The Newsletter of ProgM  
The Programme Management Specific Interest Group

June 2008 

We're back!!  We know that it's been a while since ProgM has sent you a newsletter; however, we have started the new schedule again, and will be sending you newsletters every month containing interesting information about events and other areas of interest in Programme Management. This month we feature: 

• Projects, Programmes and Portfolios
• Lessons of the Crusades
• Upcoming events

As usual details of events are on the programme management website at http://www.e-programme.com

If you are planning an event, or know of an event, website or publication that other programme management staff might be interested in you can now post them yourself on e-programme.com. 

Projects, Programmes and Portfolios [Geoff Reiss] 

The "Introduction to Programme Management", recently published by the Association of Project Management (APM) was the result of work put in by ProgM members and others. It provides one of the most succinct distinctions between programmes, project and portfolios. Whilst recognising that these terms have different across industries, it sets out the APM’s stance. This article summarised that stance.

What is Programme Management? 

The "Introduction to Programme Management" adopts a simplified definition for a programme:

"a co-ordinated set of projects that together achieve a beneficial change of a strategic nature for an organisation."

Because programmes are the method by which organisational strategy is delivered, programme management provides an interface between those responsible for deciding strategy and those responsible for managing the component projects and other activities. Thus, typical programme management responsibilities include:

• interpreting the organisation’s strategy so as to create practical programmes of improvement and change that will be successful within the organisation’s cultural and economic environment;
• selecting, initiating and monitoring the component projects that make up the programmes, including defining the scope of individual projects;
• co-ordination between component projects, so as to maximise the value of the combined deliverables of the component projects into fully usable capabilities that may be used to deliver the desired benefits;
• cancelling projects or changing the scope of projects in reaction to changes to the organisation’s strategy or environment;
• identifying, supporting, measuring and monitoring the actual delivery of benefits.

 In summary, programme management provides a layer of management, above that of the component project management teams, focussed on defining, integrating and co-ordinating the projects so that they will deliver benefits and to realise strategy – as shown in Figure 1.

 Figure 1: Programme Management in relation to organisational strategy and to project management

How Programmes Differ from Projects: 

Whilst there is frequently overlap between programme and project management activities, it is wrong to regard programmes as merely large and complex projects. They are usually larger than projects but not necessarily so.

ProgM research in the UK suggests that projects, on average, involve 17 people and can be expected to last over 20 months, whereas programmes typically involve 167 people and are expected to last over 40 months. However, the key difference is that programmes have a different purpose and require management different structures and skills to be successful.

Projects are the means to deliver specific one-off deliverables. To be successful, the required deliverables must be defined and specified in advance, with defined budgets and timetable expectations. By contrast, programmes are the means to deliver benefits or outcomes and amongst their activities are those needed to define and agree the scope of the various projects that will make the achievement of the desired benefits possible.

For example a project might create a new warehouse, i.e. a deliverable. Yet a warehouse on its own may have little direct value. However, when it is combined with the deliverables of other projects - such as a computerised stock-control system, a retrained workforce, a new organisational structure, and a new staff bonus scheme - into a programme - it provides the capability of supplying customers faster, with reduced costs and less wastage due to goods damaged in transit.

Success for a project is usually defined as creating the required deliverables to an adequate standard, within agreed time and cost constraints. Whether the deliverable, such as a new warehouse, is successfully used or not is irrelevant. Indeed, there are many projects that have been deemed highly successful that have created deliverables that have never actually been used. Success for a programme is usually measured in terms of creating a whole new capability and, increasingly, on the extent to which the expected benefits are actually realised.

The term programme management is often incorrectly used to refer to the execution of a number of projects by a contractor for a client. Examples include the construction of a number of water treatment plants for a local utility body and a series of retail unit refurbishments by a shop fitting contractor for a retail chain. Such multi-project management activities often share a common budget and resources; frequently there will be a common approach and methodology.

However, this work will typically form a part of a larger programme and it is only at that programme level that benefits will play a key role. In the case of the water treatment plants other projects to measure water quality and improve other parts of the infrastructure will combine with the treatment plants to deliver the Key Performance Indicators required by OFWAT. In the retail example, only when the marketing, MIS and staff training projects complement the shop refurbishments will the increased income and customer satisfaction benefits become possible.

