Guide to Using the Organizational Project Management Capacity Assessment Tool
Version 1.3
Table of Contents
- 1. Introduction
- 2. Related Material
- 3. Organizational Capacity and Project Complexity and Risk
- 4. Key Stakeholders
- 5. The Structure of the Assessment
- 6. Ensuring Readiness to Conduct the Assessment
- 7. Completing the Assessment
- 8. Support and Contact Information
- Appendix: Glossary of Terms
1. Introduction
1.1 Context
In , Treasury Board ministers approved the Policy on the Management of Projects, supported by the Standard for Organizational Project Management Capacity and the Standard for Project Complexity and Risk. Together, the policy and the two standards establish the responsibilities of deputy heads to ensure that projects are managed in an integrated manner across the organization rather than on a project-by-project basis. The expected results of this policy and associated standards are that:
- Projects achieve value for money;
- Sound stewardship of project funds is demonstrated;
- Accountability for project outcomes is transparent; and
- Outcomes are achieved within time and cost constraints.
The policy establishes the expectation that deputy heads will ensure that there are appropriate processes and controls in place to effectively manage projects, deliver expected results and limit risk to stakeholders. The policy focuses on project governance, oversight and organizational capacity to manage projects. The Organizational Project Management Capacity Assessment (OPMCA) supports deputy heads in their responsibilities to establish and potentially improve relevant management practices through a comprehensive assessment and analysis of opportunities to invest in capacity to better position the organization to deliver on planned projects. The organizational self-assessment of project management capacity will bring to light areas of strengths, potential weaknesses and opportunities for investment. This information should support departments and agencies in their decisions to tailor project management practices and processes to business operations, and will help them be in a better position to keep up with best practices globally as they evolve.
The Policy on the Management of Projects shifts the basis for determining the project approval authority limits of organizations from a set dollar threshold to a more objective, evidence-based assessment of the organization's capacity to manage project complexity and risks. As such, the policy requires that the organization's capacity to manage projects is accurately assessed using the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (TBS) assessment tool as directed by the Standard for Organizational Project Management Capacity. The policy further requires that deputy heads ensure that the organization conducts an accurate assessment of each of its projects in accordance with the Standard for Project Complexity and Risk. Taken together, the results of these assessments will support the determination of the relevant expenditure authority and the appropriate level of Treasury Board oversight.
The Standard for Organizational Project Management Capacity establishes the direction to ensure compliance with the Treasury Board Policy on the Management of Projects. The Policy requires that deputy heads ensure that their organization is accurately assessed to determine the level of project management capacity for the purposes of project approval and related expenditure authority. The organization as an enterprise is to be assessed using the TBS OPMCA Tool that accompanies this Guide.
1.2 Purpose and Structure of This Guide
The intent of this document is to provide guidance for completing the OPMCA in accordance with the Standard for Organizational Project Management Capacity. This guide provides additional explanation and interpretation to assist practitioners complete and justify an assessment. Intended users of this guide include organizational personnel involved in the management, completion, review, approval and/or coordination of a departmental OPMCA. Secondary users include TBS personnel and other stakeholders involved in establishing and managing project management capacity issues and investment planning activities.
This guide follows the structure of the OPMCA Tool and provides support for each of the assessment categories. It uses the following format:
| Purpose of the Assessment Category | Summary of the purpose and scope of the assessment category in relation to the OPMCA. |
|---|---|
| Stakeholders | Identifies and describes the role of those primary stakeholders that are in a position to provide insight, input and evidence for a given knowledge area. |
| Rating Significance | Identifies some potential causes or consequences for ratings in a specific knowledge area. There are many factors that can influence an organization's overall capacity. For example, number and size or complexity of projects and the maturity and capacity of individual resources assigned to projects. Therefore, although the score of a given knowledge area may be considered a useful indicator of an organization's strengths or opportunities for investment in capacity, the knowledge area should be considered within the context of the overall rating for the organization. |
The Appendix contains a glossary of terms to clarify specific terminology used in the policy and the OPMCA Tool.
2. Related Material
Documents that are relevant to this guide include :
- Guide to Using the Project Complexity and Risk Assessment Tool;
- Organizational Project Management Capacity Assessment Tool;
- Policy on Investment Planning - Assets and Acquired Services;
- Policy on the Management of Projects;
- Project Complexity and Risk Assessment Tool;
- Project Management Body of Knowledge, third edition, Project Management Institute, 2004;
- Project Management Body of Knowledge, fourth edition, Project Management Institute, 2008;
- Standard for Organizational Project Management Capacity;
- Standard for Portfolio Management, Project Management Institute, 2008;
- Standard for Program Management, Project Management Institute, 2008; and
- Standard for Project Complexity and Risk.
3. Organizational Capacity and Project Complexity and Risk
Management expectations and requirements for Government of Canada projects are set out in the following policy instruments:
- Policy on the Management of Projects;
- Standard for Organizational Project Management Capacity; and
- Standard for Project Complexity and Risk.
Further expectations for sound management are included in the TBS Management Accountability Framework (MAF).
The Policy on the Management of Projects stipulates that a deputy head is responsible for conducting:
- An organization-wide capacity assessment in accordance with the Standard for Organizational Project Management Capacity; and
- An assessment of each planned or proposed project in accordance with the Standard for Project Complexity and Risk.
The two scores resulting from the above assessments are compared to determine the appropriate expenditure authority (i.e., sponsoring minister or Treasury Board) and to inform the determination of Treasury Board oversight. For all projects with a total estimated cost exceeding $1 million, the department is required by policy to seek Treasury Board approval of any project with an assessed risk and complexity level that exceeds the Treasury Board-approved Organizational Project Management Capacity Class of the organization, or if the project is otherwise identified by Treasury Board ministers for their further consideration (see Figure 1).
Figure 1 - Text version
Figure 1 is a graph that illustrates how the relationship between the organizational project management capacity class and the project risk and complexity level determines the project approval limits of an organization by using two projects undertaken by the same department. The y-axis depicts the organizational capacity class of 0 to 4. The x-axis depicts project complexity and risk levels of 1 to 4. The department has an organizational project management capacity class of 3 - Evolutionary. For this organization, any project that has a project risk and complexity level of 4 requires Treasury Board approval and expenditure authority to proceed with the project, or any phase of the project. Project A has a project complexity and risk level of 4 - Transformational and would therefore require TB approval. Project B shown in this graph is a project in the same organization that has a project risk and complexity level of 2. This project would likely not require Treasury Board approval and expenditure authority.
