Projects and programmes: different approaches to change demand distinct skills to manage
Ian Clarkson - Senior Director - PRINCE2, PeopleCert
The world is full of projects and programmes. From the very small events, to the multi-billion dollar change initiatives.
Yet despite the stark difference in size, scale and financial resources, I often hear programmes referred to as big projects and I think it’s something we need to address.
You might ask why it matters. It’s a fair point. After all, both terms refer to delivery of a change of some kind. However, programmes are about more than just delivering products. They are about affecting much bigger meaningful change through delivering new capability and embedding it to realize the benefit.
A high-speed rail network isn’t about building railway lines and laying tracks. It’s about making commuting quicker and easier with more economic benefit as a result. Just as building a new nuclear power station aims to generate cleaner, more secure, more sustainable and resilient energy for the country.
Know the future state
The way I see it, and the way PRINCE2 Programme Management sees it, programmes deliver a vision for a new future state. In fact, the definitions within the PRINCE2 portfolio are a good place to start when reminding ourselves of the differences between projects, programmes and portfolios.
Most organizations start by delivering change through individual projects. That's often enough when the objective is to create a specific product, service or capability. However, when several projects are working towards the same strategic vision, managing them independently is no longer enough.
This is where PRINCE2 Programme Management provides the framework to coordinate change, align projects with the future state, and ensure the intended benefits are achieved.
In time, there comes a maturity challenge and this is when a cluster of projects that all lead to the same vision should form part of a programme.
So, in the case of the rail line, you’ll have interrelated building projects, people projects, community projects, environmental projects etc, with thousands of people involved to deliver the vision.
Funnels and tunnels
When defining terms, I want to note that - collectively - several programmes (and projects for that matter) sitting in the ‘hopper’ awaiting execution is called a portfolio.
Portfolios are a ‘funnel not a tunnel’ and are a matter of high-level organizational strategy, only letting things get into the hopper/funnel if they are deemed desirable, i.e.,which are the right projects and programmes to do and in which order. These change initiatives move out of the funnel and go into the ’tunnel’ for execution when there’s been a clear prioritization based on an understanding of what will make a difference to the organizational vision.
Vision is hugely important within programmes. Stakeholder engagement relies on it and you can’t achieve the best outcomes without understanding why you are doing something.
The author, motivational speaker, and organizational consultant Simon Sinek says “people don’t buy what you do, they buy why you do it.” When it comes to projects, programmes and portfolios I also say, “People don’t buy into what you do, they buy into why you do it”. Again, this is the vision driving the agenda.
Competencies underpin programmes
It’s this that brings me on to skills. I don’t believe you can manage programmes effectively without the right competencies, especially when you are coordinating potentially thousands of people. Programme leaders must be equipped to ‘tame the beast’, so to speak.
What do I mean by that? Programme managers are dealing with a more complex view of the future state. They need to bring multiple projects together – the supply chain, engineering, HR projects. That’s why PRINCE2 Programme Management encourages the use of the Target Operating Model, which describes the future state and addresses what is needed to get there.
This takes practice and years to hone. To be successful, you need people who understand how programmes run and, more importantly, have done it successfully time and again. These are the people who can then see a bigger picture and guide multiple projects to achieve the vision.
Experience matters
Can you be good at programme management if you haven’t run projects? The view on this is split. Programme management can be seen as a separate job family to project management, and it can also be seen as a progression from projects.
A different set of tools are used in programmes (e.g. vision, target operating model, transition planning, benefits realization) yet I’d say having experience of running projects would be an advantage to understand language, general concepts, standard governance models and so on.
It’s frightening however, how many interrelated projects are being delivered individually in an organization without programme management governing them. There’s often little structure and the vision isn’t central to decision making, which inevitably leads to lack of prioritization, poor strategic alignment and insufficient benefits realized.
This is about both maturity and an industry familiarity issue. If you don’t know what a programme is, how can you run something as a programme? What you should strive to avoid is a scenario like this: being in front of an independent review into why your programme was unsuccessful, and admitting that you didn’t have enough people who knew what a programme was or were qualified in programme management to deliver it.
However, it’s not just programme managers who need to be qualified. Everyone involved in a programme needs to know what a programme is. You’ll often hear the term “SQEP”: Suitably Qualified and Experienced Person in heavily regulated industries. I think we should be asking ourselves if SQEP should include project and programme management.
People must be more than adequately skilled to do the role and know the difference between a project and a programme so they can pull the right levers to achieve the vision. I think it’s time we faced up to this for the good of the profession.