Please answer the following question after reading the case study which is attached below:

1. How much PM is enough PM? How much PMO support is enough PMO support?

The AtekPC Project Management Office 308-049 Exhibit 2 AtekPC "Idea Form" IDEA DEVELOPMENT FORM Section A. (Requestor completes this section) Project Name: Requestor Name: Replacement Advanced Systems Date Request Submitted: Project Manager System Name (if known): Date needed by: Section B. Reviewer completes this section) Approved Idea Reviewer: Not Approved - Reason for non-approval: Date Reviewed : Manager Project ID: Communications Workgroup Technology & Operations Director Section C. Work Type (Reviewer completes this section) Enhancement Emergency Fix Project Manager Project Manager Section D. (Requestor completes this section 1. Provide a Description (What is it?): Management Support Group Larry Field Director Project PMO Director Mark Nelson 2. Why should we do this? (Explain the business value and select the appropriate benefit type) Explanation : Benefit Type (more than one type can apply) Estimate if possible Creates Revenue Estimated annual revenue: Officer Chief Information Cost Avoidance Estimated cost avoidance: John Strider Cost Savings Estimated annual savings: Operational Reliability Customer Service Enhancement Quality Improvement Financial Systems Manager 3. Scope (Describe what it includes and excludes.) Lead Analyst Lead Analyst Linda Starr Lead Analyst Lead Analyst Lead Analyst 4. Deliverables (Report changes, new screen, data entry, etc...) 5. Impacted Departments / Customers Steven Gardner Systems Manager Development Richard Steinberg Director Application Manufacturing 6. Assumptions Exhibit 1 AtekPC Information Technology Organizational Chart 7. Related projects 8. Risk/Impact of not doing project Sales Systems Manager Source: AtekPC. Source: AtekPC. 15 s document is authorized for use only by Celina Kadanya in Principles of PM Group Assignment taught by Alexa Marko, Fleming College from Nov 2022 to May 2023. This document is authorized for use only by Celina Kadanya in Principles of PM Group Assignment taught by Alexa Marko, Fleming College from Nov 2022 to May 2023.ror me eXCIuSIVe use 01' U. naaanya, ZUZJ. 3:334:49 The AtekPC Project Management Office Implementation and Culture AtekPC was engaged in a difficult challenge by trying to implement standard methods in an organization that was unaccustomed to consistent, disciplined processes and standardization. IT management realized that in the future they would depend on standards and consistent processes to manage their projects and drive them forward. Nonetheless, implementing a I'MO in a non-PM environment was challenging because it went against the grain of the organizational culture. Many people within AtekI'C viewed project management as just administrative overheadgsomething that would inevitably get in the way of doing \"real work.\" Field described the cultural challenge facing the new PMO: We are moving from a company that had really no formal project management to a company that would like to be very formal. We are going to be somewhere in the middle. We can't be so rigid about project management. This culture is not going to let us do that. You have to mix the culture in with the methods and the processes, and now I even hear where the processes can't be that rigid. If we go too rigid, it will fail. We have to be a little uid and dynamic at times, and that upsets some PMO folks, but we have to do it that way here. To succeed we have to develop an organization that will be exible and will be accurate in its reporting. So that's my struggle having project management fit into a culture that is changing but is not quite over here yet. The forces opposing the PMO seemed overwhelming at times to those involved. Strider wondered how willing the IT organization itself was toward changing their processes and adapting to new project management practices. This was a key cultural issue in his mind. Many of the staff including managers had little or no experience with formal project management practic . Very few knew how to use any of the software tools available such as Microsoft Project. In additi in to these knowledge barriers, the informality of the current practices was seen as highly attractive by many. The functional areas enjoyed working with IT people who were responsive to their needs and made things happen quickly. The IT staff also found the informality appealing since there was no cost tracking not were any performance records kept on the projects. The functional areas were not accountable for measuring the benefits resulting from their projects, and the 1T project staff was not working within an assigned project budget. Another source of resistance was the lack of understanding at all levels of the value of formal project management. Altogether these sources of resistance to a PMO created formidable cultural barriers to its success that management and the PMO team had to address. Strider understood many of these cultural barriers and recognized that he would have to nd ways of working through them if the PMO were to survive. In a recent discussion around his ofce table, he had summed up the situation: \"My opinion is that I have two choices. I can conform to the culture and survive,- or I can fight the culture and fail . . . You can only swim up stream so far and so long, regardless of how good and smart you are. But, if you fight the culture at every turn, you will lose.