8QGHUVWDQGLQJ FHLYH 9DOX H ,7 HF IILFH ( ) · 2018-05-24 · 8QGHUVWDQGLQJ FHLYH 9DOX H ,7 HF IILFH...

Understanding the Perceived Value of the

IT Project Management Office (IT PMO)

A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Siddhartha Arumugam

Faculty of Business and Law Swinburne University of Technology

2018

I

ABSTRACT

IT-enabled transformation projects have become critical for organisations to remain

competitive and survive in today’s volatile business environment, and the Project Management

Office (PMO) has been acknowledged by both academics and practitioners as key to ensuring

the effective management and success of these projects. However, research data has also

indicated that the business value of the PMO is often called into question despite being set up

to ensure the effective management and successful delivery of projects. This concern has

thus motivated this research into the perceived value of the IT PMO (PMO dedicated to the

management and delivery of IT-related projects).

The objectives of this research are two-fold: (1) develop an understanding of the perceived

value of the IT PMO, whilst (2) assisting IT PMOs in this study address their real-world problem

with the lack of perceived value. Based on these aims, the two research questions posed are:

RQ1: In what ways can the IT PMO team be assisted to develop a shared

understanding of the IT PMO’s perceived service performance in order to take

ameliorating action to improve perceptions of value?

RQ2: What do the expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO’s service

performance imply for the IT PMO’s perceived value?

A review of the extant literature on PMOs has indicated a dearth of research into the perceived

value of the PMO. Through the review of the literature, a significant link between stakeholders’

perceptions of the service performance of a service provider and its perceived value was

established; and with the IT PMO being considered a provider of IT project management

services, it is therefore apposite that this study investigates the expectations and perceptions

of the IT PMO’s service performance and their corresponding implications to gain an

understanding of the perceived value of the IT PMO.

Action research is adopted in this study and involves the researcher working directly with the

owners of the real-world problem and intervening to help them address their problem, in

addition to contributing to knowledge. A pragmatic worldview allows the researcher to select

the data collection and analysis methods which is deemed appropriate, be it qualitative or

quantitative, or both, to address the research questions of this study, and interviews,

questionnaires, and workshop sessions were part of the overall engagement process adopted.

II

As a result, both IT PMO teams in this study have each developed a shared understanding of

their stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions of their service performance. This would

confirm the effectiveness of the overall engagement process in assisting IT PMO teams identify

the perceived gaps in their service performance in order that they might take ameliorating

actions to improve perceptions of their business value. The findings from both studies also

establish that stakeholders’ perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance, the IT PMO

team’s engagement and relationships with its stakeholders, and the IT PMO’s management of

the tensions and challenges it faces, are all significant factors associated with the perceived

value of the IT PMO. In addition, this research has also resulted in a potential contribution to

an understanding of stakeholders’ satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the IT PMO’s service

performance.

Finally, the implications for IT PMOs in practice is recommended and discussed, and

suggestions are made for future research.

III

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I wish to acknowledge and thank everyone who has helped me to complete my doctoral thesis.

Firstly, my sincere gratitude to Professor Judy McKay for her invaluable guidance all these

years throughout my doctoral research. I am indeed grateful for the time and effort that she

has invested as well as her patience in the supervision of my doctoral research. I believe I

have learnt immensely from her wealth of knowledge and experience.

I also wish to express my sincere thanks to Dr Jason Sargent who has been most supportive

and encouraging, especially towards the later years of my PhD journey; as well as Dr Nicholas

Grainger for his advice and guidance through my earlier research years.

I am deeply grateful to my wife and life partner Bee Hong, who has been my constant

encouragement and support throughout this journey. She has been extremely patient and

supportive throughout the years I have been working on this research project. I am also

grateful to my daughters, Yoann and Shanyaa who have been supportive and patient, and

responsibly doing their chores all through the years I was working on my PhD.

I would also like to thank all the other IS academic staff and students in FBL and (the former

FICT) at the Swinburne University of Technology who have been part of my PhD journey. I

believe I have learnt a lot from their encouragement, advice, critiques, reviews, and comments.

I would like to especially thank Amelia, Cucuk, Rajiv, Amir, Adi, Ashir and Felix whom I have

turned to for support and encouragement over the years.

IV

DECLARATION

This dissertation contains no material which has been accepted for the award to the candidate

of any other degree or diploma. To the best of my knowledge, the thesis contains no material

previously published or written by another person except where due reference is made in the

text of the examinable outcome. Appendix 11 provides a list of peer-reviewed publications that

resulted from this research. This thesis contains material that has been used in these

publications.

Siddhartha Arumugam

2018

V

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT _____________________________________________________ i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS __________________________________________ ii

DECLARATION _______________________________________________ iv

CONTENTS _____________________________________________________ v LIST OF FIGURES _______________________________________________ x

LIST OF TABLES _______________________________________________ xi

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION _______________________________________ 1 1.1 Background ________________________________________________________ 1

1.2 Motivation for research _______________________________________________ 3

1.3 Research problem and objectives _______________________________________ 4 1.3.1 Research problem ______________________________________________ 5 1.3.2 Research objectives and questions _________________________________ 7

1.4 Research approach __________________________________________________ 7

1.5 Thesis structure ____________________________________________________ 10

2 LITERATURE REVIEW _________________________________ 13 2.1 IT projects vital to organisations _______________________________________ 14

2.1.1 IT project failures ______________________________________________ 14 2.1.2 Management of IT projects _______________________________________ 16

2.2 The Project Management Office _______________________________________ 16 2.2.1 Growing interest in the PMO ______________________________________ 17 2.2.2 Background of the PMO _________________________________________ 17 2.2.3 PMO service functions __________________________________________ 19

2.3 Challenges for the PMO _____________________________________________ 21 2.3.1 Short life expectancy ___________________________________________ 21 2.3.2 Tensions and challenges ________________________________________ 22 2.3.3 Value delivery _________________________________________________ 23

VI

2.4 Perceived value and service performance _______________________________ 24 2.4.1 PMO value ___________________________________________________ 25 2.4.2 Assessing service performance ___________________________________ 26 2.4.3 Perceived value and service performance ___________________________ 27

2.5 Understanding stakeholders __________________________________________ 28 2.5.1 Managing stakeholders __________________________________________ 29 2.5.2 Shared understanding __________________________________________ 30

2.6 Articulating the research questions _____________________________________ 31 2.6.1 First research question (RQ1) ____________________________________ 31 2.6.2 Second research question (RQ2) __________________________________ 32

3 METHODOLOGY & RESEARCH DESIGN __________________ 33 3.1 Research paradigm _________________________________________________ 34

3.1.1 Paradigms in Information Systems research _________________________ 34 3.1.2 Pragmatism defined and characterised _____________________________ 37 3.1.3 Adopting pragmatism as the paradigm ______________________________ 38

3.2 Research methodology ______________________________________________ 39 3.2.1 Adopting action research ________________________________________ 39 3.2.2 Action research defined and characterised __________________________ 40

3.3 Research design ___________________________________________________ 42 3.3.1 Action research framework _______________________________________ 42 3.3.2 Research roadmap _____________________________________________ 45

3.4 Data collection _____________________________________________________ 47 3.4.1 Site selection _________________________________________________ 47 3.4.2 Participant selection ____________________________________________ 49 3.4.3 Data collection ________________________________________________ 50

3.5 Data analysis ______________________________________________________ 53 3.5.1 Analysis of questionnaire data ____________________________________ 53 3.5.2 Analysis of interview data ________________________________________ 57 3.5.3 Analysis across both studies _____________________________________ 65

3.6 Writing strategy ____________________________________________________ 65

3.7 Ethical Considerations ______________________________________________ 67

3.8 Quality of research _________________________________________________ 67 3.8.1 Rigour in qualitative research _____________________________________ 67 3.8.2 Authenticity of qualitative research _________________________________ 70

VII

4 FIRST ACTION RESEARCH STUDY: TRANS _______________ 72 4.1 Background information _____________________________________________ 72

4.1.1 Information about the organisation _________________________________ 72 4.1.2 Information about the IT PMO ____________________________________ 73 4.1.3 Information about the research participants __________________________ 75

4.2 Real-world problem _________________________________________________ 76 4.2.1 Developing an understanding of the real-world problem ________________ 77 4.2.2 IT PMO performance in tracking, reporting, governance and control of IT projects 78 4.2.3 IT PMO performance in project management methodology and competency support 85 4.2.4 IT PMO performance in project and portfolio management ______________ 91 4.2.5 IT PMO performance in strategic project management _________________ 95 4.2.6 IT PMO performance in project knowledge management _______________ 98 4.2.7 Comparing IT PMO team members’ own perceptions _________________ 101 4.2.8 Stakeholders’ perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance _________ 102 4.2.9 Assisting the IT PMO team address its real-world problem _____________ 106 4.2.10 Post-workshop follow-up meeting _________________________________ 108

4.3 Research interest _________________________________________________ 110 4.3.1 Emergent themes from the interview data __________________________ 110 4.3.2 Theme 1: Perceived value of the IT PMO ___________________________ 112 4.3.3 Theme 2: Service performance of the IT PMO _______________________ 114 4.3.4 Theme 3: Engagement and relationships ___________________________ 115 4.3.5 Theme 4: Management of tensions _______________________________ 116 4.3.6 Stakeholders’ overall perceptions of the IT PMO _____________________ 118

4.4 Discussion and analysis of findings ___________________________________ 119 4.4.1 RQ1 and the real-world problem __________________________________ 119 4.4.2 RQ2 and the research interest ___________________________________ 120

4.5 Reflections and conclusion __________________________________________ 123

5 SECOND ACTION RESEARCH STUDY: CONS ____________ 125 5.1 Background information ____________________________________________ 125

5.1.1 Information about the organisation ________________________________ 125 5.1.2 Information about the IT PMO ___________________________________ 126 5.1.3 Information about the research participants _________________________ 128

5.2 Real-world problem ________________________________________________ 130 5.2.1 Developing an understanding of the real-world problem _______________ 131

VIII

5.2.2 IT PMO performance in tracking, reporting, governance and control of IT projects 131 5.2.3 IT PMO performance in project management methodology and competency support 136 5.2.4 IT PMO performance in project and portfolio management _____________ 142 5.2.5 IT PMO performance in strategic project management ________________ 146 5.2.6 IT PMO performance in project knowledge management ______________ 149 5.2.7 Comparing IT PMO team members’ own perceptions _________________ 152 5.2.8 Stakeholders’ perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance _________ 153 5.2.9 Assisting the IT PMO team address its real-world problem _____________ 158

5.3 Research interest _________________________________________________ 162 5.3.1 Emergent themes from the interview data __________________________ 162 5.3.2 Theme 1: Perceived value of the IT PMO ___________________________ 164 5.3.3 Theme 2: Service performance of the IT PMO _______________________ 165 5.3.4 Theme 3: Engagement and relationships ___________________________ 167 5.3.5 Theme 4: Management of tensions and challenges ___________________ 168 5.3.6 Stakeholders’ overall perceptions of the IT PMO _____________________ 170

5.4 Discussion and analysis of findings ___________________________________ 171 5.4.1 RQ1 and the real-world problem __________________________________ 171 5.4.2 RQ2 and the research interest ___________________________________ 173

5.5 Reflections and conclusion __________________________________________ 175

6 CROSS-STUDY ANALYSIS ____________________________ 177 6.1 Cross-study comparison of the real-world problem ________________________ 177

6.1.1 Assisting IT PMOs develop a shared understanding __________________ 178 6.1.2 Stakeholders’ perceptions of service performance ____________________ 180 6.1.3 Addressing RQ1 ______________________________________________ 188

6.2 Satisfaction/dissatisfaction with service performance ______________________ 190

6.3 Cross-study comparison of the research interest _________________________ 192 6.3.1 Perceived value ______________________________________________ 194 6.3.2 Service performance ___________________________________________ 198 6.3.3 Engagement and working relationships ____________________________ 204 6.3.4 Management of tensions _______________________________________ 208

6.4 Developing the conceptual model _____________________________________ 213 6.4.1 Service performance and perceived value __________________________ 213 6.4.2 Engagement and relationship, service performance and perceived value __ 214

IX

6.4.3 Management of tensions, engagement and relationships and service performance _______________________________________________________ 215 6.4.4 The overall conceptual model ____________________________________ 216

7 CONCLUSION _______________________________________ 220 7.1 Theoretical implications _____________________________________________ 220

7.1.1 Developing a shared understanding _______________________________ 220 7.1.2 Understanding perceived value __________________________________ 222 7.1.3 Understanding stakeholder satisfaction/dissatisfaction ________________ 224

7.2 Implications for practice ____________________________________________ 225

7.3 Strengths and limitations ____________________________________________ 226 7.3.1 Reflections on the grounding of this research _______________________ 226 7.3.2 Reflections on the research approach _____________________________ 227 7.3.3 Reflections on the research quality ________________________________ 228 7.3.4 Limitations ___________________________________________________ 230

7.4 Suggestions for future research ______________________________________ 231

7.5 Final reflections ___________________________________________________ 232

REFERENCES __________________________________________ 233

APPENDIX 1: Main Interview Protocol ______________________ 246 APPENDIX 2: Main Questionnaire __________________________ 250 APPENDIX 3: Consent Forms _____________________________ 254 APPENDIX 4: Ethics Clearance ____________________________ 256 APPENDIX 5: TRANS Radial Diagrams (IT PMO Perceptions) ___ 258 APPENDIX 6: CONS Radial Diagrams (IT PMO Perceptions) ____ 261 APPENDIX 7: Feedback Questionnaire ______________________ 264 APPENDIX 8: Feedback survey results (TRANS & CONS) ______ 265 APPENDIX 9: Themes, Categories & Focused Codes __________ 266 APPENDIX 10: List of Categories Constructed _______________ 270 APPENDIX 11: List of Peer-Reviewed Publications ____________ 271

X

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1 Research roadmap for this study .................................................................................................... 5

Figure 1.2 Cognitive map of research problem ............................................................................................... 6

Figure 1.3 Action research framework .............................................................................................................. 9

Figure 3.1 Research outline for this study ...................................................................................................... 33

Figure 3.2 Action research framework ............................................................................................................ 41

Figure 3.3 Dual purpose of this action research ........................................................................................... 41

Figure 3.4 Action research framework in this study ...................................................................................... 43

Figure 3.5 Overall research roadmap ............................................................................................................. 45

Figure 3.6 Data collection ................................................................................................................................. 50

Figure 3.7 Comparison between stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions ........................................ 54

Figure 3.8 Comparison between IT PMO team’s and stakeholders’ perceptions .................................... 55

Figure 3.9 Comparison between IT PMO team’s and stakeholders’ expectations .................................. 56

Figure 3.10 Comparison of IT PMO team’s individual perceptions ............................................................ 57

Figure 3.11 Qualitative data analysis .............................................................................................................. 58

Figure 3.12 Example of initial coding .............................................................................................................. 60

Figure 3.13 Example of focused coding ......................................................................................................... 61

Figure 3.14 Illustration of a data structure ...................................................................................................... 64

Figure 4.1 Organisational structure at TRANS .............................................................................................. 73

Figure 4.2 Study participants within organisational structure (TRANS) ..................................................... 74

Figure 4.3 Stakeholders’ perceptions against expectations (Group 1) ...................................................... 79

Figure 4.4 IT PMO team’s perceptions against stakeholders’ perceptions (Group 1) ............................. 80

Figure 4.5 IT PMO team’s expectations against stakeholders’ expectations (Group 1) ......................... 80


Figure 4.7 Comparing expectations and perceptions between IT PMO team and stakeholders (Group

2) .......................................................................................................................................................................... 86



3) .......................................................................................................................................................................... 91

Figure 4.10 Stakeholders’ perceptions against expectations (Group 4) .................................................... 95


4) .......................................................................................................................................................................... 95



5) .......................................................................................................................................................................... 98

Figure 4.14 Individual IT PMO team members’ perceptions (Group 1) ................................................... 101

Figure 4.15 Discussion notes at workshop session .................................................................................... 107

Figure 4.16 Data structure of themes and categories emerging from interviews ................................... 111

Figure 5.1 Organisational structure at CONS .............................................................................................. 126

Figure 5.2 Study participants within organisational structure (CONS) ..................................................... 128

XI


Figure 5.4 Comparison between IT PMO team’s and stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions

(Group 1) ........................................................................................................................................................... 133



(Group 2) ........................................................................................................................................................... 137



(Group 3) ........................................................................................................................................................... 143



(Group 4) ........................................................................................................................................................... 146

Figure 5.11 Stakeholders’ perceptions against expectations (Group 5) .................................................. 149


(Group 5) ........................................................................................................................................................... 149

Figure 5.13 Individual IT PMO team member’s perceptions (Group 1) ................................................... 152

Figure 5.14 Data structure of themes and categories emerging from interviews ................................... 163

Figure 6.1 Data structure of themes and categories of overall research study ...................................... 193

Figure 6.2 Relationship between service performance and perceived value ......................................... 214

Figure 6.3 Relationships between engagement and relationships, service performance, and perceived

value .................................................................................................................................................................. 215

Figure 6.4 Relationships between management of tensions, engagement and relationships, and service performance ........................................................................................................................................ 216

Figure 6.5 Conceptual model of the perceived value of the IT PMO ....................................................... 217

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.1 Components of action research in this study ................................................................................. 9

Table 1.2 Thesis structure ................................................................................................................................ 11

Table 2.1 IT project success/failure rates from 2011 to 2015 ..................................................................... 15

Table 2.2 PMO service functions ..................................................................................................................... 19

Table 3.1 Research paradigms and characteristics...................................................................................... 35

Table 3.2 Action research components in this study .................................................................................... 44

Table 3.3 Details of participating organisations............................................................................................. 48

Table 4.1 Summary of study participants at TRANS .................................................................................... 75

Table 4.2 Summary of IT PMO team’s and stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions of Group 1

functions .............................................................................................................................................................. 83


functions .............................................................................................................................................................. 88

Table 4.4 Summary of IT PMO team’s and stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions of Group 3 functions .............................................................................................................................................................. 93

XII

Table 4.5 Summary of IT PMO team’s and stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions of Group 4 functions .............................................................................................................................................................. 97


functions ............................................................................................................................................................ 100

Table 4.7 Summary of stakeholders’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction (Group 1) ........................................... 102

Table 4.8 Summary of stakeholders’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction (Groups 2-5) ...................................... 103

Table 4.9 Results of feedback survey (TRANS) ......................................................................................... 108

Table 4.10 Stakeholders’ overall perceptions of the IT PMO .................................................................... 119

Table 5.1 Summary of study participants at CONS .................................................................................... 129

Table 5.2 Summary of IT PMO team’s and stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions (Group 1) .. 134





Table 5.7 Summary of stakeholders’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction (Group 1) ........................................... 154

Table 5.8 Summary of stakeholders’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction (Groups 2-5) ...................................... 155

Table 5.9 Results of feedback survey (CONS) ........................................................................................... 160

Table 5.10 Stakeholders’ overall perceptions of the IT PMO .................................................................... 171

Table 6.1 Comparison of stakeholders’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction (Group 1) ....................................... 181

Table 6.2 Comparison of stakeholders’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction (Groups 2-5) ................................. 183

Table 6.3 Conditions for stakeholders’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction with IT PMO service performance

............................................................................................................................................................................ 192

Table 6.4 Cross-study comparison of perceived value .............................................................................. 195

Table 6.5 Cross-study comparison of service performance ...................................................................... 199

Table 6.6 Cross-study comparison of engagement and relationships ..................................................... 205

Table 6.7 Cross-study comparison of management of tensions............................................................... 209

1

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Organisations need to innovate in order to survive in today’s volatile landscape and this is

argued to drive the need for most IT-enabled business transformation projects (Sauer, Gemino

& Reich 2007; Ward & Daniel 2013). With projects being considered vital to organisational

change (Too & Weaver 2013) and the reliance on IT becoming much more prominent, IT

projects have become central to organisations in their quest for change and development

(Daniel, Ward & Franken 2014). Businesses are becoming increasingly project-oriented

(Fernandes, Ward & Araújo 2013), and organisations are relying on the effective management

of IT projects in order to achieve their strategic initiatives to remain competitive amidst rapid

innovation across industries (Too & Weaver 2013; Ward & Daniel 2013; Zhai, Xin & Cheng

2009). Because IT projects have grown in strategic and operational importance, much higher

expectations are placed on them (Sauer & Reich 2009), along with the challenge for

organisations to manage the increasing complexity and risk of these multiple and inter-related

IT projects.

IT project failures are however common occurrences in organisations. The Standish Group

(2016) has been reporting the success rates of IT projects over the years, with recent global

data from 2011 to 2015 indicating that only about 30 percent of IT projects were successful;

with the remainder of IT projects being either challenged or aborted. These findings are

suggestive that organisations are too often disappointed with the results of their investments

in IT, and the failure of these IT projects has a significant impact on the business. The

consequence of such a failure in project implementation is the failure to deliver the intended

value for the business. In addition, cost overruns potentially affect project scope, or result in

projects being cancelled altogether to keep within the budget; thus eroding any potential

business value (UMT Consulting Group 2014). Hence, as vital mechanisms for organisational

change and development, IT projects must be managed effectively to ensure a better chance

of success (Aubry, Hobbs & Thuillier 2009; Singh, Keil & Kasi 2009; Ward & Daniel 2013). As

the number and complexity of projects increase, the need for more effective ways of managing

2

them becomes critical, since effective project management is expected to minimise the

likelihood of project failures and result in business value for the organisation (Kutsch et al.

2015; Thomas & Mullaly 2007; Too & Weaver 2013).

There has been growing interest in the concept of the Project Management Office (PMO) as

it is considered essential to effective project management practice (do Valle, e Silvia & Soares

2008; Hobbs & Aubry 2010). The IT PMO is essentially a Project Management Office (PMO),

a “management structure that standardises the project-related governance processes and

facilitates the sharing of resources, methodologies, tools, and techniques” (Project

Management Institute 2013:11) that is focused on IT-related projects1. Its responsibilities can

range from “providing project management support functions to actually being responsible for

the direct management of one or more projects” (Project Management Institute 2013:11). IT

PMOs are typically established in the organisation to improve the chances of IT project

success by providing a dedicated office responsible for the training of project managers and

development of IT project capabilities such as project management methodologies and

processes, project governance processes, project quality assurance, and project knowledge

management (Andersen, Henriksen & Aarseth 2007).

The PMO is recognised as not only impacting on project performance but improving overall

organisational performance (KPMG 2013), and the significant growth in organisations

worldwide deploying PMOs (PM Solutions 2014) appears to support this claim: A US-based

industry study reported a 20-percent increase in the number of PMOs in 2010 despite the

global financial crisis (Computer Economics 2011). More recently, an industry study

conducted globally reported that three-quarters of respondents confirmed the presence of a

PMO in their organisations (ESI International 2015), and thus seems to indicate that PMOs

have become entrenched in organisations worldwide. Academic research also suggests a link

between successful projects and presence of project management methodologies (Dai &

Wells 2004), implying the positive effect of PMOs on project success. The positive growth of

PMOs suggests that PMOs are believed to be effective in ensuring project success with

organisations worldwide establishing formal PMOs in their effort to improve effectiveness and

consistency in project management (ESI International 2013, 2015; KPMG 2013; PM Solutions

2014; Wellingtone Project Management & APM PMO SIG 2017).

Nonetheless, something of a paradox exists with respect to the sustainability of the PMO.

Although formed with the aim of achieving project success and research suggesting that they

do indeed achieve this (Dai & Wells 2004; Singh, Keil & Kasi 2009; Ward & Daniel 2013), the

1 With the increased importance of IT and IT-related projects, there is an emergence of the IT PMO dedicated to PMO functions for large business IT projects; and this definition effectively encompasses the various implementations of the IT PMOs currently in practice (Aubry, Hobbs & Thuillier 2007). When specifically referring to IT PMOs, ‘IT PMO’ is specified. Where broadly describing aspects of PMOs in general, the term ‘PMO’ is used.

3

value of the PMO itself is often questioned (ESI International 2013; Hobbs & Aubry 2007;

Mullaly 2017). A major concern for PMO managers is their struggle to ensure that their PMOs

are perceived as delivering value to their organisations (Kutsch et al. 2015; McKay et al. 2013;

Viglioni, Cunha & Moura 2016).

1.2 Motivation for research

Despite their potential, many PMOs do not seem to survive long. Research data has shown

that many PMO teams struggle to justify their business value, with many being disbanded after

being in operation for just two to three years (Hobbs & Aubry 2007, 2010; Stanleigh 2006).

The underlying reason is said to be the lack of perceived value of the PMO (Hobbs & Aubry

2010; Kutsch et al. 2015; McKay et al. 2013; Ward & Daniel 2013). Hence a conundrum exists.

Although established to ensure the success of projects in the organisation, the existence of

the PMO is often called into question. This seems to be a prevalent concern amongst many

PMOs in practice (Hobbs & Aubry 2010; Kutsch et al. 2015; McKay et al. 2013; Singh, Keil &

Kasi 2009), as over time, these PMOs risk being seen as overheads (McKay et al. 2013).

Academic research studies (Hobbs & Aubry 2007; McKay et al. 2013; Singh, Keil & Kasi 2009)

as well as industry market survey data (ESI International 2011, 2013; UMT Consulting Group

2014) confirm the PMO leader’s struggle to justifying the value of his/her PMO in the

organisation.

An anecdote from my personal experience reflects this problem. The organisation I had been

working for had set up a PMO to drive major transformation during the global financial crisis

in 2008. Although there was strong support initially, the business units eventually started

questioning its value and the PMO team was disbanded after being in operation for only a

year.

One of the key issues identified is that the contribution of the PMO is often not clear because

organisations face challenges in evaluating the effectiveness and value delivery of the PMO

(Mullaly 2017; Singh, Keil & Kasi 2009). These PMO teams can easily demonstrate the

successful delivery of projects such as keeping within project budget, and timeline, and

meeting key project deliverables, but this success comes at a cost: there are significant

overheads associated with the PMO (McKay et al. 2013). However, demonstrating the value

of the PMO itself is what these PMO teams struggle with. It is more difficult to determine the

overall value delivery by the PMO itself (McKay et al. 2013) as aggregating value delivered

4

from individual projects may not necessarily be indicative of the overall organisational value

delivered through the gamut of activities performed by the PMO.

In order to survive, PMOs must be perceived as delivering value in their organisations (Kendall

& Rollins 2003; Kutsch et al. 2015). However, the PMO is considered to be an integral

component of the organisation’s project management practice and part of a “network of

complex relations that links strategy, projects and structures” (Aubry, Hobbs & Thuillier

2007:328), and has to interact with multiple stakeholders within the organisation, each with

differing and at times conflicting perspectives and objectives (Hobbs & Aubry 2010; Zhai, Xin

& Cheng 2009). This would imply that the perceived value of the PMO is dependent on the

differing values and preferences of its stakeholders, but rarely is there a single common

objective for all stakeholders. Hence, this poses a challenge for the PMO to demonstrate its

business value effectively.

Based on the marketing literature, perceived value is described as a consumer’s (or service

recipient’s) “overall assessment of the utility of a product (or service) based on perceptions of

what is received and what is given” (Zeithaml 1988:14). Since the PMO is considered as a

service provider, its perceived value can be assessed based on its service recipients’ (or

stakeholders’) perceptions of its service performance. Information Systems (IS) researchers

(DeLone & McLean 2003; Jiang et al. 2012; Pitt, Watson & Kavan 1995) support the notion of

assessing the performance and effectiveness of an IS service by adopting the marketing

concept of comparing expectations and perceptions (Parasuraman, Zeithaml & Berry 1985).

This study models after this approach, comparing the various stakeholders’ expectations and

perceptions of service performance of the IT PMO (PMO focused on IT-related projects) to

understand its perceived value.

1.3 Research problem and objectives

A research problem is said to be driven by “incomplete knowledge or flawed understanding”

and is addressed “not by changing the world but by understanding it better” (Booth, Colomb

& Williams 2008:59). Research questions are consequently asked so as to better understand

and address the research problem.

The research roadmap outlining the research problem, the objectives of this research, and the

ensuing research questions is presented in Figure 1.1.

5

Figure 1.1 Research roadmap for this study

1.3.1 Research problem

The academic literature (Hobbs & Aubry 2010; Kutsch et al. 2015; McKay et al. 2013; Singh,

Keil & Kasi 2009; Ward & Daniel 2013) and global industry studies (ESI International 2011,

2013) indicate that despite PMOs ensuring that projects are successfully implemented, their

value is often questioned, and their leaders struggle to justify the value of their PMOs. The

problem investigated in this study is focused specifically on the perceived value of the IT-

related PMO.

The cognitive map in Figure 1.2 summarises the issues surrounding the IT PMO and its

perceived value.)

6

Figure 1.2 Cognitive map of research problem

Although this problem with the lack of perceived value has plagued most PMOs in practice

(ESI International 2011, 2013), there is comparatively little research in the IS literature

investigating the value delivery of the PMO. While academics have been studying the

performance of the PMO (Viglioni, Cunha & Moura 2016) and its contributions (Dai & Wells

2004; Ward & Daniel 2013), especially to organisational performance (Aubry & Hobbs 2011;

Aubry, Richer & Lavoie-Tremblay 2014; Aubry et al. 2011), there is hardly any research on

the perceived value of the PMO itself.

Since the IT PMO is fundamentally a provider of services, this study investigates the service

performance of the IT PMO to develop an understanding of its implications to the IT PMO’s

perceived value. The application of the service quality concept (Parasuraman, Zeithaml &

Berry 1985) to compare expectations and perceptions of service performance in this research

is considered a new and alternative approach to understanding the perceived value of the IT

PMO, and it is arguably the first time this concept is adopted in this research domain.

IT PMO value being questioned

IT projects critical for organisational

competitivenessPoor IT project success rates

IT PMO to ensure IT project success

Tensions and challenges

IT PMOs short-lived, disbanded

IT PMO needs to interact with multiple stakeholders

Multiple stakeholders with different expectations

IT PMO leaders struggle to justify value

7

1.3.2 Research objectives and questions

To address the research problem, the objectives of this research study are two-fold: (1) to help

the IT PMO develop a shared understanding of business perceptions of its service

performance in order to improve perceptions of its value in the organisation, and (2) develop

an understanding of the factors influencing its perceived value. This study aims to assist IT

PMO teams develop shared understanding of stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions of

the IT PMO’s service performance. With this shared understanding, IT PMO teams will be

assisted to identify how they should focus their efforts to ensure that they are adding value

from the perspective of their stakeholders. The IT PMO teams would thus be empowered to

improve their service delivery, and hence improve stakeholder perceptions of their respective

IT PMOs. Whilst assisting IT PMOs address their real-world problems, this study also aims to

contribute to the understanding of the implications of the service performance of the IT PMO

to its perceived value, as well as other factors that are associated with the perceived value of

the IT PMO.

In order to provide the framework for understanding the phenomenon under study, the

research questions must be closely linked to the objectives of the study; and hence

appropriate questions must be asked so as to better understand the problem (Bloomberg &

Volpe 2012). The two research questions in this study are therefore:




RQ2: What do the expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance

imply for the IT PMO’s perceived value?

1.4 Research approach

Information Systems (IS) is an applied discipline (McKay & Marshall 2001), and thus it is

important that research not only develops new knowledge but also improves both

understanding and practice of real world issues. In action research, the researcher

systematically investigates the problem in the real world by directly engaging with the people

involved in order to both create new knowledge, and bring about change to the real-world

problem (Checkland & Holwell 1998).

