Benefits management guide and exams
Posted by Stephen Jenner on 1 March, 2012 - 16:05
APMG have asked me to develop a guide and associated exams for benefits management. This will follow the usual APMG model used with PRINCE2, MSP, MoP etc. As far as the guide is concerned, the idea is for something that:
1. Consolidates, and is consistent with, existing Cabinet Office (OGC/ERG) Best Management Practice guidance and in particular: MSP, MoV and MoP;
2. Expands on the above with more examples and case studies from practitioners and academia; and
3. Builds on the above by filling in the gaps in existing coverage.
I think this is an excellent opportunity to produce something that represents a consolidation of leading edge thinking and which builds on what is already in place - and the development of accredited exams also helps raise the profile of benefits management which has to be a good thing!
Key to this is my belief that the Guide should represent a consolidation of good practice from the benefits management community around the globe - so I'm reaching out and requesting examples and case studies: anything from 50 words to a lot longer! Basically anything that demonstrates an example of good practice - for example, a descirption of a problem faced and the approach adopted to resolving it. I'm happy to include the name of the organisation or to anonymise the example - just as we did with MoP. We'll also credit all those who have provided examples/case studies in the Guide.
Realising benefits and value are an organisational responsibility enabled by the project deliverable. You should look at the work of Jed Simms: http://www.valuedeliverymanagement.com/ and http://www.capability.com.au/ He has been focused on getting to the end of the ‘value chain’ for years.
Cheers - I've already been talking to Jed and he's contributed to the new Guide.
Best wishes
Steve
This I thought a good initiative. I wanted to suggest that a rough outline be articulated for the index of such guide at different levels: foundation, practitioner, advanced and recognize that there be a time gap between each of the levels similar to the manner for P3O. The expectation is that by mapping the outline of the whole and then backcasting could prove helpful when collating material. Later on the OGC/Cabinet Office website or similar there could be a potential for a Knowledge Centre wherein could be Case studies/Real Life Examples, Templates and checklists etc. to aid pragmatic implementation. For example include two case studies within the appendices of such guide and thereon there would be a continuous flow of case studies and lessons learnt to the Community of Practice website as one possibility.
First issue of the guide could perhaps be a pilot with a 2nd edition to follow after a year to reflect feedback attained after the initial exams have been undertaken. The practioner and advanced could consider to be competency based wherein a review of experience and knowledge is tested on the topic.
In respect of a glossary I wanted to suggest consideration for a Benefits Management Taxonomy to augment the glossary as more encompassing.
Introduction
Benefits Management
- portfolio level
- programme level
- project level
Benefits Management Strategy
Benefits Profiles
Appendices
Roles & Responsibilities
Real Life Example No. 1 - Benefits Mngt.
Real Life Example No. 2 - Benefits Mngt.
Tools and Techniques
Maturity Model
Cultural Preferences - International Application of Benefits Mngt.
Sources of Further Information
Glossary
Web based Taxonomy
Index
One important thing to remember is benefits management is very much the end of a process. The overall capability to realise value from an investment in a project starts with selecting the right project to do for the right reasons, then doing the work of the project effectively and efficiently. Mess up any of the early stages and there are no benefits to mange and I’ve seen situations where implementing a badly though out project deliverable was highly detrimental – a better outcome would have been achieved if the deliverable was not implemented.
The concept of overall project delivery capability (PDC) needs to become more central to everyone’s thinking. An outline for this concept is discussed at: http://mosaicprojects.wordpress.com/2012/03/11/pdc-project-delivery-capability/
Having raised this point though, there is no point in a project team doing a good job that is wasted through lack of action by the organisation after project delivery. This is 90%+ the responsibility of general management and the organisation – project managers don’t control the organisation! For more on this see: http://stakeholdermanagement.wordpress.com/2012/03/04/organisational-change-management/
Guys
Many thanks - glad to say the draft covers the points you make.
I'm still on the look out for more actual examples of good practice though - fame awaits those who contribute (well a mention in the Acknowledgements)!
Best wishes
Steve
Referring to the post made by patw on the 16th of March:
I can't quite reconcile the point made that, and I quote, 'One important thing to remember is benefits management is very much the end of a process'.
True the 'benefits realisation' activities bear fruit at the implementation stage of a change initiative but the success of that initiative is enabled through the Benefits Management rigour introduced at the very beginning of the cycle.
Am I missing something here?
Before an organisation can think about managing benefits to realize VALUE several things have to have occurred:
There needs to be an innovative idea developed that is capable of creating value
The ‘right ideas’ have to be selected to turn into projects aligned with the organisations strategy (hopefully embedded in a strategic plan)
The organisation has to be capable of delivering projects reasonably successfully
The original idea still has to be valid in the current context.
The organisation has to be prepared to accept the change caused by the project’s outputs.
If all of this is doe well, the benefits management process to realise value cuts in once the project’s deliverables are transitioned to the organisation for use.
‘Benefits’ are simply a step along the way, see: http://www.mosaicprojects.com.au/WhitePapers/WP1023_Benefits_and_Value.pdf and
http://www.mosaicprojects.com.au/WhitePapers/WP1042_Outputs_Outcomes_Benefits.pdf
All of these steps lead towards generating a valuable return on the investment in a project and should be part of an holistic ‘Project Delivery Capability’ – for more on PDC see: http://www.mosaicprojects.com.au/WhitePapers/WP1079_PDC.pdf
Thanks for the reply patw. I can see and agree where you are coming from with respect to the successful delivery of a change project from a project management perspective. The common and strong point being that all change projects must be ultimately traceable to the organisation strategic objectives and be valid within the organisations business context. However, from my point of view it is the strategy that drives the objectivity and seeds the ideas and the resulting change initiatives (Projects and Programmes) emerge from a clear and distilled view of what the organisation needs to achieve.
I guess where I am with this is that I have a different view on where the boundary of the benefits management capability and processes lay and the role it plays in shaping the way the organisation responds to its prevailing change drivers. I see the BRM capability as a 'wrapper' with one or indeed many more individual projects contained within it. I also consider that BRM is perfect 'carrier' for the implementation of modern change management thinking. Although working as an integrated function with the project team BRM tends to focus on the environment, the business and the organisation and its personnel. That is, from without and within the project boundary it positions and enables early stakeholder management activities that help ensure viability, accountability and demonstrable benefits realisation. Of significant importance in my opinion, is the facility to implicate personnel within the scope of the change initiative to the point where they become embedded and become naturally committed to its successful outcome. The objective of the BRM approach is of course to de-risk and optimise the deliver of beneficial (by design) change. By definition, this means that the benefits management processes are active throughout the life of an individual change project or programme.
We agree with you Neil – the only difference is we spoke of organisational change management, primarily because the organisation has to manage its change processes to realise benefits and value. Our White Paper focused on this aspect is at: http://www.mosaicprojects.com.au/WhitePapers/WP1078_Change_Management.pdf
A 'heads up' - the comments are back from the Review Group and I'll be completing the final draft on my way to/from Australia tonight. I'm delivering BM courses in Sydney, Melbourne and Perth (a sell out) next week - the encouraging news is that we have sizeable audiences in each city which indicates a strong potential demand for the Guide and exams. So all is on schedule.
Lastly - many thanks to the Benefits Management SIG committee for their input (and in particular, Sarah Harries).
Best wishes
Steve