Trends and insights into current project, programme and portfolio practices. Presented by Michael Cooch, PWC Director (PPM) at APM Governance SIG event on 12th February 2014

1. PPM Global Survey
Trends and Insights into Current Project,
Programme and Portfolio Practices
Presented by: Michael Cooch – Director (PPM)
Hosted & Coordinated by: James M Lowe - Senior Manager (PPM)
12 February 2014

2. PwC
Agenda and timings
Registration, refreshments and networking 17:30 – 18:00
Welcome, introduction and key findings 18:00 – 18:25
Q&A session 18:25 – 18:40
Facilitated group session 18:40 – 19:25
Summary and wrap up 19:25 – 19:30
Networking 19:30 – 20:00

3. PwC
Introduction

4. PwC
Introduction
PwC’s Third Global Survey on the current state of project management contained 146
questions focused on project performance indicators with 1,524 respondents
Background:
• 8 week web based survey open between December 2011 – January 2012
• PMI network of practitioners was a key channel
Objectives
• Assess project and programme management correlation to organisational success
• Review current trends in project and programme management
• Identify organisational gaps in programme management and focus on areas
for improvement

5. PwC
Demographics
PwC was able to leverage its global connections to get responses from project
practitioners and business executives across 38 countries and over 30 industries
Figure 1: Survey participants Figure 2: Survey respondent industries

6. PwC
Context

7. PwC
Context
Modern enterprises are currently faced with unprecedented levels of change which
provides a constant threat to their success and, in many cases, survival
• The PwC ‘Run the Business’ (RTB) and ‘Change the Business’ (CTB) model is used
throughout this presentation to highlight and contextualise the finding
Figure 3: PwC ‘Run the Business’/‘Change the Business’ Model
Macro influences
‘Unstable global, and local,
market conditions’
‘Realisation of demo-graphic trends
and customer behaviours’
‘Geo-political policy and regulatory
influences’
‘Rapid technological advancement’
‘Higher expectations on corporate
responsibility and sustainability’
‘Intense and highly agile competitive
Landscape’
Run the business Change the business
Alignment and
prioritisation
Deployment and
acceptance
Measurement
and
refinement
Measurement
and
re-balancing
Macro influences
Operations
Programme
delivery
Strategy and
corporate
governance
Portfolio
management
and
governance

8. PwC
Summary of key insights
Six key insights have been derived from the 2012 PwC Global Survey and contrasted with
a number of other studies and observations on emerging Industry PPM themes
Misalignment of ‘Run the business’ and ‘Change the business’1
Portfolio Management is a competitive differentiator2
Fit-for-purpose governance strongly influences project and programme success3
Higher performance is correlated with higher maturity4
Project and programme delivery performance is not improving5
People, tools and methodology are under-utilised6

9. PwC
Summary findings

10. PwC
Misalignment of ‘Run the business’ and ‘Change the business’
...results in avoidable resource wastage. However organisations are focusing on making
limited ‘change’ budgets go further than ever before whilst balancing RTB demands
Key findings
• There is an emerging trend towards strategic
portfolio management functions
• Too often programmes operate without
involvement from the business and there is
therefore a lack of business programme
accountability
• With increased alignment of projects with
business strategy, organisations can expect
greater project portfolio impact on business
success
• Federated budget control is still prevalent
but there are examples of centralised control
(where strategic programmes cross-divisions
or have significant implementation cost or
impact)
Key question
Run the business Change the business
Alignment and
prioritisation
Deployment and
acceptance
Measurement
and
refinement
Measurement
and
re-balancing
Macro influences
Operations
Programme
delivery
Strategy and
corporate
governance
Portfolio
management
and
governance
To what extent is your
‘strategic change’ activity
managed centrally?

11. PwC
Misalignment of ‘Run the business’ and ‘Change the business’
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Lack of effective
project
leadership
Lack of
resources with
appropriate skill
set
End users not
sufficiently
trained to use
output
Outcome
doesn't solve
problem
identified
Business
culture resists
change
End users not
engaged during
delivery lifecycle
Lack of
commitment
from project
resources
Solution is
unsustainable
Lessons are not
learnt from
previous
projects
Resources not
incentivised
achieve the
change
Critical High
“The programme was operating in
isolation to us”
Client quote
“The solution delivered was not
sustainable within our
organisation”
Client quote
“We weren’t prepared for the
change, and the process for
integration was not communicated
until too late”
Client quote
Figure 4: PwC 2012 RTB/CTB Survey Compilation