8

The nature of action research and its two-fold contribution to practical problem-solving of real-

world concerns, and contribution to knowledge makes this particular approach an attractive

proposition for conducting IS research (McKay & Marshall 2001); and is hence adopted in this

research study. The considerations and possible limitations for conducting action research

highlighted in the literature (Denis & Lehoux 2009; Van de Ven 2007) are also acknowledged

and further discussed in the methodology and research design chapter.

In action research, the researcher enters a real-world situation and aims to both improve it

and acquire knowledge with a key distinguishing feature of the researcher’s active and

deliberate self-involvement in the investigation (Checkland & Holwell 1998). It aims “to

contribute both to the practical concerns of people in an immediate problematic situation and

to the goals of social science by joint collaboration within a mutually acceptable ethical

framework” (Rapoport 1970:499). The research problem in this study focuses on the struggle

of IT PMOs in justifying their value in spite of being setup to ensure better project performance.

Hence, to address the real-world problem, IT PMO teams are supported in developing a

shared understanding of the expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO’s service

performance. With this shared understanding, the IT PMO team would be anticipated to be

better equipped to articulate strategies to better manage stakeholder expectations, potentially

resulting in being perceived as delivering value. In addition to solving a practical problem, the

research interest of this study involves developing an understanding of the perceived value of

the IT PMO.

Other features of action research that make it applicable to this research study is the iterative

process with researchers acting together with people in real-world situations to diagnose,

intervene, and learn, and its distinctive approach in associating research and practice, where

“research informs practice and practice informs research synergistically” (Avison et al.

1999:94). The intervention and engagement with the IT PMO teams and their stakeholders in

this study is aimed at contributing to the understanding of the perceived value of the IT PMO

through participants’ expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO.

In developing a model to guide IS action researchers, Checkland (1991) suggests that the

researcher be guided by a framework of ideas (F) when attempting to address a real-world

problem situation along with the area of interest (A). By employing an appropriate methodology

(M), the researcher then initiates actions to bring about improvements to the problem situation.

Reflections on the changes in A based on F and M will lead to learning about F and/or M,

and/or A, thus generating new understanding and knowledge (Checkland 1991). McKay and

Marshall (2001) proposed an extension to Checkland's (1991) F, M and A framework, arguing

that the researcher must also consider what has been learnt about the action research itself,

as well as about the adopted problem-solving approach (see Figure 1.3). This re-

9

conceptualisation encourages a more explicit process of learning and reflection and describes

action research as being composed of two separate but interconnected and interacting cycles:

one “representing and focused on the problem-solving interest”, and the other “representing

and focused upon the research interest” (McKay & Marshall 2001:57).

Figure 1.3 Action research framework (McKay & Marshall 2001:54)

This action research study thus aims to both make changes in a problematic situation and

generate new knowledge and insights (Checkland & Holwell 1998; Mathiassen 2017; McKay

& Marshall 2001). The research intentions using the action research framework are presented

in Table 1.1.

Table 1.1 Components of action research in this study

Framework (F) Combining PMO service functions with the concepts of IS success (comparing

service expectations and perceptions) to understand the service performance

and perceived value of the IT PMO

Area of interest (A) Service performance and the implications to the perceived value of the IT PMO

10

Problem situation (P) IT PMOs’ struggle to justify their business value in their own organisations

Research method (MR) Action research with the use of questionnaires, interviews, and workshop

sessions.

Problem-solving

approach (MPS)

Presentation of findings comparing expectations and perceptions of IT PMO

service performance and facilitation of discussion during workshop sessions with

IT PMO teams

As summarised in Table 1.1, this study aims to help IT PMO teams develop shared

understanding of stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions in order to address the IT PMOs’

struggle to justify their perceived value in their own organisations (P); whilst understanding the

implications to the perceived value of the IT PMO (A). In addition, the investigation of the

implications of the expectations and perceptions of the service performance of the IT PMO

represent the research interest of this study. With action research as the overall approach

(MR), the framework of ideas to guide the collection and analysis of data to answer the

research questions in this study (F) are drawn from IS success and service quality concepts,

as well as the service functions of the PMO. The presentation of findings from the

questionnaire data, along with the facilitation of discussion during workshop sessions with IT

PMO teams serves as the problem-solving approach (MPS) in this study. Both initiatives thus

fulfil the dual objectives of this research study.

1.5 Thesis structure

To summarise, this research study into the perceived value of the IT PMO is introduced in this

chapter (Chapter 1) along with the background, research problem, and motivation for

conducting this research. The action research approach adopted for this study is also briefly

introduced, and the structure of this thesis presented. In the following chapter (Chapter 2), the

extant academic and practitioner literature is reviewed to establish the concept of the PMO,

its service functions and challenges; and develop the case for investigating the perceived

value of the IT PMO based on the expectations and perceptions of service performance as

well as the importance of stakeholder perspectives. Following that, the research methodology

is presented, and the design of this research study described, elaborating on the data

collection and analysis (Chapter 3). The results from studies with two organisations are then

11

presented and discussed (Chapters 4 and 5); and concluded by synthesising and discussing

the findings of both studies and presenting the resulting conceptual framework (Chapters 6

and 7).

Table 1.2 outlines the structure of this thesis, listing all the chapters and their respective

sections.

Table 1.2 Thesis structure

Chapter Contents

Chapter 1: Introduction • Background

• Motivation for research

• Problem, purpose and research questions

• Research approach

• Thesis structure

Chapter 2: Literature Review • IT projects vital to organisations

• The Project Management Office

• Challenges for the PMO

• Perceived value and service performance

• Understanding stakeholders

• Articulating the research questions

Chapter 3: Methodology &

Research Design

• Research paradigm

• Research methodology

• Research design

• Data collection

• Data analysis

• Writing strategy

• Quality of research

Chapter 4: First Action

Research Study: TRANS

• Background information

• Real-world problem

• Research interest

• Discussion and analysis of findings

• Reflections and conclusion

12

Chapter Contents

Chapter 5: Second Action

Research Study: CONS

• Background information

• Real-world problem

• Research interest

• Discussion and analysis of findings

• Reflections and conclusion

Chapter 6: Cross-Study

Analysis

• Cross-study comparison of the real-world problem

• Stakeholder satisfaction/dissatisfaction

• Cross-study comparison of the research interest

• Developing the conceptual framework

Chapter 7: Conclusion • Theoretical implications

• Implications for practice

• Strengths and limitations

• Future research

• Concluding remarks

13

2 LITERATURE REVIEW

This study aims to address the gap in the literature by attempting to establish some

understanding of the perceived value of the PMO. Although important in ensuring the success

of projects, many PMOs themselves have a short life expectancy (Aubry et al. 2010; Bredillet,

Tywoniak & Tootoonchy 2017; Hobbs & Aubry 2007; Ward & Daniel 2013), often a

consequence of the PMO’s business value being questioned (Kutsch et al. 2015; Singh, Keil

& Kasi 2009). Information Systems (IS) researchers have acknowledged the value of IT-

related projects to the organisation (Jugdev & Müller 2005; Kerzner & Saladis 2009; Reich,

Gemino & Sauer 2014; Thomas & Mullaly 2008; Too & Weaver 2013), but there are few

studies about the value of the IT PMO (PMO dedicated to IT-related projects) itself. Since the

PMO is essentially a service provider (Hobbs & Aubry 2010), this research draws on the

concepts of service expectations and perceptions to study the service performance of the

PMO and the implications to its perceived value.

This chapter reviews the extant literature surrounding the perceived value of the PMO (and IT

PMO), and the strategy adopted is described as follows:

1. An extensive review of the academic literature was conducted to identify the current issues

and gaps in the research by searching through online databases like EBSCO Host and

Google Scholar. The search was mostly restricted to peer-reviewed academic journals and

papers, as well as books.

2. While most of the literature reviewed is from academic sources, the importance of

practitioner or “grey literature” (Adams, Smart & Huff 2017:432) is also acknowledged to

increase relevance and impact (Adams, Smart & Huff 2017). The search also included

practitioner articles and books, and industry survey data.

3. Some of the main search keywords used include: PMO, project management, perceived

value, perceptions and expectations, service performance, stakeholders and IS success.

4. In addition, Google Alerts was also set up to regularly notify the researcher of any update

of these keywords.

5. Digital copies of all articles were downloaded, compiled, and filed into a data repository,

and their associated references saved in an EndNote database file.

14

In the following sections, the extant literature on projects and PMOs, service performance,

perceived value and the importance of stakeholders is reviewed.

2.1 IT projects vital to organisations

In today’s volatile business landscape, organisations are constantly under pressure to

innovate in order to survive, and this, coupled with the volatility of the business landscape, is

argued to have driven the need for mostly IT-enabled business transformation projects (Sauer,

Gemino & Reich 2007; Ward & Daniel 2013). Organisational change and transformation is

typically achieved via the use of projects (Too & Weaver 2013), with many having an

underlying reliance on IT (Daniel, Ward & Franken 2014), and the success of these projects

is considered to directly influence the success of the business (Sauer & Reich 2009). IT

projects have thus become central to organisations in their quest for change and development

(Ward & Daniel 2013; Zhai, Xin & Cheng 2009).

Because IT projects have grown in strategic and operational importance, much higher

expectations are held for them to be seen as contributing to ongoing survival and success

(Sauer & Reich 2009). In addition, organisations are frequently grappling with the challenge

of managing portfolios of projects, simultaneously having to juggle the management and

governance of these multiple and inter-related IT projects. With businesses becoming

increasingly project-oriented (Fernandes, Ward & Araújo 2013), organisations are counting on

the effective management of IT projects in order to achieve a competitive advantage (Artto et

al. 2011; Jugdev & Müller 2005). Consequently, these IT projects are more exposed to

changes in the competitive environment and becoming more complex, meaning that the

management of these projects gets increasingly more challenging (Artto et al. 2011; Sauer &

Reich 2009). As a result, project delivery requirements are becoming more demanding in

terms of schedule, cost and business value, resulting in project schedules being compressed

as time becomes increasingly critical (Sauer & Reich 2009), especially for projects that have

a direct impact on business outcomes.

2.1.1 IT project failures

Despite the importance of IT-related projects to organisations, many of these projects fail to

get implemented (Grainger, McKay & Marshall 2009), an all too common occurrence in

15

organisations. The Standish Group (2016) has been reporting the success rates of IT projects2

over the years (see Figure 2.1), with recent global data from 2011 to 2015 indicating that only

about 30 percent of IT projects were successful; and the remaining 70 percent of IT projects

were either challenged or aborted.

Table 2.1 IT project success/failure rates from 2011 to 2015 (The Standish Group 2016)

The consequence of IT project failures is the inability to realise the intended business value,

and practitioners (UMT Consulting Group 2014) agree that cost overruns in an IT project might

have an adverse impact on project scope or cause the project to be cancelled altogether in

order to keep within the budget, potentially eroding the expected business value. Hence, as

vital mechanisms for organisational change and development, these IT projects must be

managed effectively to ensure a better chance of success (Aubry, Hobbs & Thuillier 2009; Dai

& Wells 2004; Jugdev & Müller 2005; Singh, Keil & Kasi 2009).

As the number of projects increase in the business world along with the complexities in

managing them, the need for an effective way of managing becomes critical. While there are

many factors crucial for project success, for example the support and commitment by

executive management and effective change management strategies (Tan, Cater-Steel &

Toleman 2009), research suggests that inadequate project management discipline and

knowledge are among the key factors contributing to the relatively high project failures (Singh,

Keil & Kasi 2009; Ward & Daniel 2013). Effective project management is expected to minimise

the likelihood of project failures, improving project performance, and potentially resulting in

improving organisational performance (KPMG 2013) and profitability (Kerzner 2003; Kutsch

et al. 2015).

2 Although questions have been raised about the accuracy of the Standish reports (Eveleens & Verhoef 2010; Glass 2005), the findings are nevertheless still indicative of the extent of IT project failures (Vashist 2012).

16

2.1.2 Management of IT projects

Project management has been defined as the “application of knowledge, skills, tools, and

techniques to project activities to meet the requirements” of the project (Project Management

Institute 2013:5), and the concept of modern project management that acknowledged a

formalised approach to the management of projects was only popularised in the literature in

the twentieth century. Modern project management was considered to originate in the 1950s

with the application of scientific methods to the management of projects (Kelley & Walker

1989; Weaver 2007), while the concept of scope, time and cost as the three important criteria

in measuring project performance was introduced in the late 1960s (Weaver 2007).

The complexities of today’s business environment would mean that organisations must

simultaneously juggle the management of many inter-related programmes and portfolios of IT

projects. With such high complexity, many of these projects would fail if they are not managed

effectively (Dai & Wells 2004; McKay et al. 2013). The management of IT projects is also

becoming more complex and may fail to live up to the expectations of stakeholders

(Fernandes, Ward & Araújo 2013). An effective formalised approach to project management

is considered to enhance the prospects for project performance and minimise the likelihood of

project failure (Milosevic & Patanakul 2005), and hence there is a need for a centralised entity

such as the PMO to provide a “systematic coordination and unified handling of key project-

related tasks” (Andersen, Henriksen & Aarseth 2007:98).

2.2 The Project Management Office

There has been considerable interest in the concept of the PMO as it is considered essential

to the effective practice of project management in organisations (do Valle, e Silvia & Soares

2008; Hobbs & Aubry 2010). The PMO is established to improve the chances of project

success in the organisation by providing a formal environment for the training and

development of project capabilities such as project management methodologies and

processes, project governance processes, project quality assurance, and project knowledge

management (Andersen, Henriksen & Aarseth 2007). The meaning of the PMO adopted by

most researchers in the field of IS (Bredillet, Tywoniak & Tootoonchy 2017; Darling & Whitty

2016; Ferreira, Tereso & Fernandes 2016; Kutsch et al. 2015) is based on the PMI (2013:11)

definition of the Project Management Office (PMO): “a management structure that

standardises the project-related governance processes and facilitates the sharing of

17

resources, methodologies, tools, and techniques. The responsibilities of a PMO can range

from providing project management support functions to actually being responsible for the

direct management of one or more projects”.

2.2.1 Growing interest in the PMO

Although Dai and Wells ((2004) were unable to confirm the direct relationship between the

presence of a PMO and its performance, their research confirms a strong link between

successful projects and presence of project management methodologies. This would seem to

imply that PMOs, set up to formalise the practice of project management in organisations,

would be expected to have a positive effect on project success. This was in fact supported by

an industry study (KPMG 2013) which demonstrated that the presence of a PMO in the

organisation was strongly correlated with successful project performance. It is not surprising

therefore that there has been rapid growth in the creation of PMOs worldwide, suggesting that

organisations believe that PMOs are effective in ensuring project success. Organisations are

establishing formal PMOs in effort to improve effectiveness and consistency in project

management (do Valle, e Silvia & Soares 2008; Pellegrinelli & Garagna 2009; Unger,

Gemünden & Aubry 2012). A global industry study (ESI International 2015) conducted across

five continents with respondents from industrial sectors including energy, telecommunications,

engineering, financial services, and IT, had established that the PMO has become entrenched

in organisations worldwide with about 75 percent of respondents confirming the presence of

a PMO within their respective organisations.

2.2.2 Background of the PMO

The PMO is believed to have originated as the project office in the 1950s to cope with large-

scale and highly-complex projects associated with engineering, aerospace, and defence

(Kerzner 2003). The concept of the PMO was however only popularised in the literature from

the 1990s as the economic situation made it critical for organisations to be efficient and

effective (Dai & Wells 2004). Considered to be partly attributed to the Y2K projects at the close

of the twentieth century, the growth in interest in the PMO concept seemed to have been

driven by a desire to gain better control of project risks, standardise the use of project

management methodologies, tools, and techniques, improve the monitoring of project

performance, and manage and disseminate knowledge of project management practice

(Desouza & Evaristo 2006).

18

The PMO concept however varies from organisation to organisation, and there evidently is no

one single name, structure or classification for the PMO in the literature (Hobbs & Aubry 2007,

2010; Singh, Keil & Kasi 2009). Names such as project office, project support office, project

management office, program management office, and centre of excellence are amongst the

variety of names used in practice and in the literature to identify the PMO (Hobbs & Aubry

2010), some of which are used interchangeably in organisations. The name project

management office is adopted in this research study as it is considered to be applicable to

most situations. It has also been empirically determined as the most commonly-used term

(Hobbs & Aubry 2007, 2010).

Likewise, there also seemed little consensus in the literature on the structure of the PMO

(McKay et al. 2013). There exists a large body of knowledge in the literature with researchers

(Desouza & Evaristo 2006; Englund, Graham & Dinsmore 2003; Kendall & Rollins 2003;

Letavec 2006; Müller, Glückler & Aubry 2013; Unger, Gemünden & Aubry 2012)

recommending what they considered as suitable structures for the PMO but with little

agreement. Most of these proposals can however be considered as typified by the level of

involvement of the PMO in the organisation’s project management practice. For example, a

PMO performing a supporting role by acting as a project repository and establishing project

methodologies and tools would be at one end of the spectrum with minimal staff and no direct

control over the management of projects. At the other end of the spectrum, a PMO that plays

a more active role and is responsible for the delivery of projects would have a team of project

managers to directly manage these projects (Singh, Keil & Kasi 2009). Based on the PMI

model (2013:11), there are three types of PMO structures, each having a different level of

control or influence over projects in the organisation:

1. Supportive PMOs provide a consultative role to projects by supplying templates, best

practices, training, access to information and lessons learned from other projects,

essentially serving as a project repository. This type of PMO has little control over

projects.

2. Controlling PMOs provide support and enforce governance and compliance, for

example of project management methodologies, templates, forms, and tools. The

degree of control this type of PMO has over projects is moderate.

3. Directive PMOs directly manage projects, and the degree of control these PMOs have

over projects is relatively high.

19

2.2.3 PMO service functions

The main purpose for an organisation establishing a PMO is to improve the performance of its

projects (Liu & Yetton 2007; Singh, Keil & Kasi 2009; Unger, Gemünden & Aubry 2012),

possibly a consequence of a prior project failure (Englund, Graham & Dinsmore 2003), to help

spot, mitigate, and eliminate project-related issues (Hill 2004), or to create a framework to

prevent project failure (Kaufman & Korrapati 2007). The PMO can therefore be considered a

provider of services specifically for the support, management, and delivery of projects within

its organisation. Some of the common service functions of PMOs include developing project

management standards methodologies, assisting management on project strategy,

establishing project management discipline and oversight, facilitating project knowledge

management, leveraging previous solutions, sharing best practices, monitoring, controlling,

reporting, enforcing the governance of projects, and delivering project objectives (Dai & Wells

2004; Hill 2004; Liu & Yetton 2007).

There are numerous classifications of the service functions of the PMO in both academic and

practitioner literature (Desouza & Evaristo 2006; Hill 2004; Hobbs & Aubry 2007, 2010; Martin,

Pearson & Furumo 2007; Pellegrinelli & Garagna 2009; Singh, Keil & Kasi 2009; Unger,

Gemünden & Aubry 2012). One example is by Desouza and Evaristo (2006) who established

a list of (eleven) PMO functions based on what they deemed as common PMO characteristics

(i.e. successful management and delivery of projects, ensuring alignment with organisational

strategy, developing project management standards, methodologies, and competencies,

having own resources, and staffed by experts), and grouping them into three levels:

operational (providing basic centralised support), tactical (managing and coordinating multiple

projects and inter-dependencies), and strategic (advising management and prioritising

projects based on organisational strategy). However, the most comprehensive classification

of the PMO’s service functions to date is considered to have been established by Hobbs and

Aubry (2007, 2010). They had derived a list of PMO functions based on their review of the

literature, and this list was confirmed by respondents in a global survey encompassing 500

PMOs. Table 2.2 presents this list of PMO functions.

Table 2.2 PMO service functions (Hobbs & Aubry 2007:82; 2010:42)

Group 1: Monitoring and

controlling project

performance

1. Report project status to upper management

2. Monitor and control project performance

3. Implement and operate a project information system

4. Develop and maintain a project scoreboard

20

Group 2: Developing

project management

competencies and

methodologies

5. Develop and implement a standard methodology

6. Promote project management within organisation

7. Develop competency of personnel, including training

8. Provide mentoring for project managers

9. Provide a set of tools without an effort to standardise

Group 3: Multi-project

management

10. Coordinate between projects

11. Identify, select, and prioritize new projects

12. Manage one or more portfolios

13. Manage one or more programs

14. Allocate resources between projects

Group 4: Strategic

management

15. Provide advice to upper management

16. Participate in strategic planning

17. Manage benefits

18. Provide networking and environmental scanning

Group 5: Knowledge

management and

organisational learning

19. Monitor and control performance of PMO

20. Manage archives of project documentation

21. Conduct post-project reviews

22. Conduct project audits

23. Implement and manage database of lessons learned

24. Implement and manage risk database

(Additional functions not

included in the groups of

functions)

25. Execute specialised tasks for project managers

26. Provide interface between management and customer

27. Recruit, select, evaluate, and determine salaries for project managers

These functions can be clustered into five groups (Hobbs & Aubry 2010:42):

1. Monitoring and controlling project performance, comprising monitoring and controlling

projects, developing and maintaining project scoreboards, reporting of project status

to executive-level management, and implementing and operating a project information

system.

2. Developing project management competencies and methodologies, where the PMO

trains and mentors project managers, standardises project management

methodologies and processes, provides tools, and promotes project management

within the organisation.

3. Multi-project management, including the management of programs and portfolios of

projects, prioritising and selecting new projects, and coordinating and allocating

resources across projects.

4. Strategic management, by providing advice to executive-level management and

performing strategic planning functions.

21

5. Knowledge management and organisational learning, including monitoring and

controlling the performance of the PMO, conducting post-implementation reviews,

project audits, and implementing and managing lessons-learned and risk databases.

Although these service functions are considered to be important to most PMOs, not

necessarily all are adopted by every PMO implementation currently in practice. The suite of

PMO functions established by Hobbs and Aubry (2007, 2010) will be used as an indicator of

the services provided by the PMO, and adapted in this study to compare participants’

expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance.

2.3 Challenges for the PMO

The rapid growth of PMOs globally seems to suggest that organisations worldwide believe in

the concept of the PMO; and establishing PMOs in their organisations would help improve the

success rates of projects. Data from industry studies demonstrating positive growth in the

number of organisations deploying PMOs (ESI International 2013, 2015; KPMG 2013; PM

Solutions 2014; Wellingtone Project Management & APM PMO SIG 2017) seems to support

this, confirming the notion that PMOs are indeed seen to be achieving the purpose they were

setup for. However, many PMOs do not survive beyond two years of operation (Hobbs & Aubry

2010; Kutsch et al. 2015; Stanleigh 2006; Ward & Daniel 2013), and part of the reason, studies

have indicated, is that the value of the PMO is often being questioned (Hobbs & Aubry 2010;

Kutsch et al. 2015; McKay et al. 2013; Singh, Keil & Kasi 2009; Ward & Daniel 2013).

Furthermore, the PMO is often faced with tensions and challenges that are often conflicting

(Aubry 2013; Pellegrinelli & Garagna 2009; Singh, Keil & Kasi 2009). These tensions and

challenges and the short life expectancy of the PMO will be discussed in the following sections.

2.3.1 Short life expectancy

Despite its growing popularity, the average PMO does not seem to survive long. Research

data has shown that many PMOs are disbanded after being in operation for only about two to

three years (Hobbs & Aubry 2007, 2010; Stanleigh 2006). While researchers believe that the

success or failure of the PMO is associated with perceptions of its effectiveness and business

value (Kutsch et al. 2015; Ward & Daniel 2013), the PMO’s short lifespan may also be

22

attributed to poor governance (Santosus 2003) or the lack of project management thinking

(Leemann 2002). The lack of a clearly-defined value proposition, poor perceptions of the

PMO’s abilities, the lack of support from business and management are also some of the

suggested reasons for a PMO’s short life expectancy (Kendall & Rollins 2003).

Some academics recognise the PMO to be a dynamic entity, transforming and evolving every

few years and consider the short life expectancy of the PMO to be part of the transitional

change that most PMOs experience (Aubry et al. 2010; Bredillet, Tywoniak & Tootoonchy

2017; Darling & Whitty 2016). They suggest that the PMO must repeatedly evolve and

transform to adapt to the changes in the organisation in order to survive (Aubry et al. 2010;

Aubry, Richer & Lavoie-Tremblay 2014; Hobbs, Aubry & Thuillier 2008). Bredillet et al. (2017),

in their investigation into the life expectancy of the PMO by exploring the dynamic relationships

between the PMO and the organisation’s systems and processes, confirm the PMO’s “ongoing

transformative nature” (2017:13) and that it must dynamically adapt to organisational change.

Other researchers (Letavec & Bolles 2011; Pellegrinelli & Garagna 2009) believe that PMOs

were set up to address a specific problem, and once the problem was addressed, “the

relevance and value [of these PMOs] decreases” (2009:649) and they were disbanded.

Therefore, while the PMO must constantly evolve in order to stay relevant, it would appear

that the PMO must also have the strong support of its stakeholders to maintain perceptions of

its value delivery within the organisation.

2.3.2 Tensions and challenges

“Issues, tensions, and conflicts are part of the [PMO’s] existence” (Aubry 2013:243), and part

of the PMO’s problem with its short life expectancy is exacerbated by these tensions and

challenges it faces. In the literature, the inherently contradictory challenges facing the PMO

has been identified: “The [PMO] can be the battleground between empowerment and control,

between people and processes, and between political factions” (Pellegrinelli & Garagna

2009:652). Some PMO leaders, for example, face the tension of whether project ownership

and responsibilities should be with the PMO or remain with business unit managers

(Pellegrinelli & Garagna 2009). For leaders of newly-setup PMOs, budget and resources may

be channelled away from business units to fund these PMOs, potentially resulting in conflict

and dissention from adversely-affected business units where control of financial resources is

closely-linked to power (McKay et al. 2013). Other PMO leaders experience tensions such as

the choices they have to make between emphasising standardisation or being flexible and

responsive to varying business demands (Hurt & Thomas 2009; Pellegrinelli & Garagna 2009),

or between centralising or de-centralising project management capabilities throughout the

23

organisation (Curlee 2008). While most PMOs are set up to establish standardised project

management methodologies, processes, procedures, and practices (Desouza & Evaristo

2006; Hill 2004; Liu & Yetton 2007), the PMO team must also be mindful of business needs

and allow for some degree of flexibility in the projects it manages (McKay et al. 2013). The

centralisation of project management capabilities with the PMO, when accompanied with the

standardisation of methodology and process, and centralised prioritisation and decision-

making might result in unhappy business units when they feel that they are losing power

(McKay et al. 2013).

The PMO not as a “static and isolated organisational entity” but one that plays “multiple roles

in multiple organisational processes” (Hobbs & Aubry 2010:168). Being an integral component

of an organisation’s project management practice, the PMO is not considered an isolated

entity. It is part of a network of complex relationships that link projects with business and

strategy (Bredillet, Tywoniak & Tootoonchy 2017; Hobbs & Aubry 2010). The PMO team must

engage with multiple stakeholders within the organisation, each with differing and at times

conflicting objectives with varying time horizons (Aubry 2013; Cameron & Quinn 2011), thus

making this complex and difficult for the PMO team. This would imply that the PMO team must

face multiple and conflicting tensions and challenges. In addition, these tensions surrounding

the PMO are dynamic and evolve over time (Aubry, Richer & Lavoie-Tremblay 2014).

The multitude of tensions between the PMO as a service provider and its stakeholders has

been highlighted in the literature (Pellegrinelli & Garagna 2009; Singh, Keil & Kasi 2009); and

it is critical for the sustainability of the PMO that the team manages the tensions and

challenges it faces while demonstrating its contribution to project performance (Aubry, Hobbs

& Thuillier 2009; Hobbs & Aubry 2010).

2.3.3 Value delivery

One significant tension facing many PMOs is that the value of these PMOs is often called into

question (Hobbs & Aubry 2010; Kutsch et al. 2015; McKay et al. 2013), and this underlying

issue is considered to be associated with the PMO’s short lifespan (Kutsch et al. 2015; Ward

& Daniel 2013). Despite ensuring the successful management and delivery of projects, the

value delivery of many PMOs are apparently being questioned and this tension seems to be

a prevalent concern amongst PMOs (Hobbs & Aubry 2010; Kutsch et al. 2015; McKay et al.

2013).

Studies have established that PMO leaders struggle to justify the value of their PMOs to their

organisations (Hobbs & Aubry 2007; Singh, Keil & Kasi 2009), and this is further underscored

with the results of global industry surveys such as that conducted by ESI International (2013)

24

in which more than half of respondents claimed that the value of their PMO had been called

into question by key stakeholders. Many PMOs struggle with the lack of recognition of value

delivery, constantly being forced to justify their existence (Kutsch et al. 2015) and facing

constant pressure to demonstrate value to the business (UMT Consulting Group 2014). This

thus presents a paradoxical situation where PMOs, having been set up to ensure successful

project delivery, are themselves being questioned about their value delivery (McKay et al.

2013).

The value of the PMO is often questioned because the contribution of PMO is often not clear

and most organisations find it difficult to assess the value delivery of the PMO (Singh, Keil &

Kasi 2009). While the contribution of the PMO to individual projects can be assessed with

traditional project performance metrics such as being on time, keeping within budget and

ensuring the quality of outcomes, it is more difficult to determine the overall business value

delivered by the PMO to the organisation (McKay et al. 2013).

The need to develop a deeper understanding of the perceived value of the PMO thus

motivates this research study. With the IT PMO being considered a provider of project

management services for IT-related projects, this research attempts to understand perceived

value of the IT PMO by investigating the perceptions of its service performance.

2.4 Perceived value and service performance

In order to survive, PMOs must be perceived as delivering value in their organisations (Kendall

& Rollins 2003; Kutsch et al. 2015). The concept of value is abstract and varies based on the

context in which it is studied (Patterson & Spreng 1997; Sweeney 1995). The Oxford (2017)

dictionary defines value as the “regard that something is held to deserve, its importance, worth,

or usefulness”; while Merriam Webster (2017) has several definitions, of particular interest

are: (1) “the monetary worth of something”, (2) “a fair return or equivalent in goods, services,

or money for something exchanged”, and (3) “relative worth, utility, or importance”.

Although organisations tend to focus on revenue and costs, not all value that can be

appreciated is in monetary terms (Thomas & Mullaly 2007). Business value, although closely

associated with monetary worth, is not necessarily related with only economic value (Project

Management Institute 2013). Business value is considered to represent the “value of the

business, [including] all tangible and intangible elements” unique to the organisation (Project

25

Management Institute 2013:15), where intangibles including business processes, knowledge,

skills, and business relationships are also valued in organisations. Organisations with effective

project management capabilities, for example, would be better equipped to meet their

respective strategic objectives and therefore reap business value from their investments in

projects (Project Management Institute 2013).

While traditional project metrics of individual projects can give an indication of the performance

of the PMO (Dai & Wells 2004), it is more difficult to determine the overall value delivered by

the PMO in its organisation (McKay et al. 2013) as aggregating value delivered from individual

projects may not necessarily be indicative of the overall value delivered by this entity.

2.4.1 PMO value

To date, there is arguably no effective means of determining the value delivery of PMO (McKay

et al. 2013; Singh, Keil & Kasi 2009). Currently, only the individual projects managed by PMOs

are assessed based on traditional project metrics, namely, project delivery within budgeted

costs, promised timelines, and keeping within the established project scope (Kerzner 2003;

McKay et al. 2013). Project metrics alone however is not considered an effective means for

assessing the PMO’s value delivery because it only measures the success of the individual

project; but does not necessarily reflect the contribution of the PMO (Kutsch et al. 2015; McKay

et al. 2013). It would be indeed a challenge for the PMO team to demonstrate business value

to its stakeholders without an effective means of assessing its value delivery.

