It is now more and more common in recent years for all of us to have to deliver this message to possible clients with the implementation of an Enterprise Project Managing System. It's no think about that a lot of consulting organizations who deliver EPM system application assistance also manage comprehensive requests to implement Job Management Offices. "Do you have a PMO? very well is now one of our most immediate watershed questions. Those who answer no are usually not in a position to take immediate good thing about an EPM system. Those who answer yes often have founded some of the fundamental pre-requisites that anyone should be looking for before writing money for their favorite EPM Software. Here are a few of the real key pre-requisites we look for if a client calls and asks us to apply an EPM System.
Carry out You have a PMO?
I might as well start here given really how I started the column. The existence of a project management office is almost essential to a successful EPM application and here's why. Just about every EPM system essentially brings many project managers and project resources together into a centralized project management environment. All their data will now be on the inside stored. The data may be centrally calculated and analyzed. The rewards being wanted by those who buy EPM systems are typically centralized benefits; such things as reference capacity planning and inter-project impact reports and organization-wide project variance analysis and corporate reporting. All of these things can be wonderful, nevertheless they imply some level of coordinated action. The data must be saved by everyone in the same period of time. The information must be analyzed very much the same. The data from project one must be able to integrate a few level with the data from project two and so on. This kind of simply doesn't happen by chance and while EPM tools have capacity for matched action, they cannot make people behave differently.
What each EPM system absolutely needs is a centralized place where standards and the enterprise project management can be maintained. It takes someone who will be looking individuals to comply with the central system and will ensure that data received is both complete and acceptable to the standards which may have been established. Imagine if there was no common understanding of how to define reference assignments or even how to name resources. A lot of project managers would enter in them as skills, others as individuals, others as departments. It would be chaos. Imagine if some project managers updated their projects every week, others every month but still others only at the project's outset and achievement; you'd never know when you could produce an accurate organization-wide report.
A flag-bearer for standards
Although we're discussing standards, there should be someone central who will be their champ. Even if these methods and procedures somehow acquired produced from the end users, that will be their keeper? Some will say "We'll all you can keep them, " but that leaves no-one accountable to ensure the practices are being followed. Standards are essential to an EPM system even if that product is completely manual. Some people get concerned that this centralized person will have too much authority but this can also be managed within the conditions. The notion that a group of folks can be accountable is silly. Persons will do whatever they think is best but creation of standards won't happen randomly. This can only be created by someone central. Moreover, you are have to think about the future. Even if standards and practices have been used, there will be changes. When a change must be produced, who will create it, update it, get it accepted by everyone and then ensure that it is written into corporate policy? Again, this doesn't happen from a random user, it requires someone whose role it is to support those standards.
Project Management Procedures and Procedures
One of the most frequent things we face when we're called by a possible client is a lack of central process. When we ask to see a pair of accepted practices and procedures for project management, we usually get a blank look. It's not enough to have a PMO and a centralized Standard Bearer for the process, get actually got to chew the bullet and create and agree on those standards. Our usual suggestion is to start out with the most minimal number of procedures possible and then let the list broaden over time. Some clients will endeavour to create the ultimate? ber-list of procedures and procedures and conclude with a 700 site tome that no-one will ever read because it can too confronting. Starting small but getting a high level of consensus is by far the preferable plan.
One way or the other though, you're heading to have to concur on a few fundamentals:
First, how you'll name things. Naming conventions for projects, tasks and resources is absolutely essential That you'll store your jobs centrally in whatever tool or repository you've chosen. A firm agreement should be made on what data must be saved and what data need not be. Without this contract and someone who will monitor compliance, your EPM system is going nowhere fast fast.
Frequency of revisions. It makes no sense to have some data updated every week and some updated every season. Make an agreement on what the frequency should be for different varieties of data.