Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
IT Portfolio Planning – Project Prioritization ModelsAugust 2014
CONFIDENTIAL
Buckeye IT PMO Overview
The overall purpose of the PMO is to partner with business, vendors, and IT to deliver quality project results. The team works collaboratively to bring processes to the organization that facilitates Project Management consistency. Each member of the team will provide leadership for managing projects within the organization through transparent and consistent communications. The success of the PMO is measured through the successful delivery of projects and the establishment of a relationship network with feedback as a collaborative, helpful, and knowledgeable service.
CONFIDENTIAL
2
Overview of the IT Portfolio Management Program
•Functional Goals•Work with the IT Leadership Team (ILT), IT functional areas, and the Engineering Office (EO) PMO to govern the Capital Technology Programs/Projects.
•Provide a channel of communication to the SLT and ITLC on the status and performance of the IT Capital Board Portfolio.
•Functional Responsibilities •Administer the annual development and approval of the Capital IT budget, •Follow the Authorization for Expenditure (AFE) process, •Administer the Primavera Toolset for IT configurations, •Update monthly forecasts, track actuals, and report on monthly status of the financials and schedule at the project, program and portfolio level,
•Track compliance to Project Management Framework (PMF) and Program Development Control (PDC) expectations.
CONFIDENTIAL
3
Developing the Strategic Project Portfolio Plan
CONFIDENTIAL
4
Internal Review
Roadmap Updatecomplete IT update of Roadmaps – Identify 2015 Projects (Carryover, New Capital, New Expense
July
Roadmap Finalcomplete BU update of Roadmaps – confirm 2015 Projects
July 31
OOM EstimatesProposed Projects Entered in OPPM with Charter, OOM Estimates and Prioritization Scoring
August
Investment MappingProposed project scores added to investment map for prioritization
Portfolio Financials Prepared
August
CIO ReviewProposed Projects Reviewed with CIO for approval (Charter, OOM, Investment Map)
August 30
Portfolio & Program Sponsor ReviewCIO Approved Projects reviewed with Program Sponsors for Approval
September
Finalize IT BudgetSubmit Proposed Capital Budget for 2015 IT Portfolio
Oct.
Finalize 2015 BudgetProject SelectionPopulate OPPMUpdate Roadmaps
Budget Development Communication Plan
Activity Objective Responsible / Involved
IT ONLY Roadmap Updates
1. Update IT Services Roadmaps with Capital Project Initiatives2. Kickoff with CIO and Program Managers3. Working session to update Roadmap
IT PMO Program Manager / Roadmap & Program Owners, CIO
BU Review
1. Kickoff with Project Sponsors at Program Level2. Review the Proposed Roadmap initiatives with departments business owners to
identify additional initiatives they would like from the IT service area, with prioritization scoring
3. Collective Program review with business units by Program
IT PMO Program Manager / BU Process/Department Managers, IT Roadmap Owner
IT ONLY Program Owner Review
1. Update Roadmaps to confirm Program Project Proposals2. Collective Program review to confirm cross functional IT3. Update Investor Mapping with Prioritization Scoring and OOM Estimates
IT PMO Program Manager / Program Owners
CIO Review1. IT ONLY Review Proposed IT Portfolio for presentation to Executive Sponsors to
confirm IT commitment to deliver2. IT ONLY Review Final IT Portfolio to align schedules and priorities3. Iterative review throughout
IT PMO Program Manager / CIO, Program Owner, PMO Director
Executive Program Sponsor Review
Review Proposed Program Portfolio for project concept and Program budget approvalIT PMO Program Manager / CIO, Program Owner, PMO Director, Program Sponsor, Project Sponsors
Executive Portfolio Sponsor Review
1. Review Proposed IT Portfolio for approval to proceed with Program Sponsors2. Review Final Proposal for Portfolio Budget Approval
IT PMO Director / CIO, Program Managers, Program Owners
EO PMO Coordination
Review Final IT Portfolio for inclusion in Corporate Maintenance Capital Budget (send Financial Planning & Analysis the RCAP forecast)
IT PMO Program Manager / PMO Director, Program Owners
CONFIDENTIAL
5
6
IT PortfolioPrioritization Scoring Model
CONFIDENTIAL
2014 PPM IT Scoring Model•4 Weighted Assessment Scores
• 25% Business Urgency• 25% IT Urgency• 25% Business Value• 25% IT Value
•Prioritization Scale• 8.5 – 10 = Critical Strategic• 7 – 8.49 = High High Potential• 6 – 6.99 = Medium Key Operational• <6 = Low Maintenance Support
•Business Ranking• 1 – Business Critical (business or department growth and/or stability dependent on this
initiative)• 2 – Strategic Initiative (proactive measures to address efficiencies)• 3 – Exploratory (nice to have but can live without) •4 – Low Impact (current process sustainable – not considered a hindrance to growth)
Project Urgency
Business Urgency
IT Service Urgency
