Breakthroughs In [It] Project Management Slideshare
•
1 gostou•933 visualizações
introduction to new course at University of Sydney
![Agenda ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]]()
Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Mais procurados
Mais procurados (20)
Semelhante a Breakthroughs In [It] Project Management Slideshare
Semelhante a Breakthroughs In [It] Project Management Slideshare (20)
Mais de UNSW Canberra
Mais de UNSW Canberra (15)
Último
Último (20)
Breakthroughs In [It] Project Management Slideshare
- 1. Governing portfolios of programmes to execute strategy INFO 5010: Advanced concepts in IT project management Lecture 1 – Introduction, Lecture 2 – Governance Unit coordinator: Dr Raymond Young (MBA, GAICD)
- 4. The reality: project success rates have not improved ROI 30% 10-20% Clegg et al 1997 30-40% Willcocks and Margetts 1994 15% Standish 2002 2/3 of projects deliver no benefits whatsoever Success (On-time On-budget) vs Process failure Success (Realise Expected Benefits) vs Correspondence failure OK Some No Fail
- 7. Welcome & Introductions Please tell us: Your name Where you are from Your work experience What you hope to gain out of this course
- 8. Review of Course Outline
- 9. Breakthrough #1 Exposing The ICT Blindspot
- 10. A analogy for understanding the significance of project governance
- 11. It depends on your definition of success MIS Success: User focus SIS Success: Organisational focus EDP Success: Technical focus Delone, W. H. and McLean, E. R. (2003) The Delone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: a ten-year update Journal of Management Information Systems, 19:4 , 9-30. Net Benefits Information Quality System Quality Service Quality User Satisfaction Intention to use Use
- 14. Breakthrough #2: TMS – t he most critical success factor Reference: Young (2006) HB280 Case Studies – How Boards and Senior Management have Governed ICT Projects to Suceed (or Fail). Standards Australia
- 15. Project Management Success Very strong emphasis in practice
- 16. Management Perception of Project Management Kwak & Anbari (2009)
- 17. Emerging Core Tools Project Management – 50+ years of development Crawford, Pollack, England (2006) number of success stories reported are almost twice the number of failures 62% of projects are reported to have either met most or all performance criteria
- 18. How do you Govern Projects?
- 21. Governing Projects Achieving Outcomes & Realising Benefits Strategy Defined outcomes Delivered outcomes Governance Benefits Enabling projects
- 22. Corporate Governance, Governing Projects and Project Management Standards: OECD Guidelines ASX Guidelines AS8000 Focus on Vision and Mission and described in Corporate Plan (normally 3 years) Corporate Governance: The system by which organisations are directed and controlled Standards: PRINCE2 , MSP PMBOK, OPM3 Focus on Outputs (time, budget, quality, stakeholder support, outcomes) Project Management: The way of guiding and managing projects to ensure successful completion from start to end Standards: Gateway HB280 AS8016 www.valuedeliverymanagement.com Focus on Outcomes (Key Initiatives and business benefits) and described in Departmental Annual Plan Governing Projects: The connection between corporate governance & project management
- 23. Governance Evaluate Direct & Monitor Investment: benefits or terminate? Strategy/capability: how much change is required? Investment & Strategy: Benefits / alignment? Responsibility: Project Sponsor? Performance & Behaviour: measures and motivation? 67%->40% 40% 5-23% 33-67% 0-13% ITIL, COBIT Projects PMBOK, PRINCE2, etc Conformance & Behaviour: culture for issues to be raised? ??% 6Q Governance™ HB280, AS8016 Business processes ICT Operations Support Changed Business Processes Changed ICT Operations Initiate
- 24. Financial/Strategic Implications Current Performance (68% under) Source: R. Young, “What is the ROI for IT Project Governance? Establishing a benchmark.,” in 2006 IT Governance International Conference (Auckland, New Zealand, 2006) OK Some No Fail ROI 30% OK Some Fail ROI 130% Better Performance (43% under) OK Cancel ROI 220% Excellent Performance (15% cancelled)
Notas do Editor
- Investments in IT should increase from the current levels of $1,000,000,000,000 per annum (Seddon et al. 2002, Cox 2003, Ein-Dor 2003) . To unlock the fifty-fold improvements in productivity promised by the information age (Covey 2004), IT continues to represent for many organisations, their main source of opportunity (Clegg et al. 1997). Evidence suggests organisations are consistently repeating the same mistakes (Collins and Bicknell 1997). Boards are looking for guidance (Young and Jordan 2002a) and IS research clearly has a role to play. Unfortunately because IS research is lacking in relevance, especially to this wider audience, it is failing to contribute where it could add the most value. 28% of IT projects are abandoned before completion (Standish 1999) 30–40% of projects are implemented without any perceptible benefits (Willcocks 1994) 80-90% of projects fail to meet their performance objectives (Clegg & al 1997)