Figure 1 illustrates how the relationship between the Organizational Project Management Capacity Class and Project Complexity and Risk Level determines the project approval limits of an organization. For example, for a Treasury Board-approved Organizational Project Management Capacity Class of 3 - Evolutionary, any project that falls within the non-shaded area, e.g., Project A (Project Complexity and Risk Level 4 - Transformational), exceeds the Treasury Board-approved Organizational Project Management Capacity Class and requires Treasury Board approval and expenditure authority in order to proceed. Projects that fall within the shaded area, e.g., Project B (Level 2 - Tactical), have an assessed level of complexity and risk within the Treasury Board-approved Organization Project Management Capacity Class and will likely be within the organization's approval limit and be subject to minimal direct Treasury Board oversight.
The organization's project management capacity should be commensurate with the level of risk and complexity of its planned portfolio of projects.
A higher capacity class is not necessarily a better capacity class. If the organization's capacity to manage consistently exceeds the needed capacity given its planned portfolio of projects identified in the organization's investment plan, the organization may be over-controlled. A department or agency should work to maintain appropriate systems, processes and controls for managing its planned projects that support and contribute to achieving value for money and sound stewardship in government project delivery. A high level of project management capacity and the associated costs may not be a suitable investment for an organization that undertakes few large and complex projects and could lead to inefficiencies.
During or following the completion of an assessment, a department or agency may wish to consider changes to existing organizational project management frameworks and practices. Any proposed changes should be measured in terms of the expected costs of implementing, managing and monitoring new associated activities. A department or agency should ultimately work to ensure that its capacity to manage planned projects is commensurate with its portfolio of planned projects over the upcoming minimum five-year period, as identified in its investment plan.
An OPMCA is an evidence-based demonstration of the capacity that a department or agency has to manage its planned portfolio of projects.
An OPMCA is a forward-looking assessment of an organization's capacity to manage and deliver the planned portfolio of projects identified in its departmental investment plan over a minimum five-year horizon. Note that evidence is to demonstrate the organization's capacity to manage and deliver the planned portfolio of projects.
An OPMCA can accommodate organizations that have various approaches to managing their projects.
Some organizations may have different project management frameworks within their various sectors or branches. Other departments and agencies may have specific frameworks that vary based on project type or other project characteristics. Management practices can and should be scaled to reflect the individual project; however, there are common aspects and management principles that should be in place and respected.
4. Key Stakeholders
The following stakeholders are directly accountable or responsible for conducting the OPMCA. Section 7 of this guide, "Completing the Assessment," includes suggested responsibility centres or other information sources that would likely be well positioned to support responses to assessment questions in a given knowledge area.
| Stakeholder | Role |
|---|---|
Section 4 Table Notes
|
|
| Treasury Board | The Treasury Board is a committee of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and assumes its legal responsibilities under the Financial Administration Actsection 4 table note * and other statutes. (Accountable Government: A Guide for Ministers and Secretaries of Statesection 4 table note †) As the general manager of the public service, the Treasury Board has three main roles:
|
| Minister | Ministers are individually responsible to Parliament and the Prime Minister for their own actions and those of their department, including the actions of all officials under their management and direction, whether or not the Ministers had prior knowledge. (Accountable Government: A Guide for Ministers and Secretaries of State) |
| Treasury Board Secretariat | The Treasury Board Secretariat submits recommendations and provides advice to the Treasury Board on all matters relating to general administrative policy and organization in the public service of Canada, financial and asset management policies and procedures, review of annual and long-term expenditure plans and programs, and determination of related priorities. (Accountable Government: A Guide for Ministers and Secretaries of State) |
| Deputy Head | Deputy heads are responsible for effectively managing projects according to legislation, regulations and Treasury Board policy instruments. Responsible for ensuring that projects are accurately assessed to determine the level of project complexity and risk for the purposes of project approval authoritysection 4 table note §. |
| Organization | Responsible for conducting an accurate assessment of each planned or proposed project in accordance with the Standard for Project Complexity and Risk and informing TBS of any new projects and or significant changes to projects which are underway. |
5. The Structure of the Assessment
5.1 Knowledge Areas
The OPMCA is designed to assess the project management capacity of an organization and is organized according to the project management knowledge areas of the Project Management Body of KnowledgeFootnote 1 and the Project Management Institute's The Standard on Program ManagementFootnote 2 and The Standard for Portfolio ManagementFootnote 3. This assessment also considers two additional categories of capacity: organizational support structures and project management standards. For the purposes of this guide, all assessment categories will be referred to as knowledge areas.
Table 1 illustrates how the knowledge areas are further organized into major capabilities:
- Organizational integration;
- Core project management; and
- Supporting project management.
As Table 1 illustrates, the organizational integration and supporting project management capabilities can be viewed as supporting the knowledge areas required to leverage the full benefit of each of the core project management capabilities. Note that organizational integration and supporting project management functions are typically provided by the organization; core project management functions are typically the responsibility of the projects, within an organizational project management framework.
| Organizational Integration | Investment Portfolio Management | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Investment Program Management | |||||
| Organizational Support Structures | |||||
| Project Management Standards | |||||
| Code Project Management | Project Integration Management | Project Scope Management | Project Time Management | Project Cost Management | Project Risk Management |
| Supporting Project Management | Project Quality Management | ||||
| Project Procurement Management | |||||
| Project Human Resources Management | |||||
| Project Communications Management | |||||
Organizational integration capabilities are important for ensuring that the right projects are initiated. Core project management capabilities, supported by project management areas, are key to ensuring that the right project is executed in the right way.
The significance of each of the knowledge areas and their organization into the three major capabilities will be discussed or explained further in section 7, "Completing the Assessment."
To differentiate from the Government of Canada's definition of program and portfolio management, the OPMCA will use the terms "investment program management" and "investment portfolio management."
An investment program is defined as a group of related projects managed in a coordinated way to obtain benefits and control not available from managing them individually. Investment programs may include elements of related work that is outside the scope of the discrete projects in the programFootnote 4.
An investment portfolio is defined as a collection of projects or programs and other work grouped together to facilitate effective management of that work to meet strategic business objectivesFootnote 5. The projects or programs in the investment portfolio may not necessarily be interdependent or directly relatedFootnote 6.
