report to executive leadership team decision item … · report to executive leadership team –...

REPORT TO EXECUTIVE LEADERSHIP TEAM – DECISION ITEM

TITLE: Future of Project Management

DATE PRESENTING TO ELT: October 12, 2016

PREPARED BY: Jill Hyndman, Manager, PSO

ELT Sponsor (DCM or Executive Director): Kim Onrait, ED of City Services

□ IN CAMERA – not for distribution

ISSUE: The Project Support Office (PSO) is seeking direction on the future of project management practice at the City of Regina, including the role and focus of the branch, and the role of leaders in successful projects. With recent organizational structure changes, and more to come, it will be important to position the PSO appropriately to continue to influence a positive change to the corporate culture. Similarly, a shift in accountability with senior leaders is required to drive this culture change. As the PSO has provided training, support and advice, and collected feedback from clients and non‐clients across the organization over the past 20 months, we sense that the organization has approached a crucial tipping point. Project managers and teams have bought in to the value of project management, and are anticipating their managers’/leaders’ support in delivering projects effectively; that is, they are waiting and watching for managers/leaders to walk the walk. If this fails to happen throughout the organization, it will most likely result in project managers and teams disengaging from the process, and then gains will be lost. RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. ELT adopts the PSO’s project management process and tools as the corporate standard, understanding that the process and tools are adaptable and scalable to individual business unit needs, and may be supplemented by business units’ additional tools and processes, at directors’ discretion.

2. ELT will hold project sponsors accountable to: a. follow the City’s project management process, particularly by ensuring that

appropriate project discussions with relevant parties/stakeholders take place at appropriate times in the project life cycle; and,

b. participate in populating, and approve and sign the following required project management documents:

i. Initiation Document

ii. Project Charter iii. Status Reports iv. Change Orders v. Close Out Report

3. All staff who will fulfill the roles of project sponsor and steering committee member be

required to attend the project management training offered by the PSO through the Management Skills Series (approximately three working days), within a calendar year.

4. The Project Support Office becomes the formal “owner” of and point of contact for change management framework and support for the organization, and continues to lead culture change through:

a. the continued integration of change management principles and practices into project management tools and process;

b. developing a suite of non‐proprietary foundational change management tools, based on industry best practice adapted to the City context;

c. Developing and delivering in‐house training; d. coordinating a community of practices; and, e. developing a budget request for the 2018 budget cycle for a permanent change

management expert position within the PSO.

5. ELT considers the options identified in this report for the future of the Major Projects department and PSO branch, in consideration of other realignments currently contemplated, and consults with Major Projects and the PSO prior to making a decision about the future of the department and branch.

CONCLUSION: The PSO has made significant progress in steering the establishment of a foundational new culture around project management over the past 20+ months. To fully leverage the benefits of this investment, and those of project management methodology in general, it will be important for ELT and senior leaders to demonstrate commitment to the established project management process and tools, and elevate the role sponsors play in successful project delivery. It will also be important to continue a clear integration of the other enabling processes and tools across the organization required to ensure project success at all levels. As several corporate priority projects will be concluding in the next couple of years, it will important to determine a path forward for the PSO and the Major Projects department with appropriate consideration of the needs of the organization. BACKGROUND: In order to address the ongoing issue of capital carry forward, a project was established in late 2013 which sought to review the state of capital project management and governance using five sample projects. The project consultant, KPMG, provided a final report outlining 31 recommendations for the City of Regina to improve capital project oversight and management in four work streams: project governance, cost and financial management, commercial management, and general project controls.

The Major Projects Department and PSO were created in early 2014. The Major Projects Department assessed the KPMG recommendations, created an implementation plan, established a mandate and work plan for the Project Support Office, and began to implement initiatives to influence and improve project management knowledge, skills and culture across the organization. The PSO mandate was expanded by ELT in late summer 2014 to provide support to the entire organization as a Corporate Centre of Excellence in Project Management. Beginning in September 2014, the PSO began consulting with clients first in the former Operations Group (OG) and then Corporate Services (CS) and the City Manager’s Office (CMO) regarding their current state of practice and future needs with respect to project management. As a result of these assessments, the need for establishing common language, common processes and common basic tools became apparent, and this is where the PSO focused the bulk of its efforts in 2015. A suite of foundational project management tools was developed and rolled out to the organization, and a complementary training program was also developed and delivered by the PSO through the Management Skills Series, along with as‐needed one‐on‐one support for project managers, sponsors and project teams. These tools, training and consultation aim to bridge the gap between industry best practice (Project Management Institute/PMBOK Standard) and “how we do things at the City” in order to begin standardizing the approach and methodology for project planning, delivery and control. Where possible, the PSO sourced and integrated tools and processes already being used by various City work units, including change management practices, and formed a Project Advisory Group (PAG) to increase collaboration and learning across the organization. DISCUSSION: The following outlines further discussion related to recommendations in this report, and includes key organizational enablers required for advancing the project management maturity of the organization. Formal adoption of the City’s project management process and toolkit The PSO intentionally chose to implement a change management approach that respected the intelligence and experience of the organization – “meet them where they are” – to roll out the services and offerings of the PSO to ensure successful buy‐in and adoption. A conscious effort was made to bring people along, rather than enforce a new way of doing. As a result, adoption of the project management process and tools, and participation in the training program, have been voluntary and very well‐received, although not all work units are using the process and supporting tools consistently, or at all. We believe this is due in large part to lack of formal adoption by ELT. In late 2014, the PSO received the (former) OGLT’s endorsement of the project management process and handful of “mandatory” tools (initiation documents, charters, status reporting, change orders and close out reports) as the standard of practice within Operations Group. The PSO met with CLST and OCM senior management teams to seek a similar level of adoption, and received it from several directors. We believe it is time for ELT to formally adopt the basic project management process developed by the PSO as the corporate standard, and establish expectations about using it to their respective