\" For now, the PMO implementation strategy at AtekPC was to work within the culture and to develop forces that would promote the PMO and overcome cultural resistance. Promotional forces included the mentoring, coaching, and training that were being provided by the PMO team. The company was clearly under pressure to change the way it did business, but there was no consensus among senior management concerning the degree to which the PMO was integral to the change process. In Strider's opinion it was too soon to apply formal authority without evidence of value and without more widespread support for the PMO concept. He believed that more buy-in was needed from the functional areas first. One of the chief cultural issues in his mind was how quickly the functional areas (i.e., the customers of IT) would be willing to adapt to a more formal process. They ror me exaluswe use 01' U. naaanya, ZUZv The AtekPC Project Management Office 3054149 would have to be willing to prioritize projects and make the tough choices and tradeoffs. In some cases, in order to move a project forward, they would have to be willing to help justify additional resources. Nelson was working to create buy-in from the functional areas by using his team to provide mentoring and direct project management for key projects. He recognized that this implementation strategy was slow work and required considerable patience. For him, the struggle was about creating and delivering proven success. He expressed the challenge as he saw it: I can't call it bottom up (his implementation approach) because we got approval at the top for us to come in. But it's like it is almost at the top but not quite there . . . It's viewed as bureaucratic, or it's viewed as having the potential of being bureaucratic. And that's because of the industry itself and its time frameget the products out, get the orders in. One of the things we've heard from the top is 'just don't let this project management and process management slow things down. These are all great things, and we want to see them work; but don't let them get in my way.' As Director of Applications Development, Steinberg was one of the early sponsors of the PMO, and he saw some progress in breaking through these cultural barriers. When Steinberg first came to AtekPC, he was given the task of implementing a standard software development methodology. That early methodology effort failed, in his opinion, because the culture was not right for a disciplined approach. Now, he was fully supporting this PMO effort, and he brought to it a deep understanding of the AtekPC culture and its challenges. In his view, only by working with business groups one at a time could he get their buy-in to the PMO. He explained his approach: The selling of the PMO outside of IT is an issue. As hard as I've tried to push this to get some visibility outside of this department, I've not been able to get any official visibility. What happened is that we began to get our PM people involved in projects and sent them down to the users involved in it. Manufacturing was one of the first areas. The person who is the spokesperson for the IT project in Manufacturing said, \"What is this PMO going to do?\" When we told her all about it she jumped on it. The same thing happened in Sales. It's not so well received in certain groups, but fortunately it is in some areas . . . Manufacturing is on board, and Sales is starting to come on board. But I'm not sure that the other functional areas are totally on board with this concept yet. With some functional areas in support, the PMO team continued their implementation efforts. As Nelson remarked, their advancement to date had been in \"baby steps.\" The frustration of such tedious progress tempted them to consider an alternative approach 7 force the change with top-down mandates and hired experts. Several managers, including those directly involved with the PMO, recognized the need for a larger staff of experts to build standards and methods quickly, and they advocated a rapid, more resource intensive implementation strategy. Such an approach would allow the PMO to prove its value by actively managing more projects and helping AtekPC to achieve more consistent and better project performance. IT management was concerned that such an approach would fail because they couldn't force radical change on AtekPC. Thus, the senior IT managers encouraged a slow, incremental strategy that would allow the PMO concept to prove itself with small victories won through mentoring one project at a time. 1D 11 a v. um unvuau-vv \"an. v. v. nuuu-qu, -v-v- 308049 The AtekPC Project Management Office I'MO resources were acquired at the expense of other operational teams. Even as Nelson was working within these limitations, he was hoping to get more help. As Nelson explained: If I had no constraints I would like to be able to bring on the team of people consisting of project analysts, as well as managers, very quickly. Bring in a group of people up front. Most of them could be new to get started. Then as you go on, you could pull in from the rest of the organization. They would all be part of the PMO. So we would have varying degrees of experience ranging from senior PM's to people who were junior. We could achieve a lot by just taking this one step. Steinberg was concerned about the resources required and how the functional areas might perceive adding more people at this time. He explained: \"What is the implication of a sponsor in Sales trying to initiate a project that gets approval from the PMO7 They don't literally understand what the PMO is. They think it's sort of a road block and an obstacle to progressia bureaucratic thing.