Part 3 of a series on customising fields in Microsoft® Project® to make working with project schedules more useful.
So you’ve created a useful programme schedule, and you are now working on keeping it on the right track. You’ve set up fields to calculate RAG status, but what if you want some schedule management information to go with it, in the form of some compact RAG status explanation to go with it, without having to study the baseline vs. forecast dates and % complete, working it out in your head line by line?
This post describes how to customise a Text field to display a very compact schedule management commentary to explain why a project schedule item should be Red or Amber.
Part 2 of a series on customising fields in Microsoft® Project® to make working with project schedules more useful.
So you’ve created a useful programme schedule, and you are now working on keeping it on the right track, reviewing the plan regularly with the Programme Manager and Project Managers. You will probably review the programme schedule regularly – focussing on on items with Red or Amber RAG status – but how do you use MS-Project to ensure that you don’t skip items that probably should have been marked amber or red?
This post describes how to introduce some schedule automation by customising a text field to display RAG status (based on performing some simple tests and calculations with dates).
So why would you want to use this approach, how do you do it, and what’s in it for you as a result?
RAG status is often allocated to project tasks based on the intuition or “gut feel” of the project manager. But too much subjectivity in status reporting can lead to watermelon or green-side-up reporting, in which project status is reported more favourably than it probably should be. The more objective approach presented here introduces some schedule automation, assigning a RAG rating to individual project tasks based on calculation.
This approach can’t account for subjective things like project risks (that takes professional judgement), but it can give a useful “starter for ten” RAG status assessment onto which the PM can layer factors such as risk, or to act as the starting point of a discussion.
Approach: Logic tests
Devise a set of criteria that you will use to determine RAG status, based on the rules or criteria in place for your project or programme. Your central PMO may have some criteria, or you may devise your own. They may look something like this (this assumes the plan has been baselined):
Red = Item that should be complete by now but isn’t
Amber = Item forecast to finish later than baseline finish date
Green = Item forecast to finish on baseline finish date or earlier
You need to formulate the tests in such a way that they can be expressed as a mathematical expression that can be tested and return a TRUE or FALSE result. For example, to test whether an item should have finished by now, test for [Forecast finish date] < [Today’s date]. If the answer is TRUE, the item should have finished by now.
These tests can be made as simple or complex as you like, for example you could enhance the Red test so that Red returns true if the item (is forecast to finish earlier than today’s date) OR (is on the Critical path, and is forecast to finish later than baselined) OR (is on the critical path and has not yet been baselined).
After testing for item completion (because if the item is complete then none of the other tests apply) these tests will be applied in order of decreasing severity (because an item that triggers a Red condition would probably trigger all the Amber conditions too).
Implementing the tests
Pick an empty custom task text field (in MS-Project 2016, select Project, Custom Fields), rename it something like “Auto RAG” and click on Formula (see figure 1).
The MS-Project Switch() function applies a number of tests and performs an action for the first test it comes to that returns a TRUE result. The format is:
The TestThatAlwaysReturnsTrue at the end “catches” the condition where none of the previous tests return a True result. Seeing the “ERROR!” result should prompt you to check your tests (or add some more conditions to catch other scenarios).
In “coded” format, such a series of tests would look like this:
I have formatted this to make it more readable. Be aware that MS-Project will strip out the spaces and returns, so the formula will look a lot less readable if you ever have to come back to edit it.
Put this in the “formula box” (see figure 2).
Once you have a text RAG value, you will probably want to display that as a graphical indicator to make reds and ambers easier to pick out in a long plan. This is done from the same Customise Fields dialogue box as before (figure 1), but this time using the Graphical Indicators option, which gets you here:
The approach is to test whether the value in the field “equals” each of the RAG status values and to assign an appropriate graphical symbol to each.
The What(’s in it for you)
Congratulations! You have now introduced some schedule automation and given MS-Project the ability to tell you what the RAG status of an item should be, based on a rigid interpretation of whatever rules you have given it, ready to have overlaid upon it any other factors the PM knows about. What approaches do you use to calculate RAG status in MS-Project?
