kpmg & uams project & programme management survey

1

Project & Programme Management and

Enterprise Architecture in BelgiumAre you ready?

Companies in demand for professional project

management and strategic alignment

SurvEy rESultS

© 2012 KPMG Advisory, a Belgian civil CVBA/SCRL and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved. Printed in Belgium.

2 3

Table of ContentsForeword

Research Background

Project and Programme Management

A. Projects and programmes are not always a success story...

A. Importance of Enterprise Architecture

B. Structured project and programme management pays off

B. The positioning of Enterprise Architecture

C. Benefits management - a life cycle approach

C. The impact of Enterprise Architecture

D. Survey results - Belgium vs. the Netherlands

E. Project Management Trends - Agile Project Management

Executive Summary

Appendix

Enterprise Architecture

4

38

8

28

26

22

36

14

34

10

32

6

40

30


4 5

Foreword

the last couple of years have been a big challenge for many companies. less focus was on the realisation of strategic objectives, executing long term programmes and undertaking transfor-mational initiatives as a result of having to be reactive to the environment. However, as the time since the burst of the financial crises progresses, strategic activities are put on the CxO’s priority list once again.

During the economic downtime, the daunting task of simply surviving took away all energy and thus attained the core focus of organisations. After this difficult period, many companies, although not all, managed to breathe again making a revival of strategic programmes a logical consequence. One could therefore expect to see programmes focusing again on accomplishing strategic goals instead of running projects with cost-decreasing intentions.

Based on the results of our survey performed in Belgium at the beginning of 2012 we conclude that budgets for strategic projects are made available again in parallel with a renewed intention for building up professional capabilities around programme and project management. This insight goes together with a strong message from survey responding companies indicating that they are often dissatisfied with the results delivered by their projects. It is clear that expectations around strategic goal fulfilment often are not being met. This has a direct ‘bottom line’ effect: strategy realisation gets delayed, costs increase, de-liverables are of lower quality than expected and overall stakeholders’ satisfaction is not yielding.

Understanding the underlying reasons for this overall underperformance is important. In this context, the survey shows a positive correlation between project management maturity within organisations and the realised success rates of executed projects. In other words, the survey indicated that more mature organisations (in terms of how project management is done) are more successful in realising the end objectives. Another clear outcome of the survey is that many companies struggle to translate business ideas and strategies into a concrete, executable portfolio of projects. In this respect, a great role is to be played by the Enterprise Architecture function, helping to clearly structure and establish the DNA of the transformation initiative and enabling portfolio management to be the GPS leading the company through it. A key point of attention is that the Enterprise Architecture function is mandated and positioned correctly by the company’s leadership. Still a lot of work is to be done in this area as the survey pinpoints that EA is still a very young immature, though upcoming, function and that companies are on a journey to position it correctly.

These days, it is not enough anymore to deliver high quality products and services as such. On top of this, companies need to focus on delivering end to end value to their customers. Delivering this kind of customer value requires product and go to market flexibility, enterprise agility throughout all business functions and real-time tools to manage performance. This has a major effect on the type of projects that are on the wish list of today’s CxO’s and demands professional portfolio-, programme- and project man-agement and an optimal assimilation of strategic, tactic and operational objectives through the use of a mature Enterprise Architecture function.

The survey and this report are a joint effort of KPMG Advisory Belgium and the Antwerp Management School. We hope that this survey offers you valuable insights and that it helps you to benchmark your company in terms of where you stand in optimising the successes of your strategic initiatives.

Stephan Claes Partner KPMG Advisory

[email protected]

Prof. dr. Steven De Haes Academic Director ITAG Research Institute Antwerp Management School

[email protected]

Anthony van de ven Director KPMG Advisory

[email protected]

Drs. Kim Maes Researcher ITAG Research Institute Antwerp Management School

[email protected]


6 7

Executive Summary

BUDGETS OF PROJECTS AND PROGRAMMES INCREASE BUT THEIR SUCCESS IS NOT GUARANTEED

LOw IMPORTANCE OF ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE

STRUCTURED PROJECT AND PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT PAyS OFF

TyPICALLy CENTRALLy POSITIONED

BENEFITS MANAGEMENT ESSENTIAL IN ALL PHASES OF A PROJECT AND PROGRAMME

CONTRIBUTING TO ENTERPRISE AGILITy

Projects and programmes are mainly launched to achieve strategic changes in the organisation. 3 out

of 4 survey respondents indicated that the impor-tance of project management increased, as compared

to last year. yet, only 45% of respondents manage to complete less than half of their projects on time and

within budget, while delivering the expected benefits.

Organisations need to cope with the ever changing market environment and thus need to have instru-

ments to steer in an agile way. Enterprise Architec-ture (EA) can play a very important role, but currently

it is not yet the case. 38% of respondents indicate that EA does not to play any role within the organisation.

70% companies do not have any certified EA practition-ers.

Rate of success increases when project / pro-gramme management is applied in a structured way.

This includes formalisation of the processes but most importantly achieving higher maturity of the process-

es related to business case, risk and benefits manage-ment, application of lessons learned etc. Companies

who manage to do so consistently reach higher success rates in their projects and programmes outcomes.

In most cases, the EA function is executed from a single place within the organisation (central position-

ing of EA). Despite its strategic dimension, Enterprise Architecture is sometimes outsourced (14% of survey

respondents).

Organisations undertake projects and programmes in order to achieve certain benefits. yet 52% of com-

panies do not identify and follow up their benefits and only a few do that on a regular basis. The survey indi-

cates companies successfully making use of a benefits management process achieve a higher quality of out-

comes and the achievement of the expected benefits.

A successfully implemented and managed Enter-prise Architecture helps to deal with the constant

increase in the IT landscape’s maintenance costs as well as risks and loss of flexibility. Survey respondents

indicated that currently, their EA function mostly con-tributes to the enterprise agility.

PROJECT AND PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE

THE CORE SURVEy TEAM: Jeroen Habils (KPMG), Kim Maes (Antwerp Management School), Nele Steelandt (KPMG), Bartosz Balcerowicz (KPMG), Niek de Visscher (KPMG), Kara Segers (KPMG)


8 9

Project and Programme Management

Projects and programmes are a mean to realise the corporate vision. they help an organisation to stand out from the crowd, pursue the latest trends, approach the market with new products or simply comply with regulatory requirements or help them to survive.

