine learning.Thismakesavery contemporarylogical solution.
  4. 4. Page 4 Source Source Source Source System Orchestration Engine Data Lake Collectingdataviatool APIintoa centraliseddatamartor data lake to provide anintegratedpicture canprovide anearreal-time datastore that can be usedto generate asingle DWH.This will utilise the same API’sas the ‘tool APIlinkedoperationalmodel’butinsteadcapturesthe data intoa central data lake/mart.Ruleswill needtobe understood and writtenif identical dataisstoredinmultiple tools. A discussionof Data- Virtual collectionorData harvesting isavailable onrequest.
  5. 5. Page 5 Enterprise Tools It ispossible inlargerorganisationsthatkeycomponentsof the overall datamodel are aFinance system, PPMorAgile deliverytools. If the strategyistouse a data model toaggregate data rather thantakinga one size fitsall approachto solutions, itshouldbe reasonableforareastooperate theirowntoolsets (shouldthatbe realisticoperationally).Requirements(forexample) inareasthatdeliver customerprojectsmayrequire contractmanagementcapability,while thosedelivering integrationsneedeffective dependencymanagement,andagile productdelivery requiresfocusonbacklogandsprinting. Data Transformation Oftendatais summarisedoraggregatedbutdata underpinningportfoliosoftenneedsto be transformedorconnectedtoother data too.For example,aroundthe portfolios: - Translationof Main Board Opportunities,Threats,ImperativesandGoals(OTIGs) intoObjectivesandTargetsandChallenges(OTCs) - Translationof portfolioObjectivesintoroadmapitemsandenablingprojectsand programmes - Aggregationof projectandprogramme datato enable compliance checking,dependencymanagement,assurance andcrossbusinessanalysis - Relationof resource modelsmaintainedlocallywithinprojects/programmes(e.g.demand) toresource modelsmaintainedwithinManagementTeams (e.g.competingdemands,benefitdeliverydemandsandBAU) - Planning,ownershipdelegationanddeliveryof benefits,andrelatedperformancedata - Integrationof finance,actualsandcostprojectionsbetweenfinance andportfolioprogrammeandprojectmanagementteams. - Ongoingintegrationof MainBoardOTIGs to OTCs,and progress/ attainmentreportedbackagainstthese from (changing) portfoliosprogrammesand projects.
  6. 6. Page 6 It can alsobe imaginedthatevolutionwill supportmore integrateddatasolutionsforexample todeliversolutionsfor jointventures,andlargermulti organisationcollaborations. Overtime,capabilitycanbe developedasillustratedhere. Data Approach The approach to definingdataneedsshouldbe determinedby whatinformationistobe derivedfromit.The approach to this insome organisations canbe - to ask userswhatreportsthey wantand collate implications fromthere - to engage the processownersandaskwhat theirprocess implies - to ask userswhatdata they currently keep - to imagine whatinformationneeded - to take the standard setof reportsfroma vendoranduse the vendordataset Clearly – eachof these approacheshasitsplace andaskingpeople whatthey wantmay not lead to whatthey needfor a givenAccountability Node.Hence the approachtakenwiththe Core P3M Data club isto start withdefining/askingwhatisneeded tooperate the governance framework toenable goodcontrol andoversight. There were 2 reasonsfor doingthis.Itiscritical to identify suchkeyrequirements and anecdotally, delivery focusedownersof (forexample) PPMsolutions configure theirtoolsetsand reportingforoperational purposesnotnecessarily strategicpurposes. There remainsagapin manyorganisations betweenthe focusfromexecutive andthatof delivery. The anecdotethat the PMO complains "noone readswhat I produce"andthe executive complains"why dothey give me all thisbabble"are bothstill smiledatwryly. Therefore, foreachAccountability Node, the Core DataClubaskedwhatis the genericbusiness oroperations theyshouldbe performing?Forexample - while the contentsof aprojectboard mayvary, the structure and operation are productionisable- andthe core supportingMIderived.