\" Steinberg's concern about how people might View the PMO was shared by Strider. Although Strider was convinced that the PMO was the right way to go for AtekPC, he knew that he also had to ensure that IT kept its balance and got the work done, As Strider explained: Now, if you add people, where do you add them? The fact that you can add them at all is a breakthrough. Do you add them in this PMO, or do you add them somewhere else? . . . The question is how you get to go where you need to go, but not violate the culture so much that you cause a big red ag. . . . Because the PMO cannot get the project done. They're not going to write code,- they're not going to install servers; they're not going to meet with users who understand functional requirements; they're not going to meet wi customers. On the front lines, Star was getting some information through the grapevine about this new PMO, and she tried to make sense of what she was hearing so that she would be ready to adapt to any new changes. She was certainly hoping for more help, especially with what she viewed as the 'udministmtive things' on a project. As a Lead Analyst, she had dealt with many of the problems of project management, and she was keenly aware of the opportunity that the PMO created for her. She looked forward to learning to be more effective as a project manager, but she wasn't quite certain what was really happening. She described her understanding of the PMO: I thought it would be a great idea because I thought at the time that this was going to be a group that was going to head up different projects, and they would be the lead project manager. And then we would be their team. I was assuming that what would happen is that I would still be the person in chargethe leadfor that project, for my group that was working. But, I would be, in essence, reporting to this project manager who had the skills and the knowledge and the training and the tools to help us go forward. This was because my background in project management is my own self-created processes and tools that I've made myself in order to create and do the analysis and keeping track and all that. So I thought, they're coming in with all these tools, and eventually they'll be teaching us; and eventually we will be projed managers that can stand on our own. Star's manager, Gardner had the expectation that the PMO model would be more heavy than light. He was already convinced of the merits of the PMO from his group's use of the 'idea form' to capture new project requests. In his understanding, the PMO would provide a project manager resource pool. He spoke about his view of the organizational model: They are moving from just helping us with methodology types of things to managing projects. . . . They are thinking of a pool of project managers. You might have one such project, - v. um vnvlululvv may v. v. I'uuullyu, -v-v- The AtekPC Project Management Office 308049 and you could borrow that one person for a while. And your project would report to them. I think it's the understanding that they have project managers to which you assign the various projects throughout the department. For instance, we're using one now for this new launch project in addition to the projects we have now. She is starting to take over the role of planning the timeline, scheduling, getting the right folks on board, and making sure everybody's informedithe typical project manager type tasks. . . . As far as project management goes, the project is her responsibility. It's her job. In Gardner's View, he would maintain control of the project, and for its duration the assigned project marhager from the PMO staff would follow his directions. Resources would be assigned in a matrix structure for the duration of the project. This was what Gardner was doing with the current PMO project manager who was assigned to one of his projects, and in Gardner's opinion, this was a big help because he had too few people and a large stack of projects to get done. Gardner was expecting the PMO to furnish his group with project managers in a manner similar to a PMOheavy. On the other hand, Field recognized that the problem of PMO structure was not only about IT stafng, The problem with a PMO-heavy isn't just bringing on the project managers and analysts. It's also the business resources. Today, we have line managers who are working on multiple projects in addition to their regular jobs, and they can't take on any more. What really drives a lot of the projects in any company is the availability of the business resources to work on those projects. Having the business resources available is already becoming a problem for us. With a PMOlight we are lined up better with the business side in terms of the number of resources, and it's a better balance. Nelson favored PMOheaVy as the best model for AtekPC, but he recognized that he would not be able to gain acceptance immediately for this approach. The demand for resources was great throughout AtekPC, and the PMO would need to prove itself in order to earn the resources he wanted. He intended to build support for the PMO-heavy model through project successes. As the PMO gained acceptance, he wanted to implement a PMOheavy approach, furnishing project managers to the various groups. As he said: I don't think there's enough education about project management to know the difference between PMO light and I'MO heavy. There have been organizational structures that have been discussed . . . But because of the overall change that the company is going through, they are not ready to make any type of decision . . . With these processes and procedures that we're developing we'll establish