Table 1 below summarises some of the key differences between programmes and projects.
 

How Programme Management Differs from Portfolio Management:

Over the last five years or so, there has been growing interest in portfolio management. This has many similarities to programme management, not least its focus on the achievement of benefits. However, whereas programme management relates to the co-ordinated management of a set of related projects – typically where the projects are mutually dependent and all required to create the required capability and business benefits - portfolio management is generally applied to unrelated projects.

The linking characteristics of a portfolio lie in areas other than benefits, all projects within an organisation, or single department, or all customer projects, or simply as an efficient way of making use of common resources. Thus portfolio management is akin to the similarly named activity which takes place in the financial world, where a portfolio of investments is managed to yield maximum returns, capital growth, etc. In such a portfolio there is no relationship between the different stocks and shares – each investment is self contained and is bought or sold only to achieve the objectives of the portfolio as a whole.

Portfolio management is an approach that is widely used in the IT and civil engineering sectors and often enables more effective management and support for IT projects, e.g. of development resources, business analysts, solutions architects, web designers, etc, whilst minimising the costs through the elimination of duplicate management and support activities. It also helps to create an understanding of how the various IT projects will contribute or not to the achievement of strategies of the various business units for which they are being run – something that is not always clear with traditional approaches to project management.

Portfolio management may be characterised as a ‘mass production’ approach to project management, ensuring that the portfolio as a whole meets the organisation’s objectives, with projects being added or removed independently of others in the portfolio. Programme management is closer to ‘batch production’, where the component projects are mutually dependent and should only be added to or removed if that will contribute to the better achievement of that programmes benefits. . It should also be noted that a portfolio may include programmes, as well as projects.

The key fact is that both programme and portfolio management require a similar strategic awareness to be successful, similar people and organisational empathy, similar flexibility, and a similar focus on benefit achievement.

Therefore in summary:  

A programme should deliver strategic improvements to an organisation measured through benefits. Programmes deliver "outcomes".

A project delivers something: a deliverable, a product, an "output".

A portfolio is a collection of projects that benefit from being treated as a group for reasons separate from the benefits they may deliver.

[1] See “Analysis of Research Questionnaire”, October 2005, available on the ProgM website at www.e-programme.com
[2] For a definition and further guidance on portfolio management, see the “APM Body of Knowledge” as identified in a previous footnote. 

Lessons of the Crusades [Paul Rayner] 
At the time of the crusades, the concept of business programmes was unknown, but two great leaders from opposing ends of the known World both demonstrated the key attributes of successful programme management.  They mobilised the resources of many nations to fight bloody battles against each other, grew to respect each other, and are still widely-revered in the lands that they once ruled. 

Saladin – the Pride of Islam 

Saladin was born in Tickrit in what is now Iraq, the same place where, 800 years later, Saddam Hussein was born.  The son of a high ranking official, he used cunning, diplomacy and negotiating skill to become the ruler of Libya, Egypt, Syria, Northern Iraq and Western Arabia.  The thorn in his side was the Christian Kingdom of Jerusalem, which occupied what we now call Lebanon, Israel and Jordan and which straddled the communications between the two halves of his empire.  The Kingdom had been established by the 1st crusade, eighty years before.  

As long as the Moslem world had been more disunited and faction-ridden than the Christian knights of the Holy Land, the Kingdom had flourished.  But Saladin could now bring all the resources of Islam to bear.  Furthermore, he was deeply religious.  His correct name - Salah ad-Din – means “righteousness of the faith" and one of his great pleasures in later life was listening to recitations from the Holy Book.  One of the bonds that united his empire was his pledged to lead a “jihad” or holy war to free Palestine from the Christians.

In 1187 Saladin seized his opportunity.  He attacked the Kingdom and manoeuvred the Christian army to annihilation at the battle of Hattin.  Three months later, he recovered Jerusalem for Islam.

Saladin was particularly notable for his temperance, patience and good manners.  His court chronicler noted that “he was well mannered.  I never saw him insult anyone.  He always stuck to his word.”  He is quoted as saying “Victory is changing the hearts of your opponents by gentleness and kindness” – an excellent approach to stakeholder management.  Also, he was personally frugal.  When he died, in his own bed at the age of 55, his friends found he had insufficient money to pay for a funeral – he had given it all away to emirs to maintain their support.
  