Some academics have started focusing on the contribution of the PMO: indirectly implying the

value contribution of the PMO, Dai and Wells (2004) had correlated the strong presence of

project management methodologies with the success of projects, while Ward and Daniel

(2013) suggest that the PMO’s close involvement in projects would improve the chance for

project success and following that, management satisfaction. Aubry and Hobbs (2011) first

adopted the Competing Values Framework (Quinn & Rohrbaugh 1983) in their investigation

onto the PMO’s contribution to organisational performance, while Aubry et al. delved further

to highlight stakeholders’ differing and pluralistic views of the PMO’s contribution to

organisational performance (Aubry, Richer & Lavoie-Tremblay 2014; Aubry et al. 2011)

arguing for the need to capture these multiple views through some mode of dialogue. Viglioni

et al. (2016), also based on a similar approach in using Quinn and Rohrbaugh’s (1983)

Competing Values Framework to evaluate PMO performance, recommended a performance

evaluation model for PMOs in the software industry. Kutsch et al. (2015) researched into the

contribution of PMOs and established that the sustainability of the PMO is dependent on its

26

key stakeholders’ perceptions of the PMO’s ability to successfully deliver projects and

demonstrate its value contribution to its stakeholders.

However, while academics have studied the performance of the PMO (Viglioni, Cunha &

Moura 2016) as well as the PMO’s contribution to project success (Dai & Wells 2004; Ward &

Daniel 2013) and organisational performance (Aubry & Hobbs 2011; Aubry, Richer & Lavoie-

Tremblay 2014; Aubry et al. 2011), there is still little research on the value of the PMO itself.

This study attempts to develop an understanding of the perceived value of the IT PMO. Based

on the premise that the PMO is essentially a service provider, this study adopts the concept

of comparing expectations and perceptions of service (DeLone & McLean 2003; Kettinger &

Lee 1994; Parasuraman, Zeithaml & Berry 1985; Petter 2008; Pitt, Watson & Kavan 1995) to

understand the IT PMO’s service performance and perceived value. Some of the previous

studies into the contribution (Dai & Wells 2004; Kutsch et al. 2015; Ward & Daniel 2013) and

performance (Viglioni, Cunha & Moura 2016) of the PMO have been mostly positivist in nature

and focused on rational measurement, while others have been focused mainly on the PMO’s

contribution to organisational performance (Aubry & Hobbs 2011; Aubry, Richer & Lavoie-

Tremblay 2014; Aubry et al. 2011). This research builds on the knowledge currently available

to focus on developing an understanding the perceived value of the PMO, while suggesting

the significance of service performance to the perceived value of the PMO.

2.4.2 Assessing service performance

Service quality is the measure of how well the performance of a service provided matches the

[service recipient’s] expectations (Lewis & Booms 1983) and is defined as the “global

judgment, or attitude, relating to the superiority of the service” (Parasuraman, Zeithaml & Berry

1988:16). The quality of a service performance can therefore be assessed based on the

comparison between what service recipients feel should be offered (their expectations of

service), and what is actually provided (their perceptions of the performance of that service)

(Parasuraman, Zeithaml & Berry 1988).3

IS academics have acknowledged the importance of service performance (DeLone & McLean

2003; Jiang et al. 2012; Pitt, Watson & Kavan 1995). Researchers (Kettinger & Lee 1994; Pitt,

Watson & Kavan 1995; Wilkin & Hewitt 1999) had warned of the risk of inaccurately assessing

IS effectiveness without including the measure of IS service quality, and academics such as

DeLone and McLean, in acknowledging the significance of service performance and quality in

3 An instrument called SERVQUAL was developed (Parasuraman, Zeithaml & Berry 1988) based on this concept to assess the quality of service performance but it has been plagued with controversy (Asubonteng, McCleary & Swan 1996; Buttle 1996; Jiang et al. 2012; Nyeck et al. 2002; Teas 1993; van Dyke, Kappelman & Prybutok 1997). This research instead focuses on where there is agreement, that the comparison of perceptions and expectations is a useful way of assessing service performance.

27

IS, revised their original IS Success Model (1992) to include service quality as a key

component in assessing IS success (DeLone & McLean 2003).

Pitt et al. (1995, 1997) had proposed, based on the works of marketing researchers

Parasuraman et al. (1985), that the difference between the expectations and perceptions of

the performance of an IS service could be indicative of the quality of that IS service.

Parasuraman et al. (1985:42) identified that ‘‘service quality perceptions result from a

comparison of consumer expectations with actual service performance” and suggested

measuring service quality based on the gaps between the expectations of a service and the

perceptions of the performance of that service.

Hence, based on the large bodies of knowledge in the fields of IS (DeLone & McLean 2003;

Kettinger & Lee 1994; Petter 2008; Pitt, Watson & Kavan 1995; Tesch et al. 2005) and

marketing (Gronroos 1983; Lehtinen & Lehtinen 1982; Lewis & Booms 1983; Parasuraman,

Zeithaml & Berry 1985) that agree and support the notion that the quality of a service can be

assessed by comparing the expectations and perceptions of that service, this research study

explores the service performance of the IT PMO by comparing service expectations and

perceptions to develop an understanding of the IT PMO’s perceived value. This is also

arguably the first time the service quality concept of comparing expectations and perceptions

of service is adopted in this research domain.

2.4.3 Perceived value and service performance

Marketing studies have established a positive correlation between quality of service and

perceived value (Brady & Cronin 2001; Cronin et al. 1997; Cronin, Brady & Hult 2000;

McDougall & Levesque 2000; Sweeney, Soutar & Johnson 1999; Tam 2004), suggesting that

service recipients’ perceptions of service value are directly linked with their assessments of

the quality or performance of the service received (Bolton & Drew 1991; Tam 2004). Perceived

value is described in the marketing literature as a “consumer’s overall assessment of the utility

of a product (or service) based on perceptions of what is received and what is given” (Zeithaml

1988:14). It is believed to have its roots in equity theory (Oliver & DeSarbo 1988) which refers

to the service recipient’s assessment of the equity (or fairness) of a service (Bolton & Lemon

1999) by comparing his/her evaluation of a service outcome to that of the service input (Yang

& Peterson 2004).

Expectations might therefore be considered to serve as the basis on which service recipients

(or stakeholders) evaluate the quality of a service performance (Asubonteng, McCleary &

Swan 1996). Perceptions of not meeting service performance expectations might imply poor

quality of service, while perceptions of good service quality would be the result of the service

28

provider being perceived to meet or exceed service recipients’ performance expectations

(Parasuraman, Zeithaml & Berry 1985). Service recipients’ satisfaction might also

consequently increase with improved perceptions of service quality (Asubonteng, McCleary &

Swan 1996).

Similarly, in IS research, service performance has also been established as a significant

influence on perceived value and customer satisfaction (Kuo, Wu & Deng 2009). DeLone and

McLean (2003), in their updated IS Success Model, have argued for service performance as

a key component in assessing the perceived effectiveness and success of an IS entity. Thus,

in the context of the IT PMO, an IS entity providing services in relation to the management of

IT projects in its organisation, it can be assumed that the perceived value of the IT PMO might

be assessed based on service recipients’ (or stakeholders’) expectations and perceptions of

its service performance. Furthermore, IS academics have acknowledged the importance of

service performance in IS, with a substantial body of evidence in IS research adopting this

concept to measure IS success (DeLone & McLean 2003; Jiang et al. 2012; Kettinger & Lee

1997; Petter 2008; Pitt, Watson & Kavan 1995, 1997; Szajna & Scamell 1993; Tesch et al.

2005), thus supporting the use of the concept of service quality to assess and understand the

perceived value of the IT PMO.

Hence, by adopting the conceptual underpinnings that IS researchers such as Kettinger and

Lee (1994), Pitt et al. (1995), and van Dyke et al. (1997) agree; that the comparison between

expectations and perceptions offers an effective assessment of IS service performance, this

study attempts to establish an understanding of the perceived value of the IT PMO. This would

also constitute part of this study’s contribution to knowledge, where the concept of comparing

expectations and perceptions to assess service performance and perceived value are

introduced into the domain of PMO research.

2.5 Understanding stakeholders

Perceptions of effectiveness and value are considered to be based on the principles of the

individual stakeholder making the assessment (Cameron 1986a), and thus, perceptions of

value would vary from person to person (Zeithaml 1988) and be subjected to multiple

interpretations (Oliver 2010; Zeithaml 1988). For example, while the successful delivery of an

individual project for a business unit may constitute value to that business manager, the

executive management of the organisation might not; considering value delivery only if the

29

project meets organisational goals and objectives. Perceived value delivery is therefore linked

to the nature of the object of interest, the stakeholder and his/her views, and the context of the

situation itself (Bourne 2011b; Bourne & Walker 2005, 2006; Mendelow 1981).

How well the PMO is perceived in its organisation depends heavily on its key stakeholders’

perspectives (Kutsch et al. 2015) as service performance is considered to be a subjective

construct that is anchored in the differing “values and preferences of stakeholders” (Aubry

2013:243). Stakeholder engagement is thus considered critical (Bourne 2011b) for the PMO

to be perceived as delivering value and it would therefore be advantageous for the PMO team

to develop a shared understanding of its stakeholders’ views in order to effectively focus its

efforts on what stakeholders consider important.

2.5.1 Managing stakeholders

Stakeholders are considered to possess a high degree of power over the organisation

(Mendelow 1981), and project stakeholders are defined as “individuals or groups who have

an interest or some aspect of rights or ownership in the project, and can contribute to, or be

impacted by, either the work or the outcomes of the project” (Walker, Bourne & Rowlinson

2008:73). The stakeholder might therefore exert influence over the project managed by the

PMO team in order to achieve business objectives as his/her interests would typically be

impacted by the project (Project Management Institute 2013). Some stakeholders may also

be actively involved in these projects. In this study, the PMO’s key stakeholders are the project

sponsors (typically the executive management who provide the project resources and

support), customers and users (typically the business units who approve, manage, and benefit

from the outcome of the project) (Project Management Institute 2013).4

With the PMO being considered as part of a network of complex relationships amongst various

departments within an organisation (Bredillet, Tywoniak & Tootoonchy 2017; Hobbs & Aubry

2010), it must interact with its key stakeholders within the organisation and it is therefore

critical for the PMO team to effectively manage its relationships with its stakeholders.

However, these stakeholders may have different views and values to that of the PMO itself

(Bourne & Walker 2006; Hobbs & Aubry 2010) with no common objective (Cameron 1986a;

Hannan & Freeman 1977; Quinn & Rohrbaugh 1983), making it a complex and challenging

task for the PMO team to deliver services to multiple stakeholders with multiple objectives and

varying time horizons. Different stakeholders may have opposing expectations and this might

4 Although project managers may be considered as stakeholders in project management (Bourne & Walker 2005; Project Management Institute 2013; Walker, Bourne & Rowlinson 2008), the IT project managers in this study are responsible for the management and delivery of IT projects and hence considered to be part of the IT PMO team.

30

result in conflicts (Project Management Institute 2013). Many PMO teams, though technically-

competent, have failed to convince their stakeholders that they are delivering value (Kutsch et

al. 2015; McKay et al. 2013; Singh, Keil & Kasi 2009), and part of the reason is the PMO

team’s failure to understand and manage their relationships and engage effectively with their

key stakeholders (Bourne 2011b). The importance of the PMO team building and maintaining

a robust stakeholder relationship is thus emphasised.

2.5.2 Shared understanding

Since the PMO and its stakeholders are mutually dependent on each other to realise their

respective goals, the PMO depends on its stakeholders to appraise its effectiveness and

perceived value (Mendelow 1981). It is thus critical for [the PMO team] to determine what its

stakeholders expect and require (Mendelow 1981), in other words, develop a shared

understanding of their expectations.

Shared understanding is described as “mutual knowledge, mutual beliefs, and mutual

assumptions” (Clark & Brennan 1991:127; Mulder, Swaak & Kessels 2002:36), understood

within a group and involves knowing and appreciating the points of difference of others (Hunt

2000; Sonderegger 2009). Shared understanding is acknowledged to be a major factor

influencing the satisfaction of service recipients in service encounters (Bourne & Walker 2005;

Mohr & Bitner 1991; Plouffe, Williams & Leigh 2004).

This would imply that the PMO team must first gain an appreciation or understanding of the

expectations of its stakeholders in order to be able to meet their expectations (Bourne 2011b).

Equipped with this understanding, the PMO team might then have a better chance of

articulating strategies and taking ameliorating actions to address any gap in their stakeholders’

expectations and perceptions. An instrument to map these different perspectives for

comparison might help highlight the gaps between the stakeholders’ as well as the PMO team’

expectations and perceptions. Such an instrument could bring together the different and

competing points of views to help in the [PMO team in its] development of shared

understanding, consequently leading to new insights and new ideas (Arias et al. 2000). With

this shared understanding, the PMO team can then effectively focus its efforts to improve

perceptions of its value delivery.

31

2.6 Articulating the research questions

Research questions are typically constructed by identifying gaps in the existing literature that

need to be filled (Alvesson & Sandberg 2011). In this chapter, the review of the literature first

discussed the importance of the concept of PMOs to the success of projects in organisations.

Also highlighted was the short life expectancy of PMOs in practice, along with the pressing

challenge for the PMO teams to justify the value of their PMOs to their organisations. By

establishing the PMO as a service provider, this study then introduced the importance of

understanding and managing the different expectations and perceptions of the PMO’s

stakeholders who have a significant influence over the PMO. It was suggested that if the PMO

was effective in performing its service functions and thus satisfying its stakeholders, the PMO

might then be perceived as delivering value. This would thus lead to the two overarching

objectives for this research:

(1) to help the PMO develop a shared understanding of its service performance in

order to improve perceptions of its service performance and business value in the

organisation; and at the same time

(2) develop an understanding of how the perceptions of the PMO’s service

performance influence its perceived value.

The following research questions can thus be articulated, in which this research will investigate

and attempt to answer:




RQ2: What do the expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO’s service


2.6.1 First research question (RQ1)

Through the close engagements with IT PMO teams, this action research study aims to help

them address their real-world problem by assisting these teams ascertain their business

stakeholders’ perceptions of their service performance. The first research question is therefore

focused on assisting the IT PMO teams in developing a shared understanding of the

32

perceptions of their service performance in order that they may take ameliorating actions to

improve perceptions of their value delivery. The intervention of the researcher in this study is

expected to assist the IT PMO teams develop some shared understanding of their

stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions.

2.6.2 Second research question (RQ2)

Besides helping the IT PMO teams in this study address their real-world problem, this action

research also aims to fill the knowledge gap. By eliciting participants’ expectations and

perceptions to develop a deeper understanding surrounding the perceived value of the IT

PMO; the second research question is addressed.

Both research questions in this study are thus articulated in this chapter after an extant review

of the literature. The details of the operationalisation of the research questions are presented

and discussed in the following chapter (Chapter 3) which describes the research design and

methodological considerations of this study.

33

3 METHODOLOGY & RESEARCH DESIGN

The choice of an appropriate research methodology (Galliers 1991) and the development of

an appropriate research design is considered to contribute to greater validity and importance

of the knowledge and understanding generated through research (McKay 2002). The purpose

of this chapter is therefore to justify the selection of an appropriate research methodology and

to demonstrate that the selection of methodology and the design of this research contribute to

the rigour of this research project. The research outline in Figure 3.1 represents the elements

of research methodology and design incorporated in the planning and implementation of this

research study.

Figure 3.1 Research outline for this study

34

3.1 Research paradigm

3.1.1 Paradigms in Information Systems research

A paradigm is defined as “a set of basic beliefs... It represents a worldview that defines the

nature of the world for the beholder, his or her place in it, and the range of possible

relationships to that world as its parts.” (Guba & Lincoln 1994:107). Paradigms thus may be

regarded as worldviews or all-encompassing perspectives of the world which comprise “basic

beliefs that guide action” (Guba 1990:17). Morgan (2007:53) offers a more specific

perspective, presenting the concept of paradigms as “shared beliefs amongst a community of

researchers who share a consensus about asking the most meaningful questions and

adopting the most appropriate approaches for answering these questions”. This view of

paradigms is adopted in this research study.

Traditionally, there has been three main research paradigms recognised in Information

Systems (IS) research (Chen & Hirschheim 2004; Orlikowski & Baroudi 1991): (i) positivism,

employing scientific method of enquiry to objectively study a phenomenon; (ii) interpretivism

which attempts to understand phenomena through the meanings that people assign to them;

and (iii) critical theory which emphasises “the oppositions, conflicts and contradictions in

contemporary society, and seeks to be emancipatory” (Myers 1997:5). There has however

been a growing interest in pragmatism as another paradigm in the field of IS (Goles &

Hirschheim 2000).

Identified as the dominant IS research paradigm (Chen & Hirschheim 2004; Orlikowski &

Baroudi 1991), positivism is mainly concerned with scientific inquiry involving the formulation

of laws which account for observed phenomenon. Positivists believe in an objective reality

independent of human experiences, and thus argue that researchers should treat social

observations as entities, similar to the scientific inquiry of physical phenomena (Burrell &

Morgan 1979). Epistemologically, positivists typically seek causal relationships through testing

of hypotheses proposed on the basis of researcher beliefs about a phenomenon (Orlikowski

& Baroudi 1991). The researcher acts as an independent observer, remaining neutral, free of

any bias and emotionally detached from the study when empirically investigating their stated

hypotheses (Frels & Onwuegbuzie 2013; Johnson & Onwuegbuzie 2004). Positivist

researchers use objective measurements which are usually quantitative (Chen & Hirschheim

2004). The positivist researcher believes in laws or theories that govern the world; utilises

numeric measures to carefully observe and measure the objective reality that exists ‘out there’

in the world; and tests, verifies and refines them in order to understand the world (Creswell

2009) (see Table 3.1).

35

Table 3.1 Research paradigms and characteristics (Frels & Onwuegbuzie 2013:186)

Paradigm Positivism Interpretivism Critical Theory Pragmatism

Ontology Objective research

inquiry

Multiple contradictory,

but equally valid

accounts of the same

phenomenon represent

multiple realities

Social, political,

cultural, ethnic,

racial, economic,

and gender values

that evolve over

time affect reality

High regard for the

influence of the inner

world of human

experiences in action

Epistem-

ology

The researcher is

neutral, emotionally

detached and

should eliminate

biases; empirically

justify stated

hypotheses

Co-created findings/

meaning; knowledge is

subjective and not

separable for the

knower

Transactional/

subjectivist; value-

mediated findings

Knowledge is based on

the reality of the world

and constructed through

experience; justification

comes via warranted

assertability

Method-

ology

Generalisations are

time- and context-

free; real causes of

social scientific

outcomes can be

determined reliably

and validly via

quantitative (and

sometimes

qualitative) methods

Dialectical and

impossible to

differentiate fully

causes and effects;

uses inductive

reasoning; time- &

context-free

generalisations are

neither desirable nor

possible

Use of a dialogue or

dialectical approach

Thoughtful/ dialectical

eclecticism and pluralism

of methods and

perspectives; determines

what works and solves

individual and social

problems

A variant of positivism called post-positivism, specifically for the study of human behaviour

and actions, has also become popular amongst researchers. Considered a ‘softer’ form of

positivism where instead of certainty it refers to “probability”; instead of absolute objectivity it

claims a “certain level of objectivity”, and instead of absolute truth it seeks to “approximate the

truth” (Crotty 1998:29).

The interpretivist paradigm is concerned with the notion that “access to reality is only through

social constructions such as language, consciousness and shared meanings” (Myers 1997:5).

36

Interpretivists believe in the existence of human-constructed realities (Guba 1990); and seek

to understand the world through the subjective meanings of human experiences, most of which

are multiple and varied (Creswell 2009). Thus, ontologically, interpretivists believe that reality

is subjective and constructed through human interaction. Epistemologically, knowledge is

gained by understanding human interaction and constructing a subjective meaning of reality,

requiring interpretivists to typically engage in real-world settings to investigate and study

human behaviours and interactions (Orlikowski & Baroudi 1991). The philosophical

characteristics of the interpretivism paradigm are outlined in Table 3.1.

When research is geared towards empowering marginalised or disenfranchised individuals or

groups, the critical theory paradigm is more appropriate as it supports research involving social

critique and serves to highlight the “restrictive and alienating conditions of the status quo”

(Myers 1997). These researchers believe that inquiry needs to be intertwined with a political

agenda, and that social issues such as empowerment, inequality, oppression, domination,

suppression, and alienation need to be addressed (Creswell 2009). Critical theorists hold that

ontologically, social, political, cultural, ethnic, racial, economic, and gender values evolve over

time and affect reality (Frels & Onwuegbuzie 2013). Epistemologically, critical theorists view

knowledge as being “grounded in social and historical practices” (Chua 1986:620) and in

addition to their research interest, actively initiate change to the phenomena being studied

(Benson 1983). Critical theorists use dialogues or dialectical approaches to actively engage

and collaborate with participants, resulting in an action agenda for change (Creswell 2009).

The philosophical perspectives of critical theory are shown in Table 3.1.

Previously, advocates of the various research paradigms tended to engage in what was

dubbed a ‘paradigm war’, disagreeing on issues concerning the nature of objects of research,

methods of enquiry, and hence on knowledge generated, and contesting what was the most

appropriate way to generate new knowledge (Guba & Lincoln 1989; Maxwell & Mittapalli

2010). However, more recently, there has been growing interest in pragmatism as an alternate

paradigm (Morgan 2007; Morgan 2014). Pragmatism offers a philosophical foundation

grounded on pluralism (Buchholz & Rosenthal 1996), and hence attempts to reconcile some

of the traditional debates between conflicting paradigms. Because of the “intrinsic diversity of

problem formulations” in the field of IS research (Goles & Hirschheim 2000:263), pragmatism

offers a way of embracing the plurality of research perspectives. Interest in pragmatism grew

through its association with mixed-methods research (Morgan 2014) which recognises the

importance and usefulness of both quantitative and qualitative methods (Creswell 2009).

Pragmatists support the ontological view that there is an objective reality which is however

also “grounded in the environment and experience of the individual which can only be

imperfectly understood” (Goles & Hirschheim 2000:261). Pragmatists view the acquisition of

37

knowledge (epistemology) as a “continuum instead of two opposing and mutually exclusive

poles of objectivity and subjectivity”; hence allowing for the selection of methodology most

suited to answer the research question(s), be it qualitative, quantitative, or a mix of both (Goles

& Hirschheim 2000:261). The philosophical perspectives of pragmatism are listed in Table 3.1.

3.1.2 Pragmatism defined and characterised

“Pragmatism is based on the principle that the usefulness, workability, and

practicality of ideas, policies and proposals are the criteria of their merit. It

stresses the priority of action over doctrine, of experience over fixed principles,

and it holds that ideas borrow their meanings from their consequences and

their truths from their verification. Thus, ideas are essentially instruments and

plans of action.” (Rosenthal & Thayer 2017)

Pragmatism has its roots in the works of Charles Peirce, who introduced the concept into

philosophy in 1878 in his article ‘How to make our ideas clear’ (Pansiri 2005). Although Peirce

is recognised as the founder of pragmatism (de Almeida 2012; Pansiri 2005), much of the

literature on pragmatism refers to John Dewey’s work. Dewey focused on the importance of

joining beliefs and actions in a process of inquiry underlying any search for knowledge

(Morgan 2014). Pragmatism thus focuses on beliefs that are directly connected to actions: “a

problem must be felt before it can be stated.” (Dewey 1986:76 in Buchholz & Rosenthal

1996:272). Knowledge is grounded in real-world action and constructed through human

experiences (Frels & Onwuegbuzie 2013), and hence pragmatism considers research as “a

human experience that is based on the beliefs and actions of actual researchers” (Morgan

2007:1051). Pragmatism is the philosophical underpinning for using mixed methods for

research (Greene & Hall 2010; Tashakkori & Teddlie 1998) as its methodology involves

dialectical eclecticism and supports pluralism of methods and perspectives to establish what

works to solve the research problem. To summarise, the pragmatic approach can simply be

seen as “research means for research ends” (Biesta 2010:96) where the pragmatist uses what

works (Creswell 2009), adopting an approach to inquiry focusing on the research problem

(Creswell 2009; Creswell & Creswell 2005).

The field of IS research is often regarded as diverse and pluralistic (Goles & Hirschheim 2000),

and an increasing number of IS research studies has been inspired by pragmatic thinking

(Ågerfalk 2010). This is not surprising as IS researchers have been advocating the plurality of

research perspectives (Orlikowski & Baroudi 1991) believing that a more reasoned, reflective

adoption of approaches could be gained from the diverse perspectives that exist. For example,

Goles and Hirschheim (2000) argue that pragmatism offers an alternative paradigmatic stance

38

in achieving a more balanced stream of research, while Galliers (2011:300) suggests that IS

research should “dismiss exclusiveness and welcome the inclusive ‘and’, considering having

greater balance between both qualitative and quantitative approaches”. Pragmatism therefore

supports the choice of approach(es) suited to a particular problem context in order to

understand that research problem.

Because of its practical basis for research, pragmatism is recognised to be particularly suited

to an applied field of research such as IS, providing a vehicle for the conduct of both rigorous

and relevant research (Goles & Hirschheim 2000). Pragmatists recognise the importance of

theory to explain phenomena, whilst subscribing to the “test of practise and time” to determine

usefulness and value (Wicks & Freeman 1998:136). Pragmatism is considered to have

influenced IS research, with pragmatic thinking playing an important part in the evolution of IS

research (Goldkuhl 2011). One such example is the interest in action research (Baskerville &

Myers 2004).

3.1.3 Adopting pragmatism as the paradigm

Pragmatism will serve as the worldview underpinning this research. Pragmatism is consonant

with researchers being directly involved in a real-life problem situation and working with the

people who own the problem in order to develop a better understanding of the problem and

how it might be addressed with the aim of finding workable solution and/or improvements.

Given this research is based on an interest of a common business problem (the PMO’s

struggle to demonstrate its value in the organisation), it seems an appropriate perspective on

which to build this research enquiry. The research aim involves describing specific

manifestations of this problem, trying to identify workable solutions, and providing useful

insights such that research participants feel empowered to take action. It is anticipated that

both qualitative and quantitative data will be required to provide a broad, multi-faceted

understanding of contextually-grounded perceptions of issues surrounding PMOs, and it is

from this understanding and the experiences and expertise of participants that suitable

solution or improvements can be identified. Pragmatic researchers are open to collecting and

analysing any type of data, be it qualitative, quantitative or both, so long as the data provides

the best understanding of the research problem (Creswell 2009; Johnson & Onwuegbuzie

2004; Morgan 2007; Morgan 2014). Pragmatists are not committed to any one system of

philosophy and reality, and are free to choose the methods, techniques, and procedures of

research that are considered to best address the research problem (Cherryholmes 1992;

Creswell 2009; Morgan 2014).

39

3.2 Research methodology

Research methodology refers to the type of approaches researchers adopt that articulate

specific procedures by which to implement a research design (Creswell 2009).

3.2.1 Adopting action research

Given the arguments outlined above, action research seems a natural vehicle for this research

study as it offers a means to both contribute to knowledge and solve a real-world problem

(Checkland & Holwell 1998; McKay & Marshall 2001). The adoption of a pragmatic approach

and using what works to focus on the research problem allows the researcher to mix qualitative

and/or quantitative methods, drawing from their strengths while minimising their weaknesses

in researching practical solutions to this real-world problem (Greene & Hall 2010). Action

research is therefore chosen as the over-arching method for this research study.

Action research involves the researcher’s direct participation and intervention to address the

real-world problem, in addition to conducting research to contribute to knowledge (Checkland

& Holwell 1998; McKay & Marshall 2001). The adoption of action research is a suitable

approach for this study as it offers a participatory form of research to study a complex real-

world problem by investigating the different perspectives of people. Van de Ven (2007)

recommends participative approaches to bridge the gap between practice and research by

gathering the different views of study participants to result in a more penetrating and insightful

knowledge. Academics however also caution that action researchers must be able to balance

“trust, distance, and immersion within their organisational settings” in order to achieve a

successful collaborative action research (Denis & Lehoux 2009:377).

40

3.2.2 Action research defined and characterised

“Action research aims to contribute both to the practical concerns of people in

an immediate problematic situation and to the goals of social science by joint

collaboration within a mutually acceptable ethical framework”. (Rapoport

1970:499)

Given its emphasis on real-world action to ameliorate problematic situations (Baskerville &

Myers 2004; Hevner et al. 2004; Lee & Nickerson 2010), action research is considered an

exemplar of the key principle of pragmatism that “knowledge should make a difference in

action” (Dewey 1931 in Goldkuhl 2011:144). It is therefore not surprising that action research

has been experiencing growth in the number of studies being conducted in the field of IS

(Ågerfalk 2010; Avison et al. 1999; Baskerville & Wood-Harper 1996; Mathiassen, Chiasson

& Germonprez 2012; McKay & Marshall 2001). The nature of action research and both its

contributions to building knowledge and practical problem-solving of real-world concerns

makes this approach an attractive proposition for conducting IS research (McKay & Marshall

2001). The statement that “research informs practice and practice informs research

synergistically” (Avison et al. 1999:94) refers to the iterative process where the researcher

acts together with people in real-world situations to diagnose, intervene, and learn; making

action research suitable for this study.

The action researcher enters a real-world situation and aims to both improve it and acquire

knowledge with a key distinguishing feature of the researcher’s active and deliberate self-

involvement in the investigation (Checkland & Holwell 1998). Checkland (1991) suggests that

the action researcher identify relevant research themes guided by an explicit framework of

ideas (F). The researcher then selects an appropriate real-world problem situation as the area

of interest (A), and by employing an appropriate methodology (M), initiates actions to bring

about improvements to problem situation. Reflections on the changes in A based on F and M

will lead to learning about F and/or M, and/or A, thus generating new understanding and

knowledge (see Figure 3.2).

41

Figure 3.2 Action research framework (Checkland & Holwell 1998:12)

McKay and Marshall (2001:57) expand on Checkland's F, M and A framework, arguing that

action research can be conceptualised as two interlinked interests, two separate but

interconnected and interacting cycles: one “representing and focused on the problem-solving

interest in action research”, and the other “representing and focused upon the research

interest in action research” (see Figure 3.3 illustrating how these two interests might be

explicated in this research study). This re-conceptualisation encourages a more explicit

process of learning and reflection about the action research itself, as well as about the adopted

problem-solving approach.

Figure 3.3 Dual purpose of this action research (McKay & Marshall 2001:52)

42

A further development to the action research framework was proposed (Mathiassen 2017;

Mathiassen, Chiasson & Germonprez 2012), encompassing and thus emphasising the

importance of the research question (RQ), research problem (P), and research contribution

(C). The proposal argues that the action researcher raises “a research question (RQ) based

on a real-world problem situation (P) and a related area of concern in the literature (A); to

address the RQ, [the researcher] collects and analyses empirical data drawing on a

conceptual framework (F) and a method of inquiry (M); and eventually, this leads to

contributions to P (CP) and A (CA) and possibly to F (CF) and M (CM)” (Mathiassen 2017:19).

Adopting the key tenets of action research, this study aims to both make changes in a

problematic situation and generate new knowledge and insights (Checkland & Holwell 1998;

Mathiassen 2017; McKay & Marshall 2001), and the following section describes the adoption

of this framework in the design of this research study.

