Sunday, 05 August 2012 00:00

Poor Leadership, The Progenitor Of PMOs

Rate this item
(0 votes)

Image PMO not equal to LeadershipLet me be perfectly clear, I hate PMOs. It matters not if you call them project management offices, program management offices, or portfolio management offices, they only spell one thing—poor leadership. Now those of you that know me, have heard this enough times that your eyes are rolling back as you mumble, "Here he goes again. Who set the bait in front of him this time?" However, I have confused people with a couple of PMO articles that might seem contrary.

The Role of a PMO


There are as many types of PMOs are there are PMOs, maybe more. Most are trying to combat some issue with struggling projects. There are, however, a very large percentage that are implemented just because it sounds neat. "Of course, we have a PMO, don't you?" I salivate when I hear that question. This person has inadvertently stumbled upon one of my biggest pet peeves. "So, what problem was it that you were trying to solve?" Their responses and my retorts are as follows:

  1. The PMO allows us to implement a common process across all the projects. Process is about 20% of what it takes to run a project. It takes people, management, and leadership to make projects consistently successful. Process only helps since it provides the managers and executives a set of guideposts to judge a project. Using piles of process, they try to devolve projects into a checklist of activities, thinking that you can follow the steps and the project will be successful. They can ignore a project and occasionally swoop in asking for a new report. They cannot see whether the project is running efficiently or heading for ruin. Their goal is to be a one-minute manager.
  2. The PMO ensures that we are properly prioritizing our projects. Now, wait just one second. At any well-managed company, the CEO sets the direction for the company. He or she works with the executive team (other C-Suite members) to develop the strategic and tactical plans to achieve those goals. Their progressive levels of planning and maintaining close coordination of all business units develops a list of projects and their corporate priority. Only if the executives are failing at prioritizing projects or communicating these priorities do we need a PMO to do this task.
  3. The PMO removes roadblocks for the project manager. Granted, this is dearly needed support. In a properly lead company, internal roadblocks should be nonexistent (see bullet 2). Everyone should know his or her priorities with respect to one another. External roadblocks, risks, and issues, requiring "executive power" or additional resources (people, time, or money), are a reality and the PMO can be quite beneficial in addressing these. However, this is the project sponsor's job.

In so many words, the PMO is filling in for the void of leadership.

The Role of Leadership

Want to read more?

Business environments change daily making it difficult to keep initiatives aligned with the corporate goals. Without alignment the projects and initiatives fail to deliver value. Our Strategic Alignment: The Key To Project Success white paper addresses these issues and what need to be done to thwart them.

Leadership, rather than reports, solves this problem. I am aghast at the number of companies where when asked for their strategic plan the only thing delivered is a blank stare. They have the revenue to keep their inefficiencies funded and cover up their lack of leadership. You can make money with minimal leadership as long as you have a great bunch of people selling anything they can. You can only grow and prosper, however, with an executive team's vision that sets direction and inspires and empowers employees.

Image of a naval fleet

Think of it in naval terms. The executive team is comprised of captains piloting a fleet of ships on a mission; each ship having its own crucial role and piece of that mission. None can survive on their own they must work in unison. They are not guided by a group of lieutenants telling them who should be in the lead and where to steer.

Ergo, Poor Leadership

Alas, PMOs are a necessity because companies have become leader deficient. Too much emphasis has been placed on corporate politics and the resulting executive teams are incapable of creating a vision, developing the plans, and inspiring their employees to meet those goals.

PMOs should be a means to an end, not an end in themselves. They are being used to fill the leadership void instead of educating executives in the complexities for running projects with interdepartmental dependencies. PMOs can institute the discipline to ensure projects get started at the latest possible date and that key resources are properly allocated when they are needed. The added bureaucracy that most PMOs bring, however, weigh the down the organization making it a lumbering giant, when what companies desperately need is leadership.

Want To Hear More?

