Question:

1. Critically evaluate the strategic value of project management and project portfolio management, paying particular attention to their potential impact on social equity, project management life cycles, resource management and organisational change.
2. Demonstrate understanding and initiative in the application of project portfolio management tools, techniques and processes to achieve improved business practices and performance and integrate sustainable project outcomes.

Develop and defend arguments both for and against the implementation of project portfolio management in a range of organisations

Answer:

Introduction

Siemens Australia is a subsidiary of the Siemens organization that is global multinational organization. Siemens is the manufacturer of advanced technologies with a focus on engineering product and solutions while at the same time investing in sustainable programs. Siemens division of Australia and New Zealand particularly deals in digitalization, manufacturing, automobile, healthcare technologies, and services. In line with organization’s goals, the organization has developed a project portfolio management (PPM) system that assists in ensuring that portfolio is managed and evaluated to achieve objectives. Most of the portfolio management system in the organization has been reduced to automated machine that runs and is controlled by computer software called Teamcenter. The whole system though has proved efficient is also facing some few challenge (Feldenkirchen & Eberhard, 2005).  The following document gives findings the review of the project portfolio management implementation that is submitted to the executive management.

Situational Context

The organization is investing in the right project since the organization is investing in projects that aim at benefiting and incorporating community or society for common good. There are many reasons why portfolio management is the right project for the company. Firstly, the organizational portfolio is organized into a system that critically allows other innovative ideas to be implemented into the organization. The program also works to utilize innovative ideas for the better performance of the organization. Secondly, the organization’s PPM recognizes and utilizes the opportunities that are available for the benefit of the organization and society. Thirdly, the PPM also optimises resources through identifying different areas of efficiencies and play without delay by better planning. Fourthly, the organization has current trending sustainability criteria that satisfy the UN calls for sustainable environmental programs. Moreover, the PPM has a baseline that is open for future improvement or success of the business and this is enabled through high synchronization that the program offered in the line of the business objectives and goals (Sanwal, 2007).

Secondly, the organization is optimising because the organization is in the course of meeting its core objective of ingenuity for life. The organization has high optimising tools that are incorporated with current innovative technologies to ensure that the organization PPM is at the same level with other current advanced technology. The organization reduces delay or and optimise efficiencies through identification of the areas that need improvement. The PPM also utilizes high planning ability that also reduces inefficiencies in the project. The system allows proper early planning and financial resource using the organization’s robust technology with intelligent programmers. In addition, the system has been optimised for a balanced system that allocates resources in program specific capabilities (Schipper, et al 2012).

Thirdly, the organization is executing the project well and this is evident by some projects that are implemented across Australia. The organization has a project portfolio management system that is described as product lifecycle management. This system automates product development process without considering the size or complexity of the process since the whole system is computerized. The project execution makes use of the high efficiency of the portfolio management process within the organization that has been pre-planned. Moreover, digitalization of the system has been executed when the management decided to implement the digital process automation. This gave birth of the computerized system using software called Teamcenter. Teamcenter has been incorporated in the system through program termed as enterprise portfolio management. Enterprise portfolio management is a kind of process lifecycle management utilizes information available within the organization to optimize the company portfolio. In the execution process, the PPM, therefore, determine whether the portfolio management system should align portfolio with organization objectives or products (Project Management Institute, 2014).

Fourthly, Siemens Australia can absorb all the changes since the organizational framework allows absorption of new projects or ideas. The organization has most of its portfolio connected or link with the project portfolio management that allows all programs or projects to centrally manage. Despite the organization’s size that slows down automation of all production process, the absorption rate is high and this also enabled through the maturity level that has been realized in the organization. Teamcenter is easy to absorb in the organization since it simplifies the work that would have been done by many people using a lot of resources. Moreover, Teamcenter suit the constructive work culture that the organization is based (Kerzner, 2010).

Finally, the organization is realizing the promised benefits as evident by numerous projects that have been implemented. The promised benefits of the organization are engraved on the sustainability of the project and efficiency of the system. These benefits are already realized with the Teamcenter proving its advantages on the production. Since its inception, the program has enabled the organization to track all the processes and the linkage to organization goals. In addition, the program also has enabled introduction and usage of sustainability criteria that allow community involvement into the system. Sustainability program also makes the organization realize its vision of production of renewable energy. Efficiency aspect of Teamcenter bridge the gap between planning and execution that is normally realized when the manual management system is used. There is limited time wastage that results from reconciling data generated in project management and execution program. Using manual project management, therefore, waste both time and resource to do similar task conducted by Teamcenter.

