If PMO leaders want a seat at the strategic table, they need to establish themselves as trusted business partners.
In this article, I asked if the PMO is its own worst enemy and highlighted that a significant proportion of PMOs state their purpose as process and governance, have no formal process around assessing value and have no formal definition of success.
Building Trust
Trust is built on credibility, consistency, and the ability to deliver value. Building trust involves proactive problem-solving, effective risk management, transparent communication, and tangible outcomes.
For example, effective risk management requires a delicate balance of art and science. Approaches that can handle ambiguity and emergence, develop adaptive risk responses, and leverage scenario planning can help turn uncertainty into opportunity. Risks are not just threats to be mitigated; they are potential sources of innovation and competitive advantage for an organisation.
PMOs can help organisations thrive in uncertainty by acting proactively rather than reactively. Instead of lambasting project managers for not keeping their risk logs up to date and focusing on scientific, backwards-looking compliance metrics at a project level, the PMO leader could concentrate on developing a better understanding of the appetite for risk in the context of strategic opportunities. The art of risk trade-off cannot be practised retrospectively and may even steer the organisation towards greater resilience through explicit discussions and decision-making amongst senior leadership.
Understanding Complexity
In my article for the BA Digest in Q4 2021, I suggested that the Cynefin framework [ku-nev-in], developed by Dave Snowden[2], offers a powerful lens to help PMOs improve their understanding of their operating environment by characterising the context so they can assess and respond appropriately. Ku-nev-in is a Welsh word that translates as ‘place’ or ‘habitat’ and can describe the elements of our situation and personal history that influence our thoughts and decisions.
The framework also helps PMO leaders to recognise when they can rely on established processes, when to bring in experts, when to foster emergent practices, and when to take decisive action to stabilise a situation. The value for the organisation lies in the PMO leader’s ability to guide appropriate responses to different situations.
The Cynefin framework defines five domains: Clear, Complicated, Complex, Chaotic, and Disorder, each requiring a different approach to decision-making and action.
In the Clear domain, the relationship between cause and effect is obvious. Here, PMOs can effectively apply best practices and standardised processes. Routine project reporting or basic schedule management often falls into this category.
The Complicated domain is characterised by a clear relationship between cause and effect, but it’s not immediately apparent to everyone. This is the “known unknowns” realm where expert knowledge is valuable. Many traditional project management challenges reside here, such as resource optimisation or risk analysis. PMOs can rely on good practices and analytical problem-solving in this domain.
The Complex domain is where things get interesting for PMOs. Here, the relationship between cause and effect can only be perceived retrospectively, not in advance. This is the realm of “unknown unknowns.” Many strategic initiatives, organisational changes, or projects in innovative fields fall into this category. In this domain, PMOs need to probe first, then sense, and then respond. Adaptive approaches, continuous learning, and comfort with emergence are key.
In the Chaotic domain, there is no relationship between cause and effect at the systems level. This might occur during crises or rapid, disruptive changes. Here, PMOs need to act first to establish order, sense where stability is possible, and then respond to turn the situation from chaos to complexity.
The fifth domain, Disorder (shown in the image below as Confusion), applies when it’s unclear which of the other four domains is predominant. The first task here is to gather more information to determine which domain the situation belongs to.
The balance between art and science will vary depending on the context. In clear, well-defined situations, scientific approaches might dominate. In complex, ambiguous scenarios, the art of leadership may take centre stage. The most effective PMO leaders can build trust by shifting between these approaches as the situation demands.
The Power of Executive Sponsorship
Positioning the PMO as a strategic partner has significant benefits but is not without its challenges. Many PMOs lament a lack of executive understanding of PMO value, and many organisations still view PMOs through a tactical lens, focusing solely on project delivery rather than strategic impact.
Overcoming preconceptions and perceptions requires PMO leaders to build strong relationships with key stakeholders. Formal sponsorship structures might be most effective in hierarchical organisations, while a network of sponsors at various levels might be more useful in dynamic environments. The key is to align with the organisation’s culture and decision-making processes.
Strong executive sponsorship is a critical success factor for PMOs and can serve as the bridge between project execution and organisational strategy. It acts as a multiplier for the PMO’s efforts, amplifying impact and ensuring initiatives receive the attention and resources they need to succeed. Effective executive sponsors actively champion PMO initiatives, remove obstacles, and serve as advocates for the PMO at the highest levels of the organisation, securing buy-in from other executives and stakeholders.
Qualities like persistence, adaptability, and a clear focus on delivering measurable value help PMO leaders can cultivate and leverage executive sponsorship by regularly engaging with sponsors, providing them with clear, actionable insights, and demonstrating the value of the PMO in terms that resonate with executive priorities. PMO leaders must be adept at ‘managing up’, translating project outcomes into strategic impacts that an executive sponsor can advocate for in the C-suite.
A strong executive sponsor can also provide the visibility, resources, and authority the PMO leader needs to drive significant organisational change and value creation. Co-creating value with sponsors can help; it might involve collaborating on strategic initiatives, jointly developing performance metrics, or solving complex organisational challenges together.
PMO leaders need to work hard to keep executive sponsors engaged, providing regular updates and clear evidence of the PMO’s strategic impact. Sponsor disengagement is a common issue, often due to competing priorities or a lack of clear value demonstration. PMO leaders also need to be adept at quickly building relationships with new executive sponsors and re-establishing their value proposition when changes occur due to organisational restructuring or leadership changes.
Mastering the art of executive sponsorship can significantly enhance the effectiveness and strategic influence of the PMO.
In my next post, I’ll further explore adaptive PMO leadership capabilities and how to develop them.
Footnotes
[2] Kurtz, C. F., & Snowden, D. J. (2003). The new dynamics of strategy: Sense-making in a complex and complicated world. IBM Systems Journal, 42(3), 462-483.