  7. 7. Page 7 We alsoexploredwhetherthere are cyclesthatthe business needstocoordinate aroundsuchthatit can rely on integratedpicturesof progress, costand projectionata commonmomentintime.Inour example, itwasdeterminedthere wouldbe Change cyclesandOperational cyclesbroughttogetherwith Financial cycles. If we operate tocycles, we canstill allow use of local toolsdataand reportingforreal time analysis–butthat isdifferenttothe governance requirement(whichshouldnotbe detailedoperational,anddoesnothave tobe real time – justintegratedandrelevant). We can thenalsoorchestrate business support, informationqualitymanagement, assurance anddecisionsupporttobe availableinpeaksandtroughsin our cycles. Therefore, if we canconnectinthe toolswe use withcommondata classifications we organise ourselves touse dataeffectively andenable“golden threads”thoughthe organisation- ratherthan tolerate business unitboundary levelmeaningbeinglostfromthe data. For example, itbecomespossibletotrack a ‘Threat’in whichMain Board isinterested toaStrategicObjective giventoa portfoliodelivery team.ThisenablesThreat prioritytobe recognised, enableseasy decomposition into variousroadmapitemsfora programme, so thatthe projectcan pickup clearrelateddeliverables.The Sub PortfolioPPG(whichmaybe a ManagementTeam) can thenallocate resource toit,Finance can track cost against it,and the PPG/ManagementTeamcan show benefit locally (andthe portfolioisreducingthe Threat). More importantly –the business (viathe PDG) can adjustif the Threat diminishes inimportance, asthe itemsclaiming priorityforworkto addressthe Threat can easily be seen and re-allocatedasneededrealisingresource efficiency. Development and Evolution of the Data Model Havingarrivedat whatthe Core MI needsare foreach Accountability Node, itbecomespossible toclarifywhatthe datamodel underneathneedstobe. The Core P3M Data Clubstartedwitha core data model impliedoutof the APMand PraxisFramework (Documents andReports).Thiswasmergedwitha core planningdatamodel (typically usedinplanningtoolslike MicrosoftProject).We thensuperimposed ontothatthe dataneedsimpliedoutof the Core MI implications beingcareful todistinguishbetweenCore data(e.g. TaskID) andmetadatalikely tobe organisation specific(e.g. Location).
  8. 8. Page 8 Hence it ishopedthatthe investmentsinmethodsandtoolsthatan organisationhasmade inlocal areas can therefore be exploitedratherthandiscarded as failedparochial solutions andeliminatesconflictbetweenincompatiblepeerdomains. It ismost likely thatthe firstdelivery of core datacapability thatanorganisation makeswill be forpartof the organisationandforpartof the data set.Not onlywill the datamodel needtochange withlearning, butitwill needtobe extended. Clearlythe businessneedwillhave todrive whatgetsaddressed, but the IT designforthe underpinningdatacapability hastobe addressed upfront, and itmay make sense tolookat the entire datavisionaroundP3Mto avoid short termismindesign. Questions likethese will undoubtedly appear: - what is our MI / Data strategy? Sometimes, if anorganisationhasnotdeliveredadatasolution before, itmaynothave anMI / Data strategy(or isa formatthat can be easily articulated).Thiscanbe a problem, asthe requirementmayappear“toohard”. Withouta strategy, parochial solutionsmay emerge,whichmayseemsimple atthe time, butthiscan alsocause laterintegrationissues(andpossible completereplacement) Example:The visionfora client organisation requireddataintegration.IT didnot have a data/ MI strategy. A project was started for a datawarehouse for one project. Designdecisionswere taken parochiallyforthat project. Later requirements prove problematic.New IT leads not impressedwithearlier work – reputationsdamaged.All because there wasno data / MI strategy. - where are the sourcesfor this data? If we are to take feedsintoadata model, where willthisdatacome from?Are there connectors toit? Example:A clientorganisation useda deliverytool withinits technologyfunctionforagiledelivery. The same tool was used in variousareas.It was assumedthat the tool was managedandused commonly/ consistently.It emerged that there was no standard,meaningintegrationofthe toolingwith a core datamodel wouldprove problematic. - what are the enterprise reference dataitems - and where are they?For example - code schemesandmetadata- where isitmastered, andhow isthis sharedcross-systems? Example:Client organisation hasatimesheet system that collectstime spent againstprojects intotime classification codes.Thesecodes are nothingto do withprojects. Projects use Work Packages/ Costcodes, but there isno way of relatingtime spent to relevant areas forproject control. Convoluted apportioning calculationsensue… - what isthe current quality of data and what assurance / support isin place to enable the necessary data quality?