3.3 Research design

3.3.1 Action research framework

Based on the proposed action research framework by Mathiassen et al. (2012) and

Mathiassen (2017), the real-world problem situation (P) identified in this study is the struggle

of IT PMOs in justifying their perceived value within their organisations. The area of concern

(A) representing some body of knowledge within the literature therefore relates to the

perceived value of the IT PMO. The two research questions in this study are: (RQ1) In what

ways can the IT PMO team be assisted to develop a shared understanding of the IT PMO’s

perceived service performance in order to take ameliorating action to improve perceptions of

value? and (RQ2) What do the expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO’s service


Figure 3.4 illustrates the elements of the proposed framework as they apply to this study.

43

Figure 3.4 Action research framework in this study (Mathiassen 2017:19)

Acknowledging the importance of balancing “trust, distance, and immersion within

organisational settings” (Denis & Lehoux 2009:377) to achieve a successful collaborative

research, action research is adopted with a mix of both qualitative (interviews and workshops)

and quantitative (questionnaire) methods as the method of inquiry (M). Theoretical concepts

which are related to the area of concern (FA) of IS effectiveness (DeLone & McLean 1992;

DeLone & McLean 2003) and the practice and challenges of the PMO (Aubry & Hobbs 2011;

Aubry, Hobbs & Thuillier 2009; Hobbs & Aubry 2010; McKay et al. 2013; Singh, Keil & Kasi

2009) are adopted to frame and structure the collection and analyses of the data to address

the research questions. Complementing that, concepts independent of the area of concern

(FI) such as expectations and perceptions of service performance (Kettinger & Lee 1994;

Parasuraman, Zeithaml & Berry 1985; Pitt, Watson & Kavan 1995), perceived value (Oliver

2010; Zeithaml 1988), stakeholders and shared understanding (Bourne 2011a; Bourne &

Walker 2005; Mendelow 1981) are also employed as part of the theoretical framework.

More importantly, this study will contribute to empowering members of the IT PMO to develop

a shared understanding with its key stakeholders of the service performance of the IT PMO

44

(contribution to the real-world problem, CP); as well as a better understanding of the factors

influencing the perceived value of the IT PMO (contribution to knowledge, CA). In addition, this

study is also expected to contribute to the conceptual framing in understanding this

phenomenon (CF), being the first-time concept of comparing expectations and perceptions of

service performance is adopted to understand the perceived value of the IT PMO. Table 3.2

summarises the action research components in this study.

Table 3.2 Action research components in this study (Mathiassen 2017:20)

Component Definition of Component Component in this Study

P The problem setting represents people’s

concerns in a real-world problematic

situation

IT PMOs struggle to justify their value

A The area of concern represents some body

of knowledge within the literature that

relates to P

Perceived value of the IT PMO

F The conceptual framing helps structure

collection and analyses of data from P to

answer RQ; FA draws on concepts from A,

whereas FI draws on concepts independent

of A

FA: IS effectiveness, PMO practice and challenges

FI: Expectations and perceptions of service performance, satisfaction, perceived value, stakeholders and shared understanding

M The adopted methods of empirical inquiry Action research as overarching approach with mixed

methods (interviews and questionnaires)

RQ The research question relating to P and

opening for research into A

RQ1: In what ways can the IT PMO team be assisted

to develop a shared understanding of the IT PMO’s

perceived service performance to take ameliorating

action to improve perceptions of value?

RQ2: What do the expectations and perceptions of the

IT PMO’s service performance imply for the IT PMO’s

perceived value?

C The contributions to P and A; and possibly

to F and M

CP: Empowering members of the IT PMO to develop a

shared understanding with its key stakeholders of the

service performance of the IT PMO

CA: Understanding the important factors influencing

the perceived value of the IT PMO

CF: Adapting the concept of comparing expectations

and perceptions of service performance to

understand the perceived value of the IT PMO

45

3.3.2 Research roadmap

Research design involves the overall plans and procedures undertaken by the researcher in

the implementation of a research project and can be described as the logic that links the data

to be collected to the initial question of study (Yin 2009). The strategies of inquiry in carrying

out this research study from data collection through data analysis are outlined in this section

and the following sequence (see Figure 3.5) was followed:

Research preparation: Identify & select sites, communications, etc.

AR Study2

AR Study2

Analyse, Reflect, Learn

& Refine

Research paradigm, methods & design:

Interview protocols, questionnaire design, documentation, ethics

application

AR Study1

AR Study1

Finalise Findings & Data Analyses

Pre

p f

or

AR

Stu

dy2

IT PMO Team Management

IT PMO Leader

Business

IT PMOTeam Stakeholders

1. Interview2. Questionnaire


IT PMO Team(& Stakeholders)

IT PMO Leader

3. Workshop (present analysis results & insights; discussion)4. Feedback (interview & questionnaire)

3

4

6

7

8

9

2

Conceptual Framework

14

Research problem: Literature review

1

13

AR Study

2

AR Study

1

Map & Analyse Questionnaire

Data

5

10 11

AR Study

2

AR Study

1

12

Figure 3.5 Overall research roadmap

46

1. A review of the extant literature is the initial step to identify the research problem for

this research study.

2. Once the research objectives have been established, decision is made concerning

choice of research paradigm, research method and research design. This also involves

designing the questionnaires, developing the interview protocols, preparing all the

consent information documents and forms, as well as applying for ethics approval.

3. Upon obtaining approval from the ethics committee, work starts on sourcing and

selecting the site for conducting this research study according to the selection criteria

described in section 3.4.1.

4. After the communication and preparatory work, participants from the IT PMO, as well

as key stakeholders from the business units and senior management who directly

interacted with the IT PMO are separately interviewed for approximately one hour. The

questionnaire is administered at the end of each interview.

5. The quantitative data from the questionnaires are mapped onto radial diagrams and

analysed.

6. Results and findings from the questionnaire analyses are presented in a workshop

session with study participants shortly after the completion of the meetings. Besides

presenting the results, the researcher also facilitates discussions amongst workshop

participants to elicit their perceptions of the questionnaire analyses, and to jointly

evolve strategies to address issues arising with the aim of improving the business

perceptions of the performance of the IT PMO.

7. Qualitative data from the interviews are coded and analysed using grounded theory

analysis in which the themes surrounding the perceived value of the IT PMO were

abstracted, ultimately resulting in the articulation of a conceptual framework.

Interpretations from the questionnaire data and diagrams are also used to triangulate

with qualitative data from the interviews. Analysis results of the study with the first

organisation is written up, along with the researcher’s reflections. The interview

protocol is refined and updated (with ethics approval) together with the consent

documentation for the second study. The second organisation is then sourced.

8. The process is then repeated (see steps 8 through 12) for the second organisation.

9. Following that, results from both studies are collectively analysed and findings finalised

(step 13) to develop the conceptual model (step 14).

47

3.4 Data collection

The collection of quantitative data contiguous to a qualitative interview process is recognised

to help enhance interpretation: Frels and Onwuegbuzie (2013:188) suggest that combining

qualitative data from interviews with those from relevant quantitative instruments (such as

Likert scales) adds to the rigour and helps the researcher “contextualise further the qualitative

interview responses”. The interview, considered a natural mode of inquiry (Roulston 2010), is

one of the most popular ways of collecting qualitative data as it provides the researcher

opportunities to collect rich and meaningful data. In this study, the qualitative data from

interviews are complemented with quantitative data from questionnaires, allowing for the

triangulation of data in the analysis of participants’ perspectives. The triangulation of data

collection methods is highly recommended as it is considered to help improve data credibility

(Creswell 2009; Yin 2009), whilst reflecting the researcher’s attempt to gain an in-depth

understanding of the phenomenon being studied (Denzin 2012).

3.4.1 Site selection

Before a researcher commences data collection, part of the strategy includes the “purposeful

selection” of an organisation that would best aid in the understanding of the research question

and in setting the boundaries for the study (Creswell 2009:178). Although the problem with

the lack of perceived value is one that is faced by all PMOs (Hobbs & Aubry 2010), this

research study focuses specifically on IT-related PMOs; and while a heterogenous selection

of cases is recommended to strengthen the research design (Eisenhardt 1989) by allowing for

the representation of differing IT PMO situations, it is difficult in this study to be able to achieve

this at the selection stage. The criteria for selecting organisations with IT PMOs are as follows:

3.4.1.1 Established IT PMO

The first criterion was that the organisations should have an established IT PMO, one that has

been in operation for at least two years. Any relationship or interaction with the business would

arguably have already been established and stable in such an IT PMO, meaning that

perspectives from stakeholders as to their expectations and perceptions of IT PMO

performance would be founded on their experiences with the IT PMO. The IT PMOs in both

organisations in this study had been in operation for more than five years and the working

relationships were well established.

48

3.4.1.2 IT PMOs directly managing and delivering projects

The mandated functions of each IT PMO vary with every organisation. Some IT PMOs only

provide project support functions such as project reporting, project management standards

and methodologies, while others are also directly involved with the project management and

delivery. An important part of this study also involves enquiry into the perceptions of

stakeholders especially by the business and management. Hence, the selection of IT PMOs

that are responsible for project delivery functions through their direct interactions with

stakeholders from other parts of the organisation is necessary to ensure access to the data

required in this study. The IT PMOs should be responsible for project delivery functions and

directly support the business units in order to have access to the perspectives from IT PMO

stakeholders.

3.4.1.3 Internal IT PMO

The final criterion is to select only IT PMOs internal to the organisation. This is because an

externally outsourced IT PMO would likely result in a different perspective of value, since the

relationships would be governed by contractual and service level agreements and value may

well be contractually determined by service performance. Both IT PMOs at TRANS and CONS

are internal to their organisations and support their respective business units. A summary of

the organisations in this study, including the respective IT PMOs and study participants is

provided in Table 3.3.

Table 3.3 Details of participating organisations

Organisation ID TRANS CONS

Economic sector Transportation (Public) Construction (Private)

Location(s) Australia Australia & Asia

No. of employees 2,500 (approx.) 5,000 (approx.)

Age of PMO More than 5yrs More than 5yrs

No. of participants 10 11

Participant IDs PM1, PM2, PM3, PM4, PM5;

SH1, SH2, SH3, SH4, SH5

PM6, PM7, PM8, PM9, PM10;

SH6, SH7, SH8, SH9, SH10, SH11

49

Period of study

April 2013 - July 2013

Interviews: April-June 2013

Workshop: July 2013

May 2016 - July 2016

Interviews: May-June 2016

Workshop: July 2016

3.4.2 Participant selection

Before commencing a study with an organisation, agreement to participate must first be sought

from an individual of authority from that organisation. This involves the initial introductions and

communications. In the first study with TRANS, after the Head of IT had agreed to participate,

the IT PMO Manager to briefly introduced this research study. After signing the consent

documents confirming his organisation’s participation, the potential participants were identified

for this study. The research study at TRANS lasted about four months, from April 2013 till July

2013.

Five participants (SH1, SH2, SH3, SH4, and SH5) from the business and management with

senior-level appointments and directly engaging with the IT PMO were selected as the group

of stakeholders. This researcher liaised with the IT PMO Manager to ensure a fair and

unbiased selection of stakeholders with significant dealings directly with the IT PMO team.

The five stakeholder participants included the Head of IT and senior managers of various

business units whom were service recipients of the IT PMO. Also with the assistance of the IT

PMO Manager, five participants (PM1, PM2, PM3, PM4, and PM5) holding senior positions in

the IT PMO were chosen. They include the IT PMO Manager himself, the heads of the delivery

and support teams, and senior project managers.

A similar approach was also adopted for the second study at CONS which took place from

May 2016 to July 2016. After the CIO gave his consent to participate, six senior-level business

stakeholders (SH6, SH7, SH8, SH9, SH10, and SH11) were selected together with five senior

members from the IT PMO team (PM6, PM7, PM8, PM9, and PM10). The six stakeholder

participants included the CIO himself and senior managers from the various business units

who were directly supported by the IT PMO team. Members from the IT PMO group of

participants included the IT PMO Manager as well as senior project managers from the IT

PMO.

50

3.4.3 Data collection

Both qualitative and quantitative data are collected with the aim to achieve a better

understanding of the research problem. Qualitative data, typically from interviews comprises

“open-ended information without pre-determined response categories” (Creswell & Creswell

2005:317). Quantitative researchers however question the data reliability of open-ended

qualitative interviews when attempting to understand perceptions and motives (Silverman

2017), while Frels and Onwuegbuzie (2013) suggest that qualitative data from interviews can

be further enriched by supplementing them with quantitative data. Quantitative data, mostly

numerical, refers to “close-ended information in which the researcher sets in advance the

response possibilities” (Creswell & Creswell 2005:317). By combining interviews with relevant

quantitative instruments such as Likert-scale questionnaires, the researcher can arguably

“contextualise further the qualitative interview responses” (Frels & Onwuegbuzie 2013:188).

The interview and questionnaire are thus adopted as the primary methods of data collection

in this study (see Figure 3.6)

Figure 3.6 Data collection

3.4.3.1 Interviews

The interview provides the researcher an opportunity to collect rich and meaningful qualitative

data by questioning participants with the aim of revealing their experiences, beliefs and

feelings about a particular issue (Creswell 2009), helping the interviewer understand the “lived

experience [of interviewees] and the meanings they make of that experience” (Seidman

2013:9).

In this study, face-to-face interviews consisting of semi-structured and unstructured questions

are used to elicit participants’ perspectives of the IT PMO. The interview questions are crafted

Questionnaire Data Analysis

Action Research Study

IT PMO Team ManagementIT PMO Leader Business

1. Interview 2. Questionnaire


IT PMOTeam Stakeholders

IT PMO TeamIT PMO Leader

3. Workshop to present analysis results & findings4. Feedback interview & questionnaire

Stakeholders

51

based on the literature surrounding service performance and perceived value; and developed

to gather participants’ expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO. Two sets of interview

questions are established in this research study: one to gather the perspectives of the

stakeholders, and the other set to capture IT PMO team members’ views. The interview

questions were then updated for the second study based on the findings from the first study.

This updated interview protocol is presented in Appendix 1.

Besides IT PMO team members, participants are mainly business unit managers

(stakeholders) who interacted directly with the IT PMO staff, consumed services provided by

the IT PMO, and thus are in a position to articulate their perceptions of the services delivered

by the IT PMO and to elaborate on how they would prefer to see the IT PMO contributing. The

IT PMO leader and team are also interviewed to elicit their perspectives of the service

performance of the IT PMO for comparison. The duration of each interview is approximately

an hour. Participants are contacted in advance to seek their consent to be interviewed

individually and for the interview to be recorded.

3.4.3.2 Questionnaires

The use of questionnaires is recommended for the collection of opinions, facts, or explanations

from a sample group representing a population about an existing condition or particular

situation (Avison 1993; Creswell 2009), and Likert-scale questionnaires are commonly used

to measure perceptions of quality performance in service delivery (Allen & Seaman 2007).

With Likert scales being widely used in questionnaires for measuring attitudes (Göb, McCollin

& Ramalhoto 2007), the Likert-scale questionnaire is thus used to capture participants’

perspectives of the IT PMO’s service performance.

On the questionnaire, participants scored questions about the IT PMO’s performance of

service functions on a Likert rating scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) based

on their expectations and perceptions. The service functions of the IT PMO were developed

for this questionnaire based on Hobbs’ and Aubry’s (2007, 2010) empirically-established list

of PMO functions. Based on a consultation with professionals with industry PMO experience

in July 2012, the original list of 27 functions were adapted and expanded to incorporate a total

of 36 questions in the questionnaire. Some of the functions were expanded to compare

participants views on the IT PMO performing these functions for either ‘all projects’ or ‘only a

selected few’. Other modifications include incorporating the notions of governance and power;

expanding the IT PMO team’s competency function to include aspect of training and

performance measurements; and capturing participants expectations and perceptions around

the IT PMO team’s business and domain knowledge. The questionnaire was then pilot-tested

52

in August 2012 with five fellow researchers whom have had prior industry-based project

experience in order to gather their feedback for further refinement to the questionnaire.

A paper-based questionnaire (see Appendix 2) is administered in this study during the face-

to-face meetings with each participant, following each interview. The questionnaires are

administered immediately following the interviews to ensure that interview responses are not

influenced by the pre-determined response options (Creswell & Creswell 2005).

3.4.3.3 Workshops and feedback

Data of participants’ questionnaire scores are entered into a spreadsheet and plotted on radial

diagrams (see Chapters 4 and 5) to illustrate the current states of the expectations and

perceptions of the service performance of the IT PMO and presented at workshop sessions

attended by senior IT PMO team members (and business stakeholders at CONS). Each

workshop session, which lasted approximately two hours, was conducted at the premises of

TRANS and CONS respectively; and both sessions were audio-recorded. Insights from the

analyses of the questionnaires were presented during the first half of the session to apprise

IT PMO team members of their business stakeholders’ and their own expectations and

perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance. Also presented were the common topics

which also reflected the findings from the questionnaires that arose during the interviews. Following the presentation of the findings, discussions are facilitated where members of the

IT PMO team attempt to make sense of the differences in the expectations and perceptions

both within their own teams and in their stakeholders’ perspectives. This provides the

opportunity for the IT PMO teams to develop a shared understanding of some of the key issues

they face in gaining recognition for their contribution to their organisations.

At the conclusion of each workshop session, a short paper-based feedback questionnaire (see

Appendix 7) is administered to gather participants’ feedback on how helpful the workshop

session and the findings are in enabling the IT PMO team to develop a shared understanding

and work towards improving its perceived value. The IT PMO leaders are also briefly

interviewed to elicit their perceptions of the effectiveness of the overall engagement process

employed in this study.

53

3.5 Data analysis

Data analysis has been described as "a process of resolving data into its constituent

components, to reveal its characteristic elements and structure" (Dey 2005:30). In this section,

the analysis of the questionnaire data is first discussed, followed by the analysis of the

interview data.

3.5.1 Analysis of questionnaire data

The questionnaire (see Appendix 2) is developed based on the PMO functions empirically

established by Hobbs and Aubry (2007, 2010), and adapted and designed through

consultation with experienced PMO professionals from industry. Similar to the categories of

the PMO functions established by Hobbs and Aubry, the questions soliciting participants’

expectations and perceptions are also grouped into five main groups of functions:

1. Project tracking, monitoring, reporting, governance and control,

2. Project management methodology and competency support,

3. Project and portfolio management,

4. Strategic project management, and

5. Project knowledge management.

For the questionnaire (quantitative) data analysis, the scores are entered into a spreadsheet

and plotted onto radial diagrams for comparison, and the interpretation and assessment left

to the viewer. Since “humans can recognise, perceive, and evaluate information more

efficiently when presented as an image” (Dickinson 2010:473), graphical displays help make

obvious the not-so-obvious, guiding the viewer to discover patterns and important information

about the data (Wainer 1990). The questionnaire data collected is plotted onto radial diagrams

representing each of these groups of functions, comparing the score profiles of stakeholders’

perceptions against their expectations, as well as the IT PMO team’s (expectation and

perception) scores against their stakeholders. The expectation and perception scores of each

group are separately averaged, then plotted and compared in each radial diagram. Mirroring

the Likert scale on the questionnaire ranging from ‘1’ (strongly disagree) to ‘5’ (strongly agree),

these scores are plotted on the radial scale. (The area between ‘1’ and ‘3’ is also shaded in

grey to represent the zone where the IT PMO is not perceived nor expected to be performing

a particular function.)

54

Figure 3.7 illustrates (using sample data) the comparison between stakeholders’ perception

scores versus their expectation scores of the IT PMO’s performance of the first group of IT

PMO functions: tracking, monitoring, reporting, governance and control of IT projects.

Figure 3.7 Comparison between stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions

These functions include:

1.1 Reporting the status of IT projects, IT programs (groups of IT projects), or IT portfolios

(groups of IT programs) to senior management,

1.2 Regularly tracking and monitoring all IT projects,

1.3 Regularly tracking and monitoring only selected IT projects,

1.4 Using appropriate computer-based tools to monitor IT projects,

1.5 Directly controlling all IT projects,

1.6 Directly controlling only selected IT projects,

1.7 Enforcing the project governance for all IT projects, and

1.8 Enforcing the project governance for only selected IT projects.

The stakeholders’ average perception scores in relation to this group of functions are plotted

in solid blue line on the radial diagram, while their expectation scores are in dashed red. The

shaded area (in light red) highlights the gaps between stakeholders’ expectations and

perceptions. Sets of these radial diagrams are used to facilitate discussions amongst IT PMO

55

team members on possible courses of action to close these gaps between expectations and

perceptions.

Similar diagrams are also created using sample expectation and perception scores of the IT

PMO team members, allowing for comparisons to be made across the two groups (see Figures

3.8 and 3.9). In Figure 3.8, the perception scores of the IT PMO team are shown in dashed

green line, while their stakeholders in solid blue. The shaded area between both sets of scores

(in light blue) indicates the extent of the difference in perceptions between both groups.

Figure 3.8 Comparison between IT PMO team’s and stakeholders’ perceptions

Figure 3.9, on the other hand, compares the IT PMO team’s own expectations (dashed dark

red line) with those of their stakeholders’ (solid bright red line) with the shaded area (in yellow)

highlights the extent of the difference in expectations between both groups.

56

Figure 3.9 Comparison between IT PMO team’s and stakeholders’ expectations

These diagrams help make visible such differences or similarities in perceptions, and are used

in the group workshops with members of the IT PMO teams as a basis for discussion on the

extent to which business stakeholders were satisfied with their performance, areas where

there was clear dissatisfaction, and functions regarded by the IT PMO team as important but

largely unvalued by business stakeholders, indicating that perhaps fewer resources could and

should be devoted to those activities. This facilitates discussions that might assist the IT PMO

teams to develop some level of shared understanding of the problem (business

satisfaction/dissatisfaction with their service delivery). With this shared understanding, IT PMO

team members are able to conceptualise ways of addressing any dissatisfaction: arguably this

would over time improve perceptions of value delivery.

Another useful diagram (see Figure 3.10) from the questionnaire data is the comparison of the

individual perception scores amongst members of the IT PMO team itself. The different

coloured lines each represent a different member of the IT PMO and the shaded area (in

purple) bounded by the individual perception scores help reveal the areas of agreement and

disagreement amongst the IT PMO team members’ own perceptions of the performance of

their IT PMO. If the range of participants’ scores encompass the both the ‘agree’ and ‘disagree’

zones of the Likert scale, this would imply a lack of agreement amongst these participants.

Conversely, it would appear that participants are in agreement if all individual participant

scores fall within either the ‘agree’ or ‘disagree’ zones.

57

These diagrams are also useful in that they might reveal a possible need for internal

remediation.

Figure 3.10 Comparison of IT PMO team’s individual perceptions

Perceived value is a construct anchored in the principles of the stakeholder (Aubry 2013;

Cameron 1986b). Arguably, it would be helpful for the IT PMO team to develop an

understanding of its stakeholders’ perspectives to encourage reflection and to identify possible

actions that could be helpful to improve perceptions of value delivery in their organisation. By

presenting diagrams comparing both groups of participants’ expectation and perception

scores of the IT PMO’s performance of its functions to IT PMO team members and visually

highlighting the gaps between expectations and perceptions, the IT PMO team is thus

supported in developing some level of shared understanding of areas of satisfaction and

dissatisfaction amongst its stakeholders.

3.5.2 Analysis of interview data

I have adopted a grounded theory approach based on the work of Charmaz (2008, 2014) for

the analyses of data from the interviews. With the original statement of grounded theory

focused on ‘emergence’ (Charmaz 2008), early grounded theorists (Glaser, Strauss & Strutzel

1968) argued for grounded theory researchers to approach the analysis tabula rasa to avoid

58

the researcher unconsciously (or consciously) applying any a priori theoretical or experiential

knowledge to the data.

More recently, constructivist grounded theorists have challenged this view, and instead

consider the emergent nature of the grounded theory method itself as “arising from

researchers’ questions, choices, and specific strategies and thus remain inseparable from

their earlier and evolving perspectives” (Charmaz 2008:161). When constructivist grounded

theorists enter a study and engage their data, “their perspectives may grow and/or change

and thus permit the structure of inquiry, as well as its content, to be emergent” (Charmaz

2008:161). Charmaz (2014:1) therefore defines the grounded theory method simply as

consisting of “systematic, yet flexible guidelines for … analysing qualitative data to construct

theories from the data themselves”. The following phases, illustrated in Figure 3.11, represent

the qualitative analysis process utilised in this study.

Interview transcripts

& field notes

Individual interviews

Abstracting codes to categories

(Inductive)

Thorough (re)reading of transcripts

for holistic understanding

Abstracting categories to themes

(Inductive-Deductive)

Conceptual Model

Emerging

insights

Interpretation/findings from

questionnaire data

Initial coding

(Inductive)

Focused coding

(Inductive)

CAQDAS

Figure 3.11 Qualitative data analysis

59

3.5.2.1 Coding preparation

Before beginning the process of coding the interviews, the transcripts are thoroughly read and

re-read to familiarise myself with the data, as well as to get an overall sense of the interviews

(Dierckx de Casterlé et al. 2012). In the course of reading and re-reading, notes are made of

this researcher’s thoughts or reflections to establish a holistic understanding of the views of

the participants.

3.5.2.2 Coding with Computer Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis Software The process of coding is suggested to “trigger analytic thought” (Miles, Huberman & Saldaña

2014:99) where data is broken down, conceptualised, and put back together in new ways.

Coding is considered a key process of “constant comparison, theoretical questioning,

theoretical sampling, concept development, and their relationships" (Strauss & Corbin

1994:280). To assist in coding and managing almost four hundred pages of interview

transcripts from this study, Atlas.ti is used for coding and managing the interview data. Atlas.ti

is considered effective in the overall management of the data being coded: the assigning of

codes, the merging of initial codes into focused codes, the linking of relevant data, the storage

of codes together with related quotes, and the search, retrieval, and display of codes and

related quotes. Microsoft Excel is also used in conjunction with Atlas.ti for compiling and

managing the lists of initial and focused codes, as well as the abstracted categories.

3.5.2.3 Initial coding

Working with the Atlas.ti software, codes are assigned based on this researcher’s

interpretation of the conversations to explicate the implicit meanings (Charmaz 2014).

Adopting ‘line-by-line coding’, each line of data is analysed and the codes assigned,

summarising or accounting for a piece of data that is deemed significant. An example of the

initial coding process is shown in Figure 3.12.

60

Figure 3.12 Example of initial coding

Codes are assigned by asking the following questions: What does the data suggest?

(Charmaz 2014); and Whose point of view is this? (Charmaz 2014). During initial coding,

codes are still considered interim and the researcher can update, reword, or add new initial

codes as more data is revealed during the coding process (Vashist 2012). Based on the

interviews at both organisations, a total of about six hundred initial codes were established.

3.5.2.4 Focused coding

“Focused coding requires decisions about which initial codes make most analytic sense to

categorise data incisively and completely” (Charmaz 2014:138). The re-examining of the

interview transcripts with initial codes allows for the selection of initial codes that could be used

for synthesising, analysing and conceptualising larger segments of data in order to help

advance the theoretical direction of this study (Charmaz 2014). In this second phase of coding,

the set of initial codes which are considered most significant and/or appearing more frequently

61

are grouped and combined into focused codes. An example of focused coding based on the

initial codes established (in Figure 3.12) is presented in Figure 3.13.

Figure 3.13 Example of focused coding

In this example, the initial codes ‘Getting IT PMO members to engage more with business’

and ‘Embedding IT PMO members in business’ are combined into the focus code ‘ENGAGING

WITH BUSINESS’. Eighty-six focused codes were established from the first action research

study, with another thirty-eight focused codes surfacing from the second study, adding up to

a total of a hundred and twenty-four focused codes for both studies (see Appendix 9).

3.5.2.5 Constructing categories

Categories, which “explicate ideas, events, or processes in the data” (Charmaz 2014:189),

consist of similarly-coded ideas grouped based on similarity, relevance, and importance

(McKay 2002). The categorisation process in grounded theory is considered to be a complex

one involving both classification as well as inferencing (Charmaz 2014; Dey 1999). Charmaz

62

(2014) therefore proposes that researchers adopt memo-writing as a process for deciding on

the focused codes that could be collectively grouped and raised to a higher level of abstraction

as categories. The narrative statements in memo-writing, Charmaz suggests, help give

conceptual definition and analytic treatment in developing the conceptual framework.

When forming categories, the focused codes that appear similar are collectively grouped,

allowing for the assessment of codes that best represent this researcher’s view of what is

happening in the data based on this researcher’s perspectives of service performance,

perceived value, and the IT PMO. This initial process of grouping the codes into similar groups

according to relevance and importance helps with the identification of potential categories from

these focused codes, as well as sorting the codes for subsequent memo writing. Charmaz

(2014:190) advises that researchers consider the following when writing memos in narrative

statements:

(1) Define the category;

(2) Explicate properties of the category;

(3) Specify conditions under which the category arises, is maintained, and changes;

(4) Describe the consequences; and

(5) Show how this category relates to other categories.

A total of forty-one categories (see Appendix 10) were constructed in this research study by

collectively grouping the focused codes and memo-writing to raise these codes to a higher

level of abstraction.

Table 3.4 demonstrates an example of the memo-writing of the category ‘RELATIONSHIP

WITH BUSINESS’, illustrating the process of narrating and summarising categories by writing

memos in this study.

Table 3.4 Example of memo-writing of a category

Category: Relationship with business. Health of IT PMO’s relationship with business

stakeholders. How effectively the IT PMO is perceived (by both stakeholders and the IT

PMO team) to engage with and work with its key stakeholders in business

List of Focused

Codes:

• Working and engaging with the business.

• Getting support from the business.

• Having the ability to effectively engage business stakeholders

63

Properties: Individual perspectives of stakeholders of how well the IT PMO team works and

engages with the business and the relationships. Perspectives are varied because of

the differing experiences with different members of the IT PMO interacting with these

stakeholders. Also, the individual perspectives of IT PMO team members themselves of

how well they interact with their stakeholders from the business. Also notable is the IT

PMO leader’s views on the effectiveness of IT PMO member engaging with

stakeholders; some more capable than others.

Conditions

where category

arises, is

maintained, and

changes:

During situations where the IT PMO is engaging with, working with, interacting with,

communicating with the business. Arises when each stakeholder perceives his/her

individual experiences collectively and forms a perception of the overall working

relationship of that stakeholder with the IT PMO team. The stakeholder may also form a

perception of the working relationships of the IT PMO team with the rest of the

organisation based on his/her observations. These perceptions may change over time

with the changing dynamics of the IT PMO team itself, as well as the rest of the

organisation.

Consequences: Reflects on how well the IT PMO is recognised and accepted by the rest of the

organisation, especially so because of its working relationships as perceived by its key

stakeholders from the business. The power and influence of these key stakeholders

could impact the IT PMO team’s recognition, acceptance and fit within the organisational

culture, potentially contributing to the IT PMO’s perceived value.

Related

categories:

Communications with business: Mutual influence between both categories where the

effectiveness of communications between the IT PMO and the rest of the organisation

could impact its working relationships, and vice-versa.

Organisational culture and challenges: Mutual influence between these categories

where positive working relationships between the IT PMO and the rest of the

organisation could result in the IT PMO being accepted, recognised and fitting in with

the organisational culture. However, cultural fit and recognition as well as the challenges

could also be factors influencing the IT PMO’s perceived working relationships within the

organisation.

64

3.5.2.6 Developing themes

The development of themes is the next step in data analysis, involving an inductive-deductive

process where the categories established from this study are combined and abstracted into

themes by building a data structure (see Figure 3.14).

Figure 3.14 Illustration of a data structure (Corley & Gioia 2004:184; Gioia, Corley & Hamilton 2012:21)

Considering this to be a pivotal step in the research process, Gioia et al. (2012:21) suggest

that by constructing the data structure, the researcher is compelled to “step-up” in abstract

thinking. They contend that this process encourages researchers to think both theoretically as

well as methodically about their data. The complete list of categories and themes that emerged

from both studies is presented in Appendix 9.