project planning, tracking, initiation, and closure. AH the project managers will help get the IT house in order. As AtekPC sought to find the right organizational model, the PMO team worked to deliver the services that were slowly building their credibility and proving their value to AtekPC. Finding the right place for the PMO along the spectrum between heavy and light organizational models was an ongoing tension that would have to be worked out sooner or later. With more resources, Nelson believed that his team could provide more support faster and move more rapidly ahead with critical projects and standards. On the other hand, Strider reminded Nelson that the PMO was but one of many responsibilities within AtekPC's IT organization. There were other needs for resources with their own justifications and paybacks. Thus, the issue of PMO heavy versus PMO Light was not a simple or easy decision. mama H A R V A R D B U S II! E S S S C H O OIL 9-308-049 OCTOBER 11, 2007 F. WARREN MCFARLAN MARK KEIL JOHN HUPP The AtekPC Project Management Office A rain had started in the early evening of March 3, 2007, and the streets of Metropolis were cold and grey where the AtekPC headquarters were located. As John Strider, CIO for AtekPC, packed up his briefcase at the end of the day, his thoughts returned to the new Project Management Ofce (PMO) that he had approved several months ago. During his tenure of over twenty years at AtekPC, Strider had never witnessed the kinds of pressures that were now facing the personal computer (PC) industry. Strider recognized that the industry was in transition and that his Information Technology (IT) organization would be involved in some critically important projects in the days ahead, as AtekPC sought to take a leadership role in these changes. It was that thought which brought to mind the PMO initiative. If it were implemented right, this PMO could be a big help to AtekPC, but Strider had concerns about what might happen if they tried to push too hard with this idea. Instead of a help, it could become another item on his growing list of problems. There were so many questions on his mind: How much PM is enough PM? How much PMO support is enough PMO support? When do you get to the point that the PMO structure and process is enabling productivity and contributes to a more Successful outcome with feWer mistakes and a higher quality result whatever you define success to be at the beginning? And when does PM involvement become administration for its own purposes? When do you cross the line? Strider thought that he understood what this PMO could do for AtekPC, but the initiative was still in its infancy. It needed time to prove itself. On the one hand, his management team had hired some experienced people with real talent to spearhead the PMO program. On the other, they were new to the PC business and to AtekPC. They didn't understand how powerful the culture was here, he thOught. As Strider expressed it, the PMO had to become a part of the AtekPC, culture, and that required small changes over a long period of time. If the PMO found itself fighting against the culture, it would definitely fail. As CIO he was keenly aware of the many initiatives and responsibilities that he had to cover with his limited resources, and he knew the PMO was only one of theSe. He couldn't let things drop just to build up this new PMO. It all had to be done together. Strider knew that his people who were working on the PMO were frustrated that they could not move faster. He, too, was tempted by the thought of rapidly loading up the PMO with more resources and knocking out projects. But in his opinion, that would be a bold and short-lived initiativetoo much, too soon, too fast. tantrums... I: Una\"... mannala\" D_ntm.nm. Tun1, V,.:l "t runway. CL..." TT..:.m_..:-." M": Int... LL...\" talc": onrwt Hyman": sun .1...\" rum-".5. Anhnn lUI \"IU UAUIUaIVU U3: VI '1- nauallya, 'U'O- SUE049 The AlekPC Project Management Office the past that had employed some formal practices, these projects had not resulted in lasting formalization of practices. Steinberg explained: You can go back over the years, to Y2K, to the conversion of our order management system; on those major projects they used a project management approach. They didn't realize it. They got everyone together; they talked about what it's going to take to get this done, and they got it done. Everyone handed out awards and said, \"That was done well. So now that we're through with that, we've got to get back to doing projects normally.\" They didn't realize that that is the way to do it. All of a sudden when those major things go away, when that disappears, then you go back to trying to do things out of your back pocket again. In 2007, IT projects were typically managed by adding I'M responsibilities to one of the development staff who were assigned to specific functional areas. For example, the Lead Analyst assigned to Manufacturing would also play the role of project manager. Lead Analysts supervised workgroups of analysts and programmers of varying skill levels, and they were responsible for satisfying the requests of the functional areas as well as the performance of their workgroups. Using an informal project initiation process, users requested IT services through the Lead Analyst who then managed the project with the support of the resources within their workgroup. The manager, in this case the Manufacturing Systems Manager, resolved any issues and conicts, if needed; otherwise, the request was received, executed, and delivered through the Lead Analyst. Project methods, documentation, practices, and