  9. 9. Page 9 Example:client organisation has23 major projects, noneof whichare plannedwithresource assignments.Resourcenegotiationdoneoutsideof formal toolsand inlocal spreadsheetscausingadmineffortand allocationissues.Agreementmade to take resource demandsform project plansandaggregate them. First cut shows4x as muchresource demandas available. - what isthe strategy to assemble data? Manual copy and paste?Data Warehouse?SystemsIntegration? Example:client organisation hasastandardtool for dataintegrationand insistsonusingit for integratingdatabetween Tool A and Tool B. Mapping never reallyworked, toolingunreliablebecauseIT instructedto program aroundbusinessmatters that wouldnotbe resolved. Once we are clearon what data isneeded(tostartwithat least- and to supportgovernance andoperation- notjustoperation), andthe capability is enabled- the business canstartto run itsgovernance meetings off the Core P3Mdataset, safe inthe knowledge itcanextenditsdatasources, serve its regularand ad hoc MI needsandmostimportantly - enable more informeddecisionmakingthroughoutthe portfolio. Data Sources and Enterprise Reference data If an organisationistouse a core data model,thenclearlyitmustworkouthowto source information, addressthe necessitytofocusoncommon reference dataandto use that throughoutall componentsystems.A keyimplicationof thisisthatas an organisation,we canidentifyandsupplyourcore ‘Enterprise ReferenceData’.Forour portfolios,thiscaninclude simplethingslike projectcode,Resource IDbutalsolocal specificdatalike Location, BusinessUnitetc.If we can collate andmaintainthe collationof thisreference data,thenourcomponenttoolsetsanddatastorescanbe configuredtouse these code schemestoenable integrationof datafromothersystems.Forexample,if we refertoaresource witha differentcode inPPMsystem,HR systemandfinance,we will struggletoconnecttheirdata. Model Details Thismaterial can supportthe AccountabilityNodesandexample MIneedsreferencedabove.Itisexpectedtodevelopasusage examplesemerge. The linksbelowprovideanoutline of the componentsandreferencetothe details –plandata, finance data,resource data,controlsdata,but alsodiscusses usingEnterprise Reference data,permissionsandreferencingbetweendataobjects.Howtoestablishthese linksif theyare notcontainedwithinone systemisTBD! Linksto the model detailsare giveninthe material index.
  10. 10. Page 10 The followingtable outlinesthe dataelementsthe clubhasdefined: Table Outline Key Document Links This page defines where key documents arestored in relation to the portfolio.Exampletypes aregiven (from Praxis) Core fields These are fields included in every table in the Dataset Core Metadata These are the fields and tables thatan organisation may need to import from its existingbusinessdata to enable classification,aggregation and connection of data from various sources Actions Simple Action list Approval Simple record of approval of an item Assignment Resource to task Assumption Simple assumption Benefit Simple Benefit Breakdown Structures Similar to Metadata - these arethe code hierarchies thatwe want to use in the whole solution Brief Set of entity data related to initiatingproject Business Case Developed set of data relatingto a projectviability,may be based on a closed Brief Cash Input Record of funds set asidefor an entity, or received from (usable) revenue Change Change items Cost Item Record of expenditure item againstan entity Compliance Summary Link to a narrative Communications Link to a comms - likeCompliance Decision Simple Decision record.(May be an Approval) Dependency Cross projectlogical dependency. May need more thought for risk outcome, benefit, scopeand business change Entity An item for which someone has accountability. Portfolio,Portfolio Item(project / programme), team, department…. Features Developed set of data relatingto a project Issue Simple Issuedefinition Metadata items Relates metadata to data items - e.g. relates a risk to a risk categorisation Lesson Simple Lesson definition Metric All the metrics in use. This would saveaddingmetrics to specific tables
  11. 11. Page 11 Objective Given definition/attributeof a future state. E.g. Reduce sales cycletime,50% carbon emission,attain 15%profit level.May be hierarchy associated to objectives.Consistof business goals,businessimperatives,operational targets Portfolio Item Simple description Product Simple Productdefinition.May be comprised of features, part of a Solution,in response to a Requirement Related to To enablelinkingof entities - e.g. Actions from a Risk,Issuefrom a Risk,benefit from a product etc. Requirement Simple Statement of need that an entity is set up to respond to Resource Capability with this to carry out tasks to deliver features / products Risk Simple Risk Definition for project/ programme, but also corporatethreat / opportunity Roles & Responsibility Classification of servicedelivered by a resource - e.g. Project Manager, Programme Manager. Specific by portfolio item Solution Items in response to a Requirement. Decomposed into Products / Features Stakeholder Resource with a given interest in the entity. Classified,and may be given roles Task Activity to achieveprogress on an entity / products / features, may be carried outby a resource User Story For agiledelivery TechnologyDiscussion ThisModel is notprescriptive abouttechnologyandtalksinlogical terms.Itprovidesastartingpointandneedsadaptionbefore adoption.However,the Core P3M Data Clubmembersare experiencedtoknowthatsimple technologycandeliverclearrequirementswhereascomplex technologycannotdeliver unclearrequirements. The OperatingModel probablyrequiresatechnologybackbone (inlargerscale scenarios),perhapsonlytojoinupenterprisecapabilitythatalreadyexists. There are some useful capabilitydefinitionsforStrategyExecutionManagementtoolswhichcanassistwiththe processof strategyexecutioninmanyof the followingways: 1. Enablingvisualisationof the organisation’sObjectives,TargetsandChallengesintermsof Metrics,People,PortfolioItems,Service levels,Products and otherAssets 2. Prioritisingupcomingandin-flightinvestmentsrelativestoObjectives,TargetsandChallengessupportingstrategicintent. 3. Continuousplanningandre prioritisationbasedonresourcesavailabilityandcapability 4. Reportingstrategicexecutionattainmentandattainmentexpectedthroughthe Portfolios