12. PwC
Portfolio management is a competitive differentiator
...and its adoption is highly correlated to improvements in key business performance
across all indicators of quality, scope, budget, time, and business benefits
Key findings
• The adoption of Portfolio Management (PfM) has
not increased amongst organisations but its use
clearly leads to increases in the key performance
indicators
• The four strongest drivers for making portfolio
management effective are:
- Active and periodic alignment of the CTB
portfolio with the organisation’s strategy and
objectives
- Deploying an enterprise PMO (and associated
tools) to manage the portfolio e.g.
Interdependency resolution and neutral QA
reviews (stage gates)
- Robust benefits definition and management for
financial and non-financial measures
- Robust delivery performance measurement
processes (e.g. resource utilisation, Earned
Value, critical path management)
Key question
How tightly aligned is your
organisational strategy to your
project portfolio?
Figure 5: Survey Respondents Project Management Maturity Model
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Strategy executed to plan Organisation works on the right
projects
%PerformanceImprovement
Portfolio management and governance
Low
performance
High performance
Organisations with a more mature approach to PPM perform better

13. PwC
Fit-for-purpose governance strongly influences programme
and project success
...but surveyed organisations, overall, have not mastered the ability to design it effectively
resulting in it being cited as a top contributor to programme and project failure
Key findings
• Lack of effective key stakeholder
engagement often results in a
misunderstanding of the benefits and, if
unmanaged, political duality
• Along with centralised governance for
strategic change we are also seeing more ‘c-
suite’ and board representation (e.g. Chief
Projects Officer -CPO)
• In low-performing organisations executive
sponsorship is approx 60% less likely to
have an appreciation of the strategic value of
programme and project management
• Business resources do not see or feel the
benefit of working on change programmes
(often on top of their ‘day job’) resulting in a
lack of motivation
Key question
How active/effective are your
governance processes? Do you
have RTB/CTB resourcing
conflicts?
Identify, assess, map and
prioritise stakeholders
Develop an stakeholder
engagement strategy and plan
Develop key messages and
tailored intervention packs
Engagement with stakeholders
and measure success
Figure 6: PPM Service Catalogue – Governance

14. PwC
Higher performance is correlated with higher maturity
...but there is a pronounced disconnect between ‘self-diagnosed’ programme and project
management maturity and the reality (as measured by industry CMMI/PMI methods)
Key findings
• Self diagnosis for PM maturity (61% at
Mature or Optimised) shows a stark over-
estimation of capability when compared
with robust industry assessment of the same
(10% at Mature or Optimised).
• For those organisations who have built
genuine, robust programme management
capabilities (Level 3 – Established to Level 5
– Optimised) we see strong performance
improvement across all indicators
• Based on these results further investigation
is needed to understand the reasons e.g.
- A lack of understanding of the concept of
maturity
- Softening interpretation of standards
- Formal standards are still not widely
adopted
Key question
Do you use PM maturity
assessments as a value driver?
Where do you sit on the scale?
Level 1:
Immature
26%
Level 2:
Established, in
need of
improvement
34%
Level 3: Grown
up, more
successes than
failure
30%
Level 4:
Mature, very
successful
9%
Level 5: Best in
class
1%
Figure 7: Survey Respondents from (CBP) Report

15. PwC
Project and programme delivery performance is not improving
... although some, lower margin, industries (e.g. construction) are statistically better at
delivery than others (e.g. banking) where margins are typically higher
Key findings
• 86% of projects fail to deliver against their
budget, schedule, scope, quality and benefits
baseline
• Poor estimation continues to be the largest
(32%) single contributor to project failures
• The governance theme (namely: lack of
executive sponsorship, poor communication
and lack of stakeholder involvement)
contributes even more heavily to failure
(36%)
• In low-performing organisations PM
performance is not measured or owned
• 30.7% of respondents believe their
organisations do not have suitable
succession plans in place (all levels)
Key question
How important is benefits tracking
to your business? Do you track
non-financial benefits?
Figure 9: Factors contributing to poor project performance when
implementing an organisation’s approach to PM
*Source: The State of the PMO – 2007-2008 A Benchmark of Current Business Practices Center for Business Practices (CBP) Report

16. PwC
People, tools and methodology are underutilised
...but provide ‘low hanging fruit’ for improving programme and project execution through
training, standardisation and automation
Key findings
• In low-performing organisations PM staff are
much less likely to have formal PM
qualifications, hands-on-experience and
extensive PM knowledge
• Engaged, experienced staff lead to project
success
• A project staffed with uniformly very low-
rated personnel on all capability and
experience factors require 11 times as much
time to complete a project as would a project
team with the highest rating in all the above
factors
• Commercially available PM software drives
higher levels of portfolio performance through
data-driven and timely decision-support
• 77% of respondents have a PM methodology
Key question
Is EPM software used in your
organisation? ...how well? Do PM
resources have targeted training?
Figure 10: Types of PfM software in use
PwC global project management survey of 236 senior management (2007)
The State of the PMO – 2007-2008 A Benchmark of Current Business Practices – Center for Business Practices (CBP) Report

17. PwC
Group Session

18. PwC
Breakout group session
“How do these trends impact on Governance and how can Governance
be used to address them? Do the findings correlate with the APM
‘Directing Change’ methodology?”
• We will break you out into groups around each of the 6 key areas
• Each group will discuss the above ‘exam question’ and will be asked to
feedback on the following three points:
- How is Governance impacted by your trend?
- How can Governance be used to impact your trend?
- What does your trend mean for the APM ‘Directing Change’ guide?
• Each group will be facilitated by a PwC colleague
Timing: Group discussion – 30 minutes, Feedback – 15 minutes (2
minutes per group)

19. PwC
Feedback
2 minutes per group to feedback on the following:
• How is Governance impacted by your trend?
• How can Governance be used to impact your trend?
• What does your trend mean for the APM ‘Directing Change’ guide?