teams. This will create clarity of expectations across the organization, at all levels of the organization. “Unless an organization demonstrates visible, unreserved commitment to sound project management practices, the chances are that project management will be viewed as just another activity. The successful implementation of project management depends on an organization’s explicit belief that the manner in which projects are managed is just as important as what they achieve. Project management becomes ‘the way we do business around here.’” (p. 12, Organizational Project Management Maturity Model (OPM3®) Knowledge Foundation, Third Edition) By design, the City’s project management process is simple, logical, based on best practice, and flexible, while providing some new rigour to decisions and documentation at key points of a project life cycle. This rigour will help ensure:

clarity of scope, desired outcome, strategic alignment and rationale of projects

clarity of approvals/decisions

better planning before executing projects, which results in better risk identification and mitigation

thorough documentation to support corporate memory and our ability to respond to challenges or requests for information

more predictable and successful project delivery

easier collaboration between work areas because they will have a shared foundation of process and supporting tools

The tools are accessible (unlocked Word and Excel files) and adaptable to meet the specific needs of each business area’s projects, and by no means are meant as a “one size fits all” solution. For example, the ITS department often employs Agile methodology to projects it leads. ITS staff have adopted the PSO process and tools, and have overlaid Agile/technology project‐specific supporting tools and processes to ensure they are in alignment with the corporate methodology, and so that their clients are familiar with the tools and process. We expect other areas of the organization to similarly modify the foundational tools to meet their needs, while maintaining a basis in a common process. Increased accountability of sponsors The PSO has found that most staff filling the project manager role across the organization generally know how to get a project delivered successfully. Those that have attended PSO training are appreciative of the simple, adaptable tools and a better understanding of roles and responsibilities of various project players. A full‐day module on leadership skills for project managers helps round out project management tool and process knowledge, and better equip project managers to be successful. The 2016 Pulse of the Profession (Project Management Institute’s annual global survey of 2428 project management practitioners, 192 senior executives, and 282 project management office directors) indicates that when organizations focus on project managers with a balance of project management skills, leadership skills and strategic and business management skills, 40% more projects meet goals and original business intent. We believe the current PSO‐led project

management training, along with the remainder of the Management Skills Series provides a solid foundation for project managers to build success. We are hearing from project managers that one of their biggest pain points is effective sponsorship; that is, getting consistent access to a sponsor who is appropriately engaged for the particular project, and who can provide enough direction, mentorship and coaching at the right times for the project manager to successfully deliver the project. Much of the PSO’s “support” time is spent coaching project practitioners on interpersonal relationships. PMI research shows on average, only three out of five projects have engaged project sponsors, and yet, their research also indicates “effective executive sponsorship is critical to the success of an organization’s strategic initiatives – an executive sponsor’s active engagement is actually the top driver of project and program success.” (PMI’s Pulse of the Profession, 2016, p. 13) The PSO currently offers a three‐hour training module focused specifically on the sponsor role on projects. (Previously it was two hours in length, but was recently amended to better align with and reflect the expectations established in the City’s Leadership Competency Model.) However, most of the participants in the sponsor module are not actively filling a sponsor or executive lead role; they are project managers or project team members (or not participating on projects at all and are attending to complete their Management Skills Series passport). While it would be beneficial for all sponsors to attend the sponsor training module, at a minimum, we believe there would be greater benefits for sponsors to participate in all of the PSO‐led training modules, including:

thorough understanding of the City’s project management process and tools;

increased visibility with their own staff and others across the organization;

better understanding of project manager/project team needs and barriers on projects; and

a full understanding of the level of commitment required by effective sponsors to ensure successful project delivery.

One of the most‐often asked questions/comments shared at training sessions is, “Can the PSO compel my sponsor/manager/director/executive director to take this training?” The sentiment being shared is that it would be helpful for all participants on projects to be working from a common language, process and tool kit. The PSO recommends that all active sponsors, steering committee members, and executive leads, if possible, be mandated to participate in the PSO project management training. A similar recommendation appears in the Bakkeli audit of the City Plaza project: “…future project management expectations should be clearly communicated to project sponsors, with references to available tools, templates and internal experts. Training (either internal or external) should be offered to those who will have the role of project sponsor or manager.” (Review of City Square Project Management, T. Bakkeli Consultants Inc., March 2, 2012, pp.21‐22). The PSO feels that the voluntary offering of training has not produced the required uptake by sponsors to support either organization‐wide culture change (that is, demonstrated commitment to the new way of doing things) or to ensure individual project success. Mandating sponsor training, and holding sponsors accountable, will provide a clear message about the importance and expectations of being an effective sponsor.