Richard I – the Warrior King

But Saladin was not to enjoy his success in peace.  The Pope preached a crusade to recover the Holy City and the three most powerful rulers of Europe responded – Richard of England, Phillip II of France and Frederick IV of Germany.  Frederick was killed on the journey and Phillip was always half-hearted, having been manoeuvred into the crusade by Richard, who feared that if left behind in France he would take advantage of Richard’s absence to sow rebellion.  Richard, by contrast, was totally committed.

In the prime of his life, Richard had learnt the art of war in rebellion against his own father and brothers.  As well as England, he ruled Normandy and all of Western France.  Like a good programme manager, he ensured adequate resources by selling everything he could to raise money.  He is reputed to have said he “Would sell London if he could find anyone rich enough to buy it”. 

Furthermore, Richard’s preparations were methodical.  On the way to the Holy Land, he conquered Cyprus, to provide a base for the crusaders.  He then led the attack on Saladin at Acre and captured the city to provide a bridgehead for further operations, before leading his army South towards Jerusalem.  In spite of constant harassment, by force of personality he maintained the cohesion, discipline and morale of his heterogeneous army of English, French, Fleming, German and Italian speakers that owed allegiance to a myriad other Kings, Dukes, Counts and Barons.  With the clever use of his fleet to provide supplies, he inflicted a stunning defeat on Saladin at Arsuf. 

Meanwhile, at Jaffa, a handful of crusaders had barricaded themselves in the citadel and refused to surrender to a vast army of islamic besiegers, confident that Richard would come to their aid.  He did not disappoint and personally led an amphibious landing to rescue them and then personally led the charge that routed the Moslems.  Throughout the campaign, his personal courage inspired those around him and gained the admiration of his opponents.  Saladin’s court chronicler described Richard as “a powerful man, of great courage and spirit … excitable, brave and clever”. 

Yet his tiny army, so far from home, was insufficient to destroy Saladin on home territory.  In the end, with his brother John rebelling back in England, Richard compromised and signed a treaty which, though failing to recover Jerusalem, guaranteed the survival of the Christian Kingdom on the coast for another ninety years.  

Approaches to Programme Management

Both Saladin and Richard were extremely successful in their programmes of military enterprise and state building, welding diverse and antagonistic multi-national contingents into successful teams.  Both were brave, educated, dedicated and able to inspire confidence in others.  Both could be devious and brutal when the need arose – and, like good programme managers - both were prepared to compromise and accept a good result, rather than throw away everything that they had gained in an impossibly expensive pursuit of total victory.  Both knew how to delegate authority and to leave trusted lieutenants to work on their behalf.  Both appear to have been religiously motivated, but also fully aware of the public relations benefits gained from using religion to justify actions that gave them secular advantage.

In one respect they were different.  Richard’s personal courage was sometimes accompanied by rashness and a violent temper.  At Acre, he quarrelled violently with Duke Leopold of Austria, which subsequently led his capture and imprisonment during the return journey from the Palestine.  Contemporary chroniclers record that Saladin never lost his temper.  Richard’s energy, determination and sometimes reckless personal bravery motivated his followers to deliver the near impossible and suggest he would have been excellent at organising the complex inter-relationships of delivering a large civil-engineering programme.  Saladin’s equally ruthless but more thoughtful approach, combined with his love for administering Koranic justice, suggests he would have been completely at home ensuring the long-term realisation of business benefits from a programme of organisational change.

Saladin is the inspiration of many modern Middle-eastern rulers.  His personal symbol of the eagle is incorporated in the coats of arms of Egypt and Iraq.  Richard, always conscious of his dynastic obligations, adopted the motto of “Dieu et mon droit”, which translates as “By God and my right”, which is still the motto of the British sovereign.  Saladin is commemorated in heroic statues in Damascus and at Kerak in Jordan, while Richard’s statue stands outside the Houses of Parliament in London.  Both their tombs can still be visited, more than 800 years after their deaths: Saladin’s in Damascus and Richard’s at Fontevraud in Western France – could any modern programme manager ask for more?       

Forthcoming Programme Management Events

The table provides an overview and links to each event.  Please let us know about your events, we will publicise anything relevant to our readership.

Your feedback is important to us