If the outcome of projects and programmes is so important, the way they are executed should get the utmost attention of the organisation. this can be achieved through a well-designed and implemented enterprise portfolio management or, in the case of a given project or pro-gramme, a well-established Project/Programme Management Office.

Drivers for undertaking projects and programmes are OK...

The enterprise portfolio composition should reflect the strategic priorities of an organisation and the level of its ambitions. It should also be a place for focusing on continuity and complying with external require-ments. Proper balancing of priorities and ensuring that enough capacity is available to realise the strategic initiatives are some of the main challenges of enterprise portfolio management.

This survey shows that in general the achievement of strategic objectives is the most important driver to launch a project or programme. Compliance with laws and regulations and assurance of continuity have an equal share in the portfolios of survey respondents. This demonstrates that Belgian companies are pri-marily focusing on achieving their strategy through projects and programmes, which is as it should be. Of course the portfolio composition will fluctuate over time and sector depending on e.g. future regulations (such as Solvency, Risk Management, Corporate Governance etc.).

23% Comply with law and regulations

26% Ensuring continuity of your organisation

6% Other

45% Achievement of strategic objectives

Drivers for undertaking projects and programmes

...but are the achievements also in line with the expectations?

One thing is to build a portfolio of pro-jects and programmes, another thing, is to ensure they are delivered effectively and efficiently. what does an effec-tive and efficient delivery mean? Each company needs to answer this ques-tion through a perspective of its own vision – do we deliver products, qual-ity or value to our clients? How do we measure success in delivering these items? Similar metrics should be used in measuring the success of a project or programme.

In our survey we have investigated the most typical metrics of project / pro-gramme success in order to find out if the stakeholders’ expectations have been met with the results.

“Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.”

Sun Tzu

Definitions(1)(2)

PROJECT

A project is a temporary endeavor with a defined be-ginning and end (usually time-constrained, and often constrained by funding or deliverables), undertaken to meet unique and agreed upon goals and objectives, that may bring beneficial change or added value.

PROGRAMME

A programme is a collection of interrelated projects which enable change and increase distinct and meas-urable potential benefits to an organisation which could not be realised when projects are managed independently.

PORTFOLIO

A portfolio is a set of programmes, projects and other assets that is grouped to facilitate the effective man-agement and monitoring, in order to meet the stra-tegic business objectives and to create sustainable value to the organisation.

PROJECT / PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT OFFICE

A business secretariat that provides a combination of managerial, administrative, consulting, and techni-cal services to support the initiation, execution, and delivery of programmes or projects. Therefore, the of-fice provides effective methodologies, standards and tools, helps with the set up of programme structures and processes, documents and assures meeting min-utes and lessons learned, and facilitates training and development.


10 11

A. Projects and programmes are not always a success story...

Projects and programmes are essential in achieving the strategic goals. However, even though the awareness of project management is usually well incorporated in the business rationale, the successful execution of projects and programmes is not always self-evident.

Significance of project and programme management has risen over the last year...

72% of survey respondents indicated that the importance of project and programme management has increased compared to the last year. No one reported that it was lower. The portfolio budgets and the number of projects have also grown (only a minority of companies spend less than the year before).

Additional spending on projects and programmes leads to an increased awareness of the importance of proper project and programme management. This appreciation is a good indicator of the care and atten-tion the companies are likely to pay towards the quality of the delivery process, not only the outcomes. It may also indicate a willingness to improve the existing processes which is correct because still many projects and programmes fail to deliver the expected results, as presented later on in this report.

“Trying to manage a project without project management is like trying to play a football game without a game plan.”

K. Tate (Past Board Member, PMI)

KPMG InsightProjects and programmes are important for the realisation of the organisation’s strategy. In many cases, however, the potential benefits of solid portfolio man-agement are not fully utilised. There is still room for improvement when it comes to directing and steering the enterprise portfolio.

TIPS:

•Set up a portfolio management framework to select, monitor and steer projects and programmes effectively and improve the quality of the overall portfolio.

•Link projects and programmes to the corporate strategic goals (create clear “line-of-sight”) and prioritise based on their contribution to the value they cre-ate for the organisation. This will help to maximise the realisation of the ex-pected benefits.

•Setup clear project / programme review triggers that will enable to identify those off track and take timely decisions to re-scope, re-plan, restructure or abandon.

20% Much

Higher

28% Equal

52% Higher

Importance of project and programme management as compared to last year

Decrease of more

than 100%

Decrease of more

than 50%

Decrease of more

than 25%

Increase of more than

25%


50%


100%

Decrease between

5 and 25%

Increase between

5 and 25%

Equal number of projects (+-5%)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%Projects / programmes

How many projects and programmes are undertaken by your organisation compared to the last year?

Budget

How much has your budget for projects and programmes grown compared to the the last year?


12 13

…, but delivering projects and programmes successfully is still a hard nut to crack.

There are many metrics in place for measuring project / programme success, starting from the traditional ones – cost, time and quality – up to the modern value-creation measurement. Cost and time are the easi-est metrics to measure, as they are quantitative, and they usually constitute a natural basis for decision making. The concept of Earned Value Management is well known to most project managers but rarely used in the organisations KPMG works with. On the other hand, the awareness of quality and benefits management has increased steadily over the last years. More and more organisations realise that deal-ing with and resolving errors in the early stage of a project pays off and following-up the achievement of expected benefits helps improve forecasting in the future.

The survey results show that only around 50% of the expected benefits are gained through projects and programmes. Moreover, this comes at a higher cost than foreseen, and the results come later than planned.

Executing projects and programmes according to schedule seems to be the biggest challenge - only 9% of the survey respondents deliver 75-100% of their portfolio on time. In case of budget and benefits it is respectively 18% and 14% - a bit better than timing. More than 30% of companies indicate that their projects and programmes are at least 76% compliant with the quality criteria that have been set up.

These numbers are not startling nor new. For years, organisations have been (and still are) struggling to deliver on time and within budget. To improve this, lessons learned sessions should be embedded in the existing project and programme management processes with the purpose of evaluating mistakes in the planning and execution in order to prevent them in the future. The responsible managers have seldom time to make such observations before rushing to another endeavour.