Project Value
Business Value
IT Services Value
8
Prioritization Scorecard
CONFIDENTIAL
Score
Weighted Score
Business Urgency 30% Organizational Change Readiness 30% 10 3.00 Regulatory 10% 10 1.00 Dependencies 30% 10 3.00 Department Efficiency 25% 10 2.50 Department Ranking 5% 10 0.50
Business Value 25% Alignment with Strategic Goals 25% 10 2.50 Business Employee Productivity Improvement 30% 10 3.00 Financial /Revenue Impact; 20% 10 2.00 End-User Satisfaction 15% 10 1.50 Criticality of Project Delivery; Operational Risk 10% 10 1.00
IT Urgency 25% Age of Platform / Technology 10% 10 1.00 Platform / Technology Maturity 15% 10 1.50 Platform / Technology Complexity 20% 10 2.00 Product / Technology Supportability 25% 10 2.50 Historical Risk of Failure 30% 10 3.00
IT Value 20% Alignment with IT Roadmaps 25% 10 2.50 IT Service Quality Improvement 25% 10 2.50 IT Employee Productivity / Staff Impact 20% 10 2.00 IT Cost Benefit 15% 10 1.50 Contribution to Strategy 15% 10 1.50
Prioritization Proposal Categorization Strategic 10 Critical 6 Long-Term 5 Business Critical KBO1
Project Name
Scoring Criteria Weight
10.00
10.00
10.00
Project T ier Project Urgency
Project Value Strategic Alignment
10.00
KBO Description
KBO1Increase infrastructure and architecture support effeciencies through consolidation and reduction of hardware and technologies
KBO2Improve services to the business through strategic technology investmens and partnerships
KBO3Leverage enterprise buying power and partnerships to improve technology cost sharing opportunities across lines of business
KBO4Provide hands-on opportunities for associates to apply training concepts
IT Prioritization Scoring
Business Urgency 30%
Organizational Change
Readiness
Significantly changes how people do their jobs; will require significant change
management communication across the
enterprise; anticipated resistance
Project improves existing processes, reducing
administrative burden; increases job satisfaction
Provides improved tools, work processes, and/or new opportunities for
career growth; anticipated acceptance
Serves a large set of users with significant positive impact; addresses key
organization / department goals; not visible to the user
community
30%
Regulatory not related to a regulatory or contractual directive
Proactive measures to mitigate potential regulatory finding
Responsive to regulatory finding
Mandatory based on new contractual and/or
regulatory directives10%
DependenciesSingle Department; little
to no visible benefit to the user; no financial
dependency
Strategic Investment; silo effort; no dependency with other projects or process improvement
efforts
Must be completed as a dependency to other non-
critical active/approved projects
Significant importance to existing critical processes / projects; financial success depends on this change
30%
Department Efficiency
Project provides little to no direct visible benefit to the end user experience
Project improves / automates existing non-
mission critical processes
Project improves existing processes, positively
affecting job performance
Project automates critical processes, significantly improves or eliminates
critical business processes, 25%
Department Ranking Low Impact Exploratory Strategic Initiative Business Critical 5%
IT Prioritization Scoring
Business Value 25%
Alignment with Strategic Goals
Exploratory, nice to have, minimal impact if not
completed
Business benefits not quantified; not verifiable;
low value project;
Promote a culture of accountability, execution
and continuous improvement; improved
service offerings
Regulatory requirements as issued by PHMSA;
Acquisition Activity; Quantifiable Benefit Metrics
of project identified
25%
Business Employee
Productivity Improvement
No process efficiencies anticipated; low
occurrence frequency; low value processes
Proactive measures to address potential
resource constraints; automation of manual process; department
performance improvement
Departmental resource capacity issues being
addressed; new or enhanced business
capability
Capacity / Business Productivity currently
constrained; must be done to enable growth to sustain
department productivity
30%
Financial /Revenue Impact
No cost savings or additional revenue
identified
Benefits outweigh the risk of the project; NPV
anticipated to delivery a positive return >3 years
NPV anticipated to deliver a positive return <3 years;
increases existing revenue generating abilities
Enables New revenue stream; acquisition related;
Open headcount closed; release of contract resource
20%
End-User Satisfaction
High Training and High Number of Users; adds
complexity or new processing responsibility
to existing staff
High Training and Low Number of Users; minimal
impact to existing user interface and/or
processes
Low Training and Low Number of Users; intuitive
changes to UI; no user interface
Low Training and High Number of Users; Significant increase to user satisfaction
and/or usability of the product/service.