| Knowledge Areas | Definition |
|---|---|
| Organizational Integration | |
| 1. Investment portfolio management | This refers to the selection and support of projects or investment program investments. These investments in projects and investment programs are guided by the organization's strategic plan and available resources. |
| 2. Investment program management | This refers to the centralized, coordinated management of an investment program, designed to achieve the program's strategic objectives and benefits. |
| 3. Organizational support structures | These are the organizational structures and mechanisms that support project, investment program, and investment portfolio management. |
| 4. Project management standards | This refers to evidence of compliance with a standard methodology that reflects best practices for project management, investment program management, and investment portfolio management. |
| Core Project Management | |
| 5. Project integration management | This includes the processes and activities needed to identify, define, combine, unify, and coordinate the various processes and project management activities within the project management process groups. Within the project management context, integration includes characteristics of unification, consolidation, articulation and integrative actions that are crucial to project completion and to successfully meeting customer and stakeholder requirements and expected outcomes. |
| 6. Project scope management | This primarily consists of defining and controlling what is and what is not included in the scope of the project. It includes processes needed to ensure that the project includes all the work required, and only the work required, to complete the project successfully, based on the original or formally updated requirements. |
| 7. Project time management | This includes the processes required to accomplish timely completion of the project. |
| 8. Project cost management | This includes the processes involved in planning, estimating, budgeting, and controlling costs so that the project can be completed within the approved budget. |
| 9. Project risk management | This includes the processes concerned with conducting risk management planning, identification, analysis, responses, and monitoring and control on a project. It also includes the completion of project complexity and risk assessments as required by the Policy on the Management of Projects. |
| Supporting Project Management | |
| 10. Project quality management | This includes the processes and activities of the performing organization that determine quality-related policies, objectives, and responsibilities to ensure that the project will satisfy the business needs for which it was undertaken. A quality management system implements policy and procedures, through continuous process improvement activities, as appropriate. |
| 11. Project procurement management | This includes the processes required to purchase or acquire the products, services, or results needed from outside the project team to deliver project outputs and outcomes. Project procurement management also includes the contract management and change control processes required to administer contracts or purchase orders issued by authorized project team members. It also includes administering any contract(s) issued by an outside organization (the buyer) that is acquiring the management services for the project from the performing organization (the seller) and administering contractual obligations placed on the project team by the contract. |
| 12. Project human resources management | This includes the organization and management of the project team. The project team is comprised of the people who have assigned roles and responsibilities for completing the project. |
| 13. Project communications management | This includes the processes required to ensure timely and appropriate generation, collection, distribution, storage, retrieval, and ultimate disposal of project information. |
5.2 Organizational Project Management Capacity Classifications
To reflect the relative importance of one knowledge area versus another, relative weightings have been defined for each assessment category. Therefore, the raw score resulting from each assessed knowledge area will be adjusted according to the relative weight for each assessment category. Table 3 outlines the weighted values.
| Knowledge Area | No. of Questions | Weighting | Maximum Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| Investment Portfolio Management and Investment Program Management | 10 | 5% | 50 |
| Organizational Support Structures | 9 | 5% | 45 |
| Project Management Standards | 20 | 10% | 100 |
| Project Integration Management | 21 | 16% | 105 |
| Project Scope Management | 4 | 10% | 20 |
| Project Time Management | 5 | 12% | 25 |
| Project Cost Management | 7 | 12% | 35 |
| Project Risk Management | 4 | 10% | 20 |
| Project Quality Management | 2 | 5% | 10 |
| Project Procurement Management | 4 | 5% | 10 |
| Project Human Resource Management | 4 | 5% | 20 |
| Project Communications | 2 | 5% | 10 |
| Total | 92 | 100% | 460 |
The assessment tool tabulates a score out of 460 points. Expressed as a percentage, this score corresponds to the capacity class ratings shown in Table 4.
| Capacity Class | Definition | Rating (Out of 100) |
|---|---|---|
| 0 - Limited | Spending authority is limited to $1,000,000. At this class, organizations tend not to have consistent project management discipline but instead rely on the skills of individual project managers for success. |
< 25 / 100 |
| 1 - Sustaining | The organization has the capacity to successfully deliver projects to maintain its operational capacity. At this class, organizations tend to apply basic project management capabilities to projects, project planning tends to be more efficient and reporting often begins to be centralized. |
25 – 49 / 100 |
| 2 - Tactical | The organization has the capacity to successfully deliver projects to adjust its operations to meet planned objectives. At this class, project management processes tend to become standardized; project information is often collected centrally and projects tend to be approved and overseen by a designated governance body. |
50 – 69 / 100 |
| 3 - Evolutionary | The organization has the capacity to successfully deliver projects to achieve evolving strategic objectives. At this class, organizations will have integrated multi-project planning and control, where projects are managed as investment programs where appropriate, to improve project selection, resource allocation and project timing. Project-related processes are to be integrated with corporate processes and structures, project performance analysis is advanced enough to provide input to process improvement and project planning, and standard governance structures are in place for project approval and oversight. |
70 – 90 / 100 |
| 4 - Transformational | The organization has the capacity to successfully deliver projects to change the way the organization does business. At this class, projects are selected and overseen based on contribution to the strategic plan. Project approval, timing and resource allocation decisions are continually re-assessed to ensure optimal use of resources. Project management practices are continuously improved based on measurement of key performance indicators of compliance and project success. Project and portfolio management information systems are used to share information between project teams and between projects and management. The organization is “projectized” structurally and culturally to optimize the success of strategic projects. |
> 90 / 100 |
6. Ensuring Readiness to Conduct the Assessment
6.1 Completing the OPMCA: Considerations and Best Practices
Regularly Review and Revise Once Every Three Years
The Policy on the Management of Projects stipulates that a deputy head is responsible for ensuring that an organization-wide capacity assessment is conducted and updated in accordance with the Standard for Organizational Project Management Capacity. As stated in the Policy on the Management of Projects, project approval limits are to be regularly reviewed and revised at least once every three years, normally as part of the consideration of the organization's investment plan as set out in the Policy on Investment Planning - Assets and Acquired Services. Therefore, at a minimum, an organization will need to submit the results of the assessment to Treasury Board every three years together with its investment plan.
Organizations should recognize that the assessment is a dynamic exercise that will likely require regular updating as an organization's project management capacity, operational environment, and supporting and enabling activities change. An organization is also required to conduct an assessment when there has been a significant change in the organization such that the capacity to manage projects may be affected.
Organizations are encouraged to consider opportunities to integrate a regular review of the OPMCA with established business planning processes to ensure the accuracy of the OPMCA and leverage assessment information as a management and planning tool within the organization.
Organization-Wide Internal Consultation
Departments and agencies are encouraged to consider a number of good practices when completing and updating an OPMCA. In particular, an assessment should ideally involve participants from across the organization, including all functional and program areas such as corporate services, finance, project management, human resources, program areas, and information and technology management. Accordingly, a more informed, accurate and balanced assessment of the organization's project management capacity is expected to result from this comprehensive viewpoint.
Early Consultation With TBS
It is important to note that, initially, responses to assessment questions may be less than definitive because of incomplete or unsubstantiated information. Organizations are encouraged to first complete an OPMCA based on available information at a given point in time and begin a dialogue within the organization and with TBS. As information that supports different assessment criteria is identified and becomes available or changes, the OPMCA can be updated to reflect the most current and accurate indication of the organization's project management capacity. This practice reflects the policy requirement that the deputy head ensure that the organization maintains an accurate OPMCA in accordance with the Standard for Organizational Project Management Capacity and Risk. Note that TBS is expected to be notified if the capacity of an organization changes in any significant manner.
