After writing yesterday’s post, I started thinking about really how to define the value proposition of a PPM investment. While the primary value remains (as I wrote yesterday) alignment with portfolio goals, there are still quite obviously benefits related to operational excellence, increased efficiency, and reducing the risk of rework or potential safety issues. In fact, as I started writing down all of the various value propositions of a PPM investment, I realized that pretty much everything falls into one of two categories:
- Benefits that align the portfolio/program/project with the goals of the organization. (Aligned)
- Benefits that reduce the delivery overhead of the portfolio/program/project. (Efficient)
I then mapped those value propositions to the engagements and organizations that I’ve worked with to see if I could map them to specific characteristics of an organization, i.e. to determine if some organizations value efficiency while other organizations value alignment. I played with a couple of different taxonomies, before settling on this one:
- Organizations working with a defined project / program / portfolio scope (Defined)
- Organizations working to translate a high level strategy into an execution plan. (Derived)
Once I mapped that out, I realized that many of the organizations I’ve worked with have evolved over time. I initially engaged when they were focusing on operational excellence and efficient delivery, and then over the years, have watched as they’ve grown in maturity and become focused on how to effectively define the portfolio.
Finally, I overlaid some of the component capabilities of a PPM solution to see where they fit into the model.
The end result is as follows….thoughts?