Portfolio Evaluation

The portfolio evaluation in the organization is quite technical as the company is technologically capable with the ability to use computerized evaluation and management system. Firstly, the Siemens Australia uses Teamcenter software that is incorporated into project lifecycle evaluation aspect. Teamcenter® utilizes the top-down managerial skills in evaluating the project portfolio management. One of the key areas where Teamcenter has proved good is portfolio evaluation process where it is used to reconcile all the data with respective project systems. The ability of the program to link planning and execution stages of the project make the software advantageous in project evaluation. The top-down evaluation process is also good in evaluating project strategy following project pipeline. Teamcenter allows articulation of direction in evaluation process giving the overall framework that works in accordance with organization’s strategic management goals (Müller, Martinsuo & Blomquist, 2008).

Secondly, the justification for using Teamcenter® for evaluation is based on its ability to assist in the evaluation of many aspects of project stages as compared to other methods that rest on the human operator. Using Teamcenter in PPM complies with the changing working environment that currently allows utilization of technology and reduced human capability. This allows the machine to perform most work hence increase inefficiencies that are caused by human errors due to manual operations. Development and usage of Teamcenter are also justified by its innovative nature that works in hand with the organization’s objective of increasing the innovative capability development. At the time of its deployment, there was a need to replace the manual portfolio management with Teamcenter as means of organization change culture. Teamcenter brought the picture of machine capability compared to the initial human manual PPM system that was full of error, time wastage, and resource wastage.

Thirdly, benefits management cycle is incorporated into the evaluation process since all aspects of project lifecycle are harmonized in the software. In the Teamcenter, some of the benefits that are incorporated as benefits management cycle are optimization of resources, synchronization system, and continuation business system. Resource optimization cycle is benefited management cycle that allows the system to align the resource in accordance with benefits set for the project. Synchronization system also ensures that the product development process is synchronized to bring benefits to both stakeholders and the business. Business continuation, on the other hand, benefits management cycle that lay the foundation for future business improvement. This leaves the system open for improvement in future and to make the PPM process better as the technology also increases (Khatib & Hatemi, 2014).

Fourthly, benefits management evaluate the project benefits and the realization of the company goals as a reflection of company goals.  Benefit management help organization realize its goals through reduced time wasted, increase efficiency, optimal resource utilization and innovation. Usage of benefits management through Teamcenter has made the time spent on project evaluation reduced that work in line with organization’s goals. Optimization of portfolio evaluation process it tied to high efficiencies as errors are limited and this enables the system to produce the desired result. Resources are properly utilized through benefit management and this makes the organization to realize the project benefits while using minimal resource possible. Lastly, benefits management uses innovative ideas that are consistent with organization’s goals of utilization of innovative ideas. Siemens Australia basically encourages innovation and this also part of the back bone of research that lead to the development of Teamcenter (Rajegopal, McGuin & Waller 2007).

Portfolio Management

Firstly, project portfolio management coordinates all the managerial operations of the project to ensure that project lifecycle is maintained. PPM is coordinative in nature that coordinates all the activities that form the basis of project management.  In order to ensure that all the projects are in line with strategy, the portfolio management organizes the operations, works on risk management, portfolio optimization, prioritization and project selection. Portfolio management  though is incorporated in the software, the program coordinates all the operations within the project. Teamcenter manages the risk that might be associated or encountered in the project whether financial or strategic risks. PPM used in the organization also prioritizes on the portfolio that is used in the organization based on the organization’s goals. The portfolio management also determines the project that is selected and this also works in accordance with the organization’s objectives (EPMC, 2011).

Secondly, project management office has been introduced into the project through business administration projects that manage organization projects. According to definition project management office (PMO) standardize project based on the governance process and this is divided into two within the organization (Blomquist & Müller, 2006). The primary PMO is introduced into the project through the office of business administration projects. The second aspect of PMO is within the Teamcenter software itself where it is made of interface that allows sharing of resource and evaluation or management of projects. In addition, according to 50Lessons (2009), PMO assist management and support projects a function that is fully dedicated to Teamcenter. This leaves the proof that project management office has been introduced into the project (EPMC, 2011).