This approach comes to you from my experience of getting it wrong and coming up with a better way. If you would like to have the benefits of an approach like this but prefer not to have to worry about this sort of techy stuff, why not talk to us about taking care of it all for you on your next big project or programme?
Part 1 of a series on customising in Microsoft® Project® to make working with project schedules more useful.
So, you’ve inherited a set of project schedules that you need to combine into a useful programme schedule. How do you set up a framework to enable you to quickly find and diagnose schedule setup problems, without having to deduce and apply complex combinations of filters? Here is an approach I have used successfully on several programmes.
To create an project or programme information hub, you could do a lot worse than setting up a SharePoint team site as suggested by Dux Raymond Sy’s definitive book on the subject. If SharePoint is already used in your organisation, it’s virtually a no-brainer.
SharePoint document libraries represent a great way to share documents across teams, giving you features like metadata classification, automatic version control, and more efficient document management. Julian Maynard-Smith outlines the benefits of a proper document management system in this great post.
However, there are some things that I have discovered for myself over several years of creating and using project management libraries on SharePoint sites that I would like to share with you.
1. Set up document libraries using reference data and standardised views.
Set up lists of reference data you want to be available throughout your site (e.g. project name, project stage, document type, document status, etc.).
Create a customised document library template containing fields that “look up” this reference data
Create a consistent “family” of useful library views that use this data, such as:
All documents (grouped by project, then document type)
Draft documents (grouped by project, then document type)
All documents grouped by Governance body and then status, sorted by review/issue date (for when you want to check what was reported three SteerCos ago)
All issued documents, by project and then document type
2. Set up views based on metadata (and maybe folders)
People are used to storing files in a shared network drive using nested folders. This works, but locks you into categorising your documents by just one hierarchy. Consider a document library containing contact details could be organised like a paper telephone directory, with folders arranged in counties, then towns, then business/residential, then sorted alphanumerically by name.
This is fine if youwant to see records for all the businesses in Bedfordshire, as this complies with the filing structure’s hierarchy.
But what if I want to see all the residential records across Bedfordshire and Buckinghamshire, sorted alphanumerically by name but excluding those beginning with Z and P?
That’s where metadatacomes in. By assigning document metadata (information about the documents, aka “tags”) you can:
Filter documents, much as you would in Excel®. So you can “slice and dice” the documents any way you like.
Group documents by expandable/collapsible category headings that behave and look a bit like folders.
Set up and save your own views, and look at documents differently from other users at the same time.
Users often don’t tag files with metadata on uploading, even though they subconsciously do it in a file share by choosing which folder to put a file in. This could lead to many unclassified documents. The Programme Office (PgMO) could tag documents of course, but to do it all is a lot of admin and the document owner usually knows the document content better than the PgMO. You can of course require users to add metadata, but this can cause problems when the available tags don’t quite fit (so the PgMO needs to add new values to the field list), or a user is unsure of what metadata to add (PgMO needs to educate users).
File grouping can only go two layers deep, so you have to apply grouping thoughtfully, and use sorting or filtering below that.
An option that works for both philosophies (kind of) is to set up libraries with a standard set of folders, but also set up views that ignore the folder structure, using metadata instead. That way, people can find information using the approach they are the most comfortable with. And the point of a document library is to enable people find the information they seek, faster.
3. Use check-out and versioning
OK, so this iscovered in Dux Raymond Sy’s book, but it’s soimportant, I want to highlight it here.
Using this feature:
Prevents the absurdity of “who saves last wins” (when two people are working on the same document, making competing changes, and saving the document with the same name)
Enables you to “permalink” to the latest version of a document (so that the URL you issue for a document always points to the latest version)
Enables you to see all the previous versions of a document (along with who created them when) and reinstate any one of them as the current version.
And why wouldn’tyou want all that?
4. Create document libraries from your template
To determine how many libraries to create, think about how people will use the documents you store in them.
