News

Managing success through programme delivery

Projects and programmes

What is the difference between a programme and a project? A project tends to be self-contained - with well defined scope, timing and outputs. A programme is a portfolio of projects and other activities that together achieve outcomes and realise business benefits that are of strategic importance.

Programme management is now emerging as an essential skillset required to deliver change through implementing business strategies.

There has been a clear evolutionary path in the management of projects and programmes. Initially, the emphasis was on the vocabulary and techniques surrounding project delivery. The concept of programmes and programme management developed as the need for co-ordinating hard and soft outputs and outcomes aligned to business benefits gained prominance. Challenges of prioritisation and tight resource constraints have now driven more awareness of broader needs to optimise choices between programmes through effective portfolio management across business units.

This evolution has taken us from a period when the delivery of projects was seen as something fairly simple – mirrored by relatively simple early guidance. There has now been a natural learning process through the adoption of best practice on a larger number of projects and programmes. This has provided a often stark realisation that project and specifically programme delivery is not as simple as first believed. It rapidly became clear that specific programme management guidance was required to share experience and drive greater success.

Managing Successful Programmes (MSP)

MSP was first published in 1999 with its first major revision in 2003 to reflect the growing understanding and experiences of organisations that were using programme management techniques. An increasing rate of take up of the foundation and practitioner accreditions shows that MSP is beginning to be seen as a public sector standard for programme management. MSP has now undergone a further review to reflect more changes in the world of programme management.

This continuing process of renewal based on organisational experience is key to keeping MSP up to date and refreshed and ensures that as a product it can take account of advances in programme management.

The diagram summarises the overarching MSP frameworks and concepts. The outer ring deals with the main principles, the second ring the governance themes (which provide the framework through which the programme delivers) and the inner circle deals with the transformational flow.

Some of the major changes made in the new version of MSP reflect:

o that programmes are more often “transformational” than originally thought - these programmes make a step change to the policy or process that has previously driven delivery of outcomes. Non-transformational change tends to be dealt with as business as usual because change is now such a constant in the modern working environment

o portfolio management is seen as much more key to delivery and sits above the programme level covered by MSP. MSP does, however, need to reflect this as the real life context in which programmes have to operate.

This level of transformational change is clearly seen within the programmes that government has to deliver such as introducing identity management on a national scale, NHS National Programme for IT and e-borders, to name but a few!
Programme management – evidence from the front line?
OGC obtains a significant amount of evidence of programme delivery via Gateway reviews, procurement capability reviews and consultancy assignments. Gateway reviews are an independent short sharp review undertaken at the crucial points in the life cycle of projects and programmes. In the case of programmes this is achieved by Gate 0 (strategic assessment) repeated at the key points in the life cycle of programmes. 59 Gate 0 reviews of programmes have taken place so far in 2007/08 with another 43 already in the pipeline.
What does the evidence that OGC collects show us about programmes and the common areas of weakness that they exhibit? Some key consistent areas of weakness are:
• insufficient board level support
• leadership is weak
• insufficient focus on benefits
• insufficient engagement of stakeholders
Interestingly, these matters are also reflected in a recent National Audit Office (NAO) report on successful IT delivery – a report they undertook on successful delivery of IT projects in public, private and international sectors - and the findings were similar across them all. The NAO made a number of recommendations including:
• ensuring that ministers are briefed early and that departments have a clear framework for ministerial briefings
• ensuring that senior responsible owners of mission critical and high risk programmes and projects are selected on the basis of competency based selection procedures
• all business cases are accompanied by a benefits realisation plan, based on OGC best practice, and which is endorsed by the accounting officer
and key to the use and development of MSP
• that both specialists and non-specialists receive training in programme and project management, strategic thinking, and communications and marketing – skills key to the management of large-scale change.
This final recommendation reinforces work underway with the Professional Skills for Government (PSG) agenda, the development of which is undertaken centrally by Government Skills – the sector skills council for government. Programme and project management is a core skill within PSG for all those in middle management roles and above in the civil service.
These areas of concern are well covered by MSP and the new 2007 version has strengthened its coverage of areas such as benefits specifically to try to alleviate these common causes of failure – and indeed success! Some examples of the strengthened areas are given below:
• benefits realisation: MSP 2007 places greater emphasis on the programme board to improve leadership and specifically the role of the business change manager. This recognises that almost all programmes include a large element of business change – often the hardest part to deliver and which is key to the realisation of the real benefits of the programme. The relationship between business change and realisation and achievement of benefits is made clearer by the greater emphasis on the need to exploit delivered capability and project outcomes in order to achieve the real benefits from the programme outcomes
• engagement of stakeholders: stakeholder management is covered in considerably more detail. It is acknowledged that stakeholders must be actively engaged with rather than just communicated with and managed to ensure that they are fully on board with the programme, it’s objectives and understand what part they have to play in the delivery of outcomes and benefits.
• business cases: MSP ensures that the business case for a programme is a live document, is not written once and forgotten about. It is key that the business case is regularly checked at least at the end of every tranche to ensure that there is continued alignment with strategies, policies and initiatives and that the business cases of the underlying projects continually align with the programme business case.
Programmes - the way forward?
How does all this fit in with changes to the wider context of programme delivery within government and how can MSP play a role in ensuring that programmes are delivered successfully?
Pressure continues to grow for improved delivery of programmes – and rightly so as they consume a large proportion of government spend and impact significantly on the lives of citizens and wider society.
As a result of previous programme failures - or perceived failures - there will be growing demands for much tougher and earlier scrutiny of projects and programmes and a desire and need for a greater level of delivery assurance and openness across Whitehall and with the public. Departments will be challenged to have effective portfolio management in place to exercise strong business control.
This forms the basis of the direction of travel for the OGC in the next few years. A new Major Projects Review Group is now in place in Treasury, supported by OGC and adding further weight to the ongoing strengthening of scrutiny and escalation routes for major issues on the largest and most complex projects and programmes.
Conclusion
The appropriate use of MSP guidance enables programmes to put in place good organisational and governance structures from the outset – a key to ensuring that risks, issues and decision making can all be managed, escalated and dealt with effectively in the context of business management.
With the increased scrutiny of programmes – especially at the early stages – there will be a growing emphasis to ensure that these are run in a way that is proven to achieve the successful delivery of outcomes and the realisation of genuine benefits. MSP has a key role to play in this by providing a flexible yet rigorous framework to drive successful programme delivery and build the skills needed for future programme challenges.

The Office of Government Commerce was established in 2000 and is an office of HM Treasury. It is responsible for improving value for money by driving up standards and capability in procurement, from commodities buying to the delivery of major capital projects and programmes, maximising the effective use of what is 60% of all government spending and a £30 billion property estate.

OGC seeks to do this through setting the right procurement standards and ensuring they are met, capitalising on the government’s collective buying power to achieve value for money and playing a leading role in the scrutiny and assurance of the most complex and expensive projects and programmes.

Within this, OGC has a new, clearer and strengthened remit to work closely with central government departments to improve the delivery of programmes and projects as outlined in Transforming Government Procurement . The use and further development of best practice tools and techniques, such as OGC Gateway™, Prince 2, Managing Successful Programmes (MSP) and others remains central to OGC’s broader role of influencing the project and programme management (PPM) community, including wider public sector organisations and suppliers.

Tell us what you think – have your say below, or email us directly at [email protected]