tools were individualized by the Lead Analyst with little or no consistency across IT groups or business areas. AtekPC had realized many benefits from this informal approach to projects. Lead Analysts often had long tenures in their areas and developed a deep knowledge of the business activities, needs, and people. As a result of their informal approach, they provided rapid responseIto user requests and were able to balance emergent critical needs within their workgroups with few conicts. Because of this record of responsive delivery, considerable trust was developed between the functional area and their Lead Analyst. The trust-based relationship was highly personalized to the individual employee, and loyalties arose from both sides. The openness of these relationships enabled the Lead Analyst to gather and assess quickly the requirements and to reach consensus on a schedule and delivery date. Linda Star, a Lead Analyst for Manufacturing, described her Work in this role: In my world I have a variety of users that I talk to. They would say, 'I need this.' Some would say, 'I really need this. Can I get this? This is an emergency, and I have to have it.' I would come back, and I would look at what my people are working on and say 'I need you to switch gears. I need you to give me two hours, two days, or whatever it takes. We need to get this little piece done.' I do a schedule based on what everybody in my group is doing and what I know after talking with them. lUl IIIU UAUIU3IV7 uat: UI U: nauallya, 'V'O- The Alekl'C Project Management Office 302L049 This informal approach to project management had traditionally been the norm at Ateld'C. Historically, the prevailing View was that IT was peripheral to the core business activities at AtekPC. As a result, 1T had been seen as an order-taker, expected to provide service on demand. During the past decade, projects had become increasingly focused on operations and maintenance in an over- riding effort to improve efficiencies within the business functions. The development of cross- functional integration systems and the use of internet technologies were only two of many emerging needs as AtekPC struggled with radical changes in its industry and marketplace. The required new projects were larger, more complex and they involved multiple functional areas and multiple technological areas unlike the tightly focused projects that were performed in the past by a single workgroup. The demands of these new initiatives and projects were expected to overtax the current informal project management methods The AtekPC I'MO was being implemented to provide more consistent and better practices for both business and IT projects. However, implementing a PMO at AtekPC was itself a challenge which required skillful management to be successful. A difficult balance had to be maintained both between maintenance and new development as well as between resources that went into development activities versus resources that went into project management activities under the new PMO. Strider described the challenge: We don't have it all figured out. That's better than thinking you do when you don't. In the IT department we have to be better able to manage the conicts between new business critical initiatives and operations with incremental changes to existing systems. We cannot sacrifice one for the other. The history is that we've only done operational maintenance, and now we've got to have a culture of doing both. PMO Mission The mission of the AtekPC PMO had been gradually evolving since its inception in late 2006. As of spring 2007, there was not a complete consensus regarding its purpose, its responsibilities, and its authority. While formal documentation and plans for the PMO did not exist, the immediate goal was to establish the office and to prove its value. The general consensus was that the purpose of the PMO was to realize the benefiE derived from consistent project practices. Although not clearly specified or measurable at this time, these benets were expressed in a Variety of terms ranging from IT improvements in project performance, efficiency, and resource utilization to enterprise improvements in cost management and corporate capability to launch products. Steinberg explained from the enterprise perspective: If I think about the PC industry and its challenges, I think about two things that could be driving for a PMO. One might be cost reduction. We cannot afford to be careless. Frankly, we have to be a lot more cautious about how we use our resources. Another motivation to get better on projects would be that we have to get more creative, adaptive, and agile in launching new products. And in order to launch new products, what would you say is driving those initiatives but project mnagement? The responsibilities of the PMO were not so clear, however. At present the responsibilities of the PMO were limited to IT projects, although there was ongoing discussion about expanding its scope to an enterprise level PMO that would include business projects in the future. The specific duties of a PMO were typically divided into two categories: project-focused and enterprise-oriented. Project- focused responsibilities such as consulting, mentoring, and training were services that enabled the success of individual projects. On the other hand, enterprise responsibilities addressed services that might improve all projects such as portfolio management, PM standards, methods, and tools, and For me exmuswe use OI La. nauanya, 40'6- 308049 The AtekPC Project Managemenl Office Governance The issue of PMO governance was not widely