Assessing the Capacity of Other Government Departments and External Providers
It may be the case that an organization supports its capacity based on functional assistance provided by other government departments. For example, Public Works and Government Services Canada is mandated to support real property functions and procurement functions.
Departments and agencies are directed to assess the other government departments' capacity in collaboration or consultation with the service provider. Similarly, when external providers are used to provide capacity, it must be assessed based on evidence and in collaboration or consultation with the external provider.
Creating an Organization-Specific Guide and Glossary
To ensure consistency and common understanding, organizations may also wish to consider developing an organizational glossary that defines any terms in the OPMCA that may have a particular context or meaning within the organization.
6.2 Guidance on Methodology
The completion of an OPMCA is expected to conform to the established methodology for clearly documenting and making available supporting evidence for each individual assessment criterion. This approach seeks to ensure consistent and comparable results across organizations and to facilitate updates and audits of the assessment. In addition, all evidence is to be readily available; the TBS review of the OPMCA may include requests for some or all of the documented supporting evidence. Finally, a good practice is to establish business processes dedicated to the completion, review and approval of the OPMCA. These processes are expected to provide the necessary rigour and discipline needed to ensure that the OPMCA is completed in a timely and accurate manner and is supported by documented evidence and updated appropriately.
What follows is guidance on the expected key steps that should be applied by an organization when completing an OPMCA.
Step 1: Resource Allocation Exercise
An organization must first complete a resource allocation exercise across the entire department or agency, in accordance with the Treasury Board Policy on Investment Planning - Assets and Acquired Services. The resource allocation exercise is, ideally, to be supported by relevant information, including identified requirements, risk and complexity, performance, project reviews, expected outcomes (value), strategic alignment, and resource availability. See the TBS Guide to Investment Planning – Assets and Acquired Services for more information on this exercise.
Resource allocation decisions should be based on planning decisions. An organization is to clearly describe its approach and arrive at an understanding of how it makes resource allocation and reallocation decisions. An organization's capacity to manage its planned investments is a key consideration, and the OPMCA provides this understanding. Along with a documented account of resource allocation and reallocation governance structures, the end result of the resource allocation exercise is an organization's list of all planned investments over the upcoming five-year period. These planned investments, including all planned projects as well as those underway, are to be reflected in the organization's investment plan, which confirms its affordability.
Step 2: Portfolio of Planned Projects
The list of planned investments is an organization's initial starting point for compiling its portfolio of planned projects. Once an organization has identified all planned investments over a minimum five-year period, it should work in collaboration with TBS to ensure that all distinct planned projects have been appropriately identified.
An organization should describe its approach for identifying activities as planned, and for distinct projects, including any dollar-based thresholds or any other key determining factors that may be considered during this process. An organization is expected to include its supporting rationale for its decisions in its investment plan. An organization's approach must comply with Treasury Board policies. The portfolio of planned projects, along with additional project information, should also be reflected in the investment plan.
It may be the case that, following the identification of all planned investments, an organization will have remaining project-like activities or other investments that will not be individually highlighted in the investment plan. Within the investment plan, the organization is expected to clearly state the magnitude and volume of these clusters of activities to determine their overall significance and the potential resource implications and impacts on the organization's capacity to manage its entire portfolio of projects. This is a key consideration in completing the OPMCA.
Step 3: Departmental Project Management Framework and Scalability
An organization will need a clear and factual working knowledge of its departmental project management framework or set of practices. Many assessment criteria require that an organization determine whether these practices are documented and that there is evidence of the extent to which these practices are applied across the organization. Note that evidence should demonstrate the organization's capacity to manage and deliver the planned portfolio of projects. However, in Questions 9 and 10, historical evidence based on projects within the last five years needs to be provided. These two questions are the only historical evidence-based assessment criteria. The OMPCA does not set or define expectations; it is up to the department or agency to implement suitable project management practices.
For a department or agency that has more than one project management framework or set of practices within an organization, the scoring of the assessment criteria is to be based on the number of projects in each of the respective portfolio of projects that are to be subject to each framework or practice over the planning horizon. In considering a response to an assessment criterion that reflects a percentage of projects, an organization is to first confirm that the criteria defined is in place, determine the extent to which the defined criteria is applicable, and compute the percentage of the planned portfolio of projects for which there is evidence.
Step 4: Planned Approach and Methodology
Once all necessary information has been gathered and reviewed, a department or agency should begin to establish a standard approach and methodology in consultation with TBS for the completion of its OPMCA.
For instance, information and data could be collected and analyzed at the level at which a project management office is established. Such a structured approach should facilitate data collection and allow the organization to more readily identify project management strengths and opportunities to invest in capacity across the organization.
It is important to recognize that concrete methodology is crucial for large and sometimes disparate organizations. For a larger organization, the most effective approach can be to aggregate OPMCAs for each of the branches within that organization in order to establish one capacity class. This can be undertaken effectively once the planned portfolios of projects have been fully established for each branch. Through this approach, each branch would complete the assessment based on the evidence supporting each of the assessment criteria, resulting in individual OPMCAs. These assessments can then be aggregated, based on the number of planned projects to be managed by each branch, to represent the capacity of the enterprise as a whole.
Example 1: An organization with two distinct branches (Branch A and Branch B)
Having completed an investment planning cycle and allocated all resources within reference levels to investments, including projects, 100 projects have been identified over the five-year planning horizon. Of the 100 projects, 60 will be managed in Branch A, and 40 will be managed in Branch B.
The department elects to have each branch complete its own OPMCA.
Question 44
To what extent is a project charter approved prior to undertaking detailed project planning?
- 0 = <10 per cent of projects
- 1 = 10-24 per cent of projects
- 2 = 25-49 per cent of projects
- 3 = 50-64 per cent of projects
- 4 = 65-90 per cent of projects
- 5 = >90 per cent of projects
In Branch A, project charters approved by the sponsor are required for all projects over $5 million. This requirement is supported by a deputy head-approved policy for Branch A. Over the planning horizon, Branch A has 30 projects estimated at over $5 million, or 50 per cent (30/60) of its projects.
Branch A
Answer: (3) 50 per cent
In Branch B, there is no documented requirement for project charters at any stage of the project life cycle, approved or otherwise.
Branch B
Answer: (0) 0 per cent
At the enterprise level when aggregating the two branches, based on the number of projects, not estimated costs, the following statement can be supported by evidence:
There is evidence that for 30 out of 100 projects, a project charter will be in place and approved prior to undertaking detailed project planning (30/100).
Department
Answer: (2) 30 per cent
Example 2: A department with three distinct branches (Branch A, Branch B and Branch C)
Question 1
Do senior executive Performance Management Accords (PMAs) include project performance metrics?
- 0 = No
- 2 = Some PMAs
- 5 = All PMAs
Two of the three branches include project performance metrics in senior executive PMAs. The third branch does not include these metrics in any PMAs.