“Plans are nothing; planning is everything”

Dwight D. Eisenhower

Quality

Portfolio

ProgrammeBene

fit

Benefit

Benefit

Project

Cost Time

0% 0%

10% 10%

20% 20%

30% 30%

40% 40%

50%

0% - 25% 0% - 25%0% - 25% 0% - 25%26% - 50% 26% - 50%26% - 50% 26% - 50%51% - 75% 51% - 75%51% - 75% 51% - 75%76% - 100% 76% - 100%76% - 100% 76% - 100%

50%

% of projects / programmes delivered on time

% of projects / programmes delivered within budget

% of projects / programmes delivered in accordance

with established quality criteria

% of projects / programmes that achieved

> 90% of benefits


14 15

B. Structured project and programmemanagement pays off

Improving projects and programmes success needs to start from the top. “you cannot manage what cannot be measured”. Project and programme sponsors and key stakeholders should demand and obtain in a timely fashion reliable and significant information in order to direct projects instead of following them. this can be achieved through a strong, empowered and structured PMO, as a structured approach pays off.

A structured programme and project management approach benefits any investment. Research shows that the use of tools such as risk assessments, business cases, project methodology, lessons learned, and project management training contribute in a positive way to project success (3)(4)(5).

Structured project and programme management leads to higher success rates

One of the indicators of the maturity of processes is the extent to which they are formalised and analysed periodically for improvement.

In this survey, none of the respondents making use of informal project / programme management pro-cesses managed more than 75% of their portfolio on time, whereas 13% of those using formal processes managed to do that. The differences are even more striking when looking at the percentage of companies that deliver less than 25% of projects / programmes on time – 40% of companies with informal project / programme management and less than 15% in the case of formal process.

Similar results, although with less profound differences, can be observed in relation to the realisation of the projects and programmes in terms of the budget foreseen.

KPMG InsightTo develop strong project and programme management capabilities, it is key to invest in efficient governance, training (even up to the steering committee level), as well as lessons learned and risk management.

TIPS:

•Designating an effective PMO is a project on its own – it requires planning, budget and implementa-tion of an appropriate governance model in addition to support of the project stakeholders.

•Ensure that the PMO is correctly empowered to get the information needed and to implement PMO processes. Support the PMO in implementing these processes in your own organisation unit.

•Do not focus solely on risks regarding time and cost, but also those concerning the achievement of the expected benefits. Perform regular risk assessments in order to identify risks as soon as pos-sible and mitigate them.

• It is not because you do not see any risks in the risk register the risk will not materialise. Make sure that people know how to identify and measure risks on your projects.

• Improve processes by regularly drawing conclusions from lessons learned. Don’t log the lessons just for the sake of having a log – embed the process in the culture of the organisation.

0%

% of projects / programmes delivered on time

% of projects / programmes delivered within budget

FormalFormal Informal Informal

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%0% - 25%

26% - 50%

51% - 75%

76% - 100%

Success rate as indicated by survey respondents using formal or informal project management processes


16 17

RISK MANAGEMENT

Risk management is used to monitor, control or minimise the occurrence and/or impact of uncontrollable events. These events can have different source: environment, budget, time, people, etc. (6).

risks are usually identified and controlled...

Around 93% of survey respondents indicate that they carry out some kind of risk assessments - out of which 48% identifies and controls risks regularly and 47% only at the start of a project / programme con-duct a one-off review.

11% Identified and controlled at each

transition to the next phase 5% Identified at each transition to the next phase

18% Identified and controlled at the start

29% Identified at the start

37% Identified and controlled at a

fixed frequency

... typically by the project team itself but not only.

Almost 30% of the risks assessments are performed regularly by the project management teams and around the same magnitude is performed ad hoc. Sometimes, however, external reviewers are also en-gaged who do not participate in the daily project management operations and therefore may have a differ-ent, often more independant way, angle of seeing things – this includes internal audit (14%) and external assessments (5%).

robust risk management stongly enhances the quality of outcomes but also the ability to deliver within time and budget.

45% of survey respondents carrying out risk assessments claim to complete their projects and pro-grammes within established quality criteria as opposed to 19% of those not doing such assessments. with respect to time and budget, those organisations performing regular assessments are better off (10% vs. 7% deliver more than 75% projects and programmes on time and 21% vs. 15% deliver more than 75% within budget).

- Frequency by which organisations identity and control project and

programme risks -

BUSINESS CASE

Business cases increase the understanding of the impact of an investment before, during and after its implementation. It is an objective instrument to approve an initial idea, to communicate the investment objectives and to analyse the expected project outcomes (7)(8).

Developing detailed business cases increases the investment success rate. Some organisations also de-velop a high-level business case prior to a detailed one, to reduce the initial investment of resources and to enable early innovative ideas of which the value is not clear yet (9)(10).

Business cases are used regularly by 64% of respondents ...

16% of survey respondents have a formal policy describing the usage of a business case and claim to consistently adhere to it. 48% have a comparable policy, but only make use of the business case for special projects or programmes. The remaining part (36%) do not consistently make use of any form of business case.

... but their content could be further improved ...

Most respondents include in their business cases general information on projects or programmes along with costs and quantitative benefits which enables to perform a financial analysis of the feasibility of the initiative. Qualitative benefits, harder to measure, are less frequently included in the business cases, the same goes for risks that have been taken into consideration. Finally, the assumptions taken, being another important element of the business case review, are documented in less than 40% of organisations.

Elements of importance for a business case according to the respondents

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

General information on the project (rationale, design and transition)

Costs (structural and one-off) over a period of at least 5 years

Quantitative Benefits (structural and one-off) over a period of at least 5 years

Financial ratios (NPV, ROI, Payback, etc.)

Explanation of the considered scenarios (current situation and various future situations)

Risk analysis

Advice to management

Stakeholder Analysis

Qualitative benefits

Insights into the underlying facts and assumptions

Insights into the methods for income management


18 19

... and fewer ad hoc reviews.

Just like the majority of project / programme management tools – business cases as a document present only limited value to the organisation. The most important is the process in which they are created and reviewed as this helps people to reflect and judge if the outcomes followed until now are still there and feasible to reach. This is also a chance to align the stakeholders on the direction and the vision of the programme undertaken.

Among the organisations surveyed 16% do not perform any reviews of their business cases and 44% perform them only in the event of significant deviations, but not regularly.

More elaborated business case increases chances of completing project / programme on time and achieving expected benefits.

Based on the survey results we can see a positive correlation between the maturity of a business case and the realisation of the benefits, as well as timely delivery of projects / programmes. 25% of the organi-sations having high maturity of the business cases achieved the expected benefits in more than 75% of their projects and programmes. The same result was achieved by only 5% of the organisations with low maturity of business case.