discussed, but already of some importance. At present, there were no roadmaps or timelines for its maturation, so there was no way to measure PMO performance other than through the subjective opinions of those involved. There was a sense that AtekPC would know whether the PMO was working if the projects were getting done and the company was getting what it needed. Field acknowledged that there were few measures in place for projects or the PMO. He explained: How do we measure ourselves? How does a project organization measure success? One of the worries has been will project management, because of its bureaucracy, slow things down. There is still some worry about that We are trying to say that we will actually speed things up and get things done quicker with less reworkr So how do we measure ourselves to say that we are succeeding? We haven't really put those metrics together yet. Determining how to prove the PMO's value was a major challenge for Nelson: \"Proving its value is the only way it's going to work And this is going to be tough because there hasn't been any collection of data before. But even if it is anecdotal, we can show them that . . . we have to be able to show progress.\" Given this approach to measuring PMO performance through subjective consensus and anecdotal data, the next governance issue was figuring out to whom was the PMO accountable. For the moment, it reported to Steinberg as Director of Applications Development which in his opinion was because of his experience with methodologies and standards, He explained some of the current governance options: I It currently reports to me in application development, but I really think it should be elsewhere . . . The key is that I've been tapped as the person to get it started. I think at some point down the road, it more correctly should report somewhere els%if not the C10, somewhere else in the organization l . . I think there's a possibility it could report either to the senior vice-president, or if we institute this new Planning Office, then maybe in the Planning Office. Strider recognized that the current governance model was only temporary, and explained his views: The only reason we can get a PMO established is because there is a Planning Ofce for the company, and the senior vice-president is committed to a more planned, rigorous, project management approach. I could not drive this internally within IT unless [had that support . r . Right now, it reports to the head of Application Development Steinberg and I have talked that over time, probably, the PMO will report to me directly. But frankly, I just don't have time right now . . . There's also the Planning Office that doesn't report to me but to the senior vice- president and that's a possibility. Understanding this close interaction between the new Planning Office and the PMO, Steinberg shared his over-riding concern about it remaining within IT. I think as long as it remains an element, a division apart within 1T, there will still be this 'us-them' kind of a thing, and the feeling that we're in there to get our way, and it's our axe to grind, and it's to make us look better . . . We've done some work with group applications, and they've been successful. People want more of them. So my hope is that we will have enough 12 For me EXCIUSIVB U58 OI La. nauanya, 046 The AtekPC Project Managemenl Office 308049 breathing room here to get started with the PMO and to show the benefit of it That will sell it to other areas and allow it to continue to live. Deciding How Best to Move Forward The PC industry was changing, and AtekPC was engaged in dealing with dramatic pressure from larger competitors such as HP, Dell, and Lenovo. To compete in a changing industry in which consolidation was occurring, AtekPC had implemented a corporate Planning Office. Recogiizing the role that IT would likely play in enabling AtekPC to respond to the industry pressures, the senior Vice-president had supported the creation of a PMO within IT The role of the PMO might be expanded to include non-1T projects if it proved to be successful. At the same time, there was a possibility that the PMO might fail due to the challenge of implementing such a measured and disciplined approach to projects in an environment where that was viewed as foreign to the culture. After all, AtekPC was an organization that was used to people rushing around doing whatever it took to build and ship products each and every day. The PMO implemenmtion had already raised several issues, some of which had proven too controversial to resolve immediately. AtekPC was therefore feeling its way along with the PMO effort. As they tried to hammer out agreement on basic PMO issues, everyone in the IT organization was acutely aware of the challenges they faced and the risk associated with failure. Projects were piling up quickly. Success would depend entirely on their decisions and their efforts, and that was a cause of worry to each of them. The traffic was at a standstill as Strider drove along the interstate trying to get out of Metropolis and home to his family that evening. It gave him time to reect again about the PMO. He had guided his management team to this implementation strategy. He had strong convictions that the PMO-light model was the way to go He had held back on hiring more full time employees for the PMO. He was concerned about the many issues that the PMO implementation had already raised. Were small steps building on small successes going to get the job done fast enough? He thought to himself as he waited for the traffic to move: \"How can I get where we need to go, without