The program/project management

1. Under the Office of Inspector General Audit (#12-08 for December 2011) for the FBI Sentinel System,
development is now done under Agile. Describe what you consider the most important problem discussed in the
audit including the page number where the problem is detailed.

2. Using the Office of Inspector General Audit (#12-38 for September 7, 2012) for the FBI Sentinel
System, describe what you consider the most important aspect of managing Sentinel that was:
A. effective in getting Sentinel into production citing page numbers,
B. neglected while getting Sentinel into production citing page numbers,
C. not included in the July Sentinel deployment citing page numbers with your opinion on impact on Sentinel’s
users.

3. Describe in detail the most important aspect of program management that you found improved in the
Sentinel case including why you think it is the most important.

4. Describe in detail what role the PMO has played in Sentinel’s deployment covering a PMO’s primary
roles and functions and its relationship with Sentinel’s management.

5. What role did the introduction of using Agile development methodology have on:
A. the program/project management.
B. the PMO.

PROJECT MANAGEMENT OFFICES:
A WASTE OF MONEY?

The risks of starting a PMO have never been greater, new research shows. After years of observing project
management, I agree.

Will most companies that implement a project management office take on higher IT costs without improving
performance?
That’s the bold headline of a Hackett Group study of more than 200 organizations. It’s not just hype: I happen
to agree that the risks of a disastrous PMO implementation have never been greater.

Don’t get me wrong: PMOs can be incredibly valuable when they manage the right projects through to
business-focused completion and kill the projects that don’t measure up. Trouble is, PMOs aren’t right for
every organization, and every organization won’t match the intent with the follow-through. Creating a PMO
under the wrong circumstances is likely to produce nothing but more project overhead.
Hackett Group, an operations improvement firm, found that PMO use for companies of every stripe grew from 2007
through 2009 but steadily declined thereafter. Its research backed up some of the findings in
InformationWeek’s 2012 Enterprise Project Management survey, which also traced a reduction in PMOs and formal
PMO skill sets over time.
The Hackett bombshell: In some cases, the IT organization’s performance actually improved once the PMO was
eliminated.
Hackett also found that more PMO oversight doesn’t necessarily improve business results. “In a weak PMO, poor
management of time, resources, requirements or customer expectations encourages shortcuts that increase design
weaknesses that drive higher maintenance and support costs,” the Hackett report concludes. “Failure to
properly identify and manage risk associated with poor technical decisions can also lead to complexity. Even
the selection of projects for the portfolio can influence complexity if the PMO does not understand the
long-term tradeoffs associated with certain kinds of technically risky projects.”
Many of the PMOs of poorer-performing organizations have employees with Project Management Institute and other
formal certifications, Hackett found. The problem is that those employees often lack a working knowledge of
the business or its technology infrastructure, and their main functions are as task-list keepers and process
cops. Most of us wouldn’t want to provision a whole business unit full of those kinds of people, yet I’ve seen
it happen, mostly because management doesn’t want to pay extra for business leadership.
In successful organizations, Hackett found four key practices: Centralized IT demand management,
accountability for business benefits, standardization of processes and architecture, and program and project
reviews. OK, let’s translate that consultant speak into English. Their PMOs work with business units to review
and set priorities for the IT services they use. They’re responsible for results, not allowed to point fingers
and say: “Well, you didn’t listen to me!” They revisit projects after they’re completed to assess lessons and
adjust practices.
Yet those key practices might still not be enough to justify a PMO. In some cases, Hackett says, agile
development and collaboration methodologies such as Scrum can eliminate the need for heavyweight PMOs.
I don’t think the PMO is dead, but given the research findings and my own experiences, proceed with caution.
Watch out for career builders who prioritize padding their resumes (“I built a PMO!”) over delivering
organizational benefits. Be minimalist: Anything that gets implemented should have a plain-English reason.
Above all, ensure that the executive team is committed to the PMO. After many years of observing projects and
project management, I know this: A PMO that gets just lip service from the C suite won’t get the resources or
executive attention it needs to succeed. The PMO will then linger on, both for project managers and the
business units it’s inflicted upon, for year after year before it’s put out of its misery. Bottom line: while
the benefits are there, the risks have never been greater.
Jonathan Feldman is a contributing editor for InformationWeek and director of IT services for a rapidly
growing city in North Carolina.

 
ORDER THIS ESSAY HERE NOW AND GET A DISCOUNT !!!

 

You can place an order similar to this with us. You are assured of an authentic custom paper delivered within the given deadline besides our 24/7 customer support all through.

 

[order_calculator]