Success rate, measured in achievement of anticipated benefits, as indicated by survey respondents with high and low business case maturity

0% - 25%

26% - 50%

51% - 75%

76% - 100%

0%

0%

10%

10%

20%

20%

30%

30%

40%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Low Maturity

Low Maturity

High Maturity

High Maturity

% of projects / programmes

delivered on time

% of projects / programmes achieving

anticipated benefits

Project management methodology training requirements

METHODOLOGy, TRAININGS, LESSONS LEARNED

Making use of a project management methodology positively contributes to the structured project man-agement. Not only it is important to make use of a commonly agreed upon methodology, getting trained and learning how it is best applied within the organisation is also very crucial.

Almost 25% of companies do not use any project management methodology while executing projects ...

Most of the companies are using a sort of project management methodology either internally developed (37%) or international standards such as Prince2 (30%) or PMBOK (9%).

when asked whether it is planned to execute any change with regard to the current project management approach, many survey respondents indicate the intention to introduce Agile Project Management.

...there is also no strict project management training foreseen in a majority of the organisations...

Almost half (46%) of the respondents do not conduct any project management training for the people involved in projects – even project managers are not always trained (only 30% of the organisations do that). Regular project management training for the whole project management community is foreseen in only 2% of the companies surveyed.

Project management methodology used by survey respondents

we make use of a company developed project management methodology

Prince2

we do not make use of any formal project management methodology

PMBOK

9% Project managers, projects staff and

decision makers

2% Project managers, projects staff, decision makers and all are periodically trained

46% No formal training requirement

13% Project managers and

projects staff

30% Project managers


20 21

14% always logged

and structurally followed-up

16% not logged

56% sometimes logged, depending on the project

14% always logged

but not followed-up

... and the lessons learned concept is not wide-spread neither.

Lessons learned help to support the continuous improvement of the project management organisation but their use is rather limited – with 14% of the companies always logging and structurally following them up.

Embedding lessons learned in the organisational culture is one of the indicators of the project management high maturity. Most of the organisations, however, struggle in finding enough time or motivation to do that.

How does your organisation make use of lessons learned?


22 23

C. Benefits management - a life cycle approach

the challenge of achieving predefined benefits lies in a continuous focus on benefits management and in a clear link between the anticipated changes and their respective benefits. Most of the com-panies understand the advantages but have rarely managed to implement relevant processes suc-cessfully. Approaching benefits management as a life cycle activity will not only help the project or programme management team to realise the benefits, but also to redirect them if necessary (11).

A majority of the companies do not identify and monitor benefits ...

An initial view of expected benefits should be identified at the beginning of a project (or programme) as its main drivers. They need to be analysed periodically to confirm their validity and after delivering the outcomes they should be measured to determine if they have met the expectations. Feedback on that should be collected and used as a lesson learned in the newly launched projects. Business users are the owners of the benefits and it is their responsibility to safeguard the above process.

Majority of the organisations (52%), however, do not identify and monitor the expected benefits.

KPMG InsightAchieving the full potential of a project / programme through Change Management.

while executing projects or programmes it is frequently forgotten how important proper manage-ment of the change is. Change Management often consists of providing training and communicat-ing about a project or programme. However, these two aspects are not enough to achieve effective change management.

By deploying a full change management approach, the change becomes tangible for all actors and stakeholders. Together with their enthusiasm and collaboration, the effective change management is no longer just a part of a project or programme, but evolves together with the organisation.

TIP

• It is important to adapt the change activities to the pace of the project / programme and the context of the actors and stakeholders. There is no use, for example, to provide training if people are still convinced that they will not have to change. Providing them with insights in the need for change would be more effective.

•Business leaders need to be engaged in change management – it is more effective when the enthusiasm for change comes from the top or a well-respected person.

How does the benefits management process look like?

5% Process transferred to permanent

PMO function

12% Benefits are updated and then

process is transferred to the busi-ness line

27% Process transferred to the

business line

52% No process for identifying and monitoring benefits

4% Benefits are first updated and then the process is transferred to the permanent PMO function

Business caseProject /

Programme

Quality Benefits

time Cost

Change management


24 25

... whereas it has a clear impact on the quality and expectations

Organisations without a benefit management process in place tend to be more often surprised with the end results in terms of the quality and achievement of the expected benefits. No wonder – an established benefit management process enables stakeholders to remain more realistic about their expectations.

KPMG Insight•Setting up easy-to-use and transparent termination

criteria may ease the decision-making process.

•Never think all projects are meant to be success-ful. It’s not a shame to rethink previous decisions – a critical review of the benefits will allow you to remain up-to-date about the reality of your expec-tations.

•Organise a multi-disciplinary approach. Don’t only involve the controller, but also the line, project and change management team in the definition of the benefits.

the difficult decision to stop a project or programme is not always made.

Regular reviews of benefits and related business cases help organisations to identify projects / programmes underperforming with regard to the expected outcomes.

In less than half of the companies surveyed the projects or programmes are stopped if there is no more business case to continue. In the remaining part of the organisations – either they are not stopped or there is not enough information to make such decisions, as the business cases are simply not reviewed.

Success rate, measured in achievement of anticipated benefits and quality, as indicated by survey respondents with or without a benefits management process

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Benefits Mgmt Benefits MgmtNo Benefits Mgmt

No Benefits Mgmt

% of projects / programmes delivered in

accordance with established quality criteria

% of projects / programmes achieving

anticipated benefits

3% when after a review, the business case appears to

be no longer attractive, projects are stopped

45% Projects / programmes are being

stopped, but we should more criti-cally approach this in our organisa-

tion

27% The business case is not being reviewed

25% Disappointing projects / programmes are not stopped due to investments already made

Measures taken in case of an updated, possibly disappointing business case.

0% - 25%

26% - 50%

51% - 75%

76% - 100%


26 27

D. Survey results Belgium vs. the Netherlands

28% Equal 33%

Equal

21% Informal

16% Informal

48% yes

48% yes

16% Standar-dised

20% Standar-dised

52% No

52% No

7% Ad hoc

4% Ad hoc

6% Lower

20% Much

Higher

9% Much

Higher

2% Leading practice

2% Leading practice

52% Higher

52% Higher

54% Formal

58% Formal

BuDGEtS OF PrOJECtS AND PrOGrAMMES INCrEASE But tHEIr SuCCESS IS NOt GuArANtEED

The importance of pro-ject and programme management has in-creased over the last year in both countries surveyed (more in Belgium than in the Netherlands). Dutch companies close more projects and pro-grammes within the foreseen parameters, achieving the satisfac-tory benefits. However, only about 20% can be assessed as delivered successfully, on time and budget.