By building the data structure, the researcher organises the data into a logical and practical

visual representation of the analysis process from the raw data, through coding and

categorisation, and finally the resulting themes (Gioia, Corley & Hamilton 2012). This visual

representation of the researcher’s progress in conducting the analyses is considered vital in

demonstrating rigour in qualitative research (Pratt 2008; Tracy 2010).

As a result of the grounded theory analyses in the first study, four themes were uncovered,

and these themes that have emerged serve as starting points for the analyses of the second

65

action research study; as well as the analysis across both studies. In the tradition of action

research where the learning evolves through the progressing cycles, notes were taken to

record any emergent ideas and concepts as analysis advanced through the first and second

studies.

3.5.3 Analysis across both studies

“Qualitative research begins with questions and the ultimate purpose is

learning” (Bloomberg & Volpe 2012:171).

After completing both studies, the next step is to develop interpretive insights and present the

analysis, interpretation and synthesis of the findings from both studies. The cross-study

analysis involves the comparing and contrasting of the insights from both research studies to

help sharpen understanding (Miles, Huberman & Saldaña 2014). The findings from the

questionnaire data and radial diagrams in both studies are analysed to solve the real-world

problem, thus focusing on the first of the dual objectives of this action research study. In

addressing the second objective of this action research study, i.e. contribution to knowledge,

the qualitative data findings comprising the four themes and their respective categories are

compared and contrasted by employing tables (see Tables 6.4 to 6.7 in Chapter 6). Displaying

data visually makes things clear and helps the researcher see findings in ‘new and striking

ways’ (Bloomberg & Volpe 2012). Seeking to identify significant patterns in the findings is an

intuitive process, involving continual reflections about the findings and asking analytical

questions. During the comparisons, notes are also made of the categories that could be further

merged to raise the analysis to a more abstract level, providing some sense of understanding

to explain the themes in a conceptual model. The resulting conceptual model emerging from

the insights gleaned from both studies shows the dynamic relationships amongst the four

emergent themes describing and explaining the perceived value of the IT PMO, thus making

clear relevant data-to-theory connections.

3.6 Writing strategy

Results from both action research studies with TRANS and CONS are presented and

discussed in the following chapters. Table 3.5 outlines the approach in writing up the results

66

of the within-case analysis of each of the two action research studies (in Chapters 4 and 5) as

well as the discussion of the analysis across both studies (Chapter 6).

Table 3.5 Strategy for writing up results chapters

Chapter 4 (First Research Study: TRANS) and Chapter 5 (Second Research Study: CONS)

To comprehensively present and discuss the results and insights gained from the analysis of each of the

action research studies, both Chapters 4 and 5 are written up as follows.

Background information on

the organisation, the IT

PMO, and the study

participants.

The background information helps provide both contextual and demographic

perspectives to the study (Bloomberg & Volpe 2012). Contextual details

include the environmental and cultural backdrop to the study that may

potentially influence behaviour (Lewin 1935). Relevant demographic

information about the organisation itself and participants’ position, background

and history helps explain the underlying perspectives of these participants

(Bloomberg & Volpe 2012).

Results and discussion in

relation to the real-world

problem.

This section describes the research engagement in investigating and

addressing the real-world problem situation faced by the IT PMOs. Data from

the questionnaires was collected, analysed and the results presented and

discussed.

Results and discussion in

relation to the research

interest.

Qualitative data from the interviews was collected, analysed and the resulting

themes presented and discussed. Results of the qualitative analysis of the

interview data are also discussed and analysed in relation to the findings from

the questionnaire data.

Discussion and reflections

of results findings.

The resulting themes abstracted from within each action research study is

analysed and discussed, together with reflections on the research outcomes

in this study.

Chapter 6 (Cross-Study Analysis)

In this chapter, the cross-study analysis of both studies is discussed along with the researcher’s perspectives

and reflections as follows.

Cross-study comparison of

RQ1 and real-world

problem.

The results from both studies are analysed and discussed in relation to RQ1

and the corresponding real-world problem.

67

Cross-study comparison of

RQ2 and research interest.

The results from both studies are analysed and discussed in relation to RQ2

and the corresponding research interest. The categories and themes that

surfaced in both studies are compared and discussed in relation to the

research interest.

Development of conceptual

model.

The resulting conceptual model is abstracted and discussed to assist in the

understanding of the perceived value of the IT PMO.

3.7 Ethical Considerations

Ethics clearance (SUHREC No. 2012/241) was obtained for this study (see Appendix 4). In

adhering with the ethical considerations guiding this research, pseudonyms are used to protect

the anonymity of participants and the organisations in this study. Based on the university’s

and national guidelines on ethics in research, care is taken not to disclose any information that

could potentially identify the participants or organisations in any way.

3.8 Quality of research

3.8.1 Rigour in qualitative research

Quality considerations are critical to ensure a good and convincing set of research findings.

Validity and reliability have traditionally been used to demonstrate research quality and rigour,

particularly in positivist research. In such contexts, validity represents “how clearly the study

reflects the world being described”, and reliability represents “the confirmation that separate

researchers studying the same phenomenon would result in compatible observations”

(Bloomberg & Volpe 2012:112). Qualitative research has often suffered the criticism of lacking

scholarly rigour (Gioia, Corley & Hamilton 2012) and there has been little agreement to a

consistent set of the quality criteria (O’Cathain 2010). While some qualitative researchers

suggest adopting the same quality assessment criteria in quantitative research, i.e. validity

and reliability (Morse et al. 2002), other qualitative researchers go as far as to argue that

68

validity and reliability are positivist notions and not applicable to qualitative inquiry (Altheide &

Johnson 1994, 2011; Leininger 1994).

Lincoln and Guba (1986) proposed the concept of trustworthiness, suggesting that this

criterion can be thought of as comprising credibility, dependability, transferability, and

confirmability to demonstrate rigour in qualitative research (Lincoln, Lynham & Guba 2018;

Schwandt, Lincoln & Guba 2007). Hence, in the following sections, the issues of research

quality for this study based on the trustworthiness criterion for assessing qualitative research

are discussed.

3.8.1.1 Credibility (or qualitative validity)

This refers to the accuracy of the researcher in representing participants’ perspectives and

views in the study (Bloomberg & Volpe 2012). Credibility can be strengthened with the

researcher making a conscious effort to establish confidence in the accuracy of interpretation

(Creswell & Miller 2000; Schwandt, Lincoln & Guba 2007). To support the accuracy of the

researcher’s assessment of the findings, as well as to convince readers of its accuracy,

Creswell (2009) and Bloomberg and Volpe (2012) recommend the following:

• Researcher to be substantially involved in the field, spending a prolonged time in the field, in order to develop an in-depth understanding of phenomenon. This

study, with the adoption of action research as the inquiry strategy, allows the

researcher to be deeply engaged within the study environment.

• Collect data from multiple sources in order to help check and confirm that the interpretations of the processes and interactions are indeed valid. In this study,

qualitative as well as quantitative data are collected from the various groups of

participants through the use of questionnaires and interviews, thus fulfilling this

criterion.

• Adopt multiple methods for data analysis in order to corroborate the evidence obtained. As described in the data analysis section, visual diagrams are used for the

analysis of the questionnaire data; grounded theory analysis for the interview data; as

well as concurrent triangulation to analyse both qualitative and quantitative data in this

study.

• Self-reflection by the researcher to clarify any bias the researcher brings to the study. When discussing the results of each study (see Chapters 4 and 5), this

researcher’s reflections are also articulated in the study to address this criterion.

69

• Peer debriefing with colleagues examining and verifying research data and results. With this being a PhD project, this researcher’s PhD supervisors, who have

many years of experience in the field of IS and project management, have been

providing guidance throughout the project, at the same time checking on research data

and results.

3.8.1.2 Dependability (or qualitative reliability) Dependability indicates that the research approach in this study is consistent across different

researchers and different projects (Gibbs 2007 in Creswell 2009). It refers to the ability for

others to track the process and procedures used to collect and interpret the data. The evidence

to support dependability is suggested as follows (Bloomberg & Volpe 2012; Creswell 2009):

• Detailed and thorough explanation of data collection and data analysis. The

design of this research study, including exhaustive details of the procedures for data

collection and data analysis are presented earlier in this chapter.

• Audit trail of the research process. All documentation, software files (Atlas.ti, Excel,

etc.), and procedures during which data was collected and analysed in this study are

available for review upon request. Some of which are also provided in the Appendix

section. Also in this chapter, this researcher has also endeavoured to make explicit the

research process.

• Consistency throughout the coding process. The use of the Atlas.ti CAQDAS tool

and the writing of notes and memos helps maintain consistency whilst coding, thus

avoiding any change in meaning or interpretation during the coding process.

3.8.1.3 Transferability (or qualitative generalisation)

Transferability refers to how lessons learned in this setting might be useful to the reader; to

assist the reader decide whether similar processes would work in his/her own settings.

Suggested factors to assess the transferability of this study (Bloomberg & Volpe 2012;

Creswell 2009) are:

• Richness of descriptions. Thick descriptions (Denzin 2001), together with narrative

descriptions incorporated in the presentation of results of both studies (Chapters 4 and

5) help communicate a holistic and realistic portrayal of this study to the reader.

70

• Amount of detailed information provided. In addition to presenting the research

data and findings, references are also made to the context and background of

participants, IT PMOs, organisations, and even myself as researcher in this study.

3.8.1.4 Confirmability (or qualitative objectivity)

Confirmability shows the connections between the data and the researcher’s interpretations

to addresses the extent to which the steps of the study can be audited, confirmed or replicated

(Gray 2009). As part of making explicit the research process of this study, the evidence

demonstrating confirmability has been fulfilled, some of which include:

• Presenting the details of this research design and a thorough description of the data collection and analysis;

• Keeping an audit trail of the research process with all documentation and

procedures available upon request; and

• Using a CAQDAS tool and writing notes and memos to ensure consistency of the coding process.

3.8.2 Authenticity of qualitative research

Besides the methodological dimensions in assessing qualitative research rigour, Lincoln and

Guba also proposed authenticity in the assessment of qualitative research quality (Lincoln &

Guba 1986; Lincoln, Lynham & Guba 2018; Schwandt, Lincoln & Guba 2007). The authenticity

criteria have become fundamental to the development of quality standards in the evaluation

of qualitative inquiry (Morse et al. 2002), and they include: fairness, ontological and educative

authenticity, catalytic and tactical authenticity.

3.8.2.1 Fairness

This criterion ensures that all participants’ views, values, claims, concerns, and voices are

presented fairly; preventing any omission that could be considered a form of bias (Lincoln,

Lynham & Guba 2018; Schwandt, Lincoln & Guba 2007). In this study, the relevant comments

and views of all participants have been included and discussed, along with the presentation

of the radial diagrams using the questionnaire data which represents the collective views and

opinions of all participants. The fairness criterion is thus addressed.

71

3.8.2.2 Ontological and educative authenticity

Ontological authenticity is defined as the criteria for determining a higher level of self-

awareness by individual research participants, whilst educative authenticity refers to

participants’ awareness about the people with whom these participants encounter in their

respective organisations (Lincoln, Lynham & Guba 2018; Schwandt, Lincoln & Guba 2007).

The engagement of participants through the interviews, questionnaires, and workshop

sessions in this study has been seen to raise awareness amongst the IT PMO team members

about their own expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO, as well as those of their

stakeholders; hence qualifying both criteria on ontological and educative authenticity.

3.8.2.3 Catalytic and tactical authenticity

Catalytic authenticity refers to the ability to prompt action on the part of research participants;

whilst tactical authenticity involves the researcher in the training of the participants (Lincoln,

Lynham & Guba 2018; Schwandt, Lincoln & Guba 2007). Both criteria are met in this study as

the presentation of the findings at the workshop session, as well as the facilitation of

discussion amongst participants has helped the members of the IT PMO teams develop some

level of shared understanding, and thus be empowered to articulate strategies to address any

gap in their respective IT PMO’s perceived value.

In summary, besides the research methodology and worldview being explained in this chapter,

the data collection and analysis approaches used for this research are also described in detail.

Finally, the strategy for writing up the results and analyses is presented along with the

demonstration of quality and rigour of this research. In the following chapters, the results that

have emerged from the implementation of the research design outlined in this chapter are

presented and discussed.

72

4 FIRST ACTION RESEARCH STUDY: TRANS

This chapter details the first research exploring the service performance and perceived value

of the IT PMO. The study was conducted in 2013 at TRANS, an Australian statutory

corporation responsible for the road transport system in one Australian state. The objectives

of this action research study involved (1) helping the IT PMO team develop some level of

shared understanding of stakeholders’ views of its service performance in order to address its

real-world problem with perceived value, whilst (2) understanding the implications on the IT

PMO’s perceived value by studying the expectations and perceptions of its service

performance.

In the following sections, the background on TRANS, the IT PMO, and information about the

study participants is first presented, followed by a narrative of the engagement process

describing the real-world problem in this study. Next, the findings from the questionnaire data

based on participants’ views of the IT PMO’s service performance are discussed, grouped

based on the five main groups of PMO functions established by Hobbs and Aubry (2007,

2010). Then, based on grounded theory analysis (Charmaz 2014) of the interview data (and

triangulated with findings from the questionnaire data), the research findings are presented

and reviewed.

4.1 Background information

4.1.1 Information about the organisation

TRANS is an Australian statutory corporation which develops and manages the road transport

system in one of the states in Australia. It employs more than 2,500 employees state-wide,

across 56 offices. TRANS had evolved from several ‘road management boards’ that managed

the main and local roads throughout the state about a century ago into the single entity today.

TRANS is currently also responsible for road safety, driver licensing and vehicle registration

for the state. In addition, TRANS is faced with the challenge of building and managing the

state’s road infrastructure over a very large area and at times extreme weather conditions,

whilst keeping up with the fast-growing traffic conditions in the metropolitan areas. In order to

73

cope, the organisation relies on its information systems to effectively manage huge amounts

of real-time geographic-information and traffic-sensor data 24-hours a day on an on-going

basis.

The organisational structure of TRANS in Figure 4.1 shows the core business units

(Operations, Policy and Programs, Strategy and Planning, and Business Development) as

well as the support functions (Finance and Corporate Services, including Information

Technology and Human Resources) within the organisation. The IT PMO is located within the

Information Technology group under Corporate Services.

Figure 4.1 Organisational structure at TRANS

The organisation has however had a checkered history with respect to IT projects. While being

recognised with project management achievement awards for managing road infrastructure

projects, TRANS was the subject of a government enquiry concerning some of its major IT

projects blow-outs, with the subsequent report condemning IT project delays and wastage of

public funds5.

4.1.2 Information about the IT PMO

The IT PMO originated as a project team from within Registration & Licensing, one of the

business units within Operations (see Figure 4.1). It was initially a team of IT project managers

5 This information was gathered from TRANS’s and government websites but is not being cited to protect the anonymity of the organisation.

74

with some basic administrative and finance support delivering IT projects for that business unit

only. This team however moved out of that business unit into the IT group in 2008 to serve the

entire organisation, evolving into the current IT PMO. Its responsibilities include the delivery

of IT projects and project management support; but not the strategic planning of IT projects.

The Head of IT in TRANS was keen to participate as the planned research study was seen to

be beneficial to the organisation. The formation of the IT PMO had originally been regarded

as an important initiative amongst the senior executives. More recently however, there

seemed to be concerns as to whether or not the IT PMO was delivering the expected value to

the organisation. The findings of this study were therefore anticipated to help the IT PMO

better articulate its value delivery. The IT PMO comprised two groups: (1) Project Delivery,

where the IT project managers were located, focused mainly on delivering IT projects for the

organisation; and (2) Project Support, providing project management support functions such

as project management methodologies and tools, project knowledge management, project

resource and finance management, etc. for the IT PMO. A simplified organisational structure

of the IT PMO team (PM1-5) and the key stakeholders (SH1-5) in this research study, along

with their locations within TRANS is shown in Figure 4.2.

Figure 4.2 Study participants within organisational structure (TRANS)

75

4.1.3 Information about the research participants

With the assistance of the IT PMO leader, participants were identified from the IT PMO team

as well as key stakeholders from various parts of the organisation that had been closely

engaged with the IT PMO. A total of ten participants were involved: five senior members of

the IT PMO, and five senior-level managers who were stakeholders and recipients of the IT

PMO’s services (see Table 4.1). Most business stakeholders interviewed had some level of

engineering project management background.

Table 4.1 Summary of study participants at TRANS

Participant Job Function Description of role

PM1 Manager, IT PMO

Manager of IT PMO. Overseeing both Project Delivery and Project Support. Reporting to Head, IT (SH1).

PM2 Manager, Project Delivery

Managing Project Delivery team of IT Project Managers. Reporting to Manager, IT PMO (PM1).

PM3 Manager, Project Support

Managing Project Support team providing project reporting, risk management, governance, resource and financial management, methodologies & tools. Reporting to Manager, IT PMO (PM1).

PM4 Senior staff, Project Support

Senior staff within Project Support. Reporting to Manager, Project Support (PM3).

PM5 Senior Project Manager

Senior project manager within Project Delivery. Reporting to Manager, Project Delivery (PM2).

SH1 Head of IT Senior manager and head of overall IT within TRANS. Responsible for all IT projects and IT infrastructure within the organisation. Presents a unique engagement perspective of the IT PMO.

SH2 Head, Traffic Network Policy & Standards

Senior manager and head of Traffic Network Policy & Standards business unit. Supported by the IT PMO on IT-related projects.

SH3 Manager, IT Operations

Manager responsible for IT Operations. Supported by the IT PMO on IT projects, for example IT infrastructure upgrade.

SH4 Deputy Manager, Registration & Licensing

Deputy Manager with the Registration & Licensing business unit. Supported by the IT PMO on IT-related projects.

SH5 Manager, Road Systems

Manager with the Road Operations business unit. Supported by the IT PMO on IT-related projects through a flexible engagement arrangement.

76

The IT PMO manager (PM1) was new to the role and did not have any formal project

management training prior to being appointed to lead the IT PMO. Instead, PM1 thought of

himself more a facilitator, managing and getting the most out of the expertise of the more

experienced project managers within the IT PMO. Having worked in the organisation for more

than ten years, PM1 brought to the team his experience in working with and engaging with

senior management and the various business units.

Both the manager of Project Delivery (PM2) and a senior IT project manager (PM5) from the

Project Delivery team were knowledgeable and experienced project managers who were well-

regarded within the IT PMO, as well as amongst the service recipients interviewed. PM3 and

PM4 were senior members of the Project Support team. Besides being the manager of Project

Support, PM3 was also involved with project management of IT projects.

The stakeholders interviewed were decision makers in management from various parts of the

organisation. SH2, SH3, SH4, and SH5 typically engaged the project management services

of the IT PMO to manage projects in their respective departments’ IT-related initiatives. SH5’s

business unit was however different in that it engaged the services of the IT PMO through a

flexible arrangement where the business unit itself managed its own IT projects, but with the

project management consultation and support of the IT PMO team.

SH1, on the other hand, presented a unique perspective as a stakeholder in her engagement

with the IT PMO. She was on one hand a service recipient, supported by the IT PMO through

the management and delivery of all IT projects in the organisation. On the other hand, as Head

of the entire IT group, she also had a vested interest in the IT PMO unit, which reported into

her group.

4.2 Real-world problem

During initial wide-ranging discussions with the Head of IT (SH1), the problem of how the

perceived value of the IT PMO might be established and communicated to executive

management within TRANS emerged as a prominent challenge for SH1. After learning of the

proposed research, SH1 could see how TRANS would benefit and agreed to participate. Upon

obtaining her approval, this researcher met with the IT PMO leader (PM1) and PM2 in April

2013.

It was evident that the value of the IT PMO in the organisation was in question and the IT PMO

team was unaware how their stakeholders perceived the IT PMO and its service performance.

77

TRANS was also at that time undergoing an organisational restructuring exercise and SH1,

PM1, and PM2 agreed that it was an opportune time for the study. They appreciated the

objectives of the research study and all agreed to proceed, acknowledging the challenge for

their IT PMO to justify its value in TRANS. They were keen to find out how the IT PMO was

perceived in the organisation and how the study could help improve the perception of the IT

PMO.

4.2.1 Developing an understanding of the real-world problem

Part of the dual imperatives of action research require the researcher to work with the IT PMO

team to help members understand and ameliorate the problem of interest. With the first

research question focused on assisting the IT PMO team in developing “a shared

understanding of the IT PMO’s perceived service performance in order to take ameliorating

action to improve perceptions of value”, the researcher was committed to working with the IT

PMO team to help them address their challenges with respect to the IT PMO’s service

performance and value delivery. This section will address RQ1, by highlighting the differences

between IT PMO team members own expectations and perceptions and those of their

stakeholders; and helping them understand these discrepancies with the view of developing

strategies of how they could improve their perceived service performance and value. The

focus therefore will be on the learning of the IT PMO team based mainly on an analysis of the

questionnaire data6, and the changes that are identified to its services to help ameliorate the

problem of failing to deliver adequate business value. Details of the research design relating

to the questionnaire are available in section 3.4 (in Chapter 3). The questionnaire findings

presented in the following sections are supported with excerpts from the interviews.

The results of the questionnaire, presented as a series of radial diagrams based on the five

groups of IT PMO functions (Hobbs & Aubry 2007, 2010), represent study participants’

responses in relation to the IT PMO’s service performance. These were presented to and

discussed with senior members of the IT PMO at a workshop session shortly after the

interviews and served to support the development of a shared understanding of the gaps

existing in perceptions of performance amongst and between members of the two participant

groups.

By the end of the workshop session, the IT PMO team at TRANS had identified and discussed

gaps in their own assessments of current performance and future desired performance levels;

similarly, they had revised their understandings of the services that stakeholders valued and

6 Please note that while a few comments from the interviews preceding the questionnaires will be used to emphasise certain points in this section, in the main, the interview data will be discussed in section 4.3.

78

where current shortfalls existed; and finally, they had developed nascent strategies to deliver

better service and to improve perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance. Members

were able to identify areas where they were in agreement with their stakeholders, as well as

areas where they were not. They could establish from the findings where they were meeting

their stakeholders’ expectations, where they were not; as well as where they should consider

performing less, or stop performing the function altogether.

4.2.2 IT PMO performance in tracking, reporting, governance and control of IT projects

The first group of IT PMO functions involves the tracking, reporting, governance and control

of IT projects (see section 3.5 for details of this group of functions). The expectations and

perceptions of business stakeholders in regard to the IT PMO’s performance of this group of

functions are presented in Figure 4.3.

The aggregated stakeholders’ perception scores7 are plotted and connected with a solid-blue

line on the radial diagram, and their expectation scores represented in dashed-red, with the

area between the solid-blue and the dashed red-lines shaded in pink highlighting the extent

of the gaps between stakeholders’ perceptions and their expectations. (The scores mirror the

questionnaire’s Likert-scale rating, with scores greater than three indicating agreement

amongst stakeholders that the IT PMO was performing or expected to be performing these

functions.)

7 Please refer to section 3.5 for details of how scores were aggregated.

79

Figure 4.3 Stakeholders’ perceptions against expectations (Group 1)

While stakeholders felt that the IT PMO should be performing most Group 1 functions, the IT

PMO was not seen to be performing some of these functions, for example using computer-

based tools to monitor projects (1.4) and enforcing the governance for all IT projects (1.7).

Although the IT PMO was seen to be performing its reporting (1.1) and monitoring and tracking

functions (1.2), the data suggests that it was still not meeting stakeholders’ expectations,

hence hinting that more was expected of the IT PMO team in this regard.

A similar diagram (see Figure 4.4) compares the perception scores of the IT PMO team

against the perception scores of its stakeholders, and Figure 4.5 compares the expectations

of the IT PMO team against its stakeholders’.

80

Figure 4.4 IT PMO team’s perceptions against stakeholders’ perceptions (Group 1)

Figure 4.5 IT PMO team’s expectations against stakeholders’ expectations (Group 1)

81

In Figure 4.4, the perception scores of the IT PMO team (dashed green) were observed to be

relatively higher than those of their stakeholders (solid blue), suggesting that the IT PMO team

had a generally better perception than stakeholders of its performance of this group of

functions. The shaded area between both sets of scores (in light blue) indicates the extent of

the difference in perceptions between both groups, for example the direct control of only

selected projects (1.6): while members of the IT PMO team believed that the IT PMO was

controlling a selected number of projects, business stakeholders thought otherwise. Figure

4.4 also indicates agreement, in terms of the view that the IT PMO was tracking the status of

all IT projects in the organisation (1.2).

Figure 4.5 on the other hand presents a comparison between the IT PMO team’s own

expectations (dashed dark red line) and those of their stakeholders’ (solid bright red line). It

appears that business stakeholders were open to the idea of the IT PMO performing functions

such as reporting and tracking (1.1 and 1.2), as well as enforcing appropriate levels of

governance (1.7) in all IT projects. Also notable was the general agreement between both

groups expecting the IT PMO to be performing these functions for all IT projects in the

organisation (1.2 and 1.7) instead of only a selected few (1.3 and 1.8).

However, this was not the case in terms of the control of all IT projects (1.5). Whilst the IT

PMO expected to be in control of all IT projects, business stakeholders did not support this.

This discomfort in not having control was also confirmed during interviews with business

stakeholders, growing from concerns that the IT PMO did not fully understand the business:

“[The IT PMO] needs to better understand the business. I couldn’t stress that

more.” (SH2)

A business desire for control seems understandable, especially as in TRANS, IT projects were

typically funded by the sponsoring business unit: if the business was the sponsor and the end-

user of the project, it would not be unreasonable that the business would want to be in control

of the project. Of particular interest for this study was that the IT PMO team was initially

seemingly unaware of this issue and clearly saw control as part of their responsibilities. The

IT PMO’s expectations that the business would have little control over their projects would not

help business perceptions of the value delivered by the IT PMO; and this was one area in

which a facilitated discussion during the group workshop was vital to changing perceptions of

the IT PMO team. Further discussions around developing practices that would support the

development of modes of shared leadership of IT projects, such as relying on project steering

committees involving business stakeholders very closely, were necessary to allay business

concerns about lack of control. Incidentally, while stakeholders did not expect the IT PMO to

82

be controlling all IT projects, their perceptions matched their expectations to a large extent as

the IT PMO was not perceived to be in control of the IT projects.

It is important that the IT PMO team was made aware of the differences in views between both

groups, and the radial diagrams helped create this awareness. The findings also assisted the

IT PMO team to understand where their business stakeholders were not satisfied through that

comparison. In this case, business stakeholders generally agreed that the IT PMO team was

performing most of the functions in this group involving the tracking, monitoring, and reporting

of IT projects. There was however room for the IT PMO team to improve because business

stakeholders did not consider the IT PMO team to be meeting their expectations despite being

seen to perform these functions. These diagrams thus supported the IT PMO team with the

development of possible ameliorating action to close these gaps in service performance with

the aim to improve perceptions of its value delivery.

The findings from Figures 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5 are summarised in the following Table 4.2. The

summary table succinctly compares between both groups’ expectations and perceptions of

the IT PMO team’s performance of these Group 1 functions. The comparison between

business stakeholders’ perceptions and expectations offers a perspective of whether the IT

PMO team was performing these functions to meet (or above) their expectations (highlighted

in green) or below their expectations (highlighted in red).

Similar summary tables representing the radial diagrams are also used to compare the

expectations and perceptions for the remaining four groups of IT PMO functions in the

following sections.

83

Table 4.2 Summary of IT PMO team’s and stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions of Group 1 functions

IT PMO Function Stakeholders’ E

(Expectations)

Stakeholders’ P

(Perceptions)

Stakeholders’

P vs E

IT PMO team’s P

(Perceptions)

IT PMO team’s E

(Expectations)

1.1 Report status of

IT projects or

portfolios to senior

management

Expecting the IT PMO to be

reporting project status.

Perceiving the IT PMO to be


IT PMO performing

below stakeholders’

expectations





1.2 Regularly track

and monitor all IT

projects


tracking/monitoring all IT projects.



IT PMO performing


expectations





1.3 Regularly track

and monitor only

selected IT projects


tracking/monitoring only selected

IT projects.



IT projects.

IT PMO performing

above stakeholders’

expectations



IT projects.

Not expecting the IT PMO to be


IT projects.

1.4 Use appropriate

computer-based

tools to monitor IT

projects

Expecting the IT PMO to be using

computer-based tools to monitor

projects.

Not perceiving the IT PMO to be

using computer-based tools to

monitor projects.

IT PMO performing


expectations



monitor projects.



projects.

1.5 Directly control

all IT projects


directly controlling all IT projects.



IT PMO meeting

stakeholders’

expectations






only selected IT

projects


directly controlling only selected IT

projects.


directly controlling only selected

IT projects.

IT PMO meeting

stakeholders’

expectations



IT projects.



projects.

84


(Expectations)

Stakeholders’ P

(Perceptions)

Stakeholders’

P vs E

IT PMO team’s P

(Perceptions)

IT PMO team’s E

(Expectations)

1.7 Enforce the

project governance

for all IT projects


enforcing governance for all IT

projects.

Not perceiving the IT PMO to

be enforcing governance for all

IT projects.

IT PMO performing


expectations



projects.



projects.

1.8 Enforce the

project governance

for only selected IT

projects


enforcing governance for only

selected IT projects.




IT PMO meeting

stakeholders’

expectations






projects.

85

4.2.3 IT PMO performance in project management methodology and competency support

The second group of IT PMO functions posed in the questionnaire (see Appendix 2) was in

relation to project management methodologies and competencies. Figure 4.6 represents the

expectations and perceptions of business stakeholders in regard to the IT PMO’s performance

of the Group 2 functions.


While expecting that the IT PMO team should be performing all of these functions, business

stakeholders considered the team to fail to meet their expectations in its performance of this

group of functions. Evidently the IT PMO was not perceived to be performing adequately in all

the Group 2 functions.

Two similar diagrams comparing the perception scores of the IT PMO team against those of

its business stakeholders, as well as their expectations scores, are shown in Figure 4.7.

86

Figure 4.7 Comparing expectations and perceptions between IT PMO team and stakeholders (Group 2)

IT PMO team members also seemed to acknowledge the IT PMO’s lack of performance in

several of these functions, for example the prescription (2.9), promotion (2.10), and

enforcement (2.11) of project management methodologies in the organisation. Although the

project management methodologies and procedures had already been defined and made

available to the rest of the organisation, PM1 admitted that little had been done to promote

adoption nor to enforce their usage.

“All of our methodologies are available on the intranet. Because we don’t

communicate that enough, not many people know it’s there. And people who do

know it’s there often ignore it.” (PM1).

As a result, business stakeholders were not compelled to adopt them: “We don’t necessarily

use all of the templates and all the other bits and pieces.” (SH5). This thinking seems to hint

at the IT PMO's relatively weak standing within the organisation.

Incidentally, the findings also seemed to indicate that there was a lack of training provided to

project team members (2.13) and hardly any measurement was in place to assess the

performance of project managers (2.14 and 2.15). It seemed that not enough was being done

to promote soft skills amongst project team members (2.18), and this was confirmed by PM1

who admitted his concerns regarding IT PMO team members lacking the ability to effectively

engage with business stakeholders:

“Most of the guys have got a lot of years under their belt but probably not developed

a really good stakeholder engagement approach.” (PM1)

87

Furthermore, the inconsistency in service experienced by stakeholders seemed to add to this

lack of confidence in the abilities of the IT PMO team:

“Working relationships with the IT PMO team is extremely varied, depending on

each project manager’s competence and capabilities.” (SH3)

The findings also uncovered some mismatch in perceptions between both groups. IT PMO

team members seemed generally more positive than their stakeholders about the IT PMO’s

performance of the Group 2 functions. For example, while IT PMO team members indicated

that the IT PMO was defining competency requirements (2.16) and employing project

managers with the required competencies (2.17), their business stakeholders disagreed.