A powerful tool to assist sponsors to grow into reliably effective sponsors, and project managers to develop, is feedback. The PSO has begun to integrate a 360‐degree feedback process for sponsors and project managers as part of the close phase of all projects. This feedback process will focus on strength and growth areas, with recommended integration into PDEs where appropriate. Continuing to coordinate the implementation of KPMG recommendations, and beyond A detailed description of progress and a plan forward in implementing relevant KPMG recommendations is included as Appendix B. The PSO recommends an Organizational Project Management Maturity Model (OPM3) assessment to determine the organization’s project management maturity, and build a roadmap for continued growth and improvement. The OPM3 Knowledge Foundation states (p. 19): “Many times in the past, organizations invested in aspects of project management based on a crisis in the organization. A crisis sparks conversations about project management and leads to small tactical investments to avert the next crisis or to show improvements from the last crisis. These tactical investments include items such as:

Project management competency development,

Project management training, and

Tool implementation. Although each of these tactical solutions provides some level of improvement, and generates some quick wins, most of the time these solutions do not address the real issues facing and organization. These tactical issues sometimes support individual project success versus project success in delivering the organization’s strategy. … OPM seeks to change the investment approach from crisis investment to proactive investment targeted at value creation for the organization. Organizations need to be patient when making this challenging cultural fit.” It will be important for ELT to “stay the course” on implementing a true cultural shift, and avoid project management being seen as “just another thing to do” or a “flavour of the month” by communicating the value sound project management practice provides to the organization, and community. The PSO will investigate the cost and appropriate timing of this assessment in 2017 in time to prepare a 2018 budget request. Project management training 3.0 The PSO will continue to deliver project management training to bridge the gap between industry best practices and “the way things are done at the City.” In 2017, the PSO will launch the re‐packaged seven training modules currently delivered through the Management Skills Series into a two‐day session (covering the project management life cycle), a one‐day leadership skills session, and a half‐day sponsor skills session. This change in delivery should enable staff to more quickly gain an understanding of project management theory and process, and put their learning into practice during their day‐to‐day work.

Participation in PSO‐led training has been positive – courses are full and participants are fully engaged. Between November 2014 and March 2016, about 350 people have participated in project management training, and as of July 2016, about 20 people have completed all seven modules. Several work units and management teams have invited the PSO in to deliver customized training to them, including Fire & Protective Services Leadership Team; Corporate Services Leadership Team; Assessment, Tax and Real Estate management team; Water Engineering branch; Fleet Services management team; Finance Leadership Team; Infrastructure Planning branch; the PB&A project; ITS management team and project leads; and the Regina Police Service. Training participants are primarily staff who fulfill the role of project manager or project team member, and based on engagement during the sessions and standardized and informal feedback following them, most participants see the value of a consistent approach to project management. Feedback from training sessions is almost exclusively positive and we are hearing that the information and tools are useful and being implemented in many departments across the organization.

As the organization matures in project management knowledge and application, the PSO will continue to develop and improve the training and tools to move along the project management continuum toward PMI/PMBOK best practices by focusing on key best practices and organizational enablers. Accountability for Change Management When the PSO was formed, a question remained about “ownership” of the change management methodology and support function at the organization. Since then, some projects have been assigned dedicated change leads or managers, and others have not, based on the sponsor’s discretion. The PSO has provided advice to project managers and sponsors from a change management perspective, and often refer these staff to other Prosci‐certified staff for more detailed advice, due to capacity of the PSO. The PSO recommends that we become the corporate point of contact for change management, and that in 2018, a subject matter expert position be allocated to the branch. Rather than adopting a proprietary change management methodology, the PSO recommends that the branch develops a foundational set of non‐proprietary change management tools, training and consultancy, and coordinate a community of practice, based on industry best practices adapted to the City context (similar to the approach taken with project management methodology). This work has already begun in mid‐2016, and we are seeking formal endorsement to continue. Staff who choose to pursue training and certification in change management from Prosci or other providers will continue to do so, based on their department budgets and identified needs, in coordination with Human Resources.