StruCturED PrOJECt AND PrOGrAMME MANAGEMENt PAyS OFF

The project and pro-gramme management processes in Dutch companies are better defined than those in Belgium. The survey clearly shows the num-ber of projects and pro-grammes successfully delivered is higher in or-ganisations with formal processes – this is more evident in the Nether-lands than in Belgium.

BENEFItS MANAGEMENt IN All PHASES OF A PrOJECt AND PrOGrAMME

In both Belgium and in the Netherlands, the number of firms ap-plying benefits man-agement principles is relatively low. Belgian companies tend, how-ever, to reach higher project success when introducing benefits management, whereas in the Netherlands the difference is less signifi-cant.

BElGIuM tHE NEtHErlANDS Comments

Regarding project and programme management, Dutch companies are generally more mature than their Belgian counterparts.

0% 0%

0% 0%

0% 0%

20% 20%

20% 20%

20% 20%

40% 40%

40% 40%

40% 40%

60% 60%

60% 60%

60% 60%

80% 80%

80% 80%

80% 80%

100% 100%

100% 100%

100% 100%

No Formal Process

Time, Budget & Benefits

Time, Budget & Benefits

without Process

No Formal Process

without Process

Formal Process

with Process

Formal Process

with Process

Importance of project / programme management as compared to last year

% of projects / programmes delivered successfully

% of projects / programmes delivered successfully vs. maturity of project / programme management processes

% of projects / programmes delivered successfully vs. maturity of project / programme management processes

% of projects / programmes delivered successfully vs. existence of benefits management

% of projects / programmes delivered successfully vs. existence of benefits management

% of projects / programmes delivered successfully

% of projects / programmes delivered successfully vs. maturity of project management processes

Usage of a benefits management process

% of projects / programmes delivered successfully vs. maturity of project management processes

Usage of a benefits management process

Importance of project / programme management as compared to last year

0% - 25%

26% - 50%

51% - 75%

76% - 100%

0% - 50%

51% - 75%

76% - 100%

0% - 50%

51% - 75%

76% - 100%

0% - 25%

26% - 50%

51% - 75%

76% - 100%

0% - 25%

26% - 50%

51% - 75%

76% - 100%

0% - 25%

26% - 50%

51% - 75%

76% - 100%


28 29

E. Project Management Trends Agile Project Management

Although the concept of Agile Project Management (APM) is not new anymore, an increase of non-software developing companies using “Agile” or those willing to implement “Agile” is visible. this section is dedicated to APM and gives a very brief overview what APM can offer.

What is Agile Project Management?

Agile Project Management is derived from the software developing methodology Agile. In 2001 a group of people, who called themselves “the agile alliance” wrote down twelve principles for developing software: The Agile Manifesto.

Throughout the years the essence of the twelve principles have also proven to be useful in project man-agement. In essence, the Agile Project Management is a collection of project management methodolo-gies which stimulate:

•flexibility to quickly respond to business and technological changes,

•people management, self-management and self-discipline by lowering the level of the decision-authority,

•customer value through a customer-centric perspective, in the organisation and execution of projects.

Agile techniques may also be called extreme project management. It is a variant of iterative life cycle where deliverables are submitted in stages. One difference between agile and iterative development is that the delivery time in agile is in weeks rather than months. Since agile management derives from agile software development, it follows the same standards defined in the agile manifesto when it comes to collaboration and documentation. Several software methods derive from agile, with Scrum and Design Thinking among them.

Scrum

Scrum divides a project into small iterations of about 30 days with well defined deliverables. In line with the Agile rationale, Scrum has a well defined communication plan with the team members. It concen-trates on how teams should function in order to produce qualitative deliverables and maintain flexibility in a changing environment.

KPMG InsightCombining Agile Project Man-agement with known stand-ards.

Agile Project Management can be combined with other project management methodologies such as Prince2, PMBoK, P³,… In that way the benefits of both (or more) standards can be uti-lised.

“Agile Project Management (APM) focuses on people development, self-management and self-discipline, participatory decision making, customer focus, and less bureaucracy.”

Conforto, Amaral (2010)

Design thinking

Design thinking is a methodology for practical, creative resolution of problems or issues. It is a form of a solution-based, or solution-focused thinking that starts with the goal that is meant to be achieved instead of the problem itself. Then, by focusing on the present and the future, some parameters of the problem and the resolutions are explored simultaneously based on agile principles.

Design thinking differs from the traditional method, which starts with defining all parameters of the prob-lem in order to identify the solution. Design way of problem solving focuses more on the parameters to improve the path to reach the goal.


30 31

Enterprise Architecture

wHAT IS ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE(12)?

To help ensure that information systems are aligned with the business strategy and support the everyday operations and processes, it is important to understand the organisational structure and working upfront. The discipline of Enterprise Architecture helps managers to understand the current and future situation through a blueprint that sets the scene. Enterprise Architecture (EA) is defined as:

Business architects create business models based on the emerging business vision and strategy from the executive leadership team of the business. These business models form the basis for future business requirements for information, processing, security and integration solutions from information systems providers. Information, application, security and technology architects each design the required systems, initially at the strategic level, to guide portfolio planning, and later at the detailed solutions level to support individual implementation projects. Portfolio managers use the models to devise a programme consisting of smaller projects, providing a roadmap to attain the target Enterprise Architecture. Individual projects are then implemented, each tackling a piece of the transformation puzzle.

a coherent whole of principles, methods and models that are used in the design and realisation of the enterprise’s organisational structure, business processes, information systems and Infrastructure.

(Bernus, Nemus & Schmidt, 2003)

“An Enterprise Architect is like a city planner. A city planner sets building codes and plans common services such as roads and water. Enterprise Architects do the same thing for technology.”

Mar, Anna (Blog post on Simplicable, 2011)

POrtFOlIO PlANNING

trANSFOrMAtION GOvErNANCE

ENtErPrISE ArCHItECturE

(DESIGN)PrOJECt

MANAGEMENt (IMPlEMENtAtION)

Project Planning

Project Implementa-

tion

Solution Design


32 33

A. The importance of Enterprise Architecture

When companies want to develop new products, they attract engineers that master the right skills. Although this sounds logical for any entrepreneur, many of them seem to not com-prehend that their organisation can also be regarded as a product. Indeed, whether new or already existing, an organisation needs to be invented, defined, designed and built just as any other product.

