UCISA Major Project Governance Assessment Toolkit
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
0 likes•722 views
Universities and colleges are constantly undertaking significant change activities. These activities will typically be managed using existing institutional project and change management processes. Often, however, there is a lack of consistency and rigour in the governance approach. This can lead to significant cost overruns and project failure when confronted with the challenges of a major change project. Major projects require a more rigorous approach to governance and project management to deliver success. The UCISA Major Project Governance Assessment Toolkit has been developed to assist staff who are managing or participating in major change projects. The toolkit provides: a) guidance on assessing which projects should be classed as Major b) the key governance elements that must be managed for Major projects c) an assessment tool for project governance to help ensure that the required governance actions are established and work effectively throughout the life of the project d) a visualisation tool for project governance which gives a view of the project as it currently stands and the changes since the last review e) case studies on the use of the toolkit at the University of Edinburgh The toolkit has been designed to be complementary to existing project and change management processes. The toolkit fills an important gap by providing a repeatable assessment process that covers all aspects of governance for Major Projects. The toolkit can be used as a reference point and checklist for any project. This presentation is from the UCISA15 conference in Ednburgh and may be useful for any organisation wishing to adopt the toolkit.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (9)
Similar to UCISA Major Project Governance Assessment Toolkit
Similar to UCISA Major Project Governance Assessment Toolkit (20)
More from Mark Ritchie
More from Mark Ritchie (15)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
UCISA Major Project Governance Assessment Toolkit
- 1. Major Project Governance Assessment Toolkit Mark Ritchie, University of Edinburgh Pauline Woods-Wilson, Lancaster University Project and Change Management Group
- 2. Project and Change Management Group • Established March 2013 • Committee from across UK HE • Committee members new to UCISA • Focus on providing practical resources for practitioners • Collaborative and action oriented group – more than just the sum of the parts! “Working together to promote and develop project and change management best practice in HE and FE”
- 3. UCISA Project and Change Management Group • ~280 subscribers on mailing list • ~100 followers on Twitter • 2 resources published • Major Projects Governance Assessment Toolkit (July 2014) • Effective Risk Management (December 2014) • First event PCMG15 (June 2015) “Working together to promote and develop project and change management best practice in HE and FE”
- 4. Major Project Governance Assessment Toolkit
- 5. Why is it needed? • Project governance often ineffective • Unclear roles and responsibilities • Lack of confidence in project status • Focus on IT rather than business requirements and benefits • Weak change management • Unclear where action required Unforeseen risks and issues Poor project outcomes
- 6. How was it developed? Peer review by Project and Change Management Group (2013) Role definitions and “business as usual” added by Lancaster University (2014) UCISA Best Practice Toolkit Published (2014) • Student Record Implementation Lessons Learned (2009) • Shared Academic Timetabling (2010-13) • Adopted for all major IT projects (2012) • Research Management (2013-14) • University Web Site CMS (2014) • Library Management (2014-15)
- 7. What’s in the toolkit? Governance assessment process Scorecard for identifying major projects Project governance elements Role descriptions Visualisation tool Case studies
- 8. Major Projects “A major project is a project that has a significant financial, operational, or reputational impact on a university or college” COST Consider whole life costs over 48 months IMPACT Consider extent and nature of impact on students and staff COMPLEXITY Consider number of external stakeholders and changes to business processes and IT systems REPUTATION Consider potential for reputational damage if project goes wrong The toolkit can be used as a checklist for any project and modified to meet your institutional requirements
- 9. Project Governance Elements Vision for Change Business Case and Alignment Team Building Communication Implementation Risk Management Project Management Governance Structures Measurement Benefits Realisation Business As Usual Learning Sponsorship & Stakeholder Buy in Create vision Engage people Deliver Embed
- 10. Project Roles Project Executive (Sponsor) Project Manager Senior User Senior Supplier Project Board User Group
- 11. Project Roles Project Sponsor Owns the business case and is ultimately accountable for the success or failure of the project Senior User Ensures that the services delivered by the project meet the needs of user stakeholders
- 12. Project Roles Senior Supplier Represents the team delivering the project and is accountable for the quality, performance, technical integrity and timeliness of the supplier deliverables Project Board Provides overall governance for the project. The key members of the Project Board are the Project Executive, the Senior User and the Senior Supplier
- 13. Project Roles User Group Represents the diverse range of user stakeholders for the project. The primary responsibility of the User Group is to ensure that the project deliverables meet the needs of users. The Senior User typically chairs the User Group and represents user interests on the Project Board Project Manager Has day to day responsibility for running the project and is accountable to the Project Board. The Project Manager is responsible for ensuring that project produces the required deliverables within the tolerances agreed with the Project Board
- 14. Project Roles Project Assurance An audit function used to ensue that the project is being run correctly and that complete and accurate information reaches the Project Board.