Project and Portfolio Management The questions most frequently asked of the PSO at training sessions and during one‐on‐one support relate to project selection, approval and portfolio oversight processes, which are currently outside the mandate of the PSO. Many staff have a lack of knowledge about how projects are selected; how or if projects are prioritized, and therefore how to assign their own time to priority work; and decision‐making processes in the organization. Some staff have limited understanding of who their immediate management team is, and consequently, who senior leadership teams and ELT are and what their authorities are, including the Administration’s relationship to Council. This knowledge gap creates risk during project delivery. Clarifying drivers for projects – that is, answering “What problem are we trying to solve?” and “Why?” are still difficult for many staff (including sponsors) to answer. Clarifying the “why” of projects would enable better decision‐making and resource allocation, and provide clarity to staff who divide their time between various projects and day‐to‐day operations. It would be beneficial for all sponsors to clearly articulate the problem (or opportunity) that drives a project, the outcome desired by the project, and clarify their role and accountabilities on each project to enable project managers and project teams to successfully deliver each project. Following a standard project management process can help achieve this, but it is not the silver bullet; ideally, as the strategic planning process matures, it will remove the need for a stand‐alone initiation document (and initiation phase) within the project management life cycle (i.e., projects would begin with a charter, following robust strategic/business planning and portfolio project selection/prioritization). The PSO offers some options later in this report (see Option 5, page 13) for ELT’s consideration to move the organization forward in this regard, based on guiding principles of simplicity, practicality and completeness of function. Regardless of the choice of ELT, the MP department and PSO request that staff be consulted during the decision‐making processes related to portfolio selection and oversight. Future mandate and structure options of the Major Projects department and PSO branch The Major Projects department was created to successfully deliver several concurrent once‐in‐a‐generation projects. Late in 2015, two additional highly political projects were assigned to the department (Pacer Park relocation and the demolition planning for existing Mosaic Stadium). Housed within the Major Projects department, the PSO was envisioned as a “Corporate Centre of Excellence in Project Management.” Through the department business planning process in late 2015, initial conversations about the future of the department, and staff within it, began. In mid‐2016, decisions were made to move the RRI – Railyard project out of the department, and with the departure of the Director of Major Projects in late September, the individual projects and PSO were re‐aligned to report directly to the Executive Director of City Services. Many possible paths forward exist, and the timing is appropriate to begin investigating and articulating a future for the department, and the PSO branch.

Certainly, there appears to be demand from the organization for some sort of project delivery office to continue to take on large, high‐risk, unique projects for the corporation. This need could continue to be met by the Major Projects department, in a number of ways and structures, or conversely by re‐imagining how the organization manages projects of this nature. The following is provided for discussion and consideration: PART A: Future Mandate and Structure Options of Major Projects Department Option 1: Major Projects disbands when current projects close In this option, the Major Projects Department would cease to exist following the successful delivery and transition into operations of the current projects being delivered (WWTP, new stadium build, old stadium decommission, Pacers Park, and Railyard Renewal (which will transition to a new business unit later in 2016)). Seconded staff would return to their home positions. Term/contract staff would need to be found other positions within the organization, or provided other employment support options. The PSO would need to be found a new placement within the remaining organizational structure. Future major projects would be delivered by the “owner” business units.

Benefits:

Potential cost savings with elimination of department budget and several positions Detriments:

Loss of specialized project management delivery unit for once‐in‐a‐generation, very high risk, highly complex projects, or projects with no clear owner

Potential loss of highly‐skilled and experienced employees

MP employee morale

Potential failure on key high‐importance projects Key considerations:

Existing staff – where do they go?

Appropriate position of PSO within organization to be determined

How are projects that may have been delivered by MP now resourced, governed and delivered?

Option 2: Major Projects continues as a fixed project delivery office (PDO) with a group of PMs and sponsors that are assigned “out” to key projects In this option, the Major Projects Department would become an internal project management consultancy group, with project managers and sponsors assigned to priority projects throughout the organization, under predetermined criteria and an annual or semi‐annual intake process. Project governance would be determined on a project‐by‐project basis, and PMs would work for/with sponsors across the organization (and sponsors with executive leads), and be provided mentorship and coaching from the Director of MP. A limited number of PM and sponsor positions would exist within the department, and therefore, a limited number of “major projects” could be undertaken by the organization and supported by the department at any one time. The PSO could remain within the department to create continuity between tools, processes and training for PMs, sponsors and project staff both within and outside the department. Organizational positioning: The department should reside within either Corporate Services or the City Manager’s Office, as a central agency.

Benefits:

Standard operating budget for set number of staff year over year

Could aid in prioritizing corporate projects: department can take on only fixed number at any one time; others must wait

Dedicated staff to deliver key projects

Key projects are adequately resourced, governed and centrally housed to ensure successful deliver

Detriments:

Potentially inflexible given changing demands on time and skill set over a number of years depending on types and number of projects

Potential for silo‐ing project management expertise Key considerations:

Existing staff – may not wish to stay in department for future projects

Would require a threshold/upper limit or fixed number of projects to be taken on at any one time

Project governance – what role would the director play on projects that PMs from MP are assigned to?

Appropriate number of PMs in the department, and appropriate number of projects per PM

Option 3: Major Projects continues as a rotating PDO In this option, Major Projects continues to deliver key projects on behalf of the organization, by rotating projects and project staff into and out of the department. As projects are initiated, project budgets must include funding for project staff (sponsor, project manager, change manager, communications manager, etc.) which would become part of the MP department, and where needed, allow for backfilling “home” positions when internal staff are allocated to projects. The department’s staff contingent would change over time as projects come online, are delivered, and closed. The Director would likely play a key governance role on these projects, and mentor and coach the project staff. Again, the PSO could remain within the department to create continuity between tools, processes and training for PMs, sponsors and project staff both within and outside the department. Organizational positioning: The department should reside within either Corporate Services or the City Manager’s Office, as a central agency.

Benefits:

Dedicated staff to deliver key projects

Learning and growth opportunities for staff across the organization over time as staff rotate into and out of MP with projects

Key projects are adequately resourced, governed and centrally housed to ensure successful deliver

Detriments:

Every‐changing department size and personnel

Potential difficulty back‐filling vacated “home” positions of project participants

Business units may not wish to “give up” “their” projects or staff to MP

Key considerations:

Existing staff – where do they go?