An instrument to steer:

Organisations need to cope with an ever changing market environment and thus need to have instru-ments to steer it with agility. Enterprise Architecture provides models of the organisational structure and processes, which helps them translate their business goals into operations. Hence, it should play an important role in every organisation.

No developed and dedicated EA function:

Based on the survey responses it was found that there is a role for Enterprise Architecture within the companies but there is also room for improvement in the upcoming years:

•64% does not make use of an Enterprise Architecture framework;

•38% indicated not to have a dedicated EA function;

•33% said the function did not contribute to the development of IT Strategy;

•75% has no certified EA practitioners.

KPMG InsightCompanies do not yet fully grasp the power of Enterprise Architecture as a strategic tool to align strategic objec-tives with operational conse-quences and IT decisionmak-ing. However, the power of EA is emerging: frameworks are being generated, EA or-ganisations are beeing set up and more and more EA professionals respond to the need.

The added value of EA is not only beneficial for the ‘IT side’– EA is a business instru-ment to align the Enterprise on all levels with business ob-jectives and the guiding prin-ciples of the Enterprise and is a tool to manage transforma-tional initiatives.

3% Other

10% A governing role

Other Between 10 and 15

Between 1 and 4

Provision of testing frameworks

None

Between 5 and 9

None

Giving solicited and unsolicited advice

Execution of feasibility studies

Creation of descriptibe overviews

38% None

28% A framework role

15% A designing role

6% A monitoring role

7% Other

64% None

4% DyA

25% TOGAF

EA frameworks used by the survey respondents

Role of EA within the organisation

EA function’s role in the development of the IT strategy

Number of certified EA practitioners

0% 0%5% 10% 10%15% 20% 20%25% 30% 30%35% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%


34 35

B. The positioning of Enterprise Architecture

In the search for optimal ‘enterprise agility’, EA is definitely a means, but will probably fail to meet expectations if the necessary support for psychological change is not available. If the organisation lacks a high-level initialised, overall commitment, it will be hard for EA to get things moving. Another very important aspect is the position EA takes in the organisation. Several scenarios are possible.

3 typical EA positions

As EA is recognised as a strategic and core capability of an ambitious organisation, it is surprising that no less than 14% of the organisations have outsourced its EA function completely. In case the EA function is not outsourced, organisations typically setup the EA function in one of following ways:

•Centralised - design, coordination and output of the EA function is centralised;

•Federated - design and coordination are centralised; application of the EA function takes place at Busi-ness Unit level;

•Decentralised - all EA functions take place at Business Unit level. The central EA function does not exist or has little effect on the business unit strategy and plans.

KPMG InsightThe EA function can only be suc-cessful when organised centrally in the enterprise. EA needs to be driven in a top-down manner while aligning with the operational / business unit levels. Ideally, EA should be financed with a busi-ness budget as it is a business function and not an IT department or a purely IT function.

Where in your organisation do EA activities take place?

Financing the EA function

55 % Both design, coor-

dination and output of the EA function is

centralised (in the core)

14% Design and coordination are centralised, application of the EA function takes place at Business Unit level (‘federated model’)

50% From an overall IT budget (no business chargeback)

29% Financed

with different budgets

14% The EA function is completely outsourced

35% Other, being

15% From Business -IT budget (Identified chargeback / allocation to LOB)

71% Financed with the same budget

17% All EA functions take place at Business Unit level. The central EA function does not exist or has little effect on the busi-ness unit strategy and plans

EA function typically centralised

Based on the survey results in most cases the EA func-tion takes place at one place within the organisation. This is also reflected by the way the organisations finance their EA function: 71% of respondents indicated that the func-tion is 100% financed from the same budget.


36 37

C. The impact of Enterprise Architecture

A successfully defined, implemented and managed Enterprise Architecture helps an organisa-tion to avoid problems that come with the ever growing complexity of the It landscape: the constant increase of maintenance costs, risks, loss of flexibility and difficulties in delivering change.

Costs

35% of survey respondents indicated that Enterprise Architecture did not influence any cost aspects for their organisation. The costs that was most influenced was the total cost of ownership (TCO).

risks

50% of survey respondents did not see any impact of the Enterprise Architecture on risks. The risk that was the most impacted was the one related to excessive project costs.

Agility

Enterprise Architecture enables the survey respondent’s organisations to make better decisions and a faster fulfillment of new business processes and IT services and applications.

KPMG InsightThe value proposition of EA is threefold:

•more control over business dynamics through better structured insights

•more agility by having better overviews of the strategic, tactical and operational setup

•more means to support business change as EA helps in developing a roadmap for the enterprise, while also looping operational insights back to the strategic level

What cost aspect is most influenced by the EA function within your organisation?

What type of risk is most influenced by the EA function within your organisation?

How does the EA function affect the agility of your organisation?

None

TCO of applications

Development costs

Other

Costs of infrastructure, hardware, software and networks

Cost of business operations

Support better decision making by management

More flexible outsourcing of non-core activities

Facilitate a better penetration of new markets or serving more customers

Improve the profitability of products, services and customer

Faster realisation of IT services and applications

Faster realisation of new business processes

None

Risk of non-compliance with (legal) regulation

Risk of loss of intellectual property

Risk of excessive project costs

0% 0%

0%

5% 5%10% 10%

10%

15% 15%20% 20%

20%

25% 25%30%

30%

35%

40%

40%

50%


38 39

Research BackgroundThe survey was conducted online between December 2011 and February 2012 in order to check the fol-lowing theorems:

•Companies become more dependent on project management;

•Most organisations can continue to improve the professionalism of their project management and find it difficult to stop projects in time in case of shortfalls;

•A significant percentage of projects are not completed within time and budget;

•Project management approach is not structured or not coherently applied;

•A majority of the organisations do not have a developed and dedicated Enterprise Architecture function;

•Enterprise Architecture place within the organisation is rather centralised as opposed to decentralised;

•Enterprise Architecture contributes especially to the increase in manoeuvrability (‘enterprise agility’) of an organisation.

The survey was filled in by 60 Belgian professionals representing a diversity of sectors, sizes of the organi-sation and positions within the organisation (typically senior or project management functions).