- 15. Governance Assessment PROJECT TEAM PROJECT BOARD USER GROUP SCORES (For Each Governance Element) 0 = Not Started 1–3 = Emerging, immature and/or incomplete 4–6 = Progressing towards best practice 7–10 = Mature and working effectively REASONS FOR SCORING SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT
- 16. Visualisation – Single Assessment 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Vision Business Case Sponsorship and Stakeholder Buy-In Team Building Communication Governance Structures Project Management Risk Management & Assurance Implementation Measurement Business As Usual Benefits & Ongoing Improvement Learning
- 17. Visualisation – Assessment Over Time 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Vision Business Case Sponsorship and Stakeholder Buy-In Team Building Communication Governance Structures Project Management Risk Management & Assurance Implementation Measurement Business As Usual Benefits & Ongoing Improvement Learning ___ July 2013 ___ Feb 2014
- 18. Act Following Assessment Focus on the governance elements most needing attention Publicise outcomes and increase project engagement Recognise and reinforce existing good practice Follow up suggestions for improvement IMPROVE PROJECT OUTCOMES
- 19. Feedback So Far We have had some success with the Major Projects Assessment Toolkit. The gap for us was sizing across the project piece. We have addressed this by amending the toolkit so that we can understand the requirements for different sizes of project. This looks really interesting, I have asked our internal auditors to do a review of projects and programmes to pick up on exactly some of these issues! We hope that the governance assessment and visualisation tool will help people understand where we are and aren’t making progress with our projects’ health. It seemed very clear to us, and we are always looking at ways to present concepts visually.
- 20. Any Questions? UCISA Project and Change Management Group https://twitter.com/UCISA_PCMG https://www.linkedin.com/groups/UCISAPCMG -7427251/about Join our mailing list to have your say and find out more! Major Project Governance Assessment Toolkit
Editor's Notes
- Mark Ritchie (University of Edinburgh) Deputy Director and Head of Project Services Chair of UCISA Project and Change Management Group Lead author of Major Project Governance Assessment Toolkit Pauline Woods-Wilson (University of Lancaster) Head of Project Management and Planning Founder member of UCISA Project and Change Management Group Co-author of Major Project Governance Assessment Toolkit
- UCISA Project and Change Management Group was modelled initially on the EDUCAUSE Project Management Constituent Group Our place on the UCISA Executive give the group more potential to influence to project and change management in UK HE and FE
- We monitor stakeholder engagement at every committee meeting We’re pleased that the Major Project Governance Assessment Toolkit was our first resources as it includes so many themes which will run through our work going forward If there are any other resources you’d value please let us know.
- Our simple aim is to make project and change delivery in HE and FE more successful. Toolkit is complementary to existing project and change management processes. Toolkit is suitable for any business change or IT project being delivered using any methodology. We believe the toolkit is practical to implement and strategic in value. Audience Question How many of you were aware of the toolkit prior to this conference? How many of you have used the toolkit in any aspect of your current work? How many plan to use the toolkit, or any aspect of it, in the future?
- Create Vision Vision for Change A vision of what the project want to achieve any why. Using language readily understandable to the business and in the largely unencumbered by descriptions of how it will be done, how much it will cost or how long it will take. Business Case / Alignment The hard facts describing how the vision is to be delivered i.e. the approach, costs, benefits, timescales and risks. Engage People Sponsorship and Stakeholder Buy-In Ownership for the project and its deliverables. User leadership and engagement. Team Building The team delivering the project, their shared commitment and delivery capability. Communication Engaging and informing the wider community of project stakeholders. Deliver Governance Structures The people and processes used to provide effective governance for the project. Project Management and Planning Project management and its context. The clarity and appropriateness of the project plan. Effectiveness of project and resource management processes. Risk Management and Assurance The effectiveness of progress monitoring, financial controls, risk/issues management and project assurance. Implementation Business and technical acceptance criteria. The quality and completeness of the implementation plan including agreed contingency arrangements. Embed Business As Usual (Service Delivery) University of Lancaster introduced the new Business as Usual (BAU) / Service Delivery governance element to the set developed by University of Edinburgh. Lancaster have adopted the ITIL guidance on designing the Service elements early on in the project i.e. by agreeing and documenting the ITIL Service Design Package during the design phase before the solution is implemented. Not all of this can be completed at the start of the project, and will run through the project until it is handed over the Service support team running. Key elements include: Fully defined and costed business as usual service. Agreed plan for transition to the live service Business continuity, backup and recovery arrangements Supplier and contract management Benefits Realisation and Ongoing Improvement Credible assessment of benefits to be delivered by the project. Benefits regularly reviewed and updated as project progresses including identification of activities to support benefits realisation. Responsibilities, processes and timing for post project benefit realisation reviews. Measurement Baseline measures of situation before project started and plans for reporting improvements against the baseline. Other performance measures for the solution being delivered by the project. Learning Lessons learned from previous similar projects. Processes for learning during the project. Post project reviews for identifying learning to improve the services delivered and/or future projects.
- Toolkit provides guidance for establish appropriate project roles and responsibilities. Roles def9ined in the toolkit re based on PRINCE2 - Project Executive / Senior User / Senior Supplier / Project Board / User Group / Project Manager Lancaster University, early on in the institution's maturity on running projects, detailed Project Roles, with accompanying checklists, in a booklet for use when starting up a project or when introducing a new member of the project team to their role. A summary of the Lancaster University role information has been incorporated in the toolkit. If you fail to establish appropriate roles and responsibilities your project is unlikely to succeed. Audience Question Which roles are least understood or done least well at your institution?
- Governance Assessment as an Engagement Tool The assessment process itself increases: Awareness of the project information required by different stakeholders Project engagement and awareness of all staff completing the assessment Awareness of stakeholder viewpoints within the project team and Project Board
- The above chart was produced by the assessment of real project undertaken by the University of Edinburgh
- The above chart was produced by the assessment of real project undertaken by the University of Edinburgh
- Audience Question How many of you plan to have a closer look? How may of you are considering using it at your institution?