Thirdly, both qualitative and quantitative skills are key aspect the project management process through technological management. Quantitative skills or tools are within the computerized system itself since the program utilize data and analyze to reconcile both the initial stages of the project with execution stage of the project. Teamcenter evaluates the project based on the data generated from the system this applies the quantitative skills in portfolio management. Qualitative skills used in the PPM are based on the software itself and the principles under which it is built. The software is developed in line with the literature that provides the basis for project portfolio management. The two techniques work in a collaborative manner that all the programs to automate the product development process (McNeil, Frey & Embrechts, 2015).

Maturity Levels

Firstly, the maturity level of the organization is Level 4- Optimization which is characterized by project optimization tools. The organization is characterized by the system, resource and time optimization. The model used in the projects of this organization uses data to evaluate the process in an optimized manner and this is another character of optimization level of organization (Becker, Knackstedt & Pöppelbuß, 2009). Communication within the organization uses an effective channel that allows proper coordination of projects. This is enabled using the digitalization of the PPM as the whole system is like to the application software itself allowing effective communication. Teamcenter continuously gives the progress report since the programs are automated not as in case of manual  PPM that require the evaluation process to be done at the specific time. Optimization level of the organization maturity also uses quantitative data that is evident within the Teamcenter software (Mettler, 2011).

Secondly, the best practice that can be adopted for the organization is OPM3. Adoption of the practice helps Siemens Australia or the entire organization to develop a framework for improving the performance of Teamcenter. The OPM3 is model giving the ingredients required to come up with the best project portfolio management system that incorporates other changes. This implies that though the use of Teamcenter has been effective, much need to be done to improve its performance to accommodate the necessary shortcomings of the system. This is where OPM3 is coming in to allow the organization plan and come up with the roadmap detailing the necessary steps for the improvement (Lahrmann et al, 2010).

Thirdly, when implementing PPM with OPM3 model, there is a need for goodwill from both management and digitalization department that develop and maintain Teamcenter. The management will have to approve the necessity of improvement and development of roadmap. The digitalization department will incorporate changes into the program through republishing the software with new changes and install the new Teamcenter. This will improve maturity level as the organization still remain with one step to reach the peak of maturity level five (Hamilton, 2004).

Corporate Culture

Firstly, the corporate culture for Siemens Australia can be described as constructive safety culture. The organization is known in Australia and globally for its work-oriented culture that moderate safety and personal work life. Most employees attest that corporate culture of the organization has been on the course to harmonize workplace culture and employee work culture. The overall idea is meant to create a constructive safe working environment that promotes better working environment (Rajegopal, McGuin & Waller, 2007). The implementation of Teamcenter serves to maintain the corporate culture through the ideas create a different reaction among internal stakeholders. Some of the differences that are mostly to rise within internal stakeholders begin with a human resource manager that will have few human works as the machine takes over. Technology manager has the task to maintain the automated system in accordance with the organization’s objectives. The accountant has to devise new ways to link the system with accounting monitor system to ensure all financial records are up to date (O’Donovan, 2006).

Secondly, changes in the corporate culture especially in project portfolio management. In order to fully utilize the PPM, there is a need to some changes will be affected particularly sustainability aspect that has been silent in the Teamcenter. The corporate culture though currently concentrate on work and working within the organization should be broader that brings other aspects that are outside the bracket of the organization into the society. Another area that needs much concern is customer feedback mechanism into the system especially in the sustainability section (Project Management Institute, 2011).

Thirdly, project portfolio management that monitors all portfolios and incorporates customer’s feedback will support sustainability criteria. Feedback is an important system since it enables the organization to understand the weakness of its system for improvement. As the company uses its Teamcenter software, the organization needs to fully incorporate sustainable criteria that form the basis of society or community involvement. In generating sustainable renewable energy members of the public need to form part of the system. This is not necessarily the public but also other stakeholders that are key to the organization and therefore should give their comments on the project (Keating, Quazi, Kriz, & Coltman, 2008).

Fourthly, there are some challenges in getting sustainability criteria and the PPM embraced in the organization.   The primary challenge to the adoption is resistance to change as most people in the organization especially the management itself. The management needs convincing explanation on the need to change what to them has proved working. The resistance also arises on the profitability of the sustainability criteria as the organization management normally weigh the advantages of the project against to the organization as opposed to the normal primary society benefit (Schipper et al, 2012).