violating the culture so much that it causes a big red flag? . . . I feel that I've got to do it the way I'm doing it, rather than load up a big PMO and say, 'Here's my PMO,\" 13 I in an: clawing-'6 ucv v- v- I\\uuuuyu, subu- 308.049 The AtekPC iject Management Office project performance archives. Clarification of the responsibilities of the PMO was continuously evolving as AtekPC attempted to gain support and to reach agreement on its mission and charter: At AtekPC, project-focused responsibilities were the primary means used to prove the merits of their PMO. The plan was to create acceptance by consulting and mentoring on individual projects. Mark Nelson, the new PMO Manager, talked about this effort: What I've been doing since October 2006 has been providing mentoring and support for project management with key projects that have been identified by the IT executives. For the immediate future, until we get rolling, the plan is to have me work with a person from a project planning standpointregular meetings with the teams, status reporting, maintenance issues, and managing risks. To that end, the PMO continued to build support from the functional areas and [T personnel involved in these projects. One of the major limitations was the shortage of PMO expert resources available to support these projects. In addition to Nelson, there were three other project managers assigned to the PMO and these were contract employees. Using PMO staff to directly manage projects was done infrequently; however, Nelson had assigned one of his project managers to a critical project involving the launch of a new notebook computer. Enterpriseoriented responsibilities for the new PMO were slow to develop at AtekPC. The new PMO had been developing some standard project processes and procedures. Steven Gardner, Manufacturing Systems Manager, commented on a project chartering process that the PMO had introduced: Nelson helped us develop what we call an \"idea form\" where we try to eliminate a lot of random calls that are coming to us. We are trying to better prioritize W} at we work on, and using this 'idea form' leads us toward building a business understanding of whatever the idea is that comes along. This forces some thinking up front on our side but also on the requester's side. It helps them think through about usage and all. Why are we going to get savings here? What's the reason for doing this? Is it worth doing this project at the expense of another one? Now, how do I prioritize it? So, it is helping us get our arms around the things that we're working on. The enterprise-focused services developed by Nelson's PMO team were being well received While progress in this area was constrained by the limited PMO resources, there was a clear agreement even at the CIO level that the PMO was responsible for establishing publishing, and disseminating project practices, standards, and tools. On the other hand, portfolio management (the change from managing one-off projects to the establishment of techniques for managing continuous streams of projects) and archiving responsibilities (the establishment of archival records of projects for knowledge sharing) were not being addressed. Nelson hoped to be able to include those duties in the mission as the PMO developed, but without additional resources it was not achievable in the short-term. He also realized that additional resources could only come by taking them from other critical responsibilities, and this might compromise their ability to maintain operational effectiveness. It was a challenging balance. The final area of concern with respect to the mission of the PMO was the issue of authority. Strider recognized that enforcement of these new project practices required formal authority, and he was prepared to provide that only when the PMO had proven itself to the business and IT. For the early development efforts, Nelson was working under the benefit of an implied authority that came from a general awareness of changing management directions. However, the PMO also had the support of the senior vice~president Larry Field, Director of the Project Management Support Group, was a key I v- \"iv claw-naive now u- v- naval-ya, Aubu- Tlre AtekPC iject Management Office 3084149 member of the PMO initiative from its beginning and he explained: \"For us to be effective, we have to have support from the top. And we have that support from the senior vicepresident through John Strider and on down. That is the rst and most critical thing to make this work." However, because not all of the senior executives were equally enthused about the PMO concept, authority was primarily being developed bottom-up through the value of the PMO services. Even this was limited to those functional areas and IT areas actively engaging the PMO. There was no current plan to enforce usage at the enterprise level. Nelson summed up this approach with these remarks: The big thing is the mentoring that is going on and actually managing the projects We are being patient right now so that we can get some good concrete examples that we can show them. We can say 'look what this is doing for you. This project that would have taken a year and a half before, we're doing in three or four months now because we have put these practices in place.' And that's the key because it lets us show our worth. That has to be the approach for now. PMO Organization Two organizational models were under consideration for the PMO. These were referred to as PMO-heavy and PMO-light, and represented two ends of a spectrum of PMO organizational approaches. At the one extreme, PMO-heavy was