Is the Director the sponsor of all projects delivered by MP?

Are staff within MP considered sponsors? Project managers? Technical or subject matter experts? A combination? Etc. (Who becomes part of the department, and who supports the department/projects from their “regular” position?)

Initiation Document and Business Case must identify funding for the positions required to deliver project as part of the project budget and budget request; home business units must backfill positions vacated, or be able to manage without a backfill

Option 4: Major Projects continues as a combination fixed‐and‐rotating PDO In this option, Major Projects would have a core base of fixed/permanent staff who are assigned to projects and/or work with staff who rotate into the department in a mentoring and capacity‐building role. Again, the PSO could remain within the department to create continuity between tools, processes and training for PMs, sponsors and project staff both within and outside the department. Organizational positioning: The department should reside within either Corporate Services or the City Manager’s Office, as a central agency.

Benefits:

Nimbleness and adaptability of department to changing needs of organization is improved

Capacity building and knowledge transfer within organization is improved Detriments:

Potential confusion about which projects are delivered within MP and why Key considerations:

Appropriate criteria for project selection and delivery method

Criteria applied consistently

Option 5: Major Projects becomes a combined PMO/PDO/PSO An option to boldly grow the organization’s project management maturity is to expand the mandate of the department to become a typical project management office (PMO), with a mandate to create processes for project (portfolio) selection (likely at both corporate and department levels) (PMO function), project delivery support and oversight (PDO function) and corporate‐wide capacity culture change and knowledge growth (PSO function). This option would see a centralization of the portfolio and project support functions in a single work unit, and would likely require an additional FTE or two (or reallocation of current positions elsewhere in the organization) to deliver the expanded mandate. This would streamline the entire project life cycle (from identification, to selection, to prioritization and resource allocation, to delivery and control, to completion and hand‐over) under a single area, rather than split between several work units. A typical project management office (PMO) would have accountability to create and manage the project identification, selection, prioritization and delivery processes and support the organization in navigating and employing them effectively. This could include:

Developing project portfolio selection criteria and process, and managing their implementation

Developing and managing project prioritization processes

Providing project and portfolio governance support

Deploying staff to priority projects as PMs, sponsors or team members

Delivering project (delivery) management support and training to the organization

Coordinating lessons learned and knowledge transfer from completed projects Organizational positioning: The department should reside within either Corporate Services or the City Manager’s Office, as a central agency.

Benefits:

Everything project‐related is supported from a single work unit; clarity for the organization

Single, streamlined, clear process for project selection, prioritization, resourcing, delivery, oversight and completion

Detriments:

This will be a big change for the organization; it will need to be planned, timed and sponsored effectively, in consideration of other major change initiatives

Key considerations:

Some of these functions are currently or historically delivered by Strategy Management and other Strategy & Operations branches. The mandate of the new Strategy area in Corporate Services will need to be considered, and workable transitions will need to be planned.

Appropriate staffing levels will need to be determined

Staff competencies and attitudes will need to be in line with the desired corporate culture

This option could be successful at the City, as long as ELT is committed to becoming a more “projectized” organization, and is mindful of the manner in which the function is delivered. It will be important to learn from the organization’s past experiences and be attuned to corporate culture. It is no secret that we have experienced a PMO in the past that, despite being established for the right reasons, ultimately failed because the focus became about filling out templates. That PMO became seen as the “template police,” and not a trusted advisor or provider of an easy‐to‐use process that added value to the organization. This focus did not assist the organization in achieving its goals of allocating scarce resources to the most strategically important things while delivering its core business. It is also no secret that we have seen overly complex processes deployed that are difficult to document, explain, understand and navigate, and which provide limited value to the organization (for example, pet projects continue to draw resources away from priority work despite a robust project selection process; there are large draws on key staff’s time to prioritize budget requests when there is no extra money to allocate; etc.).

PART B: Future Mandate, Scope and Structure options for the Project Support Office Regardless of the future direction of the Major Projects department as a whole, the future role and structure of the PSO should be considered as there is a lack of alignment with the current organizational positioning of the branch, and there are emerging organizational needs the PSO could help alleviate in the short‐ and long‐term. PSO Option 1: Status quo + expand mandate to include Change Management, and realignment (recommended immediately) Continue with a mandate of growing the organization’s capacity and maturity in project delivery

with a focus on project management methodology, including:

1. training and individual project support in:

a. project scoping

b. project governance

c. project planning

d. project delivery and control

e. project close

2. tool development and deployment

3. corporate knowledge transfer from completed projects

4. coaching, mentoring and advising all levels of the organization through the

relationships created in and between projects

AND expand the mandate of the branch to be the point of contact for change management

methodology, training and support for the organization to grow the organization’s capacity and

maturity in managing people through change (most often in a project context, but not always).

This option would require an additional FTE to fulfill the change management SME and support

function for the organization.

Organizational positioning: The branch should reside within either Corporate Services or the City Manager’s Office, as a central support service and driver of corporate culture change.

PSO Option 2: Create a new work unit with a mandate of developing leaders and changing

corporate culture

While the PSO was created to improve project management competency at the City of Regina and

create a new culture around projects, it has become clear through the work the PSO has been

engaged in that there is a need to support leadership development and corporate culture change

in a much broader context (beyond project scenarios). A new branch focused on this mandate

would serve the organization well and could comprise the existing members of the PSO,

Organizational Development branch and potentially other individuals with the appropriate skill

sets and attitude.