Branch A
Answer: (5) All PMAs
Branch B
Answer: (5) All PMAs
Branch C
Answer: (0) No
Department
Answer: (2) Some PMAs
In this case, a percentage cannot be taken because Branch C does not include project performance metrics in all PMAs. The department can claim to include these metrics in only some PMAs (and must be scored as 2).
If separate assessments are to be conducted across the organization, TBS should be consulted early in the process to ensure that the planned approach and methodology are consistent in order to effectively aggregate the results. For all organizations, the planned approach and methodology should be reviewed and discussed with TBS prior to starting the assessment. The final approach and methodology should be clearly documented in the opening section of the OPMCA.
Step 5: Supporting Evidence
When completing an assessment, a department or agency is to consider:
- Evidence of a management practice, framework or the equivalent, i.e., the department is to identify its management practice, framework or equivalent that has been approved by the appropriate authority;
- The application of its management practice, framework or equivalent in order to accurately identify the percentage of planned projects to which it is applied; and
- Evidence that the management practice, framework or equivalent will actually be applied and followed. The department or agency is to clearly articulate how it can be certain that its management practice, framework or equivalent will be applied.
Each of the 92 assessment criteria is to be supported by documented evidence. If there is no documented evidence available, then the lowest score of 0 is appropriate. A lack of evidence and a score of 0 can and may be quite suitable for certain assessment criteria. It is important for a department or agency to support only management practices, frameworks or the equivalent within its organization that are appropriate given its planned investment portfolio and for which there is a business case. Striving for an elevated Organizational Project Management Capacity Class does not represent an acceptable rationale for supporting unwarranted management practices, frameworks or the equivalent.
It can be resource-intensive for a department or agency to acquire and maintain documented evidence in support of all projects that meet a defined assessment criterion over a minimum five-year horizon. For this reason, higher classes of capacity are viewed as a challenge to obtain and maintain and should be sought only if there is a strong justification for elevated management capacity.
The type of supporting evidence can and may vary by department or agency. However, all evidence is to be compelling and applicable, and be able to withstand the scrutiny of an audit.
7. Completing the Assessment
7.1 General Directions
- Every question is to be answered; and
- If the answer to a question is unknown then answer the lowest score (0) for that question.
Documented evidence is to be referenced for each question.
For example: Question 43 - To what extent is a project charter approved prior to undertaking detailed project management planning?
A documented requirement for project charters at, or before the beginning of detailed project management planning, or for signed project charters for the relevant projects, would likely substantiate the answer to this question.
There are several pairs of questions in this assessment that ask about the presence of standards or frameworks, followed by a question seeking to establish the use and compliance with the referenced standards or frameworks. The following is an example of how these question sets should be answered:
Questions 21 - Does the organization have a project management framework with established standards for approvals, phases, gates, off-ramps, and associated deliverables and reviews?
Question 22 - To what extent do projects fully apply the project management framework?
If a project management framework (PMF) is not in place, the answer to Question 21 is "0 = No." If the organization has a defined PMF, or a number of PMFs in certain sectors but not others, the answer is "2 = In some sectors but not organization-wide."
Question 22 is obviously linked to the answer provided for Question 21. If the answer to Question 21 is "0" then the answer to Question 22 would also be "0". If the answer is "2" for Question 21, the answer for Question 22 could range from 0 to 5, as applicable. In responding to Question 22, the total number of projects would need to be determined as well as the number of those projects that would "fully apply" the PMF.
- Several questions have wording that indicates they are based on the extent that a standard or framework is applied. For example, Question 22 refers to the percentage of projects across the organization that fully apply the PMF, as opposed to the projects planned in an individual sector that applies a PMF. For example, if there are three sectors within an organization, only one of which applies a PMF, then the answer to Question 21 would be "2" if that sector is responsible for managing 33 per cent of the department's projects (and there is evidence that all of the projects fully apply the PMF within the sector). If there is evidence that only 70 per cent of sector projects apply the PMF, the result would be "1" (33 per cent × 70 per cent).
IM/IT Real Property Materiel Example 1 Example 2 No Yes No All real property projects have and use a documented PMF (Q.22: "2").
Q. 22 "2"
Real property projects have and use a documented PMF (Q.22: "2").
There is evidence that only 70% of real property projects use or comply with the PMF.
33% 33% 33% 33% ( Q.23: "2") 33% × 70% is 23.1% (Q.23 "1")
7.2 Organizational Integration
Organizational integration is a measure of an organization's capacity to delivery against a strategic plan, to support a project management and delivery environment and to consistently and predictably demonstrate compliance with best practices and established standards.
7.2.1 Investment Portfolio Management and Investment Program Management (10 Questions)
Section 7.2.1 Table Notes
|
|
| Purpose of the Assessment Category | Project management exists in a broader context that includes investment program management, investment portfolio management and the project management office. Frequently there is a hierarchy of a strategic plan, portfolios and programs of projects in which the investment programs, consisting of several associated projects, will contribute to achieving a strategic plansection 7.2.1 table note *. This knowledge area is of particular importance to organizations that have complex investment portfolios and competing priorities. The questions in this category are designed to establish the degree to which an organization focuses on ensuring that investment projects are approved, resourced and sustained. |
|---|---|
| Stakeholders | Senior management (i.e., directors general or equivalent) could provide an overview of an organization's approach to operationalizing its strategic plan. Program directors or the equivalent could provide insight into how individual components of the strategic plan are operationalized and what the roles of programs and projects are. Project management offices and program directors or the equivalent could provide insight from the perspective of being responsible for the projects whose output are expected to align with strategic objectives. References include the departmental investment plan, Program Alignment Architecture, departmental strategic plan, Report on Plans and Priorities, investment governance records of decisions, business cases, and investment portfolio progress reports. |
| Rating Significance | A low score in this area is a likely indicator that an organization may be challenged with respect to:
|
7.2.2 Organizational Support Structures (9 Questions)
| Purpose of the Assessment Category | This category indicates of the degree to which an organization as a whole supports project management through alignment of corporate systems with project lifecycles, provision of standard project management tools, project management training and career progression. Providing integrated support to project management throughout the organization lowers the risk of poor project delivery. This area increases in importance as an organization's projects increase in complexity, cost, scope, potential risk, number and breadth of stakeholders or operational impact. |
|---|---|
| Stakeholders | Senior project executives, project management offices, and project managers could provide insight into the importance and support for key areas including:
References include the organization's project lifecycle methodology, framework or model, governance model (referenced in project management plans), corporate system reports of project information, human resources plans related to project management, and training curricula. |
| Rating Significance | A low score in this area indicates that the organization may not put adequate emphasis on overall support for project management. An organization that frequently undertakes complex, higher risk projects that have considerable horizontal scope may have greater challenges with project control, communications and delivery. |
7.2.3 Project Management Standards (20 Questions)
| Purpose of the Assessment Category | This area focuses on an organization's implementation of and consistent adherence to, standards and best practices and the pursuit of project management excellence. Consistently deployed, stable and operational project management standards may be considered a key contributor to achieving a better rating in the core project management knowledge area. As in the case of organizational support structures, this area increases in importance as an organization takes on larger, more complex and higher risk projects. |
|---|---|
| Stakeholders | Project management offices and project managers would be the best positioned to demonstrate and provide evidence that standards are in place and the degree to which standards are adhered to. Reference materials could include standards such as project management lifecycle methodology, the framework or model employed, and the organizational governance model, often referenced in project management plans or charters. |
| Rating Significance | A low score is typically an indicator that the organization may not be well-positioned to deliver larger, more complex projects. Similarly, a low score could also indicate an organization's inability to deliver smaller, less complex projects that have multiple dependencies. A low score can mean that the organization is not predictable or consistent in its ability to meet established quality expectations. Moreover, project costs may be greater for a low-scoring organization due to the need to develop and implement rather than reuse existing project management infrastructure or collateral. A high score in this area typically indicates that an organization is relatively well positioned to score high in the core project management knowledge area. |
7.3 Core Project Management
Core project management is a measure of an organization's ability to operationalize the five core project management knowledge areas of:
- Integration management;
- Scope management;
- Time management;
- Cost management; and
- Risk management.