characterized by a full staff of project managers who assumed responsibility for the management of all IT projects. This model focused on the acquisition of project management experts, either from internal or external sources, and used these resources to manage projects under the direction of the PMO. In the extreme version of PMOheavy, no project would operate outside the management and direct control of the PMO. At the other end of the spectrum, PMO-light was characterized by a minimal staff of experts who worked through internal project managers to perform the responsibilities of the PMO. This model focused on the development of the skills of internal project managers who were not formally connected with the PMO. In the extreme version of PMOlight, all projects operated outside of the PMO under existing organizational controls, and the ownership of projects resided within the functional area and IT group charged with execution of the project. The issue of where the PMO should be situated along the spectrum from PMO-heavy to PMO-light was generating a lot of discussion and little agreement. Strider spoke about this controversy: Right now, it's four people full-time. . . . Given the speed with which we as a company want to movewe as an industry need to moveI think four permanent people is too small. I see these people assigned to major projects to assist, but the diversity of application is too broad. I don't see all of the management moving into this group. There's kind of a difference of opinion between me and the PMO at this point about that. We're going to have to find some middle ground, . . . I'm fairly convinced it should be light. That doesn't mean I don't question it, because there are a lot of people in this department that are constantly challenging me on that. Which is fine, I mean, I don't ever need a bunch of \"yes-men\" around. While Nelson was agreeable to working with a small team at the start, he felt that the delays from this approach might compromise their ability to provide PMO services and to demonstrate its worth to the functional areas of the business. However, he and the other managers recognized that resources were not free, and they had to come from someplace which meant reducing the capabilities of someone else's work to advance his own. Strider struggled with this challenge and the current tour I U: u"; VAVIHIIV ua'; VI v. l\\uuunyn, 1.va- smum The AtekPC Project Management Office Strider closed his briefcase and headed for the elevator. His IT senior management team had been with him many years, He felt confident that he could lead them on the right path without dampening their enthusiasm for this new PMO. But would that be enough? To Strider the payoff was about alignmentaligning strategic business directions with IT resources, and that was the essence of the PMO. There was little margin for mistakes at AtekPC in these changing times. Industry Background The PC industry was experiencing tremendous cost pressure and was undergoing a period of consolidation. As prot margins fell, PC makers were launching cost reduction strategies aimed at further improving the efficiency of their supply chains, while lowering the cost of distribution. According to a recent newspaper article: The Latest nancial results for PC makers show a slow down in both sales and protability. Both corporations and consumers are holding on to their PCs for a longer period of time to avoid the cost and hassles associated with upgrading their equipment As a result, purchases are being deferred and PC makers are looking at new markets for growth opportunities The industry appears to be undergoing a wave of consolidation as cost control and scale become more important than ever before.1 In 2007, a major news magazine ran a cover article entitled \"Whittier the PC?\" The threas reported in their analysis were worldwide and stemmed from a variety of factors including the growing popularity of mobile phones, l'DAs and web-based applican'on software. For most people, email is the most important application that they use. For a long period of time, sending and receiving email necessitated having a full-edged PC. Nowadays, though, businesspeople and consumers want to reap the benet of being able to access email from anywhere 24/ 7 without the inconvenience of carrying a notebook computer around with them. Mobile phones and PDAs now provide this functionality, causing many people to question the need for carrying a full-fledged computer. In the boom days of the PC, the market was boundless, but growth has slowed considerably. Moreover, with the growing popularity of web-based applications, both businesses and consumers are purchasing less expensive machines that can access and run web-based applications and do not require massive amounts of local processing power or storage. Having ignored reality for years, PC makers are at last doing something. In order to cut costs, they are already streamlining their operations through the use of information technology and looking at new products and new markets to maintain revenue growth and boost profitability.2 AtekPC Founded in 1984, AtekPC had grown to become a mid-sized US, PC maker with 2006 sales of $1.9 billion. AtekPC employed 2100 full~time workers and an additional 200 partvtime workers. In spite of its history of rapid growth in the 19905, AtekPC found itself struggling alongside the world's other PC makers as they grappled with the transition from a growth industry to that of a maturing industry. Strider explained: 1 Smith, David, "rc Makers face increased price competition and industry consolidation\