The majority of the support, advice and training the PSO provides comes down to interpersonal

communication between sponsors, project managers, steering committees and project teams.

Projects are the PSO’s foot in the door to help with much more foundational leadership

competencies, such as:

communicating clearly and respectfully;

articulating expectations and holding people accountable;

problem and outcome identification and articulation;

problem solving and decision making;

dealing with conflict; and

working effectively in a team environment.

These foundational competencies seem to be a growth opportunity for many people involved in

projects, and in their roles in general, at the City. The efforts to create the Leadership Competency

Model, the Leadership Development Program and the Management Skills Series speak to the gap

the organization is attempting to fill.

The PSO has worked with the OD branch to base the Leadership Skills and the Sponsor training

modules on the Leadership Competency Model, in order to reinforce expected behaviours at the

City. We see a huge opportunity to continue to focus on developing these competencies and

behaviours and suggest an option that would shift the PSO mandate in this direction. This would

mean a focus on broader organizational development/leadership development/corporate culture

creation, by supporting and improving leadership skills and competencies across the organization,

in the aspects of the Leadership Competency Model, and other leadership development and

culture change initiatives, including such things as:

General management and leadership skills (i.e., support the realization of the Leadership

Competency Model and the Management Skills Series), of which project management and

change management should be core competencies

Emotional and social intelligence, self‐awareness

Internal coaching

Corporate orientation (culture integration for new staff)

The current mandate of the PSO (including the recommended addition of change management) could remain as part of this new work unit, or conversely, be hived off and become part of a reimagined Major Projects Department, or other PMO work unit. Organizational positioning: The work unit should reside within the City Manager’s Office, as a central support service and driver of corporate culture change, or within Corporate Services/Human Resources department.

City Manager’s Office or Corporate Services ‐ HR Department

RECOMMENDATION IMPLICATIONS: a) Financial

There are no immediate financial implications directly related to the implementation of the recommendations in this report, however changes to structure and FTE allocation could impact future budgets. A potential consulting budget request for an organizational project management assessment (which could be scaled) could be envisioned for 2018 or beyond. As well, a budget ask or reallocation of one ongoing FTE to be a change management expert could be developed for the 2018 budget cycle. If the recommendations in this report are not implemented, the investments made into consultant studies to provide direction to how project management should be done at the City, staffing the PSO branch, and staff training days may be at risk. As well, should a more robust project management culture not be adopted across the organization, the City will continue to face risks associated with poor project delivery.

b) Environmental

None related to this report.

c) Strategic Implementation of the recommendations in this report directly contribute to the achievement of strategic objectives in the 2014‐2017 Corporate Strategic Plan: #2 Improve Financial Viability and #3 Engage & Develop Staff.

d) Evaluation Criteria Adoption of a robust project management process will enable and support successful projects that deliver directly on scorecard measures.

e) Other Reputational risk exists for managers/leaders in the organization, as well as corporate reputational risk if projects are not managed and delivered consistently well.

COMMUNICATIONS: Building a more robust project management culture at the City is most successfully viewed as a culture change, versus a process change. Communications, to that end, are important in all interactions related to project management, including the implementation of the recommendations in this report. The PSO will continue to promote its services to the organization, and collect input on future services and offerings. It will be important for senior leadership to support and reinforce messaging delivered by the PSO, to set the expectations for the organization around project management, and to hold the organization accountable to meet those expectations. The PSO will support ELT with a communication plan and key messaging as required, following acceptance of the recommendations of this report.

LEGAL:

None related to this report. ATTACHMENTS: Appendix A: City of Regina Project Management Process Appendix B: Updated Progress on KPMG Recommendations (as at end of 2015) Appendix C: PMI’s Pulse of the Profession In‐Depth Report: Executive Sponsor Engagement

Appendix A: City of Regina Project Management Process

Appendix B: Updated Progress on KPMG Recommendations (as at end of 2015) Completed 2014‐15 While the following recommendations from KPMG are considered complete, it is important to note that each recommendation will be updated to reflect the changing needs of the corporation and new materials from the PSO and other business areas, as needed.

#1 RACI: Roles and responsibilities definitions for key project roles have been developed and rolled out through the project management manual (#4) and training (#7) delivered in 2014 and 2015, and ongoing in 2016. These definitions can be found in the project management manual, along with key questions and prompts in several project phase checklists and other tools. This deliverable will be further refined through the Contracting and Procurement Project in 2016.

#4 Project Management Manual: A basic project management manual and supporting tools have been developed and are available to all employees electronically. The manual will continue to evolve as more complex tools and training modules are brought online.

#6 Stakeholder Management Plans: The project management tools include an internal and external stakeholder identification tool to be used in the project Initiation phase. The project Planning phase workbook includes internal and external stakeholder management plan templates. Both tools are reflected in the current training and will continue to evolve as used across the organization.

