05
Aug

Why Project Managers are not fit for Program Management?

Whenever, we think about our career path as project manager, our logical sequence seems to think about program management. I can recall, number of professionals, who are in process of acquiring PMP® certification, talk to me, whenever we will finish PMP® we will come for Program Management Certification (PgMP), I believe, it will be same for other professional trainers too, however, Project Management Institute (PMI) stats, gave us a very different picture. Based on the PMI[1] statistics of March 31, 2017, worldwide there are 761,905 PMPs, and 1,880 PgMPs. Interestingly when you search on LinkedIn there are over 20 Million project managers, and 10 Million program managers, but our certified professionals ratio doesn’t correspond.


There could be numerous reasons, but what I believe is that, as a project management community or certified professionals we are unable to position ourselves to fit for the job, and sale our credential, like we are doing for PMP®. I don’t have the exact titles, but most of the PgMP® credential holders are those who are in teaching or consulting career, so technically, very few are seeing PgMP® as a vehicle for their next career move, and trust me, it is not that PgMP® certification is way difficult than the PMP®.


Consider the Covid-19, for example. It affected everybody, but some firms are growing and most are struggling. I think that the difference in resilience is linked to various factors, including designing strategic choices, defining complexity, and delivering benefits. Those are leadership choices that are amply covered in this course.


I tried to figure out, and what I found is, it is the second transition of our career, our first transition was shifting from technical mindset to project management mindset, now we need to do second, where we need to move from deliverable to benefits. However, the way we use to achieve delivers is totally different than the benefits. This is the root cause of program management failure. Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) provides, processes and tools and techniques to achieve the benefits, and we are utilizing the same mindset to understand Standard for Program Management (SPM) for benefits delivery. It is not that, there is something wrong in the SPM, but it is the fact that a mathematician is trying to solve the financial budgeting problem.


Recently, PMI is heavily focusing on project managers, who are responsible to deliver the projects, and provided a talent triangle, same way, program managers needs to understand that, there role is much similar to Chief Executive Officer (CEO). Yes, program managers are CEO, of their initiatives, yet they are temporary CEOs. The concept of a temporary CEO, is provided by Turner and Muller[2] and further Chapman[3] suggests that program manager is closely aligned with the role of CEO, and needs to set a strategy for programme, inspire the program team and manage the political landscape and stakeholders. From this perspective CEO job is not to focus on deliverable, but to get the results from those deliverable. Deliverable are important, they are foundations, but what is more important, benefits, we build deliverable to realize benefits, program manager is responsible for benefits delivery, and the methods and tools we use to achieve deliverable, cannot be same for achieving the benefits, this is where, we are lacking and looking in a wrong direction. We need to set our direction and act like a CEO, whose one of the key job, as per A.G. Lafely[4] is to link the external world with the internal organization.


Seeing a program as a temporary organization, and managing it from CEO perspective is a missing piece of a puzzle, but than the next quest is to understand and perform the transition towards temporary CEO. For this I have mapped the four tasks of CEO, provided by Lafley with SPM[5] five domains. According to Lafley four tasks of CEO are: i) defining the meaningful outside, ii) deciding what business you are in, iii) balancing future and present, and iv) shaping values and standards. SPM five domains for managing programs are:


  1. Strategy Alignment
  2. Benefit Management
  3. Stakeholder Engagement
  4. Program Governance
  5. Program life Cycle Management

Task 1: Defining The Meaningful Outside

managing the inside results. Lafley, point in this regard is that we generally focus to those stakeholders who are directly involved, however there are multiple stakeholders, whom we discount but have direct impact on our endeavors, from organization perspectives they are investors, shareholders, suppliers, retail customers and consumers. In the context of program management, PMI dedicated a stakeholder domain in this regard, where target is to provide a framework, and techniques, which can be utilized by a program manager to first identify them, and than make a plan to engage them, through out the program implementation.

Task 2: Deciding What Business You Are In

From scope management point of view, we define it as in scope and out of scope or exclusions, and in a business context, Lafley, emphasizes that we should work on our strength and constantly review our strategy, that how we are positioning ourselves, and decide, which business or business area we should focus, and which areas we should close or sold out. In the context of program management, strategy alignment is one of core task of program manager, and he is responsible to transform strategic objectives into benefits, and constantly monitor, how to achieve them, and focus to change management as his job is to not to avoid change like project managers, but to accommodate based on the current strategic needs and funding allocation of program.

Task 3: Balancing Future And Present

Benefit management is a key to program delivery, and as program manager, we focus on benefit achievement during the program life cycle, and then transition it. During the implementation, we focus on quick wins for short-term achievements and balance the resources through effective coordination among multiple components of programs. Lafley mention it from the same perspective from an organization perspective, where a CEO targets to achieve short-term goals to achieve the momentum for the long-term sustainability.

Task 4: Shaping Values And Standards

According to Lafley, values establish the identity of an organization, and as an organization metrics and KPIs, which measure the progress towards goals are important, but as per Lafley theses performances should be based on both internal and external needs. On the other hand, program manager establishes the governance structure, and develops the plan, to define the program value, for it’s benefits achievement and sustainment. The overall role of governance is to provide a decision making and monitoring of program overall alignment towards its benefits achievement, as per the integration of strategic objectives. This cannot be achieved, without the predefined performance indicators, which needs to address the identity of a program.

I believe that program management is an exciting career move, and a smart cut as defined by Snow[6], to fast forward your career, and secure a role of a permanent CEO.

Do share your feedback, love to see your comments.



References

  • Project Management Institute (2017). PMI Today.
  • Turner, J.R. and Müller, R., 2003. On the nature of the project as a temporary organization. International Journal of Project Management, 21(1), pp.1-8.
  • Chapman, P., 2009. Educating major programme managers: Hopes, fears and speculations.
  • Lafley, A. G. (2009). What only the CEO can do. Harvard business review, 87(5), 54-62.
  • Project Management Institute. (2012). Standard for Program Management (SPM).
  • Sousa, I. D. D. (2015). Smartcuts: how hackers, innovators, and icons accelerate success by Shane Snow. intelligent HQ.