One library per project might make sense; a separate library for sensitive documents (e.g. contracts, quotes, invoices, resourcing plans, etc.) definitelymakes sense (to appropriately manage access to sensitive content).
Creating new libraries created from your template means that the new libraries will already contain all the document fields and views that you put into the template.
5. Set access permissions at library level
Although you can assign permissions at folder and even document level, this can cause confusion as it is possible to assign access to a document, but not the folder that contains it.
This means the user can access the document if they are directed to it (e.g. from a hyperlink). However they cannot browse to the document location, so they have no sense of “where” it is.
There is effectively a permission “wormhole” to the document that doesn’t pass through any intermediate locations. So the poor user will know the document exists, but it will be virtually impossible for them to find it again without the hyperlink(!). To get an idea of what that looks like, take a look at this.
Also, SharePoint is not great at showing you how you have set these exceptional permissions, so it is hard to know whohas access to what.
Setting access at library level with inherited permissions makes this much easier to handle.
6. Set access permissions using groups
Name groups according to who they contain rather than the type of permissions assigned to them. A group created to assign read permissions to library X and called “Lib_X_read” may later be used for another purpose for which that name would become confusing. It would be better to call the group something like “Project Managers” or “Business Analysts”, and assign appropriate access permissions to the group.
Although you can assign permissions to individuals, it is better if you assign permissions to groups, and manage permissions by amending the users in these groups.
If you accidentally delete all users from a document library, sub-site or (heaven forbid) an entire site collection, then it is muchquicker to restore access if users are already in a group such as “<SiteName> All Members” than it is to manually restore access for each and every user or to put each and every user into a group as they really should have been in the first place. Trust me. I know.
So that’s my list of productivity top tips for SharePoint document libraries, learned through the experience of getting it wrong and coming up with a better way.
This article covers only the document library tips that I could explain in a compact form without the need for diagrams or examples. It doesn’t include many other conventions that I use when creating and managing SharePoint team sites to improve efficiency or usability, otherwise this article would have been more like a book (it’s already pretty long)!
If you would like to have the benefits of a document management approach like this but prefer not to have to worry about this sort of techy stuff, why not talk to us about taking care of it all for you on your next big project or programme?
® Microsoft, SharePoint and Excel are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries.
To create an project or programme information hub, you could do a lot worse than setting up a SharePoint team site as suggested by Dux Raymond Sy‘s definitive book on the subject. If SharePoint is already used in your organisation, it’s virtually a no-brainer.
Project management “RAID” registers are prioritised lists of things like Risks, Issues, Actions, Decisions and so on. Keeping registers helps you to keep track of the factors affecting your project, and the things going on within it, so that the whole thing ticks along more smoothly.
Microsoft SharePoint offers some facilities that can be used for this quite effectively, However, there are some things that I have discovered for myself in several years of creating and using project management registers on SharePoint team, sites that I would like to share with you.
1. Plan reference data
Decide what data you want to be available throughout your site – the sort of thing you might set up in Excel using data validation to populate drop-down menus from lists.
These lists could contain information such as the programme’s projects, locations, project stages, governance bodies, etc.
It may sound odd to consider this at the outset, but you need it in place before you set up the RAID registers. It is far quicker and easier to create registers from a template that refers to pre-existing data lists than to reconfigure registers once you have realised it would be neater for them to use reference data.
Set up any governance bodies (such as SteerCos) as SharePoint groups. You can use these anywhere you might use a person, e.g. for things like “assigned to”, “raised by”, and “escalated to”
Set up your other reference data as SharePoint lists.This means:
Changes in the source list automatically become available for use across the site, including in registers.
You can “hide” reference data lists by preventing them from displaying on the main site navigation bar. You will know where to find them for editing (in “site contents”) but most users won’t.
2. Create a custom RAID register template
You will probably want to create a “family” of registers (for Risks, Actions, Issues, Decisions, etc.), that share many fields (Date raised, assigned to, Title, Description, Score, Progress, etc.)