A low overall score in this area strongly indicates that the organization is not well-positioned for project delivery. In particular, there is considerable overlap between key factors such as scope, time and cost management; these factors are not mutually exclusive. Therefore, scores between these assessment criteria are often highly correlated, meaning that a low score in one area can influence the score of another. As a result, when a project is being reviewed the question typically asked is, "Is there evidence that the project scope can be delivered on time and on budget?"
Integration is required to manage the interactions between all relevant factors, such as cost, scope, schedule, quality, risk, procurement, human resources and communications. Risk management is a systematic approach to setting the best course of action under uncertainty by identifying, assessing, understanding, acting on and communicating risk issuesFootnote 7.
7.3.1 Project Integration Management (21 Questions)
| Purpose of the Assessment Category | The management of project integration refers to the key management practices that set the framework for managing projects within the organizational environment from conception to close-out. These practices enable effective governance and accountability for projects and seek to ensure defined and measureable project objectives that can be communicated, monitored and used to inform corrective action. Integration management increases in importance as project complexity increases. Project integration management is the ability to:
Project integration maturity speaks to the ability of project sponsors and managers to analyze project information and make the best decisions to keep projects on track or to deal effectively with changes. Consider, for example, a project making multiple changes to the project baseline, as requirements are being refined and costed. This scenario requires a high level of integration between scope management, work planning, costing, risk management, and stakeholder management. |
|---|---|
| Stakeholders | A project management office or a project manager would be best positioned to provide insight to existing processes and structures that enable project integration such as governance structures and terms of reference (especially related to decision making), documented and approved team roles and responsibilities, project management plans, project management information systems, change control, mechanisms for monitoring and controlling project work and progress reporting. Reference materials could include: existing project charters and project management plans, project progress or status reports, change requests, and governance meeting records of decision. |
| Rating Significance | A low score in this area indicates limited interaction between project management processes, which together enable strong planning, monitoring, decision making and corrective action. |
7.3.2 Project Scope Management (4 Questions)
| Purpose of the Assessment Category | Scope management ensures that a project includes all the work and only the work required to meet the baselined requirements and expectations of the project client or sponsor. A well-defined work breakdown structure is a key input to time (schedule) and cost management. Strong scope change control and management is critical to project success. Projects often fail due to scope that is ill-defined or constantly changing due to inadequate impact assessment and business-level decisions. |
|---|---|
| Stakeholders | A project management office or a project manager could identify the relevant processes and deliverables that support scope management. Reference materials could include a sampling of scope definition statements (in a project charter) and work breakdown structures or the equivalent (in the project management plan or captured in a project management information system). Review scope change requests, impact assessments and associated records of decision are also valuable scope reference documents. |
| Rating Significance | A low score in this category may suggest weaknesses in the organization's ability or discipline to either assign adequate resources to a project over its entire life cycle or to limit scope "creep." Typically, the result is that projects do not meet the user's (client's) expectations, are not delivered in a timely manner within budget, or a combination of these elements. This may be due to inadequate cost and time estimation related to desired scope, inadequate scope definition, or inadequate scope control and business-level decision making regarding scope. |
7.3.3 Project Time Management (5 Questions)
| Purpose of the Assessment Category | Time (schedule) management covers the processes required to ensure timely delivery of the baselined scope at the baselined cost. In particular, this includes establishing a project schedule with individual tasks identified that lead to the completion of larger tasks and milestones. A key element of project time management is to assign adequate resources for completing individual tasks and the regular monitoring of task completion to ensure that the project is on schedule. The timely identification of delays in project progress according to defined project objectives and taking appropriate corrective action is a critical aspect of project time management. A well-defined and designed project schedule is considered by many projects to be the "contract" against which every team member executes project delivery. As such, it is often seen as the basis for status reporting at all levels of management. |
|---|---|
| Stakeholders | A project management office or a project manager would be best positioned to identify and provide evidence of processes, deliverables and tools that support of time management. Reference materials could include a list of key milestones, project schedules and Gantt charts, records of decision related to schedule baselining a schedule control process, project progress reports and, if available, an earned value analysis. |
| Rating Significance | A low score in this area indicates that the organization's projects may have inadequate project time estimation methodologies and scheduling capabilities, or inadequate monitoring and control mechanisms and analysis and decision-making capabilities regarding ongoing time management. Inadequate project time management capacity may result in:
|
7.3.4 Project Cost Management (7 Questions)
Section 7.3.4 Table Notes
|
|
| Purpose of the Assessment Category | This category relates to the organization's management practices and methodologies for cost estimation, budgeting and control that seek to ensure that the project objectives are delivered within the approved budget. During project execution and control a project team needs to identify how changes in the project schedule and scope affect the cost of developing, using, maintaining and supporting the product or service (i.e. solution) being delivered. |
|---|---|
| Stakeholders | A project management office or a project manager would be best positioned to identify the project cost control processes and tools that support cost management. Reference materials could include samples of project funding breakdowns (ideally costed work breakdown structure work packages), cost management spreadsheets or the equivalent, cost estimation guidance documents, cost estimates and cost baselines, progress reports and, if available, earned value analysis. |
| Rating Significance | A low score in cost management indicates an organization's lack of capability or discipline to establish estimates and control project costs. Accordingly, projects are often delivered, but at a cost exceeding the original estimate, or are forced to either reduce scope or obtain additional funds to enable completion. This may in fact result in late delivery or curtailed scope or reduced support of business objectives (i.e., project outcomes). Mature and established processes that support cost planning (estimation) and ongoing monitoring and control is essential for evolutionary and transformative initiatives and for projects that consume a significant portion of an organization's available investment resources and capitalsection 7.3.4 table note *. |
7.3.5 Project Risk Management (4 Questions)
| Purpose of the Assessment Category | Risk management helps quantify risks so that informed business decisions can be made on how to respond to issues. Managing project risk involves developing a risk plan that is integrated with the organization's horizontal or corporate risk approach and reporting processes. Through this integrated risk management approach, potential project risks should be identified and analyzed, and initiatives should be undertaken to reduce the likelihood and impact of risks. For those residual risks that remain, risk mitigation plans should be developed accordingly. Ongoing project risk monitoring and control should produce regular reports to management to inform it of possible risk threats. |
|---|---|
| Stakeholders | A project management office and a project manager or a corporate risk manager would be best positioned to identify an organization's risk management strategy, risk management processes, and tools used by existing projects. Reference materials could include a departmental risk management plan, a corporate risk profile, project risk management plans and progress reports to project governance. |
| Rating Significance | A low score in this knowledge area may indicate that the organization does not recognize the importance of risk management or how to operationalize it. This means the organization will likely experience difficulty in:
The level of effort devoted to managing risk should be commensurate with the level of complexity and risk of a project. An organization is expected to demonstrate that it is capable of managing the level of risk it is likely to encounter on an individual project. |
7.4 Supporting Project Management
These knowledge areas support core project management processes and directly affect an organization's ability to fully leverage the effectiveness of its core project management capacity.