#7 Project Management Training Program: A foundational project management training program and supporting tools have been developed and are available to all employees through the HR Learning Calendar, as part of the Management Skills Series. The program will continue to evolve as more complex training is required and training modules are brought online. As well, the PSO provided recommendations to HR on appropriate resources to deliver industry best practice (PMI/PMBOK) training in order that staff can challenge the PMP certification exam. As the organization becomes more mature in its project management knowledge and delivery, the PSO will continue to work with HR and industry expert trainers to meet training needs.

o The PSO offered 52 training sessions between November 2014 and December 31, 2015,

with over 595 spots filled. o 281 people have attended training, and 7 have completed all seven modules offered

through the Management Skills Series (as at Dec. 31, 2015). o The overall average satisfaction rating (scores of 4 or higher out of 5) for all sessions

(November 2014 to December 2015) is 94%, with another 4.52 % rating 3 out of 5. (Only 1.14% rated their satisfaction with the training as 2 or lower out of 5, and most of those were related to refreshments and location/convenience).

#8 Project Management Competencies: The Organizational Effectiveness Branch in Human Resources provided advice to the PSO in developing competencies for project managers and sponsors. The competencies are based on the City of Regina Leadership Competency Model and are currently communicated through the Leadership Skills for Project Managers and PM for Sponsors training modules.

#20 Technical‐Financial Awareness and #13 Contract Management: Both of these recommendations involved the formation of a community of practice or advisory group to allow better interaction between project management professionals and financial, purchasing and legal staff. The Project Advisory Group (PAG) met 5 times in 2015 and included representatives from each department. More specific work on these recommendations is still required, and may be furthered through the Contracting and Procurement Project.

#23 Change Control Procedures: Change management documentation (Change Order Form, Change Log) and procedures are included in the manual and training currently available to all staff.

Risk Management: #25 Risk Management Procedures and #10 Risk & Contingency Allowances: Basic tools for identifying, quantifying and managing project risks are included in the tools and training currently available.

#30 Schedule Management Procedures and #31 Schedule Training: Tools and procedures have been developed to support the Planning and Execution phases with respect to project schedules. No software solutions are being proposed at this time, or for several years. Project management is better established as part of the culture and subject to the completion of other priority software projects associated with Business Transformation. The PSO is aware that some areas are acquiring MS Project software independently.

Throughout 2015, the PSO supported individual employees (project managers and sponsors), teams, and work units in varying capacities. A sampling of clients/projects served include:

Corporate Services

o Facilities Management: provided tools or advice on tools and best practices o Finance: acted as an advisor for change management, assistance with scoping on the

Financial Policy Framework o Fleet: have provided tools or advice on tools o Strategy Management: Core Service Review

Operations Group

o Fire & Protective Services: advice and tools o Major Projects: facilitated workshops for Stadium and Pacers Park, assisted with

charter development for Railyard Renewal Project o Community Services: Rec Facility Plan Refresh scoping , Mâmawêyatitân Centre

scoping and risk workshops o Assessment, Tax & Real Estate: assisted Don in preparing a charter, delivered Sponsor

training to entire leadership team o Development Services: Tool support and advice, PM and team support for Zoning

Bylaw Review o Planning: Facilitated workshops for Regional Planning, assisted with project

documentation and kick‐off meetings for Infill Guidelines, Regent Park, and Intensification Master Plan

o Solid Waste: Assisted with Automated Vehicle Locator, Landfill Operator Certificate, Business Recycling, Converting Small Vehicle Transfer Station to a Diversion Station projects

o Roadways and Transportation: Assisted with scoping Snow Routes and Snow Storage Site projects.

o Service Regina: Customer Service Strategy o Water Works Services: Assisted with Septage Receiving Station, Trunk Relief,

Wastewater Master Plan Governance & City Clerk

o Communications: Insite Revamp, Public Engagement Strategy 2016 (Continuing and New Work)

In 2016, the PSO will continue to support individual projects/clients as requested, to facilitate project discussions (scope, governance, risk, etc.). This type of work accounts for approximately 40% of branch time/resources.

#2 Corporate Project Management Centre: The PSO has been identified as corporate Centre of Excellence in Project Management. The exact definition remains vague. Therefore, a longer‐term vision, definition and plan for the evolution of the branch and Major Projects department, will begin in 2016.

#7 Project Management Training Program: The PSO will continually update the foundational training offerings to remain relevant to the organization. We envision a revamp of the training modules and delivery for launch in 2017, to include a two‐day session in project management basics; a full‐day leadership skills for PMs; and a half‐day session devoted to sponsors. As well, we envision rolling out new or updated tools to alumni during quarterly “refresher” sessions. Development and delivery of training accounts for approximately 50% of branch time/resources.

Risk Management: #25 Risk Management Procedures and #10 Risk & Contingency Allowances: Additional work is required to add more rigor to these tools and to tie these efforts to contingency ($) management. The PSO is able to accomplish this work with advice from the PAG and staff in other areas in 2016, and will be involved in enterprise risk management discussions with others in the organization. The results will be integrated into the PSO training and tools.