KPMG was responsible for the design and execution of the survey, collection and interpretation of the survey results and creation of the survey report. Antwerp Management School supported KPMG with the collection of data, provided the academic background and brought in their experience to write the survey report.

17% Other

20% CxO

38% Project, Programme, Portfolio Man-

ager/ Office

25% IT Director / Manager

13% Other

15% Industrial Markets

16% Infrastructure, Government & Healthcare

8% Consumer Markets

10% Technology, Media & Telecommuncations

8% Public Sector

30% Financial Services

Division in functions of the respondents

Division of the respondents per sector

Size of the company of the respondents

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

More Than 2000

Between 500 and 1000

Between 100 and 250

Between 1000 and 2000

Between 250 and 500

Less than 100


40 41

Appendix

KPMG SERVICES RELATED TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE

Our It transformation services are targeting a flexible, client-specific delivery of an end-to-end toolset for value creation with It transformation; consisting of an end-to-end methodology and good practices for transformation, decision making accelerators and many other concrete tools and knowledge bases to support you during the transformation journey, like maturity scans and case studies. Not only does KPMG have the specialised knowledge and experts helping to enable a smooth journey towards the end goals of the transformation but as an independent and objec-tive service provider, we are well positioned to cut through the complexity of managing the many parties and groups of stakeholders often included in a transformation exercise.

today’s challenges:

How can we take full advantage of IT in order to fulfill the business case of our transformation programme and how can we get the most out of such a programme in order to create enhanced customer value?

How can we create business benefits rather than business issues as a result of complex transformation programmes like mergers and acquisitions? How to end up with such a business transformation making us more agile and generally ‘better’ than we used to be instead of being less flexible than before?

How to focus on the process of creating the envisioned business value rather than having to manage the complexity of a technical delivery and making sure we don’t get overwhelmed by too many, too complex IT projects?

How can we generally manage IT projects better and avoid scope creep, having too high expenditures and complying with our timelines whilst still enabling the envisioned change?

How can we make critical projects that are suffering from repetitive failure successful again?

How KPMG can help:

Our IT Transformations offering embraces the following IT transformation themes and topics:

•Business/IT Strategy & -Vision Definition

•Target Operating Model Design

•Enterprise Architecture Adoption & Deployment

•Business Case Development

•Roadmap Definition, IT Programme Design, Transition Planning

•Application - and IT Rationalisation

•Software/Vendor Selection assistance

•ERP Transformation

• IT Testing

•Change management & training

•Programme and Project Design & Management

•Programme / Project Management Office (PMO)

• Independent Programme / Project Assurance & Quality Assurance

•Project Recovery

•Project Portfolio set-up and assessments


42 43

PUBLICATIONS OF THE INTERNATIONAL KPMG NETwORK

ANTwERP MANAGEMENT SCHOOL PUBLICATIONS

Recent publications concerning project, programme and portfolio management and enterprise architec-ture.

If you want to obtain any of these reports, please do not hesitate to contact us. Contact details are available at the end of the report.

MIS Quarterly Executive Vol. 10 No. 3 / Sep 2011 1© 2011 University of Minnesota

KLM’s Enterprise Governance of IT Journey: From Managing IT Costs to Managing Business Value

KLM’s EntErprisE GovErnancE of it JournEy: froM ManaGinG it costs to ManaGinG BusinEss vaLuE1

Steven De HaesAntwerp Management School and University of Antwerp (Belgium)

Dirk GemkeAir France-KLM (the Netherlands)

John Thorp Thorp Network Inc. (Canada)

Wim Van GrembergenUniversity of Antwerp and Antwerp Management School (Belgium)

MISQUarterly

Executive

Executive Summary1

A common and critical dilemma confronting enterprises today is how to ensure that they realize more value from their large-scale investments in IT and IT-enabled change. This article describes the choices made by the Dutch airline KLM to more fully engage its business managers in the governance of IT and the change-agent role played by a new CIO Office. The article identifies the benefits achieved and lessons learned thus far as the company has evolved from managing the cost of IT toward managing the business value of IT.

INTRODUCTIONIT has become crucial for supporting, sustaining, and the growth of most enterprises. Yet the business value from IT investments cannot be realized by the IT function; it needs to be created by the business through its use of IT. As Weill and Ross have described: “If senior managers do not accept accountability for IT, the company will inevitably throw its IT money at a myriad of tactical initiatives with no significant impact on the organizational capabilities.”2 In this scenario, IT can become a liability instead of a strategic asset. But moving away from managing IT as a cost toward managing it as an asset, with business managers taking ownership of and being accountable for creating value from IT investments and IT-enabled change, is a journey that requires a new way of thinking.

This article describes how KLM, an international airline based in the Netherlands, embarked on a multi-year journey to change its enterprise governance of IT, and the progress to date. The authors of this article recognize that KLM’s governance choices were in response to specific internal challenges and may not be the “right” choices for other businesses at a given point in time. Nevertheless, we believe that the KLM case provides useful lessons on engaging business managers in IT governance that other companies can benefit from. (The research approach used to gather information for this case study is described in the Appendix.)

After providing a short introduction to KLM, we describe the key principles, structures, processes, and relational mechanisms that the company implemented in its journey toward better enterprise governance of IT.3 This is followed by a discussion of the benefits flowing from the governance changes. The paper concludes with the

1 Carol Brown is the accepting Senior Editor for this article. An earlier version of this paper received an Honorable Mention award in the 2010 SIM Best Paper Competition 2 Weill, P., and Ross, J. IT Savvy: What Top Executives Must Know to Go from Pain to Gain, Harvard Business Press, 2009, p. 93 In preparing this article, the authors have used the definition of enterprise governance of IT set out in Van Grembergen, W., and De Haes, S. Enterprise Governance of IT: Achieving Strategic Alignment and Value, Springer, 2009. That definition is “Enterprise governance of IT is an integral part of enterprise governance and addresses the definition and implementation of processes, structures, and relational mechanisms in the organization that enable both business and IT people to execute their responsibilities in support of business/IT alignment and the creation of business value.”

MISQE is Sponsored by

C H A I R S : MCIS 2012 aims to:• Inspire innovave and informave IS research that promotes

smart, sustainable and inclusive growth of the Mediterranean Re-gion.

• Foster ground breaking IS research to improve the quality of life in the Mediterranean Region through enacng the distributed intelligence of Mediterranean populaons and promong the val-ue of knowledge assets they produce.