- Figure of the heavenly bodies - Illuminated illustration of the Ptolemaic geocentric conception of the Universe by Portuguese cosmographer and cartographer Bartolomeu Velho . (Bibilotèque nationale de France, Paris). Notice the distances of the bodies to the centre of the Earth (left) and the times of revolution, in years (right). The Ptolemaic geocentric model of the Universe according to the Portuguese cosmographer and cartographer Bartolomeu Velho (Bibliothèque Nationale de France, Paris). Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bartolomeu_Velho_1568.jpg Challenged by Copernicus in 1543 and later by Galileo in 1610
- 28% of IT projects are abandoned before completion (Standish 1999) 30–40% of projects are implemented without any perceptible benefits (Willcocks 1994) 80-90% of projects fail to meet their performance objectives (Clegg & al 1997)
- Jed
- Management of large-scale expenditures is a fiduciary duty requiring careful oversight. However a Deloitte survey of boardroom directors revealed oversight of IT projects was either “blind” (29% with inadequate information) or non-existent (16%) [i] . They warned in 2007 that the results were “tantamount to negligence” and the AICD have long reported statistics suggesting the problem is more widespread [ii ] (Figure 1). My own research suggests that as many as two out of three projects fail to deliver the expected benefits [iii ] . Increased scrutiny could reveal the real failure rate. However what might be worse in the current financial environment is to have two out of three strategic initiatives fail to increase revenue, enhance customer service or reduce cost and threaten survival. [i] What the Board Needs to Know About IT: Phase II Findings (Deloitte, 2007), http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/article/0,1002,sid=36692&cid=151800,00.html [ii] D. Lovalla and D. Kahneman, “Delusions of success: how optimism undermines executive's decisions, Harvard Business Review,” Harvard Business Review July (2003): 58 [iii] R. Young, “What is the ROI for IT Project Governance? Establishing a benchmark.,” in 2006 IT Governance International Conference (Auckland, New Zealand, 2006)
- Management of large-scale expenditures is a fiduciary duty requiring careful oversight. However a Deloitte survey of boardroom directors revealed oversight of IT projects was either “blind” (29% with inadequate information) or non-existent (16%) [i] . They warned in 2007 that the results were “tantamount to negligence” and the AICD have long reported statistics suggesting the problem is more widespread [ii ] (Figure 1). My own research suggests that as many as two out of three projects fail to deliver the expected benefits [iii ] . Increased scrutiny could reveal the real failure rate. However what might be worse in the current financial environment is to have two out of three strategic initiatives fail to increase revenue, enhance customer service or reduce cost and threaten survival. [i] What the Board Needs to Know About IT: Phase II Findings (Deloitte, 2007), http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/article/0,1002,sid=36692&cid=151800,00.html [ii] D. Lovalla and D. Kahneman, “Delusions of success: how optimism undermines executive's decisions, Harvard Business Review,” Harvard Business Review July (2003): 58 [iii] R. Young, “What is the ROI for IT Project Governance? Establishing a benchmark.,” in 2006 IT Governance International Conference (Auckland, New Zealand, 2006)
- Jed
- Raymond
- To survive, thrive and also to minimise the governance backlash, the first step must be to get the right information needed to govern effectively. The board bears the responsibility to set clear guidelines and expectations about the kinds of information they want to see filter up. What benefits are being targeted? [how is this consistent with our strategic priorities?] Do we have the organisational capacity to realise these benefits and what other risks are involved? How will we measure success? Do we have the right person driving the change? Are there any warning signs that the project is going off track? Are the benefits being realised? These questions seem simple but none of the directors I have spoken to had an effective process to terminate failing projects. Benefits are usually quantified (66%), but they are often overstated (27%) [i] , change is not always considered (40%) [ii] , individuals are not held accountable (5-23%) and few organisations track benefits through to realisation (10%) [iii] . Organisations do not focus on the true determinants of success. [i] Chad Lin, Graham Pervan, and Donald McDermid, “IS/IT investment evaluation and benefits realization issues in Australia,” Journal of Research and Practice in Information Technology 37, no. 3 (2005): 235-251 [ii] KPMG, “Global IT Project Management Survey: How committed are you?,” 2005, http://www.kpmg.com.au/Portals/0/irmprm-global-it-pm-survey2005.pdf [iii] John Thorp, “Unlocking Value - Delivering on the Promise of Information Technology,” in Delivering Value , 2008, http://www.isaca.org.au/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=28