Benefits and value - in theory and practice Presented by Markus Laursen APM Benefits Management SIG 14 June 2016 Hosted by Sheffield Hallam University

1. MARKUS LAURSEN
PHD FELLOW
14 JUNE 2016
BENEFITS AND VALUE - IN
THEORY AND PRACTICE
Markus Laursen, PhD fellow, Aarhus University, Denmark
Benefits Management: a core theme in management research and
education? at Sheffield Business School, Sheffield Hallam University
14th June, 2016

2. 14 JUNE 2016
2
MARKUS LAURSEN
PHD FELLOW
AGENDA
 Value creation literature
 Research on benefits and value
 Project Half Double – A new project management paradigm
 Questions and comments

3. 14 JUNE 2016
3
MARKUS LAURSEN
PHD FELLOW
BACKGROUND
 PhD project: Primo 2014 to Primo 2017
 Formative evaluation of the European Capital of Culture, Aarhus 2017
 Rethinking project management literature as the point of departure:
- From product creation as prime focus to value creation as prime focus
 Value:
Winter, et al., 2006, p. 642
(European Standard, 12973-2000, 2000; Morris, 2013: 83; Quartermain, 2002: 44–45–44–46)

4. 14 JUNE 2016
4
MARKUS LAURSEN
PHD FELLOW
Value chain Value constellation
VALUE CREATION AND REALISATON
Company 1
creates use
value
Sale from
Company 1 to
Company 2:
realisation
of exchange
value
Company 1
captures
exchange
value
Bowman and Ambrosini, 2000; Lepak et al., 2007 Normann and Ramirez, 1998; Vargo and Clavier, 2015
Company 2
creates use
value

5. 14 JUNE 2016
5
MARKUS LAURSEN
PHD FELLOW
PROJECT VALUE CREATION THEORY CONT.
Application of independent theory (e.g. RBV) and
formulation of frameworks and models (e.g. benefit map)
Laursen and Svejvig, 2016
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1981
1988
1994
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
Models and frameworks: 49
Independent theory: 14
n: 111

6. 14 JUNE 2016
6
MARKUS LAURSEN
PHD FELLOW
FUTURE DIRECTIONS
Dir. From Towards For practice
1 value management as
reduction of costs…
value management integrating value,
benefits, and costs
PMBOK, MoV, PRINCE2
2 value chain thinking… value creation in value constellations Value capture (theatre)
3 project and portfolio
management with an
operational focus…
projects and strategy linked in a
holistic approach
Management of projects
4 limited application of theoretical
frameworks…
new models based on independent
theory
Effectuation logic
Service-dominant logic Lusch and
Vargo, 2014
Sarasvathy, 2011

7. 14 JUNE 2016
7
MARKUS LAURSEN
PHD FELLOW
THE RESEARCH
Program level: Aarhus 2017
 €55 million investment
 +300 projects and events
 ‘rethink’ theme
Project level: Campus Bindslev’s Square
 Create a marketplace of the future
 7 organizations – public and private
 Learning, constructing, collaborating
Rethink Urban Habitats
 Increase and preserve biodiversity
 1 organization
 Disseminating, showcasing, collaborating

8. 14 JUNE 2016
8
MARKUS LAURSEN
PHD FELLOW
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Sampling
Theoretical replication logic for projects
Collection
Semi-structured interviews
Observation of project activities
Research workshop
Analysis
Inductive coding and categorisation
Eisenhardt, 1989; Kvale and Brinkmann, 2009; Charmaz, 2014

9. 14 JUNE 2016
9
MARKUS LAURSEN
PHD FELLOW
FINDINGS – PROGRAMME LEVEL
 An organizational divide between sponsor, programme organizer, and immediate
beneficiary calls for justification activities to communicate value to all stakeholders
 The long planning period in combination with the unfamiliar word ‘rethink’ as theme
creates challenges is communicating the project purpose and gaining public support
 An ECoC is divided into before and after designation. After being designated the focus is
on delivery – i.e. delivering a programme (product) as close to the value stated in the bid

10. 2
To put it simple, we will deliver
Projects in half the time
with double the impact
Together we will develop a new and radical project paradigm to increase the
competitiveness of the Danish industry

