First Things First

1
First Things First

• Putting Project Prioritization Before Project
  Management

Suzanne Bonefas, ACS Technology Center Robert M.
Johnson, Jr., Rhodes College
2
Introduction

• The power of emotional appeals in resource
  allocation decisions creates its own cost.
• Many campuses look to project management as a way
  to get better value from their projects or to
  limit cost and time overruns.

3
Project Management

• has become more than an art but also a science.
• focuses on doing things right, stressing
  efficiency and organization.
• doesnt do the whole job.

4
Why Project Prioritization?

• Its not enough to do things right, one must also
  be sure of doing the right things. For that we
  need a framework and process for project
  prioritization.

5
Framework for DiscussionChristensens RPV
Framework

• Clayton M. Christensen, Seeing Whats Next (2004)
• RPVResources, Processes, and Values.
• An organizations resources, processes, and
  values affect, if not determine, what an
  organization can and cannot do.

6
Christensens RPV Framework -- Resources

• Resources are the most visible of the factors
  that contribute to what an organization can and
  cannot do.
• All assets, including people, equipment,
  relationships,
• They are both valuable and flexible
• Easiest to assess, but dont tell the whole story
  of an organizations capabilities

7
Christensens RPV Framework -- Processes

• Organizations create value as employees
  transform inputs of resources into products and
  services of greater worth. The patterns of
  interaction, coordination, communication, and
  decision making through which they accomplish
  these transformations are processes
• Processes are inherently inflexible.
• Balance between flexibility (ability to change)
  and efficiency.

8
Christensens RPV Framework -- Values

• Values in this framework refer to the strategic
  interests and directions of an organization
• All employees should understand the
  organizations values in order to make good
  decisions about project prioritization and
  day-to-day operations.
• A key metric of good management, in fact, is
  whether such clear and consistent values have
  permeated the organization.

9
Applying Christensens RPV Framework to Project
Prioritization 1

• ValuesReaffirm Them!
• Christensen writes An organization's values are
  the criteria by which employees make decisions
  about priorities

10
Applying Christensens RPV Framework to Project
Prioritization 2

• ProcessesReengineer Them!
• Christensen writes Organizations create value
  as employees transform inputs of resources into
  products and services of greater worth. The
  patterns of interaction, coordination,
  communication, and decision making through which
  they accomplish these transformations are
  processes.
• To reengineer processes, first understand your
  organizational culture!

11
Applying Christensens RPV Framework to Project
Prioritization 3

• ResourcesRedeploy Them!
• Christensen writes Resources are the most
  visible of the factors that contribute to what an
  organization can and cannot do. Resources include
  people, equipment, technology, product designs,
  brands, information, cash, and relationships with
  suppliers, distributors, and customers.
• Ensure that your resources are as flexible as
  they need to be.

12
7 Steps to Applying Christensens RPV Framework
to Project Prioritization

• If Project Management is not getting you the
  results you need and you cannot change the
  inputs, then you must change the processes and do
  so in a way that is consistent with your culture.

13
7 Steps to Applying Christensens RPV Framework
to Project Prioritization

• Step 1 Assess Capacity
• Step 2 Assess Culture
• Step 3 Inventory Needs
• Step 4 Clarify Criteria for Valuation
• Step 5 Create/Adopt a Discipline
• Step 6 Do the Valuation!
• Step 7 Improve the Process
• REPEAT!

14
7 Steps to Applying Christensens RPV Framework
to Project Prioritization

• First, prepare!
• Step 1 Capacity assessment
• Take a snapshot of your projects and how they map
  onto your personnel (time), your dollars, and
  your skill sets
• Goal of step 1 is clear understanding of how you
  currently expend your organizational capacity.