If you would like to hear further debate on the subject, tune into the upcoming PMTV panel where Lindsay Scott, Dr. David Fraser and yours truly will answer the question Why do PMOs Fail?. Our hosts, Jon Hyde and Bernardo Tirado, promise this will be an exciting and educational event. It will be August 7, 2012 at noon BST (GMT +1). For all the Western Hemisphere early birds that is 7:00AM EDT or 4:00AM PDT. Yes, in the morning. If I can do it, so can you. However, it will be taped for viewing at a more reasonable hour.

More in this category:
Next Post Previous post
Read 10346 times

Leave a comment

Related items

  • The Catch-22 of Organizational Change Management

    "Kotter, ADKAR, or CAP which methodology should we be using to build our approach to improving project adoption?" I hear this question repeatedly from people trying to implement an organizational change management (OCM) program. The problem is that is the wrong question. Take a perfunctory peek at any of the models and you will see that in the quest for an answer people have mistakenly jumped over the first few steps. It is a Catch-22; unless you already have an OCM process in place, you will most likely fail at implementing it. Putting one in place, however, is a change—one of the most difficult cultural transformations that your company will undertake. As a result, people jump to the solution stage, which is well down the change management process path (which, ironically they did not know since there was no procedure in place).

  • Project Inception - Designing Organizations For Success

    Buy it now!

    A failing project’s fate is destined long before assigning a project manager. Its doom is sealed from the time the customer envisions the idea. Traditionally, project inception is defined as when the customer comes to a solution provider (internal or external to their organization) asking for a product or service. In actuality inception is much earlier. It starts when someone says, “Wouldn’t be neat if I could...” From that point forward the customer’s exceptions are set, changed, and reset as the process of discovery refines the concept. The customer’s ideas change from what they want to what they need, while continually constrained and formed by the realities of an ever-changing business environment. Although people cite unrealistic expectations as major problem during inception, the constant change in expectations causes the real issue—misalignment. For project managers to make a significant difference in a project’s success, they must use a new paradig.

  • Strategic Alignment: The Key To Project Success

    Buy it now!

    Project success rates for many companies and government organizations are dismally low, yet executives never seem to look at the big picture. They continue to make adjustments in the way projects are run by addressing isolated problems. However, projects are part of a much larger system and should be addressed in that context. To do that, companies must define how their strategic plan will use people, projects, and technology to achieve their goals. This paper discusses one approach to make this happen.

  • Vision To Value: Creating Successful Projects Using Leadership

    Buy it now!

    Value: Rather than scope, schedule, and budget, value is the lynch-pin of project success. Although the former three constraints are key factors in project success, there is no guarantee that meeting these constraints will result in a positive outcome. Instead constantly tracking the value of the project and making adjustments to the triple constraints to attain sufficient value is critical. Arguably this is the project managers most critical deliverable in the project. It requires significant insight into the project’s customer and a thorough understanding of their needs versus their wants. Project managers have to be leaders (leading subordinates, leaders, and customers), be able to assign priorities based on a critical, objective view.

  • Your CRM Implementation Is Going To Fail

    Customer Relationship Management (CRM) implementations fail at an alarming rate. For the last fourteen years, numerous independent parties have come up with the same dismal statistics. In fact, your implementation probably will not meet your goals either. The graphic above does not bode well for anyone heading out on that journey. To be sure, configuring the software is significantly more difficult that it appears at first glance. As much as one wants to blame Salesforce, Microsoft or some other software vendor, though, the problems lies much closer to home.

    For the astute onlookers it is easy to tell when the implementation is going the awry. It is the argument over who is going to drive the project—IT or Sales and Marketing. Unfortunately, these are the wrong people to have in the discussion.

Rescue The Problem Project

Internationally acclaimed

Image of RPP

For a signed and personalized copy in the US visit the our eCommerce website.

Amazon logo
Flag of the United States Buy it in Canada Flag of the United Kingdom
Flag of Ireland Flag of Germany Flag of France
Flag of Italy Flag of the PRC
Flag of Japan
Book sellers worldwide.