Right Strategy Right Time Right Place

1
SEMINAR ZONE B
2
Right Strategy Right Project Right Place

• Using GIS and the MCC Gateway process to
  scrutinise and guide capital investment projects
  in Manchester

Bob Rutt Capital Programme Manager Manchester
City Council
Project Challenge London Olympia September 2007
3
Overview

• Challenges for Manchester City Council
• Why we fail to realise benefits
• Manchesters strategy for project delivery
• MCC Gateway review process
• MCC Project Management System (PMS)
• Location appraisal using GIS functionality
• Lessons Learned

4
Challenge

• 45 square miles
• 1 million customers

• 26,000 employees
• 1billion annual spend

Successful projects
Successful outcomes
Executive
Super Portfolio
Capital Programme Business Transformation
Projects (MIP) Other Service Improvement Projects
Service Department
Portfolio
Service Area
Programme
Business as usual
Projects
Point of Service
Project
Front Line / Back Office
Work Package
5
Failure to realise benefits

• The wrong project
• Poor strategic alignment and/ or weak business
  case
• Failure to involve key stakeholders
• Little or no option appraisal
• At the wrong time
• Inadequate resources and competing projects
• Poor planning
• In the wrong place
• Adverse local impact and unforeseen operational
  problems
• Missed opportunities for joint location
• Failure to involve service delivery partners

6
Wrong project?
Business Imperative
New Opportunity
Pet Projects
Good Ideas
Other Drivers
Political Imperative
Budget available?
YES proceed with necessary sign-off
NO - bid for resources
NO reject or recycle
Gain resources and proceed
Success or Failure?
7
Wrong time?

• Q Can we wait what are the costs of doing
  nothing?
• A Demands to do something are very strong
• Weve got to be seen to be doing something
• Q What about higher priority or competing
  projects?
• A This is important so it must be a priority
• Q Do we have buy-in from stakeholders?
• A There are too many to consult
• Well meet with them in due course

8
Readiness?

• Q Are delivery partners ready?
• A Ive spoken to my counterparts and they are up
  for it
• Q Has the approach to procurement been agreed?
• A Well deal with that when we know more
• Q Have we done sufficient planning to begin
  work?
• A Weve made a good start
• We know what we are doing (honest)

9
Delivery?

• Q Do we understand overall delivery timescales?
• A We can make an educated guess
• Weve done this before (havent we?)
• Q What about constraints and
• external dependencies?
• A We know it wont be easy !
• Q Are we sure about overall resource
  requirements?
• A Not really but we dont need much to get
  started
• Grants are available to meet most of the costs

10
Organisation?

• Q Are governance arrangements in place?
• A Not yet but we will set them up soon
• Q Do we have a senior responsible owner?
• A My boss supports this project
• Q Is there a delivery team in place with the
  right skills and experience?
• A Ive been told to do this as well as my day
  job
• We are looking for a project coordinator

11
Wrong place?

• Where is the project located?
• How was the project site selected?
• Do we know the location well enough to judge its
  scale and potential impact on other services and
  the local community?
• Is there a more valuable alternative use for this
  site?
• What are other services and agencies planning in
  the locality are there opportunities for
  co-location?

12
Manchesters response
A four phase strategy to bring greater surety to
delivery of the Capital Programme (value 300m
annually)
Generic method for project delivery (launched
summer 2003)
Phase One
Effective corporate scrutiny of projects
(launched summer 2004)
Phase Two
Automation of PM method and scrutiny (launched
summer 2005)
Phase Three
MCC Centre of PM excellence (launched summer
2005)
Phase Four
13
Effective corporate scrutiny

• WHAT WE HAD
• Flawed bidding process for new projects
• Reflecting departmental rather than corporate
  priority
• Viability and timing not fully tested
• Ownership and procurement not fully challenged
• Weak appraisal of location (sticky dot meeting
  2004)
• Poor appreciation of revenue consequences
• Masses of paper, poor communication,
  disappointment
• Hundreds of projects with no corporate visibility
• Projects that never closed

14
Effective corporate scrutiny

• WHAT WE WANTED
• Joined-up process (widely understood)
• Underpinned by standard templates
• Supported by departments and Audit
• Administered centrally by Capital Programme Group
• Embracing whole of project lifecycle
• Properly reflecting corporate strategy and
  priority
• Proper scrutiny of viability/ affordability/
  procurement
• Clear/ appropriate ownership (no hidden projects)
• Effective closure of projects

15
MCC Gateway process

• 0. Idea (Mandate)
• Strategic Fit (Review Group)
• Corporate Fit (Deputy Chief Executive)
• Bid Appraisal (Scrutiny Panel)
• Budget Approval (Executive and Council)
• Capital Spend Approval (City Treasurer)
• Project Completion (Practical Completion)
• Project Closure (Financial Completion)
• 8. Benefits Realisation (watch this space)

New Front End
New Panel
New Back End
16
Gateway flow chart
17
Phase 2 outcomes

• Highly effective Gateway 1 Review Group
• All capital projects reviewed at ideas stage
• Focus on business case/ delivery/ outcomes
• Cultural change (appreciation of project
  lifecycle)
• More joined up thinking/ working
• Reality check for some service areas
• Move towards programme delivery
• Improved communication/ feedback to owners
• Capital Budget approval with minimal challenge
• Very popular with Chief Executive/ Treasurer/
  Audit
• Right things - right place - right time

18
Automation of Gateway

• PMS (corporate application)
• Business case/ bid for resources (via MCC
  Gateway)
• Operational specification web
• based, intuitive, flexible, robust
• Functional specification (via
• stakeholder group)
• OJEU (PQQ, ITT, ITN)
• Business solution provider/ delivery
• partner (Atkins)
• PMS delivery and roll out
• Functional enhancements
• Interface development (SAP and
• Corporate GIS)

19
GIS interface

• Identified in original operational specification
• Close consultation with Corporate GIS Unit
• Functional specification agreed earlier this year
• PMS business solution via Atkins
• Delivered on Monday this week!

20
Effective location appraisal
21
Wider corporate benefits

• Building Schools for the Future and Academies
  Programme

Capital investment by value
22
PMS ongoing development
8
Stage 5 Benefits Realisation
Benefits

• Finance Overview
• Enter Spend Forecast

23
Phase 3 outcomes

• PMS roll out to all service departments
• 200 user accounts for capital projects /
  programmes
• 200 user accounts for non-capital projects and
  collaborative data sharing initiatives
• GIS decision support for GW1 Review Group
• Focus on programme management improvement
• Focus on financial reporting enhancements
• Focus on data sharing with delivery partners and
  other service agencies
• One stop shop for project delivery

24
Lessons Learned

• Complex organisations require simple solutions
• Corporate processes must be clear and generic
• Introduce technology at the right time
• Focus on business benefits and added value
• Collaborative working is transformational
• Support from middle managers is key
• One step at a time
• Having an SRO and PM is a great start

25

• Thank you
• and
• Any questions

26
SEMINAR ZONE B