I recommend that you first create a risk register (by augmenting SharePoint’s built-in “Issue Tracker” template)
Set up relevant fields to “look up” reference data from the lists you created earlier, (e.g. project name, project stage, document status, etc.)
Save the risk register as a list template, to use when creating other registers. Of all the registers, the risk register has the most fields, so in order to create other registers you will either be removing unwanted fields from the template or repurposing them slightly. This is quicker and easier than creating registers from scratch, and ensures that reused fields are set up consistently across registers.
3. Create a consistent “family” of RAID register views
Most people don’t want to view all the items in a RAID register; they are mostly interested in their items, or open items, or their open items.
So, create a core “family” of consistent register views (All items, Open items, My items, My open items), all sorted by due / review date and priority.
These can be outline views (containing only a few columns) as their main purpose is to enable quick review and finding of RAID items for updating.
Create an “Open and recently closed” items view, which is good for reporting to governance bodies as it shows live items and those that have been closed since the last report / meeting (Date closed >= [Today] -28)
If you create these views before saving the risk register as a template, then they will appear in any register you create from it.
This means that users see the same logical “family” of views whichever register they are in, so they can find information faster and more easily.
4. Use Excel® for reporting on RAID registers
For easy and attractive presentation of RAID data (e.g. top 10 risks, issues, etc.), export the register of interest to Excel (SharePoint Classic view –> Lists –> Export to Excel).
Do this from a view that shows all the fields. In Excel, hide the ones you don’t want (for now) using data grouping or by hiding columns, then apply any formatting, filters, and summarisation formulae you need.
You can create a workbook containing one worksheet like this for each RAID register.
This approach gives you data tables (with detail that you can easily unhide) that can be refreshed with live SharePoint data at the click of a button (“Refresh all” in Excel).
5. How to tell which list item number you’re editing
If you’re reviewing a list of items in a filtered view of a RAID register, it’s useful to know the number of the item you’re working on (e.g. “Risk 45” or “Action 199”) so that when you go back to the list you know which ones you’ve updated, and which still need updating. But nothing on the SharePoint editing page gives you the number of the item (maybe because this is not an editable field?)
However, the number is there if you know where to look; up in the browser address bar, the item reference number is embedded in the URL, e.g. https://[SharePointServerName]/sites/[SiteName]/Lists/[RegisterName]/EditForm.aspx?ID=##&Source=VeryLongTextString
Incidentally, you can resolve this problem by creating a view that shows items that are assigned to [Me], AND of which the Status = Open, AND for which the Modified date is not equal to [Today]; this will only show your open items that you haven’t just updated. But the tip is still true 🙂
6. Link items across registers
It can be useful to understand where register items came from, e.g. that the action “Recruit developers” came from the issue “Development behind schedule”
For this reason it can be useful to add lookup columns to each register enabling users to link to items in other registers (most helpfully via the item title); this cannot be done in a list template as the other registers need to exist first.
So that’s my list of productivity top tips for SharePoint RAID registers, learned through the experience of getting it wrong and coming up with a better way.
This article covers only the RAID register tips that I could explain in a compact form without the need for diagrams or examples. It doesn’t include many other conventions that I use when creating and managing SharePoint team sites to improve efficiency or usability, otherwise this article would have been more like a book (it’s already pretty long)!
If you would like to have the benefits of an approach like this but prefer not to have to worry about this sort of techy stuff, why not talk to us about taking care of it all for you on your next big project or programme?
® Microsoft, SharePoint and Excel are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries.
His presentation contained several key points that resonated with me so I thought were worth restating in the light of my own experience.
Estimates need to have a solid foundation. No, a finger in the air won’t do here. Base your estimate on a similar project that was done recently. Base it on productivity figures and lines of code. Base it on PERT or three-time estimating if you like, but be comfortable with how you derived it and have at least some idea of the potential error margin. I have used all of these estimating techniques at some time or other, and knowing the likely accuracy at least gives you a guide for how much contingency to build in, which brings me to…
Build in some contingency. A knotty one, this! In most plans where I have explicitly built in contingency, I have been required to remove it to reduce timescales. In most cases, of course, something has then happened to increase the project timescales, and the final delivery has ended up where it would have been with contingency in place, except that the project is now Late. No wonder project managers are tempted to build in “secret” contingency, and deliver on time?
Update the plan with actuals (durations, costs, etc,). This is essential for keeping your schedule on the right track. If a task was late due to a delay, add in a task showing this delay and label it accordingly. The schedule then acts as an audit trail for delivery. If any of the tasks are repeated, use the actuals from iteration 1 to refine the estimates for iteration n. Follow through and see what the impact is on delivery. I have found it is very difficult to get people to care about activities once they’re complete, but this approach does mean that you can apply your learning from the past to the future, and best of all this happens while the project is still running.
Manage the Critical path.Make sure you make good use of dependencies, and as little use of time constraints as possible. I always do this as much as possible, as it enable you to see the effect of any changes on the critical path at the touch of a button. The plan should be a useful mathematical modelof the project, not just a pretty picture on the wall of some coloured bars linked together.
The act of developing the plan is as important as the plan itself. Or perhaps more important! Thinking through the steps in detail, rehearsing the project in the team’s collective mind, is a great way of identifying potential pitfalls and managing them while they are still risks, if appropriate.
What are your experiences? Do you agree with Andrew and me? Do you have any planning tips you would like to share?
Scheduling, Monitoring & Control: The Practical Project Management of Time, Cost and Risk
Association for Project Management (Princes Risborough, Buckinghamshire) 2015
£50 RRP (electronic review copy provided free of charge)
This book is a good reference guide to Planning, Scheduling, Monitoring and Control, with most of the topics covered at introductory to intermediate level in relatively informal jargon-free language with plenty of helpful diagrams.
The guide is aimed at students and practitioners, so I’m a bit puzzled why it begins with a chunky explanation of how projects are defined and the documents used. At 20 pages this section is too hefty for the completely uninitiated, but has nowhere near enough detail to be useful an already-practicing project manager (who would be better off referring to one of the BoKs or methodologies). I guess however that novice Project Planners may find it useful for context and orientation, and it signposts topics for further reading.
The book gives a useful and succinct description of the differences between planning and scheduling:
Planning is the art of deciding on the best way to do the project, defining scope and deliverables, and getting agreement from the stakeholders. It is broader than scheduling and logically happens earlier.
Scheduling is the science of estimating how long it will take and how much it will cost to deliver tasks, and sequencing them to create a logical model of the future that can predict when project outputs can be delivered. This model progressively becomes fact as estimates are revised and activities completed.
Next there are tips on planning and scheduling, including some suggested approaches for creating and quality-checking the documents. It describes how to set a schedule baseline, how to evaluate the impact of any changes requested (using offline, static copies of the live schedule), and how to update the baseline to take account of approved changes.
Monitoring approaches are then described, with a warning that no one of these gives a complete picture of the project’s status. Earned value analysis (EVA) comes closest, but requires significant effort
The book recommends regular schedule co-ordination meetings, to review recent progress (recording reasons behind any slippage for analysis later) and future tasks within an agreed time window, allowing team leaders to plan the near future in detail.
There is a good introduction to quantitative schedule risk analysis (a.k.a. Monte Carlo analysis) and the value it can bring to both schedule and dimensions by giving the PM statistically-derived forecasts of final delivery date and cost. Some of the diagrams here could be clearer, but I am told these will be reviewed ahead of the next print run.
The book also outlines how forensic schedule analysis can be used to establish the cause of delay(s) in litigation scenarios.
At the end there is a helpful glossary and a list of abbreviations.
Some example tips
Schedules should have an appropriate density (amount of detail) for their purpose: Low density for communication e.g. to executives; Medium density for the reference plan; High density for day-to-day management of delivery teams’ work. A schedule with too much detail is just as bad as a schedule with not enough detail, as it is difficult to manage and won’t be used.
Schedules should record a baseline (when we agreed it would be delivered, updated with any approved change requests), a forecast (when we now believe it will be delivered), and “as built” (when we actually delivered it, including any unexpected extra events). These may be in the same scheduling document but will not usually be displayed at the same time.
Where a team is producing a string of broadly similar deliverables and can be thought of ticking these off a list, it may be more helpful and easier to manage using a spreadsheet tracker rather than scheduling software.
Schedule item names should be understandable without reference to WBS headings (which may not be visible if a filter is applied) – task names should start with a verb (lay bricks; paint walls) to indicate activity, and milestone names should express a state in the past tense (walls built; plumbing complete)
First sequence tasks in logical order (using mostly easy-to-understand Finish-to-Start relationships), then allocate resources. Then apply resource levelling by first delaying tasks with free float (so delaying them does not delay successor tasks), and only then delaying tasks with no free float but some total float (so delaying them delays successor tasks but not the overall finish date)
Identify dependencies between projects, label these clearly in the schedule including whether these are inbound or outbound. Meet regularly with the PM at the other end of the dependency link; review whether the current forecast date works for both parties and agree any remedial action required. Any changes in delivery date to be the subject of change control.
A budget is a planned upper limit on resource to be consumed for a given task or tasks. It is often expressed financially but not always; it could be expressed as terms of days of effort, quantity of materials, etc.
I recommend this book for early and mid-career PMs and PMOs. I would have scored it higher if not for the somewhat incongruous section on project definition (which one can simply overlook) and a few mathematically doubtful diagrams (harder to ignore). I expect that my review copy will become dog-eared through use!
by Dux Raymond Sy, O’Reilly Media Inc, 232 pages, £25 RRP
Pragmatic PMO Rating: ****
This book is intended as a “how to” guide for setting up a Project Management Information System, aimed at the practising Project Manager (PM) or Project Management Office (PMO) Manager. In this it is completely successful. The book (safely in my view) assumes a reasonable level of familiarity with both standard office use of computers, and a reasonable level of familiarity with PM principles and techniques, taking this to build a PMIS, so often referred to in PM textbooks as an essential resource but rarely explained or explored in any depth.
Chapter 1 deals with what SharePoint is (a system that enables individuals in an organisation to easily create and manage their own collaborative websites), what a PMIS is (a standardised set of PM tools available within an organisation and integrated into a system), and whether you need one (if you are running anything more than the smallest and simplest projects then you probably do).
Chapter 2 deals with the structure and hierarchy of SharePoint sites, and takes the reader through the creation and customisation of the most basic elements of a SharePoint site (as a practical exercise if you have the necessary resources handy).
Chapter 3 builds on this foundation by adding PMIS elements such as a shared calendar, contacts list, risk list, and document library, using these as opportunities to explain how these SharePoint features work.
Chapter 4 covers the introduction of stakeholders, managing their access to information using groups with varying permissions.
Chapter 5 gets into the use of SharePoint’s document and collaboration features, with a good description of how document check out / check in saves us from playing “whoever saves last keeps their content”, and an overview of SharePoint’s native version controlling approach and whether you need it (you probably do!). This chapter also covers wikis, document workspaces, and discussion boards (with examples you can try out), all of which are intended to promote team collaboration.
Chapter 6 goes into the use of SharePoint’s built-in features to track project progress, with a warning against using the too-basic Project Task list as your only Gantt chart tool. There is a good detailed section on customising lists to use as fairly well-featured Risks and Issues Registers, and a section showing how to manage the items in these lists with SharePoint’s built-in Workflow capabilities. This chapter even goes so far as to show you how to build a pretty serviceable Change Control system using the workflow feature with a customised list.
Chapter 7 takes a look at the Reporting options available. This chapter helps the reader to learn how to set up special views and web parts to create a Project Dashboard, and how to set up alerts to stay informed about what’s happening in the PMIS.
