Fig. 2.15. Who are the players in PPM?
Sources - department managers & scientists, based on changes in operations and decision-making.
r Loss of independence / autonomy r Less engagement in decision-making r Loss of access to senior management r Stifled creativity with more structure r Resources lost to other projects or departments r Greater scrutiny by management r Less information available on products or projects r Loss of openness in communication r Lack of management resource commitment, or unclear priorities, yet expectation to perform work
The department heads provide operational leadership to ensure all the work is done by their respective staffs for the products and plans. Individual product managers in various departments (marketing, development, formulations, manufacturing, etc.) on the teams perform the work in the plan with assistance from project managers to coordinate and communicate across departments. Therefore, execution of the plan is the shared responsibility of the individual managers, their department heads, and the teams [8, 9, 22, 41, 42]
Portfolio planning and project planning often create operational and organizational concerns for department heads, who control their staff, budgets, and processes to execute the plans of product development. Figure 2.16 lists nine potential problems scientists and department managers may perceive. An appearance of taking control by PPM and project managers (PMs) can exist in an organization, because their involvement changes how information flows through the organization and how decisions are made, even though their role is support to the teams and management, assisting in planning, process follow-through, and decision making. A common and difficult challenge to collaboration is to create sharing of information openly related to issues and options for studies, manufacturing, stability, formulations, analytical problems, and slow enrollment. PPM must realize these concerns and minimize their perception by engaging these scientists and managers in the processes (planning, analyzing, tracking, and reporting) and even seeking their input in the creation of the PPM for a company. Frequent communication of what is being done, why, how, and by whom is critical to success of PPM. However, managers at all levels must get on board with PPM, and at the end of the day if anyone does not, they need to move on to some other function. Roadblocks associated with silent consent of staff or managers dooms programs to failure because cooperation is lacking, even resistance exists through lack of cooperation, or slow contribution occurs [9, 45].
A key success criterion of PPM in support of a company is the measurements employed to assess achievement of milestones at the decision points (Fig. 2.17). PPM supports department heads, team leaders, and senior management with better execution of the plan especially by gauging progress on fulfilling the plans. The 2004 BCG study and report lists 20 different metrics that could be employed by a company and PPM related to strategy, operational improvements, and project team functions. Progress reports must be regular, consistent, honest, meaningful, and relevant for the company's processes, products, and culture. The department heads need to contribute to such reports and sign-off on them (buy-in, essentially own them), in order for them to carry credibility and follow-up. Tracking of achievement of milestones includes quality (was the question answered?), timeliness (did it get done on time?), and follow-up (what is left to be done?).
The metrics chosen need to be quantifiable, measurable, accurate, fair, efficiently done, and improvement oriented (Fig. 2.17). Efficiency in reporting and its metrics is important so that the work to collect the data is not cumbersome and actually slows work down. Improvement orientation of metrics is a necessary positive approach, not punitive, and always will be better received by staff and managers whose work is being evaluated. Metrics need to change as the product evolves during the course of a program. Use of consultants is common for metrics implementation in order to access the specialized expertise, but the company needs to ensure they have real-world experiences and employ practical metrics in data collection. Implementation of even a simple metric (e.g., a system for performance relative to quota) has been shown to improve employees' agreement toward their own efficiency by a large r Progress reports of key functions and milestones r Relevant to corporation r Buy-In from all levels of management r Quantifiable r Measurable r Efficiently done r Improvement oriented r Designed to help teams and departments r Fair r Accurate
Fig. 2.17. What are Characteristics of PPM Metrics margin; for example, such a quota system increased employees from 50% to 75% stating their division is well developed in project initiation, management, and milestone achievement in one study. Also, monthly project review meetings, versus none or less frequent, were judged by employees that their products got to market 25% sooner [8, 22, 30, 42, 45].
Was this article helpful?