Although IT PMO team members felt that that they were indeed performing some of these

functions, their stakeholders did not think so or were unaware; and the IT PMO team’s lack of

engagement and effective communications with their business stakeholders might be a

possible factor behind this mismatch in views.

“I don’t think we collaborate as well as we could with [the business] and

communicate with them…” (PM1)

The findings had clearly shown the IT PMO team members that the Group 2 functions

(concerning project management methodology and competency support) was as an area that

the IT PMO team was considered seriously deficient by its business stakeholders; and the

team had to focus its efforts to improve perceptions of its performance of this group of service

functions, considered fundamental to the operation of an IT PMO.

Table 4.3 summarises the findings from the radial diagrams representing the IT PMO’s service

performance of this group of functions.

88



(Expectations)

Stakeholders’ P

(Perceptions)

Stakeholders’

P vs E

IT PMO team’s P

(Perceptions)

IT PMO team’s E

(Expectations)

2.9 Prescribe

standardised IT project

management

methodologies for the

organisation


prescribing IT project

management methodologies.




IT PMO performing


expectations







2.10 Enforce the

implementation of


management

methodologies


enforcing implementation of IT

project management

methodologies.



project management

methodologies.

IT PMO performing


expectations



project management

methodologies.



project management

methodologies.

2.11 Promote the

adoption of standardised

IT project management

methodologies


promoting adoption of IT project





IT PMO performing


expectations







2.12 Provide project

management training for

IT project managers


providing project management

training for IT project

managers.



training for IT project managers.

IT PMO performing


expectations









all staff involved with IT

projects in the

organisation



training for all staff involved.




IT PMO performing


expectations







89


(Expectations)

Stakeholders’ P

(Perceptions)

Stakeholders’

P vs E

IT PMO team’s P

(Perceptions)

IT PMO team’s E

(Expectations)

2.14 Develop

performance measures

for IT project managers


developing performance

measures for IT project

managers.




managers.

IT PMO performing


expectations




managers.



measures for IT project managers.

2.15 Measure

performance of IT project

managers


measuring performance of IT

project managers.



project managers.

IT PMO performing


expectations



project managers.



project managers.

2.16 Define project

management competency

requirements for IT

project managers


defining project management

competency requirements.




IT PMO performing


expectations







2.17 Employ only IT

project managers with

required project

management

competencies


employing only competent IT

project managers.



project managers.

IT PMO performing


expectations



project managers.



project managers.

2.18 Promote soft skills

(i.e. communications,

interpersonal, etc.)

amongst project team

members


promoting soft skills amongst

project team members.




IT PMO performing


expectations







90


(Expectations)

Stakeholders’ P

(Perceptions)

Stakeholders’

P vs E

IT PMO team’s P

(Perceptions)

IT PMO team’s E

(Expectations)

2.19 Provide mentoring

and project management

advice for IT project

managers


providing mentoring and project

management advice.

Undecided whether the IT PMO

was providing mentoring and

project management advice.

IT PMO performing


expectations



management advice.



management advice.


management tools for IT

project managers and IT

project teams



tools.



tools.

IT PMO performing


expectations


was providing project

management tools.



tools.

2.21 Participate in the

employment activities

(i.e. recruitment,

selection, evaluation,

etc.) of IT project

managers


participating in the employment

activities of IT project

managers.



activities of IT project managers.

IT PMO performing


expectations







91

4.2.4 IT PMO performance in project and portfolio management

The radial diagrams in relation to the Group 3 IT PMO functions concerning the management

of projects and portfolios is presented in Figures 4.8 and 4.9.



92

Figure 4.8 shows the IT PMO as performing most of the Group 3 functions below business

stakeholders’ expectations, for example its participation in the development of business cases

(3.24). While business stakeholders expected the IT PMO team to work closely with them in

developing business cases for their IT-related projects, the IT PMO was perceived to be

performing well below these expectations.

“I think they [the IT PMO team] will have to be involved earlier in the concept stage

of the projects… to get into the ‘head-space’. So, when we are thinking about what

we want, they [the IT PMO team] are in the [same] journey with us.” (SH2).

In contrast, IT PMO team members indicated that they were involved (see radial diagram on

left of Figure 4.9). IT PMO team members also indicated that the team was managing multiple

projects and portfolios (3.25) as well as the allocation of project resources (3.26), but their

business stakeholders did not think the IT PMO was performing well in this regard (see Figure

4.9). This discrepancy in views suggests something was amiss, possibly the team’s lack of

engagement and poor communications with their business stakeholders.

Both groups did however agree that the IT PMO should not (and also confirmed that it did not)

have the power to terminate projects (3.27). The business was not at all keen to relinquish this

power and members of the IT PMO team seemed to acknowledge this.

The data also shows that both groups expected the IT PMO to participate in the selection and

prioritisation activities for all (3.22) instead of only a selected few (3.23) IT projects.

The findings suggest that business stakeholders regarded the IT PMO team to be performing

below their expectations in most of the functions in this group which involved the management

of projects and portfolios. They only seemed satisfied that the IT PMO team did not have any

power over their IT projects. These finding were clearly useful for the IT PMO team to prioritise

its efforts to improve perceptions of its service performance in this regard. A summary of the

findings in relation to the Group 3 IT PMO functions is presented in Table 4.4.

93



(Expectations)

Stakeholders’ P

(Perceptions)

Stakeholders’

P vs E

IT PMO team’s P

(Perceptions)

IT PMO team’s E

(Expectations)


selection and

prioritisation of all IT

projects


participating in the selection and

prioritisation of all IT projects.




IT PMO performing


expectations


be participating in the selection

and prioritisation of all IT

projects.





selection and

prioritisation of




prioritisation of only selected IT

projects.




projects.

IT PMO meeting

stakeholders’

expectations


be participating in the selection

and prioritisation of only





projects.

3.24 Participate (i.e.

sharing expertise,

experience) in the

development of

business case for IT

projects


participating in the development

of business case for IT projects.




IT PMO performing


expectations





participating in the development of

business case for IT projects.

3.25 Manage one or

more IT projects or

portfolios


was managing one or more IT

projects or portfolios


managing one or more IT

projects or portfolios.

IT PMO performing


expectations





managing one or more IT projects or

portfolios.

94


(Expectations)

Stakeholders’ P

(Perceptions)

Stakeholders’

P vs E

IT PMO team’s P

(Perceptions)

IT PMO team’s E

(Expectations)

3.26 Manage the

allocation of resources

(i.e. staff, assets, etc.)

across IT projects


managing the allocation of

resources across IT projects.




IT PMO performing


expectations







3.27 Have the power

to terminate any IT

project

Not expecting the IT PMO to

have the power to terminate any

IT project.



IT project.

IT PMO meeting

stakeholders’

expectations


have the power to terminate

any IT project.

Not expecting the IT PMO to have

the power to terminate any IT

project.

95

4.2.5 IT PMO performance in strategic project management

The radial diagrams in Figures 4.10 and 4.11 represent questionnaire data in relation to the

IT PMO team’s service performance of its strategic project management functions (Group 4).



96

The data seems to indicate that business stakeholders had considered strategic project

management to be important, having high expectations of the IT PMO team performing this

group of functions (see Figure 4.11). However, the IT PMO team had again fallen short of

business stakeholders’ expectations. The radial diagram in Figure 4.10 shows that the IT PMO

was not perceived by business stakeholders to be performing all functions in this group, some

of which included ensuring the expected benefits of the projects (4.29) and ensuring that the

projects delivered were aligned with business strategy (4.28).

The existence of a separate entity in the IT group called IT Strategy & Planning, responsible

for IT-related strategic initiatives, seemed to be a likely reason for this. While this meant that

the IT PMO team was not directly responsible for most strategic project activities, the data

suggests that the business had expected more involvement on the part of the IT PMO team.

IT PMO members were also in agreement, suggesting that there may be structural issues

within the IT group at TRANS that might need to be addressed.

“When it comes to strategic work, it’s best they involve us (the IT PMO team).

Rather than them (IT Strategy & Planning) doing the strategic work and getting us

involved later.” (PM2)

Based on the stakeholders’ high expectations scores, the findings seemed to have impressed

upon IT PMO team members the importance their business stakeholders had placed on this

group of functions. While the findings indicated that the IT PMO team did not meet

stakeholders’ expectations in this regard, they did help create awareness for the Head of IT

and the IT PMO management team of the importance of the IT PMO team becoming more

involved with strategic IT activities. These findings were thus helpful for the IT PMO team in

developing strategies to address the gaps in service performance and value delivery. The IT

PMO team’s service performance of its strategic project management functions (Group 4) is

summarised in Table 4.5.

97



(Expectations)

Stakeholders’ P

(Perceptions)

Stakeholders’

P vs E

IT PMO team’s P

(Perceptions)

IT PMO team’s E

(Expectations)

4.28 Track and ensure

that IT projects are

aligned with business

strategy


tracking and ensuring that IT

projects are aligned with

business strategy.


be tracking and ensuring that IT


business strategy.

IT PMO performing


expectations




business strategy.



projects are aligned with business

strategy.


the delivery of expected

benefits from IT projects


tracking and ensuring the

delivery of expected benefits.


be tracking and ensuring the


IT PMO performing


expectations





tracking and ensuring the delivery

of expected benefits.

4.30 Keep up with current

information and

communications

technology trends


keeping up with current ICT

trends.

Not perceiving the IT PMO


trends.

IT PMO performing


expectations



trends.


keeping up with current ICT trends.


business trends


keeping up with current

business trends.


keeping up with current business

trends.

IT PMO performing


expectations


was keeping up with current

business trends.



trends.

4.32 Demonstrate to

senior management that

the IT PMO delivers

business value


demonstrating business value

delivery.



delivery.

IT PMO performing


expectations



delivery.



delivery.

98

4.2.6 IT PMO performance in project knowledge management

The fifth group of IT PMO functions concerns project knowledge management and Figures

4.12 and 4.13 represent the data from the questionnaires.



99

IT PMO team members and business stakeholders agreed that the IT PMO should be

performing these project knowledge management functions. The data however shows that

business stakeholders considered the IT PMO team to be performing poorly and well below

expectations in this regard. For example, the IT PMO team was considered to have failed in

ensuring that lessons learned were effectively communicated to subsequent IT projects (5.34).

“I think [the IT PMO] has probably ‘dropped the ball’ of late on the front of

consistency across projects and on the front of picking up and leveraging good

developments in individual projects across the group.” (SH1)

Whilst business stakeholders did not think much of the IT PMO’s performance of its project

knowledge management functions, members of the IT PMO team on the other hand thought

otherwise. They had indicated in the questionnaire that they were indeed conducting post-

project reviews (5.35), implementing lessons learned knowledge bases (5.33), and archiving

project documentation (5.36). The questionnaire data findings were therefore important for

members of the IT PMO team as it made them cognizant of the disparity in views between

both groups. These findings again helped highlight the areas for the IT PMO team to focus its

efforts to improve perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance and value.

Table 4.6 represents the data summarised from the questionnaires and radial diagrams in this

study.

100



(Expectations)

Stakeholders’ P

(Perceptions)

Stakeholders’

P vs E

IT PMO team’s P

(Perceptions)

IT PMO team’s E

(Expectations)

5.33 Implement and

manage a ‘lessons-

learned’ knowledge base


implementing and managing

‘lessons-learned’ knowledge

base.




base.

IT PMO performing


expectations



‘lessons-learned’ knowledge base.




base.

5.34 Ensure ‘lessons

learned’ are effectively

communicated to

subsequent IT projects


ensuring ‘lessons learned’

being effectively

communicated.


ensuring ‘lessons learned’ being

effectively communicated.

IT PMO performing


expectations







5.35 Conduct and

document post-project

reviews


conducting and documenting

post-project reviews.


was conducting and

documenting post-project

reviews.

IT PMO performing


expectations


conducting and documenting post-

project reviews.




5.36 Archive project

documentation


archiving project

documentation.


was archiving project

documentation.

IT PMO performing


expectations


archiving project documentation.



101

4.2.7 Comparing IT PMO team members’ own perceptions

Also presented at the workshop was a set of radial diagrams representing the individual

service performance perceptions of the IT PMO team members. Mapping out and overlaying

each IT PMO team member’s perception scores and shading (in purple) the area bounded by

the scores showed the extent of agreement or disagreement amongst members of the IT PMO

team itself. These diagrams helped reveal an issue within the IT PMO team itself, highlighting

the diversity amongst IT PMO team members’ perceptions of the IT PMO’s performance of its

service functions. The radial diagram in Figure 4.14 for example represents the IT PMO team’s

perceptions of its Group 1 functions. This diagram seemed to indicate a general lack of

agreement amongst team members in their perceptions of the IT PMO in the majority of the

service functions.

Figure 4.14 Individual IT PMO team members’ perceptions (Group 1)

Based on similar radial diagrams representing the other four groups of service functions (see

Appendix 5), it appears that there was little agreement amongst the team members of how

they perceived the IT PMO’s service performance. These findings seemed to have exposed a

potentially grave issue for the IT PMO team as it created quite a stir amongst team members

when presented during the workshop session.

102

4.2.8 Stakeholders’ perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance

An understanding of business stakeholders’ satisfaction with the IT PMO’s service

performance can be established by borrowing the concepts of satisfaction and dissatisfaction

in Herzberg’s (1966) dual-factor theory about job motivation to analyse the findings from the

questionnaire data in Tables 4.2 to 4.6. Herzberg argues that not meeting “dissatisfier”

conditions could result in dissatisfaction, while satisfaction might only be achieved if “satisfier”

conditions were met (1966:94). A summary of this understanding in relation to the IT PMO’s

performance of its Group 1 functions in presented in Table 4.7.

Table 4.7 Summary of stakeholders’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction (Group 1)

IT PMO Function

Expected

to perform

function?

Performing

function?

Below/

meeting/

above

expectations?

Satisfied/

Not

Satisfied/

Dissatisfied?

Remarks

1.1 Report status of IT

projects or portfolios to

senior management

Yes Yes Below Not satisfied

• Business stakeholders

were somewhat satisfied

with the IT PMO’s

performance of half of


• However, most of these

are in relation to the IT

PMO’s involvement with

only selected projects.


expected the IT PMO to

be involved with all

projects.

*The IT PMO was meeting

business expectations of

not controlling all projects.

1.2 Regularly track and

monitor all IT projects Yes Yes Below Not satisfied


monitor only selected IT

projects

Yes Yes Above Satisfied

1.4 Use appropriate

computer-based tools to

monitor IT projects

Yes No Below Dissatisfied

1.5 Directly control all IT

projects No No Meet Satisfied*

1.6 Directly control only

selected IT projects No No Meet Satisfied

1.7 Enforce the project

governance for all IT

projects



governance for only selected

IT projects

Yes Yes Meet Satisfied

Table 4.7 summarises business stakeholders’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction with the IT PMO’s

service performance based on the premise that business stakeholders might be dissatisfied if

103

the IT PMO was expected to perform a function but was not perceived by stakeholders to be

performing that function. Conversely, business stakeholders might be satisfied if the following

conditions were met: the IT PMO was expected to perform a function, it was perceived by

stakeholders to be performing that function, and its performance was meeting stakeholders’

expectations. Business stakeholders might however not be satisfied if the IT PMO was

performing the functions expected of it, but not meeting business expectations.

The following Table 4.8 presents stakeholders’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction with the IT PMO

team’s performance of the remaining four groups of functions.

Table 4.8 Summary of stakeholders’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction (Groups 2-5)

IT PMO Function

Expected

to perform

function?

Performing

function?

Below/

meeting/

above

expectations?

Satisfied/

Not

Satisfied/

Dissatisfied?

Remarks

2.9 Prescribe standardised IT

project management


organisation



were dissatisfied with the

IT PMO’s performance in

almost all the Group 2

functions.

2.10 Enforce the

implementation of


management methodologies


2.11 Promote the adoption of





management training for IT

project managers



management training for all

staff involved with IT projects

in the organisation


2.14 Develop performance


managers


2.15 Measure performance of

IT project managers Yes No Below Dissatisfied

2.16 Define project


requirements for IT project

managers


104

IT PMO Function

Expected

to perform

function?

Performing

function?

Below/

meeting/

above

expectations?

Satisfied/

Not

Satisfied/

Dissatisfied?

Remarks

2.17 Employ only IT project

managers with required

project management

competencies


2.18 Promote soft skills (i.e.

communications,

interpersonal, etc.) amongst

project team members


2.19 Provide mentoring and

project management advice


Yes Undecided Below Not meeting

expectations




project teams



employment activities (i.e.

recruitment, selection,

evaluation, etc.) of IT project

managers



selection and prioritisation of

all IT projects



were dissatisfied / not

satisfied with the IT

PMO’s performance in

most of the Group 3

functions.

* The IT PMO was meeting

business expectations of not

having the power to

terminate projects.


selection and prioritisation of


No No Meet Satisfied

3.24 Participate (i.e. sharing

expertise, experience) in the

development of business

case for IT projects


3.25 Manage one or more IT

projects or portfolios Undecided No Below

Not meeting

expectations

3.26 Manage the allocation of

resources (i.e. staff, assets,

etc.) across IT projects


3.27 Have the power to

terminate any IT project No No Meet Satisfied*

105

IT PMO Function

Expected

to perform

function?

Performing

function?

Below/

meeting/

above

expectations?

Satisfied/

Not

Satisfied/

Dissatisfied?

Remarks

4.28 Track and ensure that IT


business strategy



were dissatisfied with the

IT PMO’s performance of

all Group 4 functions.

4.29 Track and ensure the

delivery of expected benefits

from IT projects



information and

communications technology

trends



business trends Yes No Below Dissatisfied

4.32 Demonstrate to senior

management that the IT PMO

delivers business value


5.33 Implement and manage

a ‘lessons-learned’

knowledge base



were mostly dissatisfied/

not satisfied with the IT

PMO’s performance of

Group 5 functions.

5.34 Ensure ‘lessons learned’

are effectively communicated

to subsequent IT projects


5.35 Conduct and document

post-project reviews Yes Undecided Below

Not meeting

expectations


documentation Yes Undecided Below

Not meeting

expectations

Tables 4.7 and 4.8 indicate that business stakeholders were satisfied with the IT PMO’s

performance in only six (out of thirty-six) functions, most of which involved only selected

projects, whereas it appeared that they had preferred the IT PMO to get involved with all

projects at TRANS. It was apparently also important to business stakeholders that the IT PMO

team was not in full control of all IT-related business projects (1.5) nor had the power to

terminate them (3.27).

(There were instances, based on the questionnaire data findings in Tables 4.2 to 4.6, where

business stakeholders were undecided (neither agreeing nor disagreeing) in their responses.

In such cases, business stakeholders’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction cannot be ascertained (see

Table 4.8, functions 2.19, 3.25, 5.35 and 5.36 in particular), and only their assessments of

whether or not the IT PMO was meeting their expectations are established instead.)

106

On the overall, business stakeholders were apparently dissatisfied with the IT PMO team’s

service performance. The radial diagrams representing the questionnaire data along with the

findings presented during the workshop session seemed to have helped highlight the

differences in views between the IT PMO team and its stakeholders, thus assisting the IT PMO

team understand the problem, in this case business stakeholders’ dissatisfaction with their

service performance. Equipped with this shared understanding, the IT PMO team was

empowered to address the areas of dissatisfaction to ameliorate business stakeholders’

currently poor perceptions of its service performance.

4.2.9 Assisting the IT PMO team address its real-world problem

At the start of this research study, IT PMO team members did not appear to have a clear idea

of how their key stakeholders perceived their IT PMO. However, after the presentation of

findings at the workshop session, they realised that they needed to develop some shared

understanding of their stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO because

they were in fact unaware of what business really expected of them. Many came to realise

during the workshop session that they had always just assumed they knew what the business

needed.

The radial diagrams representing findings from the questionnaire data that were presented at

the workshop session seemed useful for the IT PMO team in that they offered a rich amount

of information that could be interpreted about study participants’ expectations and perceptions

of the IT PMO’s performance of its functions. The findings appeared to generate much interest

amongst the IT PMO members as it highlighted the misalignment in the expectations and

perceptions of the IT PMO when compared to those of the business stakeholders, as well as

amongst themselves.

After the presentation of the findings, a dialogue session was facilitated amongst IT PMO team

members to identify and develop strategies to work better with their key stakeholders. It was

particularly helpful that the dialogue was facilitated by an external party (i.e. me, the

researcher) as the discussions were less about ‘who said that’ and more ‘okay, what does that

mean for our IT PMO’. Participants were more willing to speak their mind and although the

discussions were at times lengthy and animated, they were not at all heated. It seemed that a

greater level of shared understanding of the expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO

developed amongst IT PMO team members. There also emerged an understanding of the

need for the IT PMO team to change its strategy and core values and team members

acknowledged the need for the IT PMO team to improve its communications and clarify the

roles of the IT PMO with business stakeholders.

107

Excerpts of the discussion notes at the workshop (names masked to preserve the anonymity

of participants) are shown in Figure 4.15.

Figure 4.15 Discussion notes at workshop session

The key issues that were raised at the workshop are summarised as follows:

(1) There was a pressing need to establish the goals and objectives for the IT PMO

because team members lacked a common understanding. These goals and objectives

should also be communicated to business stakeholders and the rest of the

organisation.

(2) The IT PMO team had not been communicating enough with the business. Team

members should engage and communicate with their stakeholders, and work on

building effective relationships the rest of the organisation.

(3) IT PMO members should identify their key stakeholders and endeavour to understand

their needs and expectations.

At the conclusion of the workshop session, a paper-based feedback questionnaire (see

Appendix 7) was administered to all five workshop participants from the IT PMO team. The

results of the feedback survey are presented in Table 4.9 (with the 5-point Likert scale

collapsed to 3 points to summarise participants’ responses as to whether or not they agreed

with the statements, or neither).

108

Table 4.9 Results of feedback survey (TRANS)

Feedback Questionnaire Agree Disagree Neither

Q1. The radial diagrams were helpful in illustrating the perceptions &

expectations of the IT PMO.

100% 0% 0%

Q2. The radial diagrams were effective in highlighting the differences in

perceptions & expectations.

100% 0% 0%

Q3. The overall findings were effective in helping me understand the IT

PMO's perceived value.

100% 0% 0%

Q4. This workshop session revealed interesting insights I had not previously

thought of.

100% 0% 0%

Q5. As a result of this workshop, I have a better understanding of the

perceptions & expectations of the IT PMO.

80% 0% 20%

Q6. As a result of this workshop, the IT PMO is better equipped to develop

strategies to manage stakeholders' perceptions & expectations.

100% 0% 0%

Q7. As a result of this workshop, I am satisfied the IT PMO team is better

equipped to improve its perceived value.

100% 0% 0%

Q8. I am satisfied with the outcomes of this workshop session. 100% 0% 0%

The feedback results indicated that participants unanimously agreed that the radial diagrams

and findings presented at the workshop session were helpful in highlighting the differences in

expectations and perceptions and between both groups (see Table 4.9, Q1 and Q2

especially). Some commented that the findings were “a good eye opener” (PM4), and all

participants were satisfied with the outcome of the workshop session, agreeing that the

findings allowed them to focus their efforts on the areas that their key stakeholders considered

important. IT PMO members also confirmed that the workshop session was helpful in assisting

them develop strategies to address the perceived gaps to improve the IT PMO’s perceived

value in the organisation:

“Extremely valuable insights for our group, particularly during a time of major

change.” (PM1)

4.2.10 Post-workshop follow-up meeting

The team appeared to have followed through with their ameliorating actions after the

workshop. There seemed an improvement in the perceptions of the IT PMO, as gathered from

two senior members of the IT PMO (PM1 and PM3) with whom this researcher met in August

2014, about a year after the study was conducted. Both agreed that there was an improvement

109

in the overall perception of the IT PMO after the following steps had been put in place to

address some of the key issues raised during the workshop:

(1) Establishing the vision and objectives of the IT PMO;

(2) Conducting regular communications workshops to better engage with the business

units;

(3) Appointing service managers as liaisons with the business units;

(4) Encouraging IT project managers to better engage with the business users;

(5) Re-locating the entire IT PMO team to be physically closer to the business units. (Prior

to this study, the IT PMO team was located in a separate building several kilometres

away from the main corporate building which housed most business units);

(6) Putting in place mechanisms to track business benefits of IT projects (to raise the

awareness and accountability of business benefits amongst the business

stakeholders);

(7) Setting up a central project register to provide visibility of all IT projects in the

organisation; and

(8) Setting up a demand management board to oversee the planning and management of

IT project resources.

Business perceptions of the IT PMO seemed to have improved as a result of the team following

through with the actions discussed at the workshop, and this was confirmed by PM1 who was

at the time heading a business unit (No longer with the IT PMO, he shared his views as a

business stakeholder).

The overall process adopted (in response to RQ1) can be summarised as follows:

• The workshop session where the findings from the questionnaires were presented in the

form of radial diagrams apparently benefitted the IT PMO team. Most members came to

realise from the findings that they had not been aware of how the business really perceived

the IT PMO and what the business needed.

• The radial diagrams were effective in comparing and contrasting the data from the

questionnaires representing the expectations and perceptions of both the IT PMO team

and its business stakeholders. All IT PMO team members confirmed in their feedback that

the radial diagrams were useful in visually highlighting any disparity in understanding

between both groups.

• The facilitation of the dialogue session amongst the IT PMO team members was also

useful in getting them to develop a shared understanding and articulating their action plan.

Having an external party facilitating the discussion was especially helpful in avoiding any

heated discussion whilst encouraging openness and collaboration amongst participants.

110

As a result of the dialogue, team members established a better understanding of the

expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO and were thus empowered to plan their

actions to ameliorate their situation.

• A greater level of shared understanding of the expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO

had apparently developed amongst workshop participants with the IT PMO team members

realising that they had to put in place ameliorating actions such as establishing and

articulating the IT PMO’s aims and objectives and improving its communications with its

business stakeholders.

• And finally, the post-workshop meeting was helpful in ensuring that the changes that were

planned were occurring.

The empirical results of the feedback survey and post-workshop session suggest that this

process was effective in assisting participants to develop a shared understanding of business

perceptions of their service performance and in planning and ultimately implementing actions

to improve business perceptions: it is expected that improving business perceptions will

improve perceptions of value delivery to the organisation.

In the second empirical study (Chapter 5), this process will be replicated in a different context

and further research undertaken to establish its efficacy.

4.3 Research interest

This case has provided the opportunity to study and understand the implications of the

expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance and how they are

associated with its perceived value, therefore addressing the second research question. The

following describes the data analysis and presents the findings from a research-interest

perspective.

4.3.1 Emergent themes from the interview data

Based on the analysis of the interview data using a grounded theory approach, four dominant

themes emerged. These themes, along with their respective categories are presented in the

data structure in Figure 4.16

111

Figure 4.16 Data structure of themes and categories emerging from interviews

Besides the underlying two themes that were in line with the focus of this study (the perceived

value of the IT PMO; and the service performance of the IT PMO), the two other themes that

also surfaced from the interviews were: the engagement and relationship of the IT PMO team

112

with the rest of the organisation and the IT PMO’s management of tensions and challenges.

The following sections describe these four emergent themes.

4.3.2 Theme 1: Perceived value of the IT PMO

Business stakeholders generally agreed that the IT PMO was instrumental in the successful

delivery of IT projects at TRANS:

“I know that there has been an improvement in the quality of the projects delivered

through the introduction or the use of the IT PMO” (SH3)

However, although most stakeholders from the business acknowledged the improvement in

the delivery of IT projects following the establishment of the IT PMO, they did not appear to

be entirely satisfied with the IT PMO. Stakeholders like SH5 did not consider the IT PMO as

adding any value: “I just don’t see it at this point in time.” The questionnaire data findings in

the preceding section 4.2 suggested that business stakeholders did not perceive the IT PMO

team to be meeting most of their service expectations, and the successful delivery of IT

projects also was apparently not enough to satisfy the business. Most business stakeholders

were unhappy with the IT PMO’s project management costs they had to incur, and this may

be the reason behind this lack of satisfaction.

The general sentiment amongst the business was that the IT PMO was introducing “an

overhead that’s unnecessary” (SH4). This seemed to be indicative of the view the rest of the

organisation had of the IT PMO, and stakeholders from the business considered the IT PMO

as introducing additional costs to their projects.

“As for the [IT PMO’s] cost, I looked at it and thought it could be done with much

less. So, upfront there is more ‘fat’ built into it.… Adds to the time. Adds to the

cost.” (SH2)

Being an engineering-centric organisation, most business units were themselves proficient in

managing engineering projects. Many were doubtful of the IT PMO team’s abilities and

considered IT project management no different from engineering project management and

that they therefore had the capabilities to manage IT projects as well as the IT PMO.

“There is a belief [in TRANS] that project management in engineering is sufficient

for managing IT projects.” (SH1)

SH5’s business unit in particular, managed its own projects to keep project costs low, relying

only on the IT PMO to provide IT project management consultancy. He was also not confident

of the IT PMO team’s business domain knowledge.

113

“I’ll probably feel less comfortable handing [the IT PMO team] the project than

having my people manage it because [my people] understand the systems. [My

people] understand the way it works.” (SH5)

As Head of IT, SH1 also understood the challenges faced by the IT PMO team in

demonstrating its value and empathised with the team. Her following comments essentially

underscored the challenge the IT PMO faced:

“It’s a bit like risk management. The IT PMO is ideally an ‘insurance policy’ against

project failure. Their value is in nothing bad happening. How do you articulate that

value?” (SH1)

The value delivery of the IT PMO has been acknowledged in the literature to be difficult to

determine (McKay et al. 2013), and in TRANS, the assessment of the IT PMO’s contribution

to the projects, i.e. traditional project metrics such as being on time, keeping within budget

and ensuring the quality of outcomes, was apparently how the IT PMO team gauged its own

value. Most members of the IT PMO believed that the IT PMO was delivering value because

it was “delivering projects within budget on time.” (PM3). But PM1, who had been a business

unit manager prior to joining the IT PMO, had a dissimilar view.

“There is a perception that the IT PMO probably adds a bit too much cost to the

delivery of projects, unnecessary overheads, and is somewhat seen as inefficient.

I think there are certain areas where we are not as efficient as we could be.” (PM1)

Although the IT PMO was considered to be delivering projects successfully (on time and within

budget), business stakeholders did not seem satisfied. This could be explained based on the

rationale discussed in section 4.2.8, where the successful delivery of projects would not

necessarily result in dissatisfaction; but neither would it also result in satisfaction if the IT PMO

was simply considered as just doing its job, but not to the satisfaction of its business

stakeholders.

“I think it’s the expectation that someone goes and does something, and that’s their

job.” (PM5)

In summary, the data from the interviews indicated that the IT PMO in this study was not

considered by its business stakeholders to be delivering value despite the IT PMO having

established a successful track record in the delivery of projects: value did not seem to be

perceived to accrue from “nothing bad happening”. By contrast, the IT PMO team was largely

unaware of the perceptions and expectations of business stakeholders. This would seem to

underscore the need for the IT PMO team to develop a shared understanding of its

stakeholders’ perspectives.

114

4.3.3 Theme 2: Service performance of the IT PMO

The IT PMO seemed to be meeting business stakeholders’ expectations with regards to the

successful delivery of IT projects at TRANS.