7.4.1 Project Quality Management (2 Questions)
| Purpose of the Assessment Category | Project quality management plays a key role in ensuring that the project will satisfy the needs for which it was undertaken and address both the management of the project and its defined outcomes. An organization needs to demonstrate that quality standards and a means for measuring adherence to the standards are in place. For example, does the organization have the subject matter expertise in place to assess the quality of a given information technology deliverable? |
|---|---|
| Stakeholders | A project management office or a project manager could identify the quality management standards or guidelines used within the organization or that are specific to a project. Consider the role of the client or end user in all phases of the project, particularly during the requirements and testing phases. References include a quality management plan (typically referenced in a project management plan), key performance metrics for the project, and the project's deliverables, testing and quality assurance strategies. Reference to performance metrics should also include complementary corporate documents such as the Report on Plans and Priorities, Departmental Performance Report, and the Program Alignment Architecture. Quality standards and measures should ideally apply to the project deliverables (e.g., project management plan, schedule and progress reports) and the project end deliverables (e.g., new information technology system, renovated building, or organizational or program change). |
| Rating Significance | A low score in this area may indicate that the organization does not have adequate quality standards or mechanisms in place to ensure that projects can deliver products or services that meet defined requirements in a manner that is satisfactory to the user (client). |
7.4.2 Project Procurement Management (2 Questions)
| Purpose of the Assessment Category | Procurement management includes the processes and activities required to acquire products andservices needed to deliver the project's outcomes. When procuring services or goods, project staff will need a very good understanding of the project scope, requirements, risks and cost constraints in order to select the right contractor and tailor the contract to the needs of the project. |
|---|---|
| Stakeholders | Project managers and the organization's procurement sector or branch could provide insight into the procurement strategy and the processes in place for vendor management. Consider strategies used by the organization to mitigate risk in contractor selection and optimizing vendor fit with respect to their understanding of the organization's business needs, requirements and the organization's project management standards. Reference materials could include sample requests for proposal or requests for information, contracts, contract management plans, change requests and records of decision related to contract change. |
| Rating Significance | A low score may indicate that the organization may not have the skills or experience to:
Ultimately a low score may indicate risk to scope, cost and schedule. |
7.4.3 Project Human Resources Management (4 Questions)
| Purpose of the Assessment Category | This knowledge area pertains to the degree to which the right skill sets and quantity of resources are in place to deliver the project objectives within the approved project scope. |
|---|---|
| Stakeholders | A project management office, a project manager or a corporate human resources branch would be best positioned to provide insight to project team selection strategy and processes as well any organizational requirements for project staffing plans. References include project organization charts and project roles and responsibilities (should be referenced in the project management plan, charter, staffing plans and departmental human resources strategy). Project functional leads could be able to corroborate the roles and responsibilities pertinent to their functions. |
| Rating Significance | A low score in this area indicates that the organization may not be well positioned for building, monitoring and managing effective project teams for a given project over its entire life cycle. Thought should be given to the project's organization and structure:
Developing the right project team is always key to meeting time and cost estimates for project work packages. |
7.4.4 Project Communications Management (2 Questions)
Section 7.4.4 Table Notes
|
|
| Purpose of the Assessment Category | Communications includes the processes required to ensure timely and appropriate generation, collection, distribution, storage, retrieval and ultimate disposal of project informationsection 7.4.4 table note *. A mature project management team will very early on (as part of the project initiation phase) develop and implement a communications strategy for communicating project status and managing stakeholder expectations. Communicating the right information to the right stakeholders will directly affect a team's ability to manage stakeholder and organizational expectations, resolve issues, and render and implement decisions. |
|---|---|
| Stakeholders | Project management offices or a project manager would be best positioned to define the communications strategy, plan, tools and processes in support of disseminating key project information such as milestone status, risk and issue management and performance. Project staff and other project stakeholders could provide insight and evidence of their level of involvement in communicating and acting on project information. Reference materials include project communication plans (typically referenced in the project management plan), performance and status reports, change requests, risk reports, and records of decision from governance committees or change control boards. |
| Rating Significance | A low score in this area indicates that project management may not be effectively communicating project objectives, requirements, timelines or progress to project stakeholders and relevant governance bodies. This potential lack of communication will often delay a project proposal for endorsement or approval, prevent management from taking timely corrective action and potentially put the achievement of project objectives at risk. |
8. Support and Contact Information
Any inquiries regarding the TBS policy renewal initiative or the Treasury Board Policy on the Management of Projects should be directed to the organization's TBS program sector contact.
Appendix: Glossary of Terms
- Business case
- Typically, a presentation or a proposal to an authority by an organization seeking funding, approval, or both for an activity, initiative, or project, that identifies and explores options and then develops recommendations for the proposed investment.
- Change control
- The process of identifying, documenting, approving or rejecting, and controlling changes to the project baseline. ( Project Management Body of Knowledge, third edition)
- Enhanced Management Framework
-
The Enhanced Management Framework (EMF) for the Management of Information Technology Projects was approved by the Treasury Board in and departments were directed to apply this framework to all projects that have a significant information management or technology component.
The Enhanced Management Framework for information management and information technology (IM/IT) is an integrated management model that comprises principles, best practices, methodologies, tools and templates and is designed to improve the Government of Canada's capability to manage its IM/IT investments, successfully deliver IT-enabled project, and minimize risks.