15%
Criticality of Project Delivery; Operational Risk
May involve significant outside purchases that
will require the New Supplier Sourcing process
May involve some outside purchases that will
require a new contract with existing/approved
Supplier
May involve outside purchases that may be
acquired through the use of an existing contract
Does not involve outside purchases 10%
IT Prioritization Scoring
IT Urgency 25%Platform /
Technology Maturity
<2 years of service; New Installation; Currently a
generally available product / service
2nd year of service; No longer generally available
but fully supported by vendor
3-5 years in service; Retirement announced but
support is currently available
5+ years in service; No support available; spares in short supply or non-existent
15%
IT Security / Risk
No user or network security impact; no change to
existing security; no risk to financials
Potential financial impact; additional proactive
measures
Anticipated financial impact; new security
protocol; new technology platform
Realized financial impact; system vulnerability
occurrence30%
Implementation Complexity
Potentially significant risk in implementation and/or
more than 6 system interfaces
Potentially high level of level of risk in
implementation and/or 4-6 system interfaces
Potentially moderate level of risk in implementation
and/or 1-3 system interfaces
Straight-forward; minimal level of risk in
implementation and/or no system interfaces
10%
Product / Technology
Supportability
Early Adopter; no experienced resource (First
Time Use in Buckeye IT)
Early Adopter, Limited Experienced Support Resources Available
Established / Experienced Support Resources
Stable Sr. Level Experienced Support Resources 20%
Historical Risk of Failure
No failure recorded; Improvement to service,
system stability or recoverability
Low failure rate; would disrupt non-core
operational applications
Increasing failure rate; would disrupt customer-
facing systems; would reduce operational capacity
Existing Solution has High failure rate; Outage would
disrupt core operations; unavailability of service
would significantly impact revenue; Critical System lacking DR component
30%
IT Prioritization Scoring
IT Value 20%
Strategic IT Alignment
Conflicts with existing Roadmap;
new/conflicting architecture, policy
and/or data standard
Approved Exception; Aging Technology on Existing
Roadmap
New Roadmap in alignment with existing
architecture, policy / data standards
Existing Roadmap; In alignment with IT
architecture, policies and/or data standards
25%
IT Customer Service
No improvement in customer service
anticipated; negatively impacts current service
delivery quality
IT customer services slightly improved
IT customer service improvement in key areas
Significant IT Customer Service Improvement;
acquisition activity25%
IT Employee Productivity / IT
Staff Impact
No change to productivity; increased
headcount needed
Slight Improvement to productivity; expense
contract resource required
Improved productivity; capital contract resources
required
Significant productivity / utilization improvement; No
additional resources required
20%
IT Cost BenefitSignificant Increase to CY
Expense / Communication Budget
Increase to Future Year Maintenance Budget
No impact to Expense / Communication Budget
Reduces Expense / Communication Budget 15%
Contribution to IT Strategy
Only peripheral fit with IT strategies
Facilitate better reporting of regulatory metrics
Improve quality and timeliness regulatory
compliance
Strengthen IT operations, enable innovation, increase
efficiency, and enable growth
15%
IT Prioritization Scoring
Total IT Weighted Prioritization Score
Project Tier Maintenance Support Key Operational High Potential Strategic
Project Urgency Low Medium High Critical
Project Value Slight Moderate Significant Long-Term
Score <6 6-7 7-8.5 >8.5
14
2014 Project Prioritization Investor Map
15
Capital Project Prioritization Model
CONFIDENTIAL
16
Building the Model
• Sections•IT Value, IT Urgency, BU Value, BU Urgency
•Categories•Five elements to each section to define the scope of value and urgency
•Score Criteria•Questions / Statements that drive the rater to a particular score
•Weighting•Each question given a weighting of 1, 4, 7, 0r 10 to incorporate risk•Each category given a weighting percentage for the total to 100%•Each Section weighted based on business strategy
•Validation•PM scores to confirm understanding of project•PM to review score with BU Lead to confirm business drivers•PM to review with Tech Lead to confirm understanding
CONFIDENTIAL
17
Implementing the Model
•Communication Plan•Who, What, How, When
•Investor Mapping•X & Y Axis•Color & Size•Target Balance
•Business Driver•Sponsorship•Emergent Projects•Pet project versus strategic project
CONFIDENTIAL
18
Using the Model
• Scoring the Projects•Aligning Projects to the Watermark•Selecting Projects for Execution
CONFIDENTIAL
19
Expense Project Prioritization Model
CONFIDENTIAL
20
Expense Project Prioritization
CONFIDENTIAL
21
Building the Model
• Sections•Categories•Questions•Weighting•Validation
CONFIDENTIAL
22
Implementing the Model
•Communication•Investor Mapping•Business Driver
CONFIDENTIAL
23
Using the Model
• Scoring the Projects•Aligning Projects to the Watermark•Selecting Projects for Execution
CONFIDENTIAL
24
Conclusion
CONFIDENTIAL