15
7 Steps to Applying Christensens RPV Framework
to Project Prioritization

• Step 2 Culture Assessment
• To understand culture, ask yourself how decisions
  are made, budgets are set, etc. Who is involved?
  What is their role? (Cameron and Quinn)
• Goal is to find an institutionally appropriate
  mode for project prioritization process
  (culturally acceptable process)

16
7 Steps to Applying Christensens RPV Framework
to Project Prioritization

• Step 3 Needs Inventory
• Take inventory of each units (divisions) IT
  needs as they relate to its operational
  objectives and to strategic plans.
• Goal is a high-level 30,000 ft. perspective (real
  needs, not wish lists, to the extent possible)

17
7 Steps to Applying Christensens RPV Framework
to Project Prioritization

• Step 4 Clarify strategic objectives for use as
  valuation principles or criteria.
• Where to look strategic plans (for organization
  and for divisions) as well as non-codified values
• For example, do you encounter the need to
  challenge the mentality of keeping up with the
  Joneses?
• Look for tensions and inconsistencies among
  values and opportunities to publicly resolve
  these tensions (again, culture plays a role) -
  better understanding among customers. Some values
  may need to go!
• Goal is a list of criteria that will be the basis
  for prioritization process

18
7 Steps to Applying Christensens RPV Framework
to Project Prioritization

• Step 5 Adopt a discipline for valuing projects
• Existing disciplines, e.g. Balanced Scorecard or
  Project Portfolio Management
• OR Simple home-grown rubrics
• Goal is to create framework for making good
  decisions.

19
(Step 5 continued) Example 1 Rhodes College
No. Institutional Goals VP(s) Director(s) Staff
1. Lowering costs by x/student.
2. Increasing student retention by x
3. Improving student satisfaction by x
4. Improving workplace satisfaction by x
5. Improving learning outcomes by x.
20
(Step 5 continued) Example 2 ACSTC
Criteria Asst. Directors Other staff Advisors
Resources required
Relevance to mission
Impact (schools, institutional, strategic)
Replicability
21
7 Steps to Applying Christensens RPV Framework
to Project Prioritization

• Now, begin the process!
• Step 6 Perform the valuation
• Determine relationship of projects to
  institutional goals
• Goal is to make good decisions

22
(Step 6 continued) Tips Consequences

• Evaluate projects in a batch use a regular
  project evaluation cycle (e.g., once a term).
• Know value of your assets and be able to explain
  it. E.g., set rates on time, check ROI, or use
  other payback metrics.
• Assign sunset clauses based on overruns in
  initial cost, recurring cost, or payback
  failures.
• Business units will get smarter and kill projects
  before you do.

23
7 Steps to Applying Christensens RPV Framework
to Project Prioritization

• Step 7 Refine the Process
• Determine what you can do differently
• For example
• Are there some projects you can stop now?
• Are there some workers who need different jobs?
• Goal is continuous improvement.

24
CONCLUSIONS

• Project management by itself is not enough. A
  campus needs the disciplines of project
  prioritization first.
• Values Without culturally sound project
  prioritization disciplines, the campus community
  will be dissatisfied with the project management
  it gets, no matter how good it is.
• Processes Without sound project prioritization
  processes, ITS, for its part, will always be
  reactive rather than responsive.
• Resources Without sound project prioritization,
  the institution will waste its resourcesmoney,
  time, and personnel-- without getting proper
  payback from its projects or its personnel.

25
RESOURCES

• Cameron, K. S. Quinn, R. E. (1999). Diagnosing
  and changing organizational culture. Upper Saddle
  River, NJ Prentice-Hall.
• Christensen, Clayton M. Assessing Your
  Organization's Innovation Capabilities, Leader to
  Leader. No. 21 Summer 2001. See
  www.pfdf.org/leaderbooks/l2l/summer2001/christense
  n.html.
• Henig, Peter D. The Efficient Frontier. CIO
  Insight, June, 2004, pp. 28-36.
• Bob Johnson, johnsonb_at_rhodes.eduSuzanne Bonefas,
  bonefas_at_colleges.org