“The projects that I have been involved with actually come in on budget and pretty

close to time and delivering an outcome that’s pretty close to what’s been scoped

in the beginning.” (SH2)

The findings from the questionnaire data in the preceding sections however revealed that the

IT PMO failed to meet business stakeholders’ expectations in almost all of the service

functions that the business deemed important. They did not seem satisfied with the IT PMO

team’s overall service performance. They felt, for example, that a standard project

management methodology was not being promoted nor enforced in the organisation.

“It seems to me that there is not a standard methodology. I see every [IT] project

manager doing it completely differently. Some will be producing levels of

documentation that conform to the framework; others don’t.” (SH3)

Rather than focusing on value-added activities such as developing and promulgating

standardised methods and tools for project management, developing and ensuring project

management competency, and leveraging and effectively communicating lessons learned

from projects, the IT PMO team was largely seen as “ticking the boxes” (SH1), providing

basically administrative support to projects.

“They [the IT PMO team members] are more focused in providing what I call admin

support.” (SH4)

Data from the interviews and questionnaires also indicated that business stakeholders

considered it important that the IT PMO team was directly involved with the strategic activities

in relation to the management of their projects.

“That’s how you get into the ‘head-space’. So, when we are thinking about what

we want, [the IT PMO team] are in the journey with us.”. (SH2)

Most of the strategic IT activities were however performed by a separate entity (IT Strategy &

Planning), and IT PMO team members believed that this might have raised some doubts

amongst the business units.

“The business hasn’t openly expressed any issues working with two separate

groups but I’m pretty certain that there are people out there wondering why.” (PM2)

115

The findings had clearly brought these expectations of business stakeholders to the attention

of the IT PMO management and in this case underscored the need for the team itself to be

more involved with all strategic aspects of IT project management.

To summarise, the data from interviews and the findings from the questionnaires suggested

that business stakeholders were mostly dissatisfied with the service performance of the IT

PMO team despite being considered responsible for the successful delivery of IT projects in

TRANS. More was expected but the IT PMO team had failed to meet its stakeholders’

demands in this regard.

4.3.4 Theme 3: Engagement and relationships

Perceptions of the IT PMO team’s lack of engagement and poor communications with the

business frequently surfaced during the interviews and this seemed to be the underlying issue.

Although deemed important by all participants, the IT PMO team was not considered to be

communicating enough. The businesses were hardly kept informed nor educated about what

the IT PMO team could do for them, and this in part contributed to their negative attitude

towards the IT PMO.

“If I were in [PM1]’s shoes, I would be trying to create some dialogue with the

stakeholders to understand what services I can deliver and what value I can add.

That discussion hasn’t happened.” (SH5)

“No one has actually stepped up to actually tell [the business], ‘look this is what we

can bring in for you’. Hence this ‘negative thinking’ in [business stakeholders’]

minds.” (PM2)

Also, as a result of the poor engagement on the part of the IT PMO team, business

stakeholders felt that the IT PMO team lacked an understanding of their respective business

objectives.

“Getting them [the IT PMO team] to understand the business and the vision is the

single most important thing that can be done. I just think that what they need to do

a lot more of is understanding the business.” (SH2)

In order to be perceived as delivering value, an IT PMO must be seen to operate effectively

within its organisation’s environment (Bourne 2011b), but this posed a critical challenge for

the IT PMO team at TRANS as it did not seem to have a healthy working relationship the

business. Business stakeholders were generally doubtful of the IT PMO team’s capabilities.

“IT project management is often not something that’s is seen as a profession in

itself. It’s just something that’s badly done.” (SH1)

116

Because of their own engineering backgrounds, many business stakeholders were disdainful

of the IT PMO team’s capabilities. Some openly voiced their annoyance, claiming that they

could manage their own IT projects better than the IT PMO team.

“There is a belief that project management in an engineering sphere is sufficient

for managing IT projects. Understandably so within this organisation because

engineering is a long-established profession with a very high-level of professional

respect.” (SH1)

“I know how software can be written. I know how quickly we can do stuff. And when

I don’t see it working as fast as I know it can be done, I wonder why this is taking

months when I know we can take days.” (SH2)

Furthermore, not all members of the IT PMO team were considered to be competent at both

managing projects and engaging with the business, and this did not help improve perceptions

of the IT PMO.

“We have different project managers with different strengths; some better in

stakeholder engagement, others better at pure delivery… but not many with a good

balance.” (PM1)

“In the end, the success of the project would be as much due to the project

manager as to anything... It was very much about the project manager, and his

skills in understanding the technology and dealing with people.” (SH2)

The findings thus emphasised the importance for the IT PMO team to regularly engage and

communicate with its business stakeholders so as to be perceived as performing effectively

and delivering value. The data from the interviews however suggested that the team was

generally not considered to be effective in engaging with nor having a good rapport with its


4.3.5 Theme 4: Management of tensions

The PMO is often described in the literature as having to face conflicting challenges and

tensions (Aubry 2013; Hurt & Thomas 2009; McKay et al. 2013; Pellegrinelli & Garagna 2009);

and the findings in this study confirm this claim.

One tension of particular significance for the IT PMO in this study was the need to maintain a

delicate balance between the standardisation and control over IT projects as opposed to

allowing for more flexibility. While business stakeholders expected the IT PMO to be

prescribing, enforcing and promoting the adoption of standardised project management

methodologies across the organisation, they also expected the IT PMO team to exercise

117

flexibility in support of their business goals and objectives. This was a tough challenge and

the IT PMO team appeared to be struggling to satisfy its stakeholders. Besides failing to meet

stakeholders’ expectations in ensuring the adoption of standardised project management

methodologies across the organisation (see Table 4.3), stakeholders also considered the IT

PMO team to be rigid, inflexible, and discouraging innovation.

“They [the IT PMO team] have sort of reduced innovation. What we’ve lost is the

ability to do stuff quickly. Innovation still concerns me... Is there a way to be more

efficient and innovative?” (SH2)

Business stakeholders thought that the IT PMO team’s approach was “a little too one-type-

fits-all” (SH3) and expected the team to exercise more flexibility by trying to understand and

adapt its approach to suit business needs.

“They need to recognise what it is they are dealing with today and actually tune

their approach to suit my needs.” (SH3)

In addition to being rigid and inflexible, the IT PMO team was also considered too conservative

and risk-averse.

“We are now more risk-averse in the IT area. This removes innovation, increases

your costs and timeframes… [The IT PMO team] could do a little bit more in how

they manage risks through projects. Because they’ve built in so much

conservatism into the estimates and timeframe, they don’t really need to manage

the risks as carefully.” (SH2)

Business stakeholders also did not seem comfortable with the idea of handing control of their

IT-related projects to the IT PMO team. In addition to the findings from the questionnaires (see

Tables 4.2 and 4.4), it was also apparent from the interviews that business stakeholders were

reluctant to relinquish control.

“Business is there as a sponsor. Not necessarily directly running it, but I’d expect

us (the business) to be more dominant. I’d expect us to have the responsibility and

control for it, and they (the IT PMO team) provide a service to us.” (SH5)

It was therefore imperative that IT PMO team was cognizant of business expectations in this

regard and not try to take control of the IT-related projects.

The IT PMO team was always faced with potentially conflicting stakeholder demands and

expectations, thus adding to its tensions. It had to interact with multiple and diverse groups of

stakeholders who were from different parts (and different levels) in the organisation and had

often differing objectives; and this was indeed a challenge.

118

“Our challenge is being a single entity managing different portfolios for multiple

parties with different goals in mind.” (PM2)

Limited resources despite the increasing workloads as a result of the recent restructure also

increased the strain on the IT PMO team.

“I think the number of project managers that we’ve got right at the moment in this

restructure is not enough… It won’t be enough to deliver the programs that are on

the way.” (PM1)

Based on the study findings, the IT PMO appeared to be struggling to manage the tensions it

faced and was thus perceived as ineffective. It is therefore important for the IT PMO team to

effective (and also be seen as effective) in managing these tensions in order to boost business

stakeholders’ confidence in its abilities (and subsequently be perceived as delivering value).

4.3.6 Stakeholders’ overall perceptions of the IT PMO

The perceived value of the IT PMO is heavily dependent on the perspectives of its

stakeholders (see section 2.4), and the findings from the interviews and the questionnaires

have helped form a perspective of business stakeholders’ satisfaction or dissatisfaction with

the IT PMO at TRANS. In relation to the IT PMO’s perceived value, business stakeholders did

not consider it to be delivering much value; some even referring to the IT PMO as “an

unnecessary overhead” (SH4). The findings from the questionnaire data (see Tables 4.8 and

4.9) indicated that the IT PMO team was not perceived by the business to be meeting their

expectations in almost all of its service functions and business stakeholders were mostly

dissatisfied with the team’s service performance. Based on the interview data, business

stakeholders did not think that the IT PMO team had been engaging and communicating

effectively with the business, and there seemed a lack of respect for the team. The IT PMO

team was also considered ineffective at managing tensions and challenges.

On the overall, business stakeholders seemed to have a generally negative view of the IT

PMO team, and Table 4.10 summarises this researcher’s understanding of how business

stakeholders perceived the IT PMO.

119

Table 4.10 Stakeholders’ overall perceptions of the IT PMO

4.4 Discussion and analysis of findings

In presenting the results and findings of this study in the preceding sections, both the problem-

solving objective (assisting the IT PMO team address its perceived value), as well as the

research aim (developing an understanding of the factors influencing the perceived value of

the IT PMO) of this study have been addressed. Both sets of findings are discussed and

analysed in the following sections with reference to the research questions of this project.

4.4.1 RQ1 and the real-world problem

As an action researcher, the researcher was committed to help the IT PMO team at TRANS

address their real-world problem in demonstrating their value in the organisation. Hence, part

of this research involved working with the IT PMO team to help them understand whether the

IT PMO was seen to be performing its service functions and delivering value. This aligns with

the first research question (RQ1) in this research study: In what ways can the IT PMO team

be assisted to develop a shared understanding of the IT PMO’s perceived service performance

in order to take ameliorating action to improve perceptions of value?

Based on the findings, business stakeholders were not expressing much confidence in the

service performance and value delivery of the IT PMO. The questionnaire data presented via

radial diagrams helped the IT PMO team gain an understanding of what the problem was:

expectation and perception scores of the IT PMO team and its stakeholders were mapped

onto the radial diagrams, compared and contrasted to help uncover the gaps between

expectations and perceptions representing areas of agreement and/or disagreement between

both groups. With the knowledge of the expectations and perceptions of their stakeholders

versus their own, IT PMO team members were thus:

120

(1) better able to understand what their business stakeholders wanted or expected of the

IT PMO;

(2) able to appreciate where they might be re-directing efforts from the functions not

appreciated by their business stakeholders; and

(3) better equipped to figure out ways of directly acting to improve business stakeholders’

perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance and value delivery.

In addition, the radial diagrams representing individual IT PMO team members’ perceptions

also helped highlight areas of disagreement amongst members within the IT PMO team. This

internal disparity in views was a concern for the IT PMO leadership team as it was also

considered to impact the IT PMO team’s service performance. Without a shared or common

understanding and set of objectives, it would be difficult for the team to work effectively at

improving stakeholders’ perceptions. There was thus a pressing need for the establishment of

a common set of goals and objectives to bring together members of the IT PMO team.

On the overall, the questionnaire data findings presented during the workshop session

appeared to have assisted the IT PMO team develop a shared understanding of its business

stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO. The findings resulted in:

(1) IT PMO team members realising that they did not really share a common

understanding amongst themselves;

(2) The IT PMO team appreciating that it did not know how its stakeholders really

perceived the IT PMO’s performance, or expected of it;

(3) The IT PMO team developing clearer insights into the requirements of its business

stakeholders, and

(4) The IT PMO team establishing a set of strategies which were implemented, and over

time, helped close the gaps between stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions.

As a result of this study, the IT PMO team was empowered to address the perceived gaps as

it deemed appropriate. IT PMO team members acknowledged in their feedback that the

findings were a welcome revelation, and they were better equipped to articulate strategies to

improve the IT PMO’s perceived value in the organisation. Subsequently, a follow-up meeting

confirmed that the IT PMO team had apparently achieved this improvement.

4.4.2 RQ2 and the research interest

In addition to helping the IT PMO with their real-world problem, this case was also relevant to

the research interest as it provided the opportunity to study and understand the implications

of the expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance and how they are

121

associated with its perceived value. This was in alignment with second research question

(RQ2) of this study.

This study began with an investigation into the service performance of the IT PMO with the

aim to understand its implications to the perceived value of the IT PMO. The findings however

reveal that in addition to the IT PMO’s service performance, other factors such as the IT PMO

team’s engagement and relationship with its stakeholders, as well as its management of

tensions and challenges, are also significant in influencing the perceived value of the IT PMO.

All these factors surrounding the perceived value of the IT PMO appear to be interlinked, and

their inter-relationships are discussed in the following sections.

4.4.2.1 Perceived value

Business stakeholders at TRANS did not perceived the IT PMO as delivering value in the

organisation, and the IT PMO was also not seen to be performing most of its service functions

to the extent expected by the business. This would suggest that business stakeholders’

perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance has a significant influence on the perceived

value of the IT PMO. Poor perceptions of the IT PMO’s value delivery and service performance

were apparently also associated with the IT PMO team’s poor engagement and working

relationships with its business stakeholders. The empirical evidence confirms that most

members of the IT PMO did not appear to have good working relationships with the business,

and business stakeholders complained that team members did not really seem to understand

their business.

4.4.2.2 Service performance

The IT PMO was not seen to be performing most of its service functions and was also

struggling to justify its value in the organisation. Although the IT PMO team was considered to

be responsible for the successful (on time, to budget) delivery of projects, it was not

considered to meet business stakeholders’ performance expectations of most of it services

functions (i.e. project management methodology and competency support, project knowledge

management, and strategic project management). The business did not seem to express any

satisfaction with the IT PMO in this regard, and some stakeholders even felt that they could

better manage their own projects and avoid having to bear what many considered as

unnecessary IT PMO costs. The empirical data in this study suggests that the perceived value

delivery of the IT PMO is closely associated with the perceived service performance of the IT

PMO. The overwhelming evidence is of a business dissatisfied with the performance of the IT

122

PMO, and not surprisingly, this view is associated with dissatisfaction in the value delivered to

the business by the IT PMO.

Most members of the IT PMO did not appear to have good working relationships with their

business stakeholders as some team members lacked the soft skills in engaging with their

stakeholders. Business stakeholders’ generally negative view of the IT PMO’s service

performance might also be associated with the IT PMO team’s lack of engagement and poor

working relationships with the business, and if the IT PMO team had actively engaged with

the business and built healthy relationships with its stakeholders, business stakeholders’

perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance and value delivery might improve. The

findings also confirmed that the IT PMO team was struggling with the tensions it faced, and

the business stakeholders’ generally negative perceptions of the IT PMO’s service

performance did not seem to help alleviate these IT PMO tensions. Furthermore, business

perceptions of the IT PMO’s ineffective management of its tensions might have also adversely

affected their views of the IT PMO’s service performance.

4.4.2.3 Engagement and relationships

While stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance

seemed to play an important part in the IT PMO being seen as delivering value, their

perceptions of the team’s engagement and relationships with the business were apparently

also significant in this regard. The IT PMO was considered by business stakeholders’ to be

delivering very little business value, and in the main, the IT PMO did not have good working

relationships with the business. Regular engagement and communications between the IT

PMO team and the business were also considered lacking, and as a consequence, the IT

PMO was not valued by the business despite its efforts in the successful delivery of IT-related

business projects. This suggests that inadequate engagement and ineffective relationships

may be associated with the perceived lack of value of the IT PMO.

Poor perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance also seemed to be closely linked with

the IT PMO team’s poor relationships with its business stakeholders. Part of the reason for a

lack of appreciation from the business with regards to the IT PMO was that members of the IT

PMO team were not seen to be engaging effectively with the business. As a result of the

workshop session, the IT PMO team realised that regularly engaging and communicating with

the business might build healthy working relationships with the business, leading to some

assurance amongst business stakeholders of the team’s capabilities.

123

4.4.2.4 Management of tensions and challenges

The study also highlighted the IT PMO team’s struggle with tensions and underscored the

importance for the IT PMO team to be perceived as effectively managing these tensions. In

this case, the team’s struggle with these tensions seemed to have affected perceptions of the

IT PMO’s service performance and value delivery amongst the business stakeholders. The IT

PMO’s ineffective management of its tensions also seemed to have affected the relationships

between the IT PMO team and the business. For example, while the IT PMO team appeared

to be struggling to ensure standardisation and control while allowing for flexibility and

innovation, business stakeholders complained that the IT PMO team was being too

conservative, inflexible and stifled innovation.

In summary, the empirical data seems to suggest an inter-relationship amongst the four

themes surrounding the perceived value of the IT PMO: the IT PMO’s perceived value delivery

appears to be (either directly or indirectly) associated with stakeholders’ perceptions of the IT

PMO’s service performance, engagement and working relationships, and its management of

tensions and challenges.

4.5 Reflections and conclusion

The empirical data from this study suggests that perceptions of the IT PMO’s value delivery

are linked with the IT PMO team’s service performance, its working relationships, as well as

its effectiveness in managing tensions and challenges. Theorising based on these findings

thus leads to the articulation of a framework (presented in Chapter 6) to address RQ2 in this

study (What do the expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance imply

for the IT PMO’s perceived value?).

Whilst the findings have helped develop an understanding of the perceived value delivery of

the IT PMO, the IT PMO team in this study had also been assisted to address its problem with

perceived value. This study has shown that IT PMO members were not often aware of the

expectations and perceptions of their stakeholders; and it could be inferred that the raising of

awareness had enabled the IT PMO team to gain a shared understanding of their

stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions. This shared understanding supported the IT PMO

team in identifying areas for improvement, and hence in articulating and prioritising action that

would be expected to lead to improvements in business stakeholders’ perceptions. The radial

diagrams were useful in this regard as they supported the highlighting of these areas of

124

concern. As a result, the IT PMO team was equipped to address its real-world problem, i.e. its

struggle to demonstrate value delivery. The findings also helped form a perspective of the

perceived value (or lack thereof) of the IT PMO based on business stakeholders’

dissatisfaction in relation to all four factors surrounding the IT PMO’s perceived value.

In conclusion, this study has helped address both research questions. In relation to the first

research question, the IT PMO team was assisted in addressing the problem it faced with its

lack of perceived value. With the use of questionnaires and radial diagrams to assist members

develop a shared understanding of its stakeholders’ perspectives, the IT PMO team was thus

empowered to take ameliorating actions to improve perceptions of its value delivery. Besides

addressing the real-world problem for the IT PMO, this study has also helped develop an

understanding of the implications of expectations and perceptions of service performance for

the perceived value delivery of the IT PMO, thus addressing the second research question.

Service performance is not the only factor influencing the IT PMO’s perceived value. The

findings reveal that other considerations such as the IT PMO team’s relationship and

engagement with the rest of the organisation, as well as its management of tensions, are also

significant factors influencing its perceived value. These key factors, along with their inter-

relationships are described in the proposed conceptual framework, which is presented in

Chapter 6.

125

5 SECOND ACTION RESEARCH STUDY: CONS

The second action research study was conducted in 2016 and involved the IT PMO in CONS,

an established engineering and construction company in Australia. The aims of this second

study were two-fold: (1) to help the IT PMO team at CONS develop a shared understanding

of its stakeholders’ perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance; and (2) to study this

perceived service performance to understand its implications on the IT PMO’s perceived

value.

Similar to the first study, questionnaires and interviews were employed to gather participants’

expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO’s performance, with the data collected and

mapped onto radial diagrams and analysed, and the findings shared in a workshop with the

study participants. The following sections are presented in a similar format to the previous

chapter (Chapter 4) on the first study.

5.1 Background information

5.1.1 Information about the organisation

CONS is a multi-billion dollar-revenue engineering and construction company established in

Australia more than 60 years ago. The organisation has in excess of 5,000 employees and

operates across Australia, New Zealand, and Asia. The engineering and construction services

offered by CONS include building the infrastructure for the manufacturing, energy, marine,

water management, and rail industries. With its employees working on numerous projects in

remote locations locally and internationally, CONS is heavily dependent on information and

communications technologies in order to effectively manage its engineering projects. The

organisational structure of CONS is presented in Figure 5.1 showing the core business units

(Construction Operations, Regional and International Operations, and Group Strategy and

International New Business) and the support functions (Finance, Information Technology,

People and Policy, and Operational Risk) within the organisation. The Chief Information Officer

(CIO) heads the Information Technology (IT) group and reports to the Chief Financial Officer

(CFO). The IT PMO is part of the IT group. The three business units that were involved in this

126

study are People and Policy, Finance (under the CFO), and Operational Risk as these

business units had been directly interacting with the IT PMO team.

Figure 5.1 Organisational structure at CONS

CONS was acquired about a year prior to this study in 2015 by a foreign construction company.

As a consequence of the acquisition, there was closer scrutiny and management of its financial

performance. The Information Technology (IT) group was considered a cost-centre in CONS

and hence closely scrutinized and its spending tightly-managed. The expectation of the new

owners was that the IT group (including the IT PMO) would keep costs low:

“Having a very limited support cost is important in an industry where there’s very

thin margins … and what we do is trying to keep these support costs to a minimum.”

(SH6)

5.1.2 Information about the IT PMO

Prior to the acquisition of CONS, the former IT PMO had clearly-defined IT PMO roles and

was responsible for the delivery of IT projects and project support functions. However, it had

not been visible to the executive management and most business units in the organisation.

“I don’t think the organisation had enough visibility of the IT PMO then… especially

the projects being worked on and the deliverables…” (SH11).

127

In response to the cost-reduction measures after the recent acquisition, the policy at CONS

was to allocate to members of the IT PMO team various IT PMO tasks in addition to their

respective roles in IT operations, resulting in (what the CIO and the IT team referred to as) a

‘virtual’ IT PMO. Except for the IT PMO leader (PM6), most IT PMO team members had part

of their responsibilities in IT operations in addition to being appointed to manage IT projects

as and when required. For example, the application architect (PM9) was both responsible for

the organisation’s overall IT application architecture in addition to his IT project management

roles and responsibilities in the IT PMO.

The IT PMO leader’s (PM6) role was to lead the IT PMO team, oversee the IT projects being

run, and develop and manage project management methodologies and documentation.

Although the IT PMO had the authority to manage and deliver IT projects, it did not have the

mandate to enforce project management methodologies, policies and processes in the

organisation. While the IT PMO leader had intentions to promote and enforce the project

management methodologies, policies and processes, he was apparently discouraged from

doing so by the CIO who preferred to keep things informal; and there seemed some tension

between the IT PMO leader and the CIO.

“I went through a lot of work creating a formal process and it’s all well-documented

and it’s all quite clear and everything… But to be honest, I had tremendous difficulty

being able to implement that.” (PM6)

The IT PMO in this study comprised two teams supporting different business groups in the

organisation. Led by the IT PMO leader (PM6), Manager, Mobile Applications (PM7) and

Manager, External Applications (PM8) were part of the first IT PMO team (Team A) which was

flexible in structure and focused on an agile project management approach. The second team

(Team B) focused on traditional project management methods and included Application

Architect, IT Applications (PM9) and Senior Business Analyst (PM10). The CIO had planned

to eventually evolve Team B of the IT PMO to also adopt an agile project management focus.

A simplified organisational structure of the IT PMO team (PM6-10) and stakeholders (SH6-11)

in this study with their respective positions in CONS is shown in Figure 5.2.

128

Figure 5.2 Study participants within organisational structure (CONS)

The CIO was aware that the former IT PMO had rarely engaged with business and

management and was not very visible to the rest of the organisation; and since his

appointment, had actively been promoting the IT PMO and the IT group to executive

management and the businesses. Besides keeping business and management updated on IT

projects through an IT steering committee, the CIO also regularly communicated the

achievements of the IT team through internal company blogs. In addition, he appointed PM7

as the ‘IT Relationship Manager’ to regularly engage with and educate the business units

throughout the organisation about what the IT PMO (and the rest of the IT group) could offer

these business units.

5.1.3 Information about the research participants

With the assistance of the CIO, participants were identified from the IT PMO team as well as

key stakeholders from various parts of the organisation that had been closely engaged with

the IT PMO. A total of eleven participants were selected: five senior members of the IT PMO

and five senior-level managers from the business who were recipients of the IT PMO’s

services, as well as the CIO himself (see Table 5.1).

The IT PMO leader (PM6) was responsible for the overall management of the IT PMO,

including managing the project register and developing the project reporting, project risk

129

management, project governance, project management methodologies and tools for the IT

PMO. PM7, responsible for the operations of all mobile applications in the organisation, was

also appointed as the IT Relationship Manager. He had to regularly engage with and educate

the various business units in CONS about what the IT group could offer them. As for Manager,

External Applications (PM8), in addition to his responsibilities for the operations of all IT

applications where external construction project partners were involved, he was also tasked

with the IT PMO role to manage and deliver projects. PM9 was responsible for the IT

application architecture in CONS, and together with PM10 were members of IT PMO Team B,

also tasked with the management and delivery of IT projects.

Table 5.1 Summary of study participants at CONS

Participant Job Function Description of role

PM6 IT Program Manager

IT PMO leader and member of IT PMO Team A. Reporting to CIO and Head of IT (SH6).

PM7 Manager, Mobile Applications

Responsible for the implementation and operations of all mobile applications. Also the IT relationship manager responsible for engaging with business units within CONS. Member of IT PMO Team A. Reporting to IT Program Manager (PM6) and CIO and Head of IT (SH6).

PM8 Manager, External Applications

Responsible for the implementation and operations of all applications (in collaboration with external partners) in IT. Also manages IT projects. Member of IT PMO Team A. Reporting to IT Program Manager (PM6).

PM9 Architect, IT Applications

Responsible for the IT application architecture within CONS. Also senior project manager managing IT projects. Member of IT PMO Team B.

PM10 Senior Business Analyst

Senior business analyst within IT PMO. Member of IT PMO Team B.

SH6 CIO & Head of IT

Senior manager and head of the overall IT group within CONS. Responsible for IT projects and IT infrastructure within the organisation.

SH7 Head, People Strategy

Senior manager and head of the People Strategy business unit. Supported by the IT PMO on IT-related projects.

SH8 Head, Delivery Support

Senior manager and head of Delivery Support business unit. Supported by the IT PMO on IT-related projects.

130

SH9 Manager, People Analytics & Reporting

Manager within the People Strategy business unit (responsible for human resource business intelligence and analytics). Supported by the IT PMO on IT-related projects. Reporting to Head, People Strategy (SH7).

SH10 Manager, Financial Planning & Performance

Manager within Finance business unit (responsible for financial planning and analysis). Supported by the IT PMO on IT-related projects.

SH11 Manager, Process Optimisation

Manager with the Business Improvement business unit (responsible for process improvement and optimisation). Supported by the IT PMO on IT-related projects.

The business stakeholders who participated in this study were decision makers from various

parts of the organisation. SH7, SH8, SH9, SH10 and SH11 had engaged the services of the

IT PMO to manage and deliver projects in their respective departments’ IT-related initiatives.

The CIO (SH6) however offered a unique perspective as a stakeholder in his engagement with

the IT PMO. On the one hand, he was responsible for the IT infrastructure at CONS, which

the IT PMO team helped to implement. On the other hand, as CIO and Head of the IT group,

he also had a vested interest in the IT PMO unit which reported into his group.

5.2 Real-world problem

Following its recent acquisition, the management at CONS was heavily focused on keeping

its costs low. Although acknowledged as important for the successful delivery of IT projects in

the organisation, the IT PMO was considered a cost to the organisation and was thus under

pressure to justify its business value. Hence, this study presented the CIO at CONS with the

opportunity to assess the perceived value of the IT PMO.

When first approached in May 2016, the CIO agreed to participate as he was keen to find out

how the IT PMO at CONS was perceived and how this study could help improve this

perception. He was unsure of how the IT PMO was perceived by its business stakeholders,

and he believed that the study would help him assess the IT PMO’s service performance and

perceived value. Considering the close scrutiny on IT costs at CONS, he anticipated that the

insights from the study might help guide his future decisions on courses of action to be taken.

The IT PMO was also under pressure to justify its business value as a result of the scrutiny

on IT costs but there had not been any way of effectively assessing and reporting the value

131

delivery of the IT PMO at the time. This study was timely in that it offered the CIO and the IT

PMO team a means to assess the IT PMO’s perceived value. It was also hoped that the

findings would equip the IT PMO team to take ameliorating actions to address any gap in its

service performance and perceived value.

5.2.1 Developing an understanding of the real-world problem

Part of the objectives of this second action research study was to assist the IT PMO team to

develop a shared understanding of business stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions of its

service performance, thus also addressing RQ1, the first research question: In what ways can

the IT PMO team be assisted to develop a shared understanding of the IT PMO’s perceived

service performance in order to take ameliorating action to improve perceptions of value?

The study proceeded in much the same way as in the TRANS case, and the questionnaire

data findings in this study are presented (supported with interview data excerpts) in the

following sections.

5.2.2 IT PMO performance in tracking, reporting, governance and control of IT projects

The first group of functions is related to the tracking, reporting, governance and control of IT

projects; and the radial diagrams illustrating participants’ expectations and perceptions from

the questionnaires are presented in Figures 5.3 and 5.4.

132


Based on Figure 5.3, while the IT PMO was seen to be focused on the tracking (1.3) and

governance (1.8) of selected projects, it seemed that the IT PMO was expected to be more

involved with all IT projects (1.2 and 1.7). Although the IT PMO was seen to be tracking

selected IT projects (1.3) above business expectations, it appeared that business

stakeholders would prefer the IT PMO to be more involved and tracking all IT projects (1.2).

On the overall, business stakeholders did not think that the IT PMO team was doing enough

in this regard.

“The IT PMO should be across all IT programs within [CONS]. And at the moment

they are not.” (SH7)

Figure 5.4 indicates that IT PMO team members also agreed with their stakeholders that the

IT PMO should be involved with all (instead of a selected few) projects when it concerned the

tracking and governance of these projects; and that the IT PMO was not doing enough.

133

Figure 5.4 Comparison between IT PMO team’s and stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions (Group 1)

While business stakeholders had expectations of the IT PMO tracking the performance of

(1.2), reporting the status of (1.1), and enforcing the governance of (1.7) all IT projects in

CONS (see Figure 5.4), they did not appear to be comfortable with the idea of the IT PMO

having full control over all IT projects (1.5). Since the business was sponsoring these projects

and would have eventually ended up being the end-users, it would not have been

unreasonable that the business wanted some control. Nonetheless, Figure 5.4 indicates that

the IT PMO was meeting business expectations in this regard.

The radial diagrams were useful in highlighting the similarities and differences in views

between both groups and helped create some awareness amongst the IT PMO team of its

stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions regarding its performance of this group of

functions; and a summary of these findings comparing the expectations and perceptions of

the Group 1 functions is presented in Table 5.2. Business stakeholders’ perceptions of the IT

PMO’s performance of these functions meeting or above their expectations are highlighted in

green, while their perceptions of the IT PMO performing below their expectations are

highlighted in red.

134

Table 5.2 Summary of IT PMO team’s and stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions (Group 1)


(Expectations)

Stakeholders’ P

(Perceptions)

Stakeholders’

P vs E

IT PMO team’s P

(Perceptions)

IT PMO team’s E

(Expectations)

1.1 Report status of

IT projects or

portfolios to senior

management





IT PMO performing


expectations





1.2 Regularly track

and monitor all IT

projects





IT PMO performing


expectations


was tracking/monitoring all IT

projects.


tracking/monitoring all IT projects

1.3 Regularly track

and monitor only




IT projects.



IT projects.

IT PMO performing

above stakeholders’’

expectations



IT projects



IT projects.