Effect or outcome of the PPM

The overall effect of the project and changes that are incorporated to change the PPM will lead to increased efficiencies. Most stakeholders will feel part of the system with the inclusion of strong sustainability criteria. Feedback is the primary outcome of the new Teamcenter that will result in the new portfolio management system. Another effect of the adoption of the system is a reduction of time that would be used in conducting customer satisfaction research as the feedback tells all the necessary feedback. One negative effect of adopting the system is additional resources that need to be added to the initial budgeted PPM (Project Management Institute, 2013).

Conclusion

In conclusion, portfolio management as a current phenomenon has proved that management of multiple projects is nowadays easy. Siemens Australia as a subsidiary of global Siemens has taken PPM a higher level with most work based on the computerized automated system. In addition, the PPM has been incorporated into sustainable development aspect that works in hand with society and environmental development. Teamcenter software has nearly all the managerial skills that allow it, monitor, manage and evaluate the project portfolio.

Reference

50Lessons (Producer). (2009c), Sustainability needs a business case, with Truett Tate [Video file]. Stroud, England: The Corporate Learning Consortium.

50Lessons (Producer). (2009a), Creating infrastructure to measure & celebrate corporate responsibility, with Truett Tate [Video file]. Stroud, England: The Corporate Learning Consortium.

Blomquist, T., & Müller, R. (2006), Practices, roles and responsibilities of middle managers in program and portfolio management. Project Management Journal, 37(1), 52–66.

Becker, J., Knackstedt, R., & Pöppelbuß, J. (2009), Developing Maturity Models for IT Management – A Procedure Model and its Application. Business & Information Systems Engineering 1(3), 213-222

El-Khatib, Y. & Hatemi-J, A. (2014), Portfolio Selection: An alternative approach. Economics Letters, 135: 141–143.

EPMC (2011), Project Portfolio Management: A View from the Management Trenches, 1^st edition, Wiley, NJ.

Feldenkirchen, W. & Eberhard P. (2005): The Siemens Entrepreneurs, Continuity and Change, 1847–2005, Ten Portraits, Munich.

Hamilton, A. (2004), Handbook of Project Management Procedures. TTL Publishing, Ltd.

Kerzner, H (2010), Project Management Best Practices: Achieving Global Excellence, 2nd edition. Wiley, NJ. Chapter 14, ‘Project Portfolio Management’

Keating, B; Quazi, A; Kriz, A; & Coltman, T. (2008), In pursuit of a sustainable supply chain: insights from Westpac Banking Corporation, Supply Chain Management: an International Journal, 13 (3): 175–79

Lahrmann, G. et al (2010), Inductive Design of Maturity Models: Applying the Rasch Algorithm for Design Science Research. Service-Oriented Perspectives in Design Science Research. Springer pp. 176–191.

Mettler, T. (2011), Maturity assessment models: a design science research approach. International Journal of Society Systems Science, 3 (1/2): 213–222.

Müller, R., Martinsuo, M., & Blomquist, T. (2008), Project portfolio control and portfolio management performance in different contexts. Project Management Journal, 39(3), 28–42.

McNeil, A.J., Frey, R., & Embrechts, P. (2015), Quantitative risk management: Concepts, techniques and tools. Princeton University Press.

O’Donovan, G. (2006), The Corporate Culture Handbook: How to Plan, Implement and Measure a Successful Culture Change Programme, The Liffey Press,

Project Management Institute. (2011). The bottom line on sustainability [White paper]. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.

Project Management Institute. (n.d.), Retrieved 3 June 2014 from http://www.pmi.org/ Project Management Institute. (n.d.). PMBOK Guide and Standards.

Project Management Institute. (2013), The standard for program management (3^rd ed.). Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute. Chapter 3, ‘Program Strategy Alignment’

Rajegopal, S.; McGuin P. & Waller J. (2007), Project Portfolio Management: Leading the Corporate Vision. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Sanwal, A, (2007), Optimizing Corporate Portfolio Management: Aligning Investment Proposals with Organizational Strategy. Wiley.

Schipper, R., et al (2012), Sustainability in project management. Surrey, England: GowerPublishing Limited.