• Raise the visibility of IS-related research, educaon, policy, and pracce carried out in the Mediterranean Region.

Relevant topics include: ♦ Theories and research methods; ♦ Informaon Systems that support knowledge management

and innovaon in organizaons and society; ♦ Crowd wisdom, crowd creaon, crowd funding, and crowd de-

mocracy: iniaves and plaorms; ♦ Ubiquitous and mobile parcipaon; ♦ Web 2.0 business models; ♦ Green Informaon Systems ♦ Collaboraon and negoaon informaon systems; ♦ Risk management and systems; ♦ Social media, network analysis; ♦ Intelligent tools to process large amounts of informaon. ♦ Cases of Crowdsourcing to promote social well-being

T h e 7 t h M e d i t e r r a n e a n C o n f e r e n c e o n I n f o r m a t i o n S y s t e m s

Adopng emergent knowledge and technologies to develop innovave Informaon Systems (CloudWisdom)

Conference António Dias Figueiredo, PT Isabel Ramos, Universidade do Minho, PT Eileen Trauth, Penn State University, USA

Program Barbara Pernici, Politecnico di Milano, IT José Esteves, IE Business School, SP José Tribolet, Instituto Superior Técnico, PT Angelika Kokkinaki, University of Nicosia, CY

Doctoral Consortium João Álvaro Carvalho, Universidade do Minho, PT Raul Vidal, Universidade do Porto, PT

Organization Rui Dinis, Universidade do Minho, PT Filipe Sá Soares, Universidade do Minho, PT Anouck Adrot, George State University, USA

Publicity Nancy Pouloudi, Athens University of Economics and Business, GR Abd-El-Kader Sahraoui, LAAS, FR

SEPTEMBER 8– 10, 2012 University of Minho

Portugal

Papers Submission due by March 9th, 2012

Project- en programmamanagement

survey 2012 - Haalt u eruit wat erin zit?

KPMG New Zealand Project management survey, 2010

Enterprise Architectuur: historie, evolutie en de belofte, Compact 1, 2011

Maes Kim, De Haes Steven and Van Grembergen wim (2012). IT Value Management as a Vehicle to Unleash the Business Value From IT Enabled Investments : a Literature Study. International journal of IT/business alignment and government, 3(1), 33-47, ISSN 1947-9611.

Grote projecten binnen de publieke sector, 2010

Maes Kim, De Haes Steven and Van Grembergen wim (2012). The Iden-tification and Definition of Value Management Practices Used to Deploy IS investments. Proceedings of the 7th Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems, Guimaraes, Portugal.

Businesscases in de publieke sector: commiteren aan een harde ondergrens, Compact 4, 2010

Alle ogen op de bal door sturen op baten, Batenmanagement bj transformatie, Compact, 4, 2011

Van Grembergen wim and De Haes Steven (2009). Enterprise Governance of Information Technology: Achieving Strategic Alignment and Value. Springer, New york, 218p, ISBN 978-0-387-84881-5.

Global IT Project Management Survey, 2005

De Haes Steven and Van Grembergen wim (2011). KLM’s Enterprise Governance of IT Journey: From Managing IT Costs to Managing Business Value. MIS Quarterly Executive, 10(3), 1-12, ISSN 1540-1960.


44 45

REFERENCES

1. Van Grembergen, w., and S. De Haes, En-terprise Governance of IT: Achieving Strategic Alignment and Value, Springer, 2009.

7. Krell, K. & Matook, S. (2011) Competitive ad-vantage from manda-tory investments: An empirical study of Aus-tralian firms. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 18, 31-45.

10. Smith, H. A., & McK-een, J. D. (2008). Cre-ating a process-centric organisation at FCC: SOA from the top down. MIS Quarterly Executive, 7(2), 71–84.

4. Martin, N.L., Pearson, J.M. & Furumo, K. (2007) IS Project Man-agement: Size, Prac-tices and the Project Management Office. Journal of Computer Information Systems, Summer, 52-60.

2. Maes, K., De Haes, S. & Van Grembergen, w. (2012) The Identification and Definition of Value Management Practices Used to Deploy IS In-vestment. Proceedings of 7th Mediterranean Conference on Informa-tion Systems.

8. Erat, S. & Kavadias, S. (2008) Sequential Test-ing of Product Designs: Implications for Learn-ing. Management Sci-ence, 54(5), 956–968.

11. Lin, C., & Pervan, G. (2003). The practice of IS/IT benefits manage-ment in large Australian organisations. Informa-tion & Management, 41(1), 13–24.

5. Krell, K. & Matook, S. (2011) Competitive ad-vantage from manda-tory investments: An empirical study of Aus-tralian firms. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 18, 31-45.

3. Nelson, R.R. (2007) IT Project Management: Infamous Failures, Classic Mistakes, and Best Practices. MIS Quarterly Executive, 6(2), 67-78.

9. De Haes, S., Gemke, D., Thorp, J., & Van Grembergen, w. (2011). KLM’s Enterprise Gov-ernance of IT Jour-ney: From Managing IT Costs to Managing Business Value. MIS Quarterly Executive, 10(3), 109–120.

12. Bernus, P., Nemes, L., Schmidt, G. (2003) Handbook on Enter-prise Architecture

6. Aloini, D., Dulmin, R. & Mininno, V. (2007) Risk management in ERP project introduction: Review of the literature. Information & Manage-ment, 44, 547–567.


46 47

CONTACT DETAILS

KPMG

Stephan Claes Partner, KPMG Advisory

T: +32 2 708 48 50 E: [email protected]

Anthony van de ven Director, KPMG Advisory

T: +32 3 821 18 59 E: [email protected]

Antwerp Management School

Prof. dr. Steven De Haes Academic Director ITAG Research Institute Antwerp Management School

E: [email protected]

Drs. Kim Maes Researcher ITAG Research Institute Antwerp Management School

E: [email protected]


The name KPMG, logo and ‘cutting through complexity’ are registered trademarks of KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. The information contained herein is of a general nature and is not intended to address the circumstances of any particular individual or entity. Although we endeavor to provide accurate and timely information, there can be no guarantee that such information is accurate as of the date it is received or that it will continue to be accurate in the future. No one should act on such information without appropriate professional advice after a thorough examination of the particular situation.

kpmg & uams project & programme management survey

Documents

project management maturity

portfolio management

strategic projects

benefits management

survey results belgium

structured project

survey pinpoints

bethe survey