- Executive management
- Refers to those individuals who lead the organization or individual branches or programs such as assistant deputy ministers or directors general.
- Gantt chart
- A graphic display of schedule-related information. Typically schedule activities or work breakdown structure components are listed on the left side of the chart, dates are shown across the top and activity durations are shown as date-placed horizontal bars.
- Governance structure
- Any organizational structure or formal governance process used to select which projects receive funding and approval to proceed.
- Investment program
- A group of related projects managed in a coordinated way to obtain benefits and control not available from managing them individually. Investment programs may include elements of related work outside the scope of the discrete projects in the program.
- Investment portfolio
- A collection of projects or programs and other work grouped together to facilitate effective management of that work to meet strategic business objectives. The projects or programs of the investment portfolio may not necessarily be interdependent or directly related.
- Knowledge area, project management
- An identified area of project management defined by its knowledge requirements and described in terms of its component processes, practices, inputs, outputs, tools and techniques. ( Project Management Body of Knowledge, third edition)
- Management, Resources and Results Structure
- The Treasury Board Management, Resources and Results Structure Policy supports the development of a common, government-wide approach to the collection, management, and reporting of financial and non-financial performance information.
- Methodology
- A system of practices, techniques, procedures and rules used by those who work in a discipline. ( Project Management Body of Knowledge, third edition)
- Organization
- The entire department or agency, as defined in section 2 of the Financial Administration Act including all branches, sectors, agencies and associated programs.
- Performance reports
- Documents and presentations that provide organized and summarized performance information and analyses of project progress and status.
- Project baseline (or project phase baseline)
- The baseline is composed of each of the objectives established at the time expenditure authority is secured from the appropriate authority (e.g., minister). Any significant deviations from this baseline must be authorized by the appropriate approval authority. Expenditure authority can be sought only for those specific phases of the project that have been appropriately defined, costed and assessed.
- Project charter
- A document issued by the project initiator or sponsor that formally authorizes the existence of a project, and provides the project manager with the authority to apply organizational resources to the project activities. ( Project Management Body of Knowledge, third edition)
- Project implementation
- Project implementation or execution is directing, managing, performing and accomplishing the project work, providing the deliverables, and providing work performance information.
- Project information
- Project information can include business case, charter, project management plan, progress reports, status of schedule and budget, deliverables, earned value, resource allocation, risk management information, change requests (to scope, cost, schedule, etc.), presentations to stakeholders, etc.
- Project life cycle
- A collection of generally sequential project phases whose name and number are determined by the control needs of the organization or organizations involved in the project. A life cycle can be documented with a prescribed methodology. ( Project Management Body of Knowledge, third edition)
- Project management
- The systematic planning, organizing and control of allocated resources to accomplish identified project objectives and outcomes. Project management is normally reserved for focused, non-repetitive and time-limited activities that have some degree of risk, and for activities beyond the usual scope of program (operational) activities.
- Project Management Accords
- Performance Management Accords are documents that define the criteria by which senior executives are rated for job performance or incentive pay.
- Project Management Information System
-
A Project Management Information System (PMIS) is a class or type of system. It contains the information essential to initiating, planning, executing and closing a project. It supports the organizational information system because it provides relevant, accurate and timely information. A PMIS should contain the following elements:
- A systematic process for depicting the qualitative goals;
- Interdependencies and time-sensitive information within a project;
- Cost-control monitoring that integrates with the work breakdown structure to keep track of funds and costs associated with work packages;
- Work authorization and control to provide the basis for releasing work orders; and
- Control of changes:
- Identifies changes as they occur;
- Reveals their consequences;
- Permits managerial analysis;
- Communicates changes to all impacted parties;
- Specifies policy for minimizing conflicts;
- Ensures that the project team implements approved changes; and
- Periodically reports on all changes.
A PMIS could also include:
- Resource management;
- Inventory control; and
- Document management.
A PMIS could use Microsoft Project, but use of this software in and of itself does not constitute having a PMIS.
- Project management plan
- A document that identifies the planned objectives and deliverables of the project, scope, work breakdown structure, budget, schedule, risks, roles, resources, functional strategies, project monitoring and control strategies, governance, process deviations, and management style. It becomes the baseline for the project against which changes are measured.
- Project management office (also referred to as project office)
-
Is responsible for establishing, maintaining and enforcing project management processes, procedures, and standards within the organization.
A project office is a function that supports the project manager with project planning and control activities such as management of schedule, cost, risks, information and communication. On small projects these functions may be done by a single person; on larger projects, a team may be required.
- Project manager
- The person assigned by the performing organization to achieve the project objectives. ( Project Management Body of Knowledge, third edition)
- Project planning and identification
- This is the initial stage of the project life cycle during which the sponsoring department establishes operational need(s), produces the statement of operational requirements, conducts initial options analyses and feasibility studies, sets up the appropriate management framework and agreements, assigns resources, and makes an initial assessment of project risk.
- Program Alignment Architecture
-
A Program Alignment Architecture (PAA) is a hierarchy of activities that support departmental strategic objectives. Activities in the hierarchy are linked to expected results or, in the case of actual programs, are described as outputs. Final program outcomes are linked to departmental strategic objectives. Activities at the lowest level are linked to cost accounts, enabling an organization to roll up costs based on activity groupings.
A PAA is one of three elements that make up a organization's Management Results and Reporting Structure, the other two being governance and strategic objectives.
- Program management
- In the assessment, the Project Management Institute's (PMI's) term program management is referred to as investment program management, which differentiates it from the Government of Canada's definition of program management. Similarly, the PMI's definition for portfolio management is referred to as investment portfolio management.
- Quality standards
- Quality standards address both the management of the project and the output(s) of the project. They are those standards established to ensure that the project will satisfy the business needs for which it was undertaken.
- Risk assessment
- Refers to an analysis of the risks of a project at a particular point in time in which specific risks to the success of the project are identified and quantified (impact and probability), and mitigation plans are defined and actioned, according to the degree of the quantified threat.
- Scope statement
- A narrative description of the project scope (what needs to be accomplished) that may include deliverables, project objectives, project assumptions and constraints.
- Stakeholders
- People who are actively involved in a project, or whose interests may be positively or negatively affected by the execution or completion of the project.
- Work breakdown structure
-
A work breakdown structure (WBS) in project management and systems engineering, is a tool used to define and group a project's discrete work elements (or tasks) in a way that helps organize and define the total work scope of the project.
A work breakdown structure element may be a product, data, a service, or any combination thereof. A WBS also provides the necessary framework for detailed cost estimating and control along with providing guidance for schedule development and control. Additionally the WBS is a dynamic tool and can be revised and updated as needed by the project manager.
- Work package
- The lowest level of the work breakdown structure. Together, all work packages identify all the work required to deliver the project's objectives. A work package ideally has a single accountable lead.
Page details
- Date modified: