There are benefits to joining the club and benefits to the BIG Model
The club – is free for one thing. It is a place to gain knowledge, network, solve problems and contribute to enhance your reputation. It is a place to be seen.
The BIG Model – these depend on who you are, what your organisation is and how well you deliver culture change.
Here is a starter for 10. What can you add / disagree with?
| Problem / Impact | Resolving Outcomes | Solution Benefit | Customer Stakeholder |
| Board level information poor. Manual effort and inaccuracy preparing material leading to Lack of faith in the data | Clear information needs for a clear governance operation, integrated P3M data, simplified assurance, standard reporting, flexible MI capability | Less time spent collating data, less time spent on data query resolution. Less hedging in decision making | All boards |
| Too much presentation on history and not enough forecasting and prediction | Clear information needs for a clear governance operation, integrated P3M data, more reliable forecast data and analysis | Less time spent on data query resolution. More time spent on solution definition. Less hedging in decision making | All boards |
| Independently managed toolsets don’t have their enterprise data aligned – so manual integration problematic | Maintain enterprise data reference in a data store to enable all toolsets to use the same code schemes | Less time spent on data query resolution | PMO |
| Forced to use an enterprise toolset that does not support local needs or business operation leading to poor data quality and additional parochial solutions | Enable local tool usage with the proviso that the data model is supported | Better data quality for governance, tools of choice for better local operation less adoption issues / expense. Dis benefit more tools to support | Department Heads. Delivery community – Programmes, Projects, Team Members etc. |
| Cannot easily see the portfolio when data is stored in multiple toolsets | Enable local tool usage with the proviso that the data model is supported | Visualise the portfolio and aggregated resource demand more easily. Less time spent on data query resolution. Less hedging in decision making | All boards. Department Heads & resourcing teams. Delivery community – Programmes, Projects, Team Members etc. |
| Multiple reports created in multiple technologies with multiple data “fixes” to generate outputs, along with sustainment implication | Clear information needs for a clear governance operation, integrated P3M data, one set of core reporting and one reporting technology to support for ad hoc query | Less time spent collating data. Less time spent on data query resolution. Less reporting tools to support, greater concentrated MI capability. Delivery community does not have to re-invent wheels | IT. PMO, Assurance, Delivery community |
| No historical data, only what is in the tool now, cannot see trend and cannot hold people to account | Core Dataset includes historical snapshots outside respective tooling that otherwise may not | Trend reporting and claim resolution simpler | PMO, Assurance, Delivery community |
| PMO provides information the executive does not want, executive does not express what information is needed to PMO | Enable conversations about governance data needs between operations and executive | Picture from strategy to delivery and back again available to support joined up business decision making. Less parochial reporting work | All boards, PMO Delivery Community |
| Small organisations do not have the resources to implement and sustain a full PPM solution | Provide a core data model that simple solutions – as well as sophisticated ones – can deliver against | PPM benefits without needing PPM tool investment and change. Less parochial reporting work | PMO, Delivery Community |
| Consultants do not have a starter governance framework or data model to engage clients with leading to less ability to engage and slower delivery | Data framework and sample governance framework | More engagements started. Faster benefits delivered. Better application of consultant time to exploit rather than devise a solution | IT. PMO, Delivery community |
| Painful data integration scenarios patching over incompatible operations and tool features | Data integration in a data warehouse joins data through common code scheme. Focus on what is needed, not what is possible | Less expense to deliver governance information. Less expense to maintain a data warehouse than bilateral tool integrations | PMO, IT |
| Un aligned operating models across the portfolio, departments, suppliers, customers causing additional work and slower decision making | Focus on governance and related data needs enables closer alignment | Less data integration issues smoother operation enabled by common understanding of that is needed top to bottom, in and out | PMO, Delivery Community, Department Heads & resourcing teams, suppliers, customers |
| Complex data models caused by lack of understand on what is really needed and from mis alignment of incompatible solutions | Focus on governance and related data needs enables closer alignment | Design, build and sustainment of technology and support models less expensive. Simplification of operations | IT, PMO, Delivery Community, Department Heads & resourcing teams. Suppliers, Customers |
| Expensive and risky software solution deployments that support delivery, not governance and are compromised by disparate stakeholder needs | Enable any software solution to map to the Core Data Model to ensure, Alignment to a standard, One size fits all integration model | Implementation risk reduction and implementation cost saving. Greater number of sales / deployments possible and Best of Breed strategy for solutions more possible | IT, PMO, Delivery Community, Department Heads & resourcing teams. |
| Change management and solution configuration / integration burden where one solution does not fit all requirements | Greater flexibility possible to adopt tools of choice | Less change management spend greater adoption benefits, less tool failure risk | IT, PMO, Delivery Community, Department Heads & resourcing teams. |
| Standard MI capability not off the shelf for client organisations | Standard data services and MI capabilities based on the core standard | IT savings creating and maintaining reports. Opportunity for service providers (PMO / Platform / Data / BI solutions) to deliver service as opposed to solution | IT, PMO |
| Stakeholder groups do not have simple access to data | Standard data services and MI capabilities based on the core standard | Enable all stakeholders to access their perspective on P3M data | All boards and executives. IT, PMO, Delivery Community, Department Heads & resourcing teams |
| Governance framework operation poorly defined and struggles to provide control | Clear governance framework, adoption of it, sustainment of it | Less time spent in ineffective meetings making poor decisions, Better decisions, Cost savings faster/greater benefits – improve bottom line | All boards and executives. IT, PMO, Delivery Community, Department Heads & resourcing teams |
| Respected bodies frameworks are great in theory, but are not presently supported by data frameworks – meaning implementation and sustainment are more difficult | Core data model that Respected Bodies have been involved in preparing and can jointly adopt and develop together | Less cost to Respected Bodies to create their own framework, cross discipline solution that benefits the customer using multiple frameworks and tools | All boards and executives, IT, PMO, Delivery Community, Department Heads |
| Process and data assurance very difficult where multiple frameworks and tools are used | Deliver a Core Data Model and related governance framework | Enable easier, faster assurance and indirectly to better outcomes | PMO, Delivery Community, Department Heads, Assurance |
| No visibility of or mechanism to manage resource demand, supply, allocation and spend in a multi / zero tool scenario | Aggregated resource picture to enable demand, supply and allocation management across the business. Assurance of priority implementation | Effective resource utilisation. Focus on imperatives and necessities | All boards and executives, PMO, Delivery Community. Department Heads & resourcing teams |
| Project and Programme managers and PMO re-invent performance reporting MI | Common capability, standards and MI callability | Less time re-inventing wheels and sustaining them. Transportable capability. | All boards and executives. IT, PMO, Delivery Community, Department Heads & resourcing teams |
| Lack of belief in strategy attainment / risk / forecast outcome at the Cx Level leading to additional un-necessary oversight and checking | Clear governance framework, core data standard and adoption of it, sustainment of it. Greater Cx level confidence | Reduction in unnecessary oversight and checking. Focus on Cx time on key issues, risks and decisions leading to effective strategy attainment. | PMO, Delivery Community, Department Heads & resourcing teams Assurance |
| Lack of insight on where funding is being consumed compared to where it is apparently deployed | Include funding data into the Core P3M data model to enable integrated cost and funding decision making | Funding deployed and spent on valuable initiatives with less wasted on lower priority items. | PMO, Delivery Community Department Heads & Finance / Accounting teams |
| Dependency management across solutions manual and problematic causing issues downstream where impacts are not anticipated | Raise visibility of dependency above individual tooling | Reduction if impact from effects of slippages and decisions in predecessor plans. | PMO, Delivery Community, Department Heads & resourcing teams, Assurance |
| Tool upgrade / replacement causes problems in continuity of reporting and maintenance of historical data | Separation of core reporting from specific tooling and bi lateral integrations | Reporting from a datastore means tooling can be plugged in and out without affecting historical data or reports | IT, PMO, All Boards, Department Heads |
| Cannot easily integrate customer / supplier plans into our plans causing coordination difficulty | Data store to give / take feeds in a common form with suppliers, partners & customers to share data without specific tooling or bi lateral integrations | Integration simpler and more reliable, less coordination issues. Greater likelihood of common understanding of status and forecast. | IT, PMO, All Boards, Department Heads, Customers, Suppliers |
| Poor market appreciation of the issues and opportunities in P3M governance operation | It will add to market knowledge and enhance how the CxO level can exercise better control and decision making | Market perceives improvement as a possibility – less risky and less expensive than it presently does | PMO, All boards |
| Competing Professional Bodies / suppliers not agreeing a common approach between them, or between interest groups within them as this may risk losing reputation to a competitor | The model will be of greater value as a model of common ownership will not give competitive advantage to one supplier or another. It is agreed this model will offer a greater chance of adoption and sustainment by the community | Greater value, progress and simplicity of sustainment | PMO, All boards |