11. 3

12. 4
Projects in half the time with double impact
Together we will develop a new project paradigm to increase
the competitiveness of the Danish industry
+ 500 practitioners

13. 5
Impact case examples

14. 6
The ambition is simple: We aspire to deliver
projects with higher benefits – in shorter time
IMPACT CASE - PHASE 1
PROJECT VISION
The purpose of the Half Double programme in Company X is to empower and accelerate the project management organisation’s (Project
owners, SteCo’s and Project leaders) capability to reduce time to benefits on projects
Project leader allocated 50 % in average on selected pilot projects throughout
Phase 1
2 C projects designed to realise benefits faster. Benefit solution design
approved by project owner within two months.
PPM impact faster setup designed in half the time, and accumulated benefits
realised on 2 C projects (TBD)
$
(Business effect)
USAGE
(Changed behaviour)
LEARNING
(Competency development)
REACTION
(Good or bad)
Phase 2
Phase 1
Phase 1
´Phase 1
IMPACT CASE - PHASE 2
Portfolio flexibility in place so that projects are prioritised in line with emerging
strategy (TBD )
1 A+B project & 5 C projects designed to realise benefits faster
TBD
Lead time reduced by
25 % on 1 A+B project &
5 C projects
DAGC hours reduced
with 25 %
Time-to-benefit reduced
by 50 % on 1 A+B project
& 5 C projects
BUSINESS IMPACTBUSINESS IMPACT
BEHAVIOURAL IMPACTBEHAVIOURAL IMPACT
X # new PL & PMO’s capable of
designing project work for faster
benefit realisation
X # of new Project Owner/SteCo
require faster benefit design
2 PM + 3 PMO capable of designing
project work for faster benefit
realisation
3 Project Owners require faster benefit
design
Stakeholder satisfaction increased by 20% (Pulse check) Stakeholder satisfaction increased by 20% (Pulse check)
Time to benefit on “Impact Faster” reduced with 5 months (from September to
March)
# of parallel A+B projects in the portfolio reduced by X %
The core idea is to design projects and
project behaviour for faster benefits
and adapt current PPM setup to
support Impact Faster aspiration
– reducing overall time to impact
with 50 %

15. 7
Impact tracking
IMPACT OBJECTIVES IMPACT MEASUREMENT
KPI/measure Baseline Target Date
Primo
March
Date
Medio
March
Date
Primo
April
Date
Medio
April
Date
Primo
May
Date
Medio
May
Date
Primo
June
Date
Medio
June
Business Impact
Number of
projects with
Benefit Solution
Design
0 3
High quality
charter developed
by the end of
Start-up phase
0 3
Behavioural Impact
Pulse check
question number
7
4.0 4.0 4.0 4.5
Mini pulse : PMOs
feels capable of
applying the
Impact Faster
approach
71%
80%
are
very
certai
n
71%
Number of Impact
Faster workshops
where the project
owner
participated
N/A
5/5
RWO
5/5
DDLG
1
0
1
0
1
1 1
Number of weekly
“Impact Faster
updates” PO
N/A 100% 2 2 2 2 2
TBD

16. 8
Impact Solution Design
examples

17. 9
EXAMPLE 1
Phase 1 Phase 2
2 projects ready
for faster impact
realisation
IMPACT
01. July,
2016
Impact
realisation
Impact
realisation
6 projects ready for
faster impact
realisation
X# of projects ready for
faster impact realisation
01.January,
2017
4 project owners, 4 project leaders and 4
project consultants capable of designing &
leading projects for faster impact realisation
8 project owners, 8 project leaders and 8
project consultants capable of designing &
leading projects for faster impact realisation
Phase 3
3 project owners, 2 project leaders and 3
project consultants capable of designing &
leading projects for faster impact realisation
TIME