20. PwC
Outputs from 12/02/14 PwC 3rd Global PPM Survey Event for APM
Governance SIG: “Trends & Insights into Current PPPM Practices”
Run the business
and change the
business
alignment
Effective
portfolio
management as a
competitive
differentiator
Higher
performance
correlated with
higher maturity
Project and
programme
delivery
performance is
not improving
People, tools and
methodology are
under-utilised
Key: Strategic key development area/frequent issue Strategic strength/infrequent issue
There is a poor
definition of benefits
and baseline metrics
Business cases
are rarely
refreshed
Misalignment is
often a symptom of
a breakdown in
governance
Resources are not
effectively balanced
between run and change
projects often resulting in
conflicts
Change projects are not
given strong enough
sponsorship
Communication is often
lacking and managers often
misjudge escalation points
Timescales are often out
of sync with BAU and
change cycles conflicting
Managers with ‘pet’ projects
can undermine overarching
governance efforts
Don’t always know what ‘fit
for purpose governance’
should look like when it’s
done well
Strategy formed at
board level needs to be
understood at all levels
There needs to be a
common language and
methodology
Management needs to
be more hands on and
engage with their teams
Need a more
objective assessment
of out maturity
There is not always
clear knowledge
management and
benchmarking
Better to do the right
things somehow
rather than the
wrong things well
Performance is not
always embedded in
corporate governance
Governance structures are
often in place but are not
necessarily empowered
There aren't always the
right people to manage
change well.
Priorities between projects
and BAU are not always
agreed at board level
Lack of succession
plans means there are
often resourcing issuesCommunication is not
consistent at all levels
Considerations
for the
governance SIG
Expectations are
not managed well
enough
Don’t maximise the
value of programmes
across the business
Need to ensure
transparency and clear
reporting across the
organisation
There is often a delay
from the business case
sign off to project start
Actions taken are seen
as ‘a good thing to do’
rather than being
linked to strategy
There is often a lack of
C-suite understanding
and sponsorship
Approach needs to vary
across industries
reflecting client needs.
Poor alignment
between strategic intent
and portfolio activity
Value is not
always recognised
at the top
Necessary level
of quality and
sponsorship is
not present
Tactical key development area/frequent issue Tactical strength/infrequent issue

21. PwC
Conclusions

22. PwC
Concluding remarks and findings from today
• The current environment is already highly pressurised with indications that more challenges are
ahead. Positioning for organisations is critical i.e. Definition of strategy and the change necessary to
achieve it
• The seven things organisations should do tomorrow:
1. Undertake unambiguous definition of organisational objectives, derived from
strategy, which can be quantified. Projects should then clearly state how they will drive
achievement of those objectives
2. Focus more on the interaction between RTB and CTB. Ensure resources who do both
activity have clearly defined performance criteria to ensure motivations are aligned to the
right outcomes
3. Assess the number/size/impact of cross divisional projects and consider designing an
Enterprise Portfolio Management function if significant
4. Ensure project sponsors and stakeholders are actively engaged throughout
the lifecycle
5. Embed formalised portfolio and programme maturity assessments, as standard, to
identify ongoing opportunities for improvement
6. Consider, if not already in place: (1) a formalised PM training curriculum, (2)
Enterprise PM software and (3) creation of a standardised delivery methodology
(including estimating tools)
7. Hire proven PM talent (with a strong track record) to drive delivery excellence

23. PwC
The 4th Global PPM Survey is still open for a few more days…
• The 4th Global PPM Survey explores the gap between what is commissioned
and what is delivered – even when the business change is delivered
‘successfully’, is the client really getting what they wanted/expected?
• There is an executive level questionnaire (c.a. 20 questions) and a
practitioner level one (c.a. 50 questions)
• Your contributions would be very welcome… you will receive a copy of the
full survey report and you will be entered into a prize draw to win an iPad
mini
The 4th Global PPM Survey closes on 14th February, so there is still time to
submit your responses.
To participate, visit www.pwc.com/ppmsurvey

24. © 2013 PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. All rights reserved. In this document,
"PwC" refers to PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (a limited liability partnership in the
United Kingdom), which is a member firm of PricewaterhouseCoopers
International Limited, each member firm of which is a separate legal entity.
Thank you!