2016 Contracting and Procurement Review Project: #24 Project Management Consultancy Scope, #14 Contract Strategy Evaluation, #17 Consultancy Agreement & Construction Contract Review and #18 Purchasing Review will form a single project intended to assess and improve the way in which the City procures contractors and consultants and then manages their work. The scope may also include assessing #15 Commercial Manager; #16 Market Engagement recommendations. This project was submitted to the 2015 Stage Gate and budget processes as it cannot be delivered without significant time commitments from various business areas outside the PSO and the involvement of an external consultant. This project was also put forward as a “stop” for 2016 to address capacity concerns in the corporation and was strongly supported for continuation. This project is currently being scoped to provide foundational work for upcoming Business Transformation initiatives related to procurement. Byron Werry

(City Solicitor) is the sponsor; Meghan McEachern (PSO) is the project manager (50% of her time); and a small steering committee and project team are being struck.

#27 Quality, Health, Safety & Environment KPIs and#28 Quality Management System: Health, Safety & Environment (HSE) and other indicators are currently included in the risk assessment tools. A tool for evaluating project quality and HSE during the Execution phase will be available in Q2 2016 based on information and processes currently used in Water Works Services, and more detail on these measures will be explored in the Execution phase‐specific training.

#21 Independent Audit of Construction Projects: Once corporate expectations across the organization are clear and project management tools are in common use for project delivery, appropriate methods of project evaluation will be assessed and delivered. This may include external (independent) reviews/evaluations, and potentially, and more likely, internal evaluations. The PSO will participate in the Operations Group Strategy & Operations Branch’s Performance Measurement Project to determine the most useful measures of project success, in alignment with corporate scorecarding processes. In the interim, at the request of an Executive Lead, Sponsor or Project Manager, the PSO will conduct a project audit as its resources permit. The PSO will continue to track project management progress by soliciting feedback (surveys, interviews) and report it to leadership.

2017 and beyond

Financial Tools for Project Managers: Recommendations #19 Cash Flow Management, #5 Budgeting & Estimating Procedure, and #9 Project Management Report were bundled into a single project that intended to develop tools, procedures and training to support project managers in developing budget estimates, distributing that estimate over the life of a project based on anticipated progress, and in connecting existing capital and operating variance reporting to the project dashboard/status reporting. PSO staff managed the project with support and advice from the Finance Department and Development Services. Part‐way through 2015, staffing changes and reprioritized work in Finance resulted in this project being put on hold. The project will remain on hold until such time that Finance can re‐engage and lead the work. However, basic financial tools were developed and delivered through the Project Plan spreadsheet tool and the Planning phase training.

#3b Project Classification: Project classification to provide varying levels of project management rigor based on project complexity was initially thought to be an easy win and was identified for early implementation by KPMG. In scoping what a project classification system could entail and assessing the needs of project participants in the organization, it became clear that developing a basic level of project management rigor for all projects needed to be well‐established before providing for variability in project management would be prudent. Direct support for more complicated projects is available from the PSO based on client demand. Project classification, which should support a future program/portfolio management system, could be examined in 2017+. Changes to program reviews, business planning and other corporate processes that are currently underway will also be better established when this work proceeds.

In addition to the KPMG recommendations, 2017 or 2018 may also see an assessment of project technology needs. Without foundational processes and organizational capacity in place for project

management, any investment in software would be premature. By 2017 or 2018, the organization will be in a better position to evaluate its project performance and accurately assess its project management technology needs. Delivered by Others A number of the recommendations in the KPMG report have been or will be delivered by work units other than the PSO and are subject to separate reporting processes. The PSO will, however, work with the responsible business units to ensure process integration and support for these initiatives are built into PSO project tools, processes and training.

#3a Stage Gating: Strategy Management has responsibility for the Corporate Stage Gating (portfolio selection and management) process, in conjunction with the Business Advisory Group (BAG).

#11 Program Budget Management: Program budgets can represent funding for a collection of projects or portfolio. A program also refers to the funding available for the annual performance of business‐as‐usual activities or tasks that are charged to a single account. While a portfolio‐based approach to project management is a goal of the organization, program budget accountability is largely a financial exercise and the Finance Department has agreed to lead this work when its resources permit.

#12 Multi‐year Budgeting: Multi‐year budgeting would be an asset in delivering multi‐year projects. If multi‐year budgeting is approved, the PSO will deliver revised tools and procedures related to its successful use, at the advice of Finance. The research and recommendations with respect to multi‐year budgeting are a financial and legal exercise and the Finance Department expects to lead this work.

#22 Corporate Asset Management: A corporate asset management function was identified as a "blue box" in the Transportation and Utilities Division as part of the 2014 reorganization. Collaboration is required for consistency with project management practices and is actively occurring. Progress reporting on the state of asset management practice will occur independently.

#26 Document Control: Project management document control is included in the basic training currently being provided by the PSO. Corporate document‐naming conventions, storage protocols, and third party use policies are currently managed by ITS and Clerks, both of which are represented on the PAG.

#29 Health, Safety & Environmental (HSE) Management System: Quality management tools for projects are included in the basic PM manual currently available to all employees. HSE considerations are also identified in the risk management tools. HSE in a broader context is managed by other business areas as part of their operations likely does not need to be project‐specific in its definition. For example, Human Resources has developed and implemented a corporate safety program that is also part of the corporate scorecard.

Appendix C: PMI’s Pulse of the Profession In‐Depth Report: Executive Sponsor Engagement See attached PDF

report to executive leadership team decision item … · report to executive leadership team –...

Documents