18. 10
EXAMPLE 2
TIME
IMPACT
GAINING INSIGHTS PILOT
SCALE PREFERRED
SOLUTION
OPERATION
Insights gained from initial
pilot countries
Other insights to be
captured to support decision
Decision:
Small or medium
solution as pilot?
Two pilots
Pilot project learnings to
drive the right decision
Decision:
Small solutions in all countries
or medium solutions in few
countries?
More pilot projects to tailor
scaling for operations
Key learnings to ease roll-
out of preferred solution
Decision:
Ready to roll-out preferred
solution in all countries?
And how?
Operational rollout
CAPTURINGKEYLEARNINGSANDINSIGHTTO
DRIVEDECISION
CAPTURINGKEYLEARNINGSANDINSIGHTTO
DRIVEDECISION
CAPTURINGKEYLEARNINGSANDINSIGHTTO
DRIVEDECISION
Start small - fast insights and focus on measurable results (one market, one/few personas, existing resources)
Identify the most beneficial solution (small, medium or large?)

19. 11
EXAMPLE 3a
Time
(months)
Ambition
Impact realisation
at project
evaluation stage
Markets
Reality
Delayed Impact
realisation due to heavy
after work to fine-tune
solution after release
Time
(months)
Learning
loop 1
Learning
loop 2
Learning
loop 3
Markets
IMPACT SOLUTION DESIGNCLASSICAL APPROACH
Risk: All markets in one go
Impact uncertain
Opportunity:
Risk limited to one market
Local interaction with cross boarder learning
Put company
brand on one
online shop to
gain insight for
strategic
decision
making

20. 12
EXAMPLE 3b
SUB-PURPOSE DELIVERABLES
Online business model
Successful online shop
Communication to customers
and stakeholders
Change mindset of offline
dealers and employees: Online
is opportunities
Governance and
Competencies
Ensure online capabilities to
support online business
Q2 Q3 + Q4 TBD
Pilot1UK
Pilot2
Pilot3
PilotX
PilotX
Broadimplementation
marketbymarked
Ongoing online assessment and continuous learning
Online Market AssessmentIn which markets do we have
biggest online opportunities?

21. 14 JUNE 2016
15
MARKUS LAURSEN
PHD FELLOW

22. 14 JUNE 2016
16
MARKUS LAURSEN
PHD FELLOW
REFERENCES
Bowman, C., Ambrosini, V., 2000. Value creation versus value capture: Towards a coherent definition of value in strategy. British Journal of Management, 11, 1-15.
Charmaz, K., 2014. Constructing grounded theory, 2. ed. ed. SAGE Publications, London.
Eisenhardt, K.M., 1989. Building Theories from Case Study Research. The Academy of Management Review, 14, 532-550.
European Standard 12973-2000, 2000. Value Management.
Kvale, S., Brinkmann, S., 2009. Interviews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. Sage Publications, Incorporated.
Laursen, M., Svejvig, P., 2016. Taking stock of project value creation: A structured literature review with future directions for research and practice. International Journal of
Project Management, 34, 736-747.
Lepak, D.P., Smith, K.G., Taylor, S.M., 2007. Value creation and value capture: A multilevel perspective. Academy of Management Review, 32, 180-194.
Lusch, R.F., Vargo, S.L., 2014. Service-Dominant Logic: Premises, Perspectives, Possibilities. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Morris, P., 2013. Reconstructing Project Management. Wiley Blackwell, Chichester, West Sussex, UK.
Normann, R., Ramirez, R., 1998. Designing interactive strategy : From value chain to value constellation. Wiley, London.
Quartermain, M., 2002. Value engineering. In: Management,, A.f.P. (Ed.), Project Management Pathways. Association for Project Management, Buckinghamshire, pp. 44-
1–44-20.
Sarasvathy, S.D., Venkataraman, S., 2011. Entrepreneurship as Method: Open Questions for an Entrepreneurial Future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35, 113-
135.
Vargo, S.L., Clavier, P., 2015. Conceptual Framework for a Service-Ecosystems Approach to Project Management, System Sciences (HICSS), 2015 48th Hawaii
International Conference on. IEEE, pp. 1350-1359.
Winter, M., Smith, C., Morris, P., Cicmil, S., 2006. Directions for future research in project management: The main findings of a UK government-funded research network.
International Journal of Project Management, 24, 638-649.

24. This presentation was delivered
at an APM event
To find out more about
upcoming events please visit our
website www.apm.org.uk/events