  12. 12. Page 12 5. Formalisingascenarioplanningprocessperiodicallyandwhenevernecessary(changeinopportunity,threat,imperativesandgoals,reassessment of strengthsandweaknessesinrelationtoenvironment 6. Managing the outcomestobusinessimpactsandbenefits 7. Providingcontinuousportfolioitemperformance management Withthe emergence of cloudtechnology,the marketplace forP3Mtoolshas expanded –withchoice of vendorandoptionsforfeaturesintoolsetsbroad and deep.Beinginthe cloud,manyservicesdon’trequire internal ITsupporttosetup or supportthem(save forsecurity review/accreditation).Runninga single projectorprogramme,itiseasiertobe parochial,andeasilyactivate apparentlygoodsolutions.However,ITfunctionsare notjustaboutproviding technical people theyalsohave capabilityinbusinessanalysis,solutionarchitectureandlookafterthe widerneedsof the business –and perhapshave a strategyinplace to enable abusinesstoexploitandsustaincapability.AsITbecomesmore integral toourbusiness,andthe IToperationbecomesmore complex,there maybe compromisesnecessarybetweenwhatabusinessunit‘needs’andwhatanIT function‘wishes’. An example of thistensioncanbe foundinorganisationswhosebusinesseshave mature P3Mprocessesandtoolsbutare developingfuture capabilityusing agile methodsandtools.Businessunitscanaccessonline toolsetsveryeasilyandaddresslocal needs.The coalface canbe veryhappy.However,aproblem arisesif enterprise level dataneedsare drivenoff the mature toolsetswhichare becominglessandlessreliedupon.Whatcan an IT function – or the businessasa whole do? 1. Fightthe adoptionof newtoolsets?No,notif the capabilityprovidesutility. 2. Allow2 toolsetsbutrequire the datainthe corporate toolsettocontaina usable image of the source data. People resentthissortof admin overhead,anditprovesunreliable. 3. Try to work outa bi-directionalinterface –to keepdatainsync inboth systems?Experiencetellsusthisisnotsimple,especiallyif datamodelsare different. 4. Work out howto share the data in a Core P3M Dataset,and workwithall realisticsolutionstosupportcommongovernance processeswhile allowinglocal toolsandprocessestomanage details.(whichisthe core P3M data clubpreferredapproach.) It can be the case that a businesswill journeythroughall 4steps – whichispainful,costlyandtime consuming.So,the bestapproachistospot the issue brewinginthe firstplace andmake good strategiccallsat the earliestopportunity(whichcanof course be difficultif there isaconflictinprogress). Anotherexampleof the tensioncanbe foundinorganisationsthatwanttoforce one processandtool on theirorganisationas theirculture is‘command and control’.Inone example of this,the tool configurationbecame complexandhardto use,andthe compromisesleftsome businessareasreticenttouse the tool.Otherimplicationswere thattoagree a common processthe language wasleftsovague as to meanbusinessunitshad tointerpretitandwould therefore operate effectivelydifferentprocessesanyway.
  13. 13. Page 13 We believe the answer is to focuson informationneededfor governance, to offer commontoolsand process, and to supportbusinessunitsmeeting their own needs to ensure adoptionandoperational success. This meansaccepting enablingtechnologiesaroundacore technology – whether that isone system or a data model – that is a matter of interpretationof circumstancesandvisiondesign.This isa very differentapproachto some taken in the past when the objective hasbeen one tool and one process – but times (technologyandmethods) have changed. It islikelyanorganisationhasafinance systemthatcontainsthe core Enterprise Reference Data andcost tracking /revenue collectioncomponents. It may have an HR solutionwhichcontainspeople definitionsandskillsets, headcountdataetc. There maybe one / several PlanningTools (Primavera, MicrosoftProject,Planview,Jira…) - perhapsindifferentdepartmentswith differentneeds(i.e.projectplanning,developmentplanning,construction planning,innovationplanning,strategyplanning,manufacturingplanning, maintenance planningetc.) An organisationmayhave atechnologysolutionformasterdatamanagement,and an IntegrationSolution to pull together/connectrelateddata. There may be a preference foraData Platform(Amazon,Azure,Oracle…) It may have a preference fortechnologytosupport BusinessIntelligence dashboards/ reports forsupportability(PowerBI,Tableau…) To deliverinformation/knowledge tosupportthe governance operation,forbestresultsthese needtobe coordinated,else therewillbe overhead in manuallycontrivingacomplete datapicture (if evenattempted). Everyoneowningacomponentneedstounderstandthe constraintstheycanworkwithin. Platforms/capability –Azure,Oracle,PowerBI,Portalsetc. TechnologyDiscussion sare available uponrequest. Furtherdiscussionsonthe place of technologyinportfolioprogramme andprojectmanagementcanbe foundinavideo here.

×