Chapter 8 deals with the integration of Excel with SharePoint, showing how to achieve bidirectional information exchange. Unfortunately direct synchronisation with MS-Project is not possible, but the book suggests an alternative approach to minimise the pain (keeping the management of the MSP plan in the hands of the PM, but allowing the Project team to report updates using a task list).
Chapter 9 rounds off the book by explaining how to shut down a project and its associated SharePoint site, even capitalising on what you have learned from your experience by saving your site as a template.
The issue of how to get users to interact with and properly use a SharePoint site is dealt with in just two pages right at the end of the book. I guess that is not surprising in a book that is really aimed at the technical rather than people aspects of creating a PMIS in SharePoint, but I still found it a little disappointing as this is crucial to adoption and uptake.
Overall, if you implement all the practical exercises in this book then you will end up with a very usable PMIS for very little outlay. You will still need to convince your team members that this is a Good Thing and that using the PMIS facilities is better than storing copies of documents on their Desktop before emailing them to multiple reviewers for comment, but you will have the tools for them to pick up and use.
In a PMO role on a Programme of over 100 team members that uses SharePoint as its document repository, I have referred to this book as my SharePoint ”Bible” most days; as a result it has quickly become well-thumbed! I would recommend this guide to anyone wanting to set up a low-cost, practical PMIS and who wants guidance on how to do this without getting bogged down in technical minutiae.
Project and Programme Managers (PMs) are used to managing projects within a budget for the project stage or the whole project, but they sometimes overlook the context of the organisational annual budget; this is especially important if the project spans multiple financial years.
Project funding approval for a whole project or project stage can be thought of as the Portfolio Board deciding that the project’s Business Case is viable, and that the project should go ahead.
This approval can be given once for the whole project (usually if the project is relatively small, short in duration, low in complexity and risk), or gatewise at the beginning of each stage (usually if the project is relatively large, long in duration, high in complexity and risk). This approval can also be separate and distinct from the financial year budgeting process (figure 1).
Inclusion of project funding in the financial year budget can be thought of as (usually) the Finance department deciding that the organisation can afford to spend £x on projects as a whole, with the projects making up the budget being selected based on some prioritisation rationale.
So a project managers’ forecasted project costs need to stay not only within the budget for the project (current stage and overall), but also the financial year budget (this is especially important if the project covers more than one financial year).
So how to apply this to portfolios? I was brought into a PMO facing an annual project budget considerably smaller than the previous year’s, with no way to forecast whether the proposed portfolio could be delivered within budget. The organisation had also mandated moving labour spend from Consultants, via Staff Augmentation (comprising flexible resources and independent Contractors), to permanent Internal staff. This is how I approached it:
I devised a standardised way of classifying labour costs to enable comparison across projects (projects had previously been accounting for labour costs in a variety of ways).
I introduced an approach requiring PMs to validate their remaining project cost forecasts every reporting cycle when updating actual costs.
I created an automated report to extract financial data from the project portfolio system and present a monthly breakdown of costs over the financial year (with actuals in the past and forecasts in the future). Labour was broken down further (Consultancy / Staff Augmentation / Internal) to reveal trends (figure 2).
Thus, stakeholders could see every month whether the portfolio was on track to deliver within the financial year budget and track the movement of labour from high towards lower cost labour sources as mandated.
After a few months monitoring, I noticed that there was a “bow wave” phenomenon, with projects seeming to “push” cost forecasts in front of the current month (figure 3). I suspected this was because the projects were forecasting to use up the remainder of the funds allocated to them, so I challenged the PMs to ensure that the forecast to the end of the year represents the forecast cost of the work remaining.
After some revisions to the forecasts, and delays to a number of projects (some deliberate, and some arising from outside the organisation), the outcome was that all the projects in the portfolio could be delivered well within the new lower budget, with a surplus being returned to the organisation.
Does your organisation monitor against annual financial budgets as well as end-to-end or gatewise project budgets? How does your PMO ensure that projects stay within all of these? Let me know in the comments.