1.4 Use appropriate

computer-based

tools to monitor IT

projects



projects.


was using computer-based tools

to monitor projects.

IT PMO performing


expectations



monitor projects.



projects.


all IT projects


should be directly controlling all IT

projects.



IT PMO meeting

stakeholders’

expectations






only selected IT

projects



projects.



IT projects.

IT PMO meeting

stakeholders’

expectations



IT projects.



projects.

135


(Expectations)

Stakeholders’ P

(Perceptions)

Stakeholders’

P vs E

IT PMO team’s P

(Perceptions)

IT PMO team’s E

(Expectations)

1.7 Enforce the

project governance

for all IT projects



projects.


be enforcing governance for all

IT projects.

IT PMO performing


expectations



projects.



projects.

1.8 Enforce the

project governance

for only selected IT

projects







IT PMO meeting

stakeholders’

expectations






projects.

136

While the findings seemed to indicate a general agreement between both groups in their

expectations of the IT PMO being involved in all IT projects in the organisation, the IT PMO

team was not performing some of these functions, i.e. tracking and monitoring the progress

(1.2) and enforcing the governance of all projects (1.7). The business preferred the IT PMO to

be involved with all IT projects, but it seemed that the IT PMO was more involved with only

selected projects. The IT PMO was only meeting business stakeholders’ expectations in one

out of the five functions which they considered important: the control of all IT projects (1.5).

5.2.3 IT PMO performance in project management methodology and competency support

Figures 5.5 and 5.6 represent participants’ expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO’s

performance of its Group 2 functions in relation to project management methodologies and

competencies.


137


These radial diagrams highlight that the IT PMO was not performing most of the service

functions in this group, and Figure 5.6 indicates that although business stakeholders expected

the IT PMO to perform these functions, they did not perceive it to be doing so. Although

considered to be what a typical IT PMO would be doing (Hobbs & Aubry 2010), the IT PMO

team at CONS was not seen to be performing most of the project management methodology

and competency functions, a consequence of its lack of mandate to prescribe and enforce the

use of project management methodologies, policies, and processes. Although the radial

diagrams suggest that business stakeholders would welcome a more formalised IT PMO that

performed actively in this group of functions, this was not the case, and most stakeholders

seemed unclear about the IT PMO’s policies and procedures.

“I don’t see that we have an IT PMO in a formal structured sense… In terms of a

governance process around projects and prioritisation, I don’t know if I could

actually say who in there is running it… who’s doing what. I don’t see a lot of that.”

(SH7)

While the standards and methodologies were apparently available, they were not necessarily

enforced, and IT PMO team members’ questionnaire responses also reflected their honest

assessments that they were not performing any of these functions.

When the findings were presented at the workshop session, business stakeholders were

“surprised with the IT PMO team’s view of itself” (SH9). The CIO was however less concerned

and felt that it was good that the team was being humble:

138

“The criticality [of the IT PMO team] on [itself] is good… that level of humility is

really good.” (SH6)

This seemed an important finding for the IT PMO leadership, the CIO in particular, suggesting

the need for the IT PMO team to focus its efforts on developing, promoting and enforcing a

formalised structure and processes, training project teams, and establishing performance

measures. But judging from his comments, he did not realise that the IT PMO team’s

responses might have been their honest appraisal of the fact that they had not really been

performing these functions.

The findings from the radial diagrams in relation to the Group 2 functions are summarised in

Table 5.3.

139



(Expectations)

Stakeholders’ P

(Perceptions)

Stakeholders’

P vs E

IT PMO team’s P

(Perceptions)

IT PMO team’s E

(Expectations)

2.9 Prescribe


management


organisation





be prescribing IT project


IT PMO performing


expectations







2.10 Enforce the

implementation of


management

methodologies



project management

methodologies.


be enforcing implementation of


methodologies.

IT PMO performing


expectations



project management

methodologies.



project management

methodologies.

2.11 Promote the

adoption of standardised


methodologies





be promoting adoption of IT

project management

methodologies.

IT PMO performing


expectations









IT project managers



training for IT project

managers.




IT PMO performing


expectations









all staff involved with IT

projects in the

organisation

Undecided whether the IT

PMO should be providing

project management training for

all staff involved.


be providing project

management training for all staff

involved.

IT PMO performing


expectations







140


(Expectations)

Stakeholders’ P

(Perceptions)

Stakeholders’

P vs E

IT PMO team’s P

(Perceptions)

IT PMO team’s E

(Expectations)

2.14 Develop

performance measures





managers.


be developing performance


managers.

IT PMO performing


expectations




managers.



measures for IT project managers.

2.15 Measure

performance of IT project

managers



project managers.



project managers.

IT PMO performing


expectations



project managers.



project managers.

2.16 Define project


requirements for IT

project managers





be defining project


requirements.

IT PMO performing


expectations







2.17 Employ only IT

project managers with

required project

management

competencies



project managers.


be employing only competent

IT project managers.

IT PMO performing


expectations



project managers.



project managers.

2.18 Promote soft skills

(i.e. communications,

interpersonal, etc.)


members





PMO was promoting soft skills


members.

IT PMO performing


expectations







141


(Expectations)

Stakeholders’ P

(Perceptions)

Stakeholders’

P vs E

IT PMO team’s P

(Perceptions)

IT PMO team’s E

(Expectations)

2.19 Provide mentoring and

project management advice




management advice.


PMO was providing mentoring


advice.

IT PMO performing


expectations


be providing mentoring and

project management advice.



management advice.




project teams



tools.


PMO was providing project

management tools.

IT PMO performing


expectations


be providing project

management tools.



tools.




evaluation, etc.) of IT

project managers




managers.




managers.

IT PMO meeting

stakeholders’

expectations


be participating in the

employment activities of IT

project managers




142

5.2.4 IT PMO performance in project and portfolio management

The expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO’s performance of its project and portfolio

management functions are illustrated in radial diagrams in Figures 5.7 and 5.8.


Figure 5.7 indicates that business stakeholders considered the IT PMO to be meeting their

expectations in most of the project and portfolio management functions in this group. However,

while the IT PMO team was seen to be performing all these functions, it appears that more

was expected of it, particularly the selection and prioritisation of all projects (3.22), participating

in the development of business cases (3.24), and managing programs and portfolios (3.25).

For example, business stakeholders expected IT PMO team members to be more involved

during the development of the business case for their IT-related projects, by sharing their

knowledge and expertise.

“[The IT PMO] knows the systems… It knows how everything falls into place. So,

if you’re looking for an enterprise-wide solution, involving the IT PMO would help

you do a much better job.” (SH10)

143


The radial diagram on the right in Figure 5.8 indicates a significant difference in expectations

between both groups where it concerned the IT PMO having the power to terminate IT projects

(3.27). This finding is significant for the IT PMO because it implies that the team wanted more

control but was not fully aware of its stakeholders’ expectations. Coincidentally, the radial

diagram on the left (in Figure 5.8) indicates that neither the business nor the team itself

considered the IT PMO to have any power to do so.

Although business stakeholders perceived the IT PMO to be performing all these functions

close meeting to their expectations, members of the IT PMO team did not. The radial diagrams

in Figure 5.8 show the perceptions of IT PMO team members to be mostly lower than their

business stakeholders, while their own expectations were generally higher than their

stakeholders’. This would suggest that the IT PMO team had expected to take on more

responsibilities, but their responses seemed to indicate their genuine view of the situation.

The findings in Table 5.4 summarise how the IT PMO was seen by business stakeholders to

be performing most of its Group 3 functions and meeting their expectations.

144



(Expectations)

Stakeholders’ P

(Perceptions)

Stakeholders’

P vs E

IT PMO team’s P

(Perceptions)

IT PMO team’s E

(Expectations)


selection and

prioritisation of all IT

projects





participating in the selection

and prioritisation of all IT

projects.

IT PMO close to

meeting stakeholders’

expectations








selection and

prioritisation of





projects.


participating in the selection

and prioritisation of only


IT PMO meeting

stakeholders’

expectations




projects.




projects.


sharing expertise,

experience) in the

development of

business case for IT

projects





participating in the

development of business case

for IT projects.

IT PMO performing


expectations





participating in the development of

business case for IT projects.

3.25 Manage one or

more IT projects or

portfolios







IT PMO close to

meeting stakeholders’

expectations


managing one or more IT projects

or portfolios.


managing one or more IT projects or

portfolios.

145


(Expectations)

Stakeholders’ P

(Perceptions)

Stakeholders’

P vs E

IT PMO team’s P

(Perceptions)

IT PMO team’s E

(Expectations)

3.26 Manage the

allocation of resources

(i.e. staff, assets, etc.)

across IT projects







IT PMO meeting

stakeholders’

expectations



resources across IT projects




3.27 Have the power

to terminate any IT

project

Not expecting the IT PMO to


IT project.


have the power to terminate

any IT project.

IT PMO meeting

stakeholders’

expectations



IT project.

Expecting the IT PMO to have the

power to terminate any IT project.

146

5.2.5 IT PMO performance in strategic project management

Figures 5.9 and 5.10 indicate that both the IT PMO team and its business stakeholders

appreciated the importance of the IT PMO performing this group of functions.



147

The mostly high expectation scores suggest that business stakeholders and the IT PMO team

had placed importance on the IT PMO performing this group of functions. Although both

groups had similar expectations, there was however a noticeable difference in the perceptions

of performance between the IT PMO team and its stakeholders. Figure 5.10 indicates that

members of the IT PMO did not consider the IT PMO to be performing its strategic project

management functions whereas their business stakeholders thought they were. Business

stakeholders however, did not think that the IT PMO team was meeting their performance

expectation levels.

While IT PMO team members were probably reflecting their deep-seated frustrations at their

current situation, their business stakeholders seemed to have a more positive perception of

the IT PMO, possibly the result of the IT PMO team’s effectiveness in engaging with the

business.

“[The IT PMO] has been engaging the business considerably better than it has

been in the past… and valued across the business.” (SH11)

The high regard that business stakeholders held for the IT PMO team with respect to its

technical expertise might have also been part of the reason.

“I see [the IT PMO team] as having specialist knowledge and skills, obviously within

the domain of IT. And so, they might be our ‘go to’ as internal experts… to realise

the delivery of the solution.” (SH11).

The radial diagrams in Figures 5.9 and 5.10 highlight the similarities and differences in views

between both groups in relation to the strategic management group of IT PMO functions, and

Figure 5.9 indicates that although business stakeholders considered the IT PMO to be

performing this group of functions, it did not meet their expectations.

The findings based on these radial diagrams surrounding the IT PMO’s performance of its

Group 4 functions are summarised and presented in Table 5.5.

148



(Expectations)

Stakeholders’ P

(Perceptions)

Stakeholders’

P vs E

IT PMO team’s P

(Perceptions)

IT PMO team’s E

(Expectations)


that IT projects are

aligned with business

strategy




business strategy.




business strategy.

IT PMO performing


expectations




strategy.




strategy.


the delivery of expected








IT PMO performing


expectations








information and

communications

technology trends



trends.

Perceiving the IT PMO


trends.

IT PMO performing


expectations


was keeping up with current ICT

trends.


keeping up with current ICT trends.


business trends



business trends.



business trends.

IT PMO performing


expectations



trends.



trends.

4.32 Demonstrate to

senior management that

the IT PMO delivers

business value



delivery.



delivery.

IT PMO performing


expectations



delivery



delivery.

149

5.2.6 IT PMO performance in project knowledge management

The expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO team’s performance of its project knowledge

management group of functions (Group 5) are presented in Figures 5.11 and 5.12.



150

Although the IT PMO team and business stakeholders had high expectations for the IT PMO

to be performing most of its project knowledge management group of functions, neither group

rated the IT PMO performance particularly highly (see Figure 5.11).

Figure 5.12 shows that except for the archiving of project documentation (5.36), neither

members of the IT PMO team nor business stakeholders considered the IT PMO to be

performing these functions. The IT PMO was not considered to be performing most of its

project knowledge management functions. Some examples include functions such as

conducting project implementation reviews (5.35), documenting and maintaining a lessons-

learned database (5.33), and ensuring that these lessons learned were effectively

communicated and leveraged across subsequent projects (5.34). Without a formalised set of

IT PMO policies and processes being enforced, it would be difficult to establish an effective

knowledge management practice, and these findings proved useful in highlighting to the IT

PMO team it needed to ensure that the project knowledge management processes were

established and practiced.

Again, there was some observable difference in perceptions between the business

stakeholders and the IT PMO team: IT PMO team members had lower perceptions of their IT

PMO performance when compared to their stakeholders.

The questionnaire data findings in relation to this group of functions is summarised in Table

5.6.

151



(Expectations)

Stakeholders’ P

(Perceptions)

Stakeholders’

P vs E

IT PMO team’s P

(Perceptions)

IT PMO team’s E

(Expectations)

5.33 Implement and

manage a ‘lessons-





base.




base.

IT PMO performing


expectations



‘lessons-learned’ knowledge base.




base.



communicated to



ensuring ‘lessons learned’

being effectively

communicated.




IT PMO performing


expectations







5.35 Conduct and


reviews







IT PMO performing


expectations


conducting and documenting post-

project reviews.





documentation


archiving project

documentation.



IT PMO performing


expectations


was archiving project

documentation.



152

5.2.7 Comparing IT PMO team members’ own perceptions

A different set of radial diagrams representing the individual service performance perceptions

of IT PMO team members also helped illustrate a potential issue with the IT PMO team at

CONS.

Figure 5.13 presents each team member’s individual perceptions of the performance of the IT

PMO in the monitoring, tracking, governance and control group of service functions, with the

shaded area (in purple) revealing the extent of agreement or disagreement amongst members.

Based on the radial diagram, members only seemed to largely agree that the IT PMO was

reporting the status of projects to management (1.1). They were hardly in agreement when it

concerned all other functions in Group 1.

Figure 5.13 Individual IT PMO team member’s perceptions (Group 1)

The radial diagrams representing individual team member’s perceptions for the remaining four

groups of service functions (see Appendix 6) also uncovered differences in perceptions within

the team as well for the other groups of functions. This lack of agreement seemed to have

exposed a potential concern with the lack of a common understanding amongst members of

the IT PMO team. Team members were being tasked to manage IT projects on an ad-hoc

basis in addition to their daily tasks in IT operations, and without a common set of IT PMO

153

goals and objectives being established and actively communicated amongst the team, it would

be difficult to foster any shared understanding amongst team members.

5.2.8 Stakeholders’ perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance

The questionnaire data and radial diagrams were useful in highlighting what business

stakeholders had expected and perceived of the IT PMO team, and based on the findings from

Tables 5.2 to 5.6 coupled with Herzberg’s (1966) concepts of satisfaction and dissatisfaction,

an understanding of their satisfaction/dissatisfaction with the IT PMO’s service performance

could be established:

1. Dissatisfied. Business stakeholders might be dissatisfied if the IT PMO was expected

to perform a function but was not perceived by stakeholders to be performing that

function.

2. Satisfied. If the IT PMO was expected to perform a function and it was perceived by

business stakeholders to be indeed performing that function while meeting (or

performing above) their expectations, they would be expected to be satisfied.

3. Not satisfied. If the IT PMO was performing the functions expected of it, but below

business expectations, stakeholders might not be satisfied. (This would mean that the

IT PMO is indeed performing the particular function that business stakeholders expect

it to, but is not considered to meet their level of expectation.)

Table 5.7 summarises stakeholders’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction in relation to its performance

of the Group 1 functions. For example, business stakeholders were not entirely satisfied with

the IT PMO in its project status reporting to management (1.1) because although they

considered the IT PMO to be performing this function (as it was expected to), they did not think

its performance was meeting their expectations. Although they expected the IT PMO to be

tracking and monitoring all projects (1.2), they did not consider the IT PMO to be doing so,

and might have been dissatisfied in this regard.

(Based on the questionnaire data findings (in Tables 5.2 to 5.6), there were instances where

business stakeholders were undecided (neither agreeing nor disagreeing) in their responses.

In such cases, business stakeholders’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction cannot be ascertained (see

Table 5.7, functions 1.4 and 1.5 in particular), and instead, their assessments of whether or

not the IT PMO was meeting their expectations can only be established.)

154

Table 5.7 Summary of stakeholders’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction (Group 1)

IT PMO Function

Expected

to

perform

function?

Performing

function?

Below/

meeting/

above

expectations?

Satisfied/

Not

Satisfied/

Dissatisfied?

Remarks


projects or portfolios to

senior management



were satisfied with the

IT PMO’s performance

of half of the Group 1

functions. However,

most of these are in

relation to only a

selected few projects.

• The IT PMO was

expected to be involved

with all projects.

* The IT PMO was meeting


not controlling all

projects


monitor all IT projects Yes No Below Dissatisfied



projects

Yes Yes Above Satisfied

1.4 Use appropriate


monitor IT projects


expectations


projects Undecided No Meet

Meeting

expectations


selected IT projects Yes Yes Meet Satisfied


governance for all IT

projects



governance for only



Table 5.7 indicates that business stakeholders were satisfied with the IT PMO’s performance

in about half of the functions in Group 1. These findings also suggest that business

stakeholders preferred the IT PMO team to be involved with all (instead of only a selected few)

IT projects at CONS.

Business stakeholders’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction with the IT PMO team’s performance of the

remaining four groups of functions are summarised in Table 5.8.

155

Table 5.8 Summary of stakeholders’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction (Groups 2-5)

IT PMO Function

Expected

to

perform

function?

Performing

function?

Below/

meeting/

above

expectations?

Satisfied/

Not

Satisfied/

Dissatisfied?

Remarks

2.9 Prescribe standardised



organisation



were mostly dissatisfied

or not satisfied with the


in almost all of the

Group 2 functions.

2.10 Enforce the

implementation of


management

methodologies


2.11 Promote the adoption

of standardised IT project

management

methodologies




project managers




staff involved with IT

projects in the organisation

Undecided No Below Not meeting

expectations



managers


2.15 Measure performance

of IT project managers Yes Yes Below Not satisfied

2.16 Define project


requirements for IT project

managers



managers with required

project management

competencies



communications,

interpersonal, etc.) amongst

project team members


expectations

156

IT PMO Function

Expected

to

perform

function?

Performing

function?

Below/

meeting/

above

expectations?

Satisfied/

Not

Satisfied/

Dissatisfied?

Remarks

2.19 Provide mentoring


advice for IT project

managers


expectations




project teams


expectations




evaluation, etc.) of IT

project managers



selection and prioritisation

of all IT projects



were satisfied with the


in most of the Group 3

functions.

*The IT PMO was meeting


not having the power to

terminate projects


selection and prioritisation

of selected IT projects Yes Yes Meet Satisfied


sharing expertise,

experience) in the

development of business

case for IT projects


3.25 Manage one or more

IT projects or portfolios Yes Yes Meet Satisfied

3.26 Manage the allocation

of resources (i.e. staff,

assets, etc.) across IT

projects


3.27 Have the power to

terminate any IT project No No Meet Satisfied*

4.28 Track and ensure that

IT projects are aligned with

business strategy


• IT PMO performing all

Group 4 functions, but

below business

stakeholders’

expectations.


delivery of expected

benefits from IT projects Yes Yes Below Not satisfied

157

IT PMO Function

Expected

to

perform

function?

Performing

function?

Below/

meeting/

above

expectations?

Satisfied/

Not

Satisfied/

Dissatisfied?

Remarks


information and


trends



were not satisfied with

the IT PMO’s

performance of all

Group 4 functions.


business trends Yes Yes Below Not satisfied


management that the IT

PMO delivers business

value


5.33 Implement and

manage a ‘lessons-learned’

knowledge base



were dissatisfied with

the IT PMO’s

performance of almost

all Group 5 functions.



communicated to



5.35 Conduct and


reviews



documentation Yes Yes Below Not satisfied

The data in Table 5.8 indicates that the IT PMO team was considered to be underperforming

its project management methodology and competency (Group 2) and project knowledge

management (Group 5) service functions, and business stakeholders were mostly dissatisfied

(or not satisfied) with the IT PMO in this regard. On the other hand, they appeared to be

satisfied with the IT PMO team’s performance of its project and portfolio management (Group

3) functions. Whilst considering the team to be performing all of its strategic project

management (Group 4) functions, business stakeholders were not entirely satisfied as they

felt that the IT PMO was performing them below their expectations. Overall, however, the

general sentiment amongst the business stakeholders was that they were moderately pleased

with the service performance of the IT PMO, and the following comment indicates business

stakeholders’ general impression of the IT PMO.

158

“I’d give them a seven or an eight (out of ten) … which means that they’re not

bad.” (SH9)

5.2.9 Assisting the IT PMO team address its real-world problem

Prior to this study, members of the IT PMO team did not seem to have a clear picture of how

the IT PMO was perceived at CONS; and part of this research objectives was to help the IT

PMO team develop an understanding of how it was perceived to be performing its service

functions and delivering value in the organisation. Data from the questionnaires was mapped

onto radial diagrams and presented at a two-hour workshop session attended by IT PMO team

members and business stakeholders. Unlike the workshop at TRANS where only members of

the IT PMO were present, the CIO at CONS had also invited the business stakeholders to

attend the workshop session.

The findings comparing participants’ expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO team’s

service performance seemed useful as they helped the IT PMO team gain a shared

understanding of its perceived service performance. Members of the IT PMO team valued the

utility of the radial diagrams because they helped highlight the service functions that their

stakeholders considered to be important. The radial diagrams offered a rich set of visual

information for the IT PMO team and the CIO, providing interesting and useful insights and

aiding the IT PMO team in identifying the areas to focus its efforts on.

“What’s excited me around this research were the radial diagrams... and those

insights. That would be [the IT PMO team’s] call-to-action.” (SH6)

Also presented were common topics that arose during interviews which also reflected the

findings from the questionnaires. Business stakeholders seemed generally satisfied with the

IT PMO team’s performance of its project management and delivery functions, but team

needed to improve on its performance of its strategic project management, project knowledge

management, and project management methodology and competency functions. The findings

appeared to generate much interest and participants acknowledged that the findings revealed

interesting insights they not previously thought of. For example, the findings revealed that the

IT PMO team had lower perceptions of the IT PMO’s performance compared to its

stakeholders. The findings also highlighted the lack of a common perspective within the IT

PMO team, as well as between the team and its business stakeholders.

After the presentation of the findings, a discussion was facilitated amongst the workshop

participants to identify the main areas of concern for the IT PMO team to work on. Having the

discussion facilitated by an external party seemed helpful as the dialogue was respectful and

not heated, and the discussions were more ‘okay, what does that mean for [CONS]’ instead

159

of ‘who said that’. However, because of the CIO’s insistence on including business

stakeholders in the workshop, members of the IT PMO team did not comment much during

the discussions. The dialogue might not have been as candid as it was at the TRANS

workshop and there was less input from IT PMO team members, with the conversations often

driven by business participants despite the researcher’s attempts as the facilitator to get the

IT PMO team members to participate more in the discussions.

Nonetheless, several issues surfaced from the dialogue. Amongst the concerns that arose

from the discussion, the top three issues that were identified included:

(1) the lack of effective selection and prioritisation of IT projects in CONS;

(2) the challenges and tensions surrounding the IT PMO’s limited resources; and

(3) the lack of a formal IT project management practice in the organisation.

The first two issues were in relation to the way IT projects at CONS were being prioritised for

implementation, especially in a context where (the IT PMO’s) resources were very limited.

“When we have a request come up, somehow it gets elevated in priority and ends

up getting into the list and we end up doing it. Usually it doesn’t mean that we stop

doing something else. It just means that we try to do more things at one time. That

ends up impacting the quality and delivery and the time for delivery.” (PM6)

The CIO was apparently more focused on pleasing the business by taking on projects at the

expense of the IT PMO team. His inaction at managing the business when selecting and

prioritising projects for the IT PMO seemed to have resulted in the IT PMO team being

overloaded.

“I think the issues are to do with deciding what projects go ahead or not. It’s

basically the decision made almost solely by [the CIO]. So, when someone from

the business wants something, his first thought is to say ‘Yes’. But sometimes,

probably the correct answer should be ‘No, we don’t have the resources to do it

properly.’ … I think that’s what’s missing.” (PM8)

The third issue was apparently a consequence of the informal work culture at CONS. While

the CIO had intentionally kept the IT PMO informal, the virtual nature of the IT PMO was a

concern voiced by workshop participants, especially by members of the IT PMO who believed

that they lost their focus as a result of their dual responsibilities.

“I feel that we’re using that [virtual] phrase as basically an excuse for how deficient

we are. So, you could say virtual IT PMO or you could just say a non-functional IT

PMO.” (PM6)

160

A paper-based feedback survey (Appendix 7) was administered to all ten workshop

participants from the IT PMO team and the business at the conclusion of the workshop

session, and in their feedback, participants unanimously agreed that the radial diagrams and

findings presented at the workshop session were helpful in highlighting the differences in

expectations and perceptions and between both groups (see Table 5.9 representing the

results of the feedback survey, with the 5-point Likert scale collapsed to three points to

summarise participants’ responses as to whether they agree, disagree or neither).

Table 5.9 Results of feedback survey (CONS)

Feedback Questionnaire Agree Disagree Neither

Q1. The radial diagrams were helpful in illustrating the perceptions &

expectations of the IT PMO.

100% 0% 0%

Q2. The radial diagrams were effective in highlighting the differences in

perceptions & expectations.

100% 0% 0%

Q3. The overall findings were effective in helping me understand the IT

PMO's perceived value.

90% 0% 10%

Q4. This workshop session revealed interesting insights I had not previously

thought of.

100% 0% 0%

Q5. As a result of this workshop, I have a better understanding of the

perceptions & expectations of the IT PMO.

100% 0% 0%

Q6. As a result of this workshop, the IT PMO is better equipped to develop

strategies to manage stakeholders' perceptions & expectations.

80% 0% 20%

Q7. As a result of this workshop, I am satisfied the IT PMO team is better

equipped to improve its perceived value.

80% 0% 20%

Q8. I am satisfied with the outcomes of this workshop session. 90% 0% 10%

Business stakeholders commented that the findings were “insightful” (SH6) and the radial

diagrams were “simple, clear, and effective” (SH11). It seemed that a greater level of shared

understanding of the expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance and

perceived value had developed amongst the workshop participants. In their feedback, IT PMO

team members agreed that the findings in this study had helped them better understand their

stakeholder’s expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO: “Great insights... Pretty much

reflects reality quite well” (PM7).

Although IT PMO team members agreed that the overall workshop helped them develop a

shared understanding of the expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO, their feedback

responses indicated that they were not entirely confident that they were empowered to

161

address the concerns that were raised in order to improve the IT PMO’s perceived value (see

Table 5.9, Q6 and Q7 especially). The underlying issues that were raised during the discussion

were apparently beyond IT PMO team members’ control. Only the senior management, the

CIO in particular, was in a position to address them. However, he seemed to place more

emphasis on satisfying the business and management and was sometimes oblivious to the IT

PMO team’s issues. Besides his inaction at managing the business when selecting and

prioritising projects for the IT PMO, he also failed to empower the IT PMO team.

“At the moment, [the CIO] makes all the decisions… It’s not particularly well-

delegated. The direct reports to [the CIO] have very little authority… Even little day-

to-day things, there’s not much delegation of authority there.” (PM8)

In summary however, most participants were satisfied with the outcome of the workshop

session, and the CIO in particular was satisfied with the overall outcome of this study as it had

provided him a means of assessing the service performance of the IT PMO team.

The overall engagement process in response to addressing RQ1 can be described as follows:

• The workshop session was apparently beneficial to the IT PMO team as well as business

stakeholders present. The questionnaire data findings comparing the expectations and

perceptions of the IT PMO team’s service performance were acknowledged to be

especially useful in helping the IT PMO team understand how its service performance and

value delivery was really perceived by the business.

• The radial diagrams were considered by the IT PMO team to be very effective in revealing

areas of disparity in understanding between both groups as well as highlighting the service

functions that business stakeholders considered to be important (i.e. having high service

performance expectations of the IT PMO).

• The dialogue session was useful in helping the IT PMO team develop a shared

understanding of the expectations and perceptions of its service performance and

perceived value. However, the inclusion of business stakeholders might have somewhat

stifled a potentially frank and open discussion by members of the IT PMO team.

• Based on the findings, workshop participants developed a greater level of shared

understanding of the expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance.

Similar to the first study, the feedback from the workshop session also suggests that this

engagement process was effective in assisting IT PMO team members to develop a shared

understanding of the expectations and perceptions of their service performance and value

delivery. There was however a notable difference in the composition of participants at this

workshop (as compared with the one at TRANS). With the inclusion of business stakeholders,

162

IT PMO team members seemed more guarded in their comments and the discussions might

not have been as candid as it was at the TRANS workshop session.

While business stakeholders’ perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance were generally

positive, IT PMO team members themselves were apparently not confident that they were

empowered to address some of the gaps in the IT PMO’s service performance. The problem

that they faced was structural and beyond their control. It was something that could only be

addressed by the senior management at CONS.

5.3 Research interest

Whilst assisting the IT PMO team resolve its real-world problem, this study also addressed

the research interest (and the second research question) by understanding the implications of

the expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance and how they are

associated with its perceived value. The analysis of the data and the presentation of findings

to deal with the research interest and RQ2 are described in the following sections.

5.3.1 Emergent themes from the interview data

Similar to the first study, the analysis of the interview data uncovered four main themes:

(1) the perceived value of the IT PMO;

(2) the perceived service performance of the IT PMO;

(3) the IT PMO team’s engagement and relationships with the rest of the organisation; and

(4) the IT PMO team’s management of tensions and challenges.

These four themes and their respective categories are presented in the data structure in Figure

5.14.

163

Figure 5.14 Data structure of themes and categories emerging from interviews

164

5.3.2 Theme 1: Perceived value of the IT PMO

IT and IT change were considered critical to the success of CONS, and hence the business

relied heavily on the IT PMO team to deliver their IT-related projects.

“We need to work with [the IT PMO team] … because the longer-term solutions are

going require [the IT PMO team’s] support to deliver them. Every single one of

them that I think of will require some level of IT support.” (SH7)

Many business stakeholders seemed satisfied with the IT PMO team’s efforts in providing

them its services and support towards achieving their business goals.

“[The IT PMO team] understands our priorities in terms of what we want delivered,

and tries to satisfy us stakeholders in terms of how it’s going.” (SH10)

“I'm more than happy to work with [the IT PMO team] because they're helping me

reach a decision on whether we go ahead or not, and helping me work through that

process. That's huge value-add that's helping me achieve my objectives, helping

me to be successful. It’s not just about company governance, it's got to be about

helping the people to be successful in what they're trying to achieve.” (SH7)

Data from the interviews indicated that the IT PMO was seen to deliver value to the business:

“I see the value that they deliver.” (SH9). Business stakeholders had a generally positive view

of the IT PMO, many considering its effective management and successful delivery of IT

projects as delivering value in the organisation.

“The IT PMO has helped me... Oh, my world’s better. Yeah, of course it’s helped...

I see value in it.” (SH11)

“Is the IT PMO delivering value? Look, I think the answer is yes.… Not like it’s done

perfectly but a lot of people are understanding what the priorities are; a lot of people

are understanding the broad timelines around that and what the priorities are. So

yes, [the IT PMO] is perceived to be delivering some value.” (SH10)

Part of the reason for the generally positive view was that the IT PMO was acknowledged by

business for its technical expertise.

“I see [the IT PMO team] as having specialist knowledge and skills, obviously within

the domain of IT. And so, they might be our ‘go to’ as internal experts… to realise

the delivery of the solution.” (SH11).

Although the IT PMO was meeting his expectations in the delivery of IT projects, SH8 did not

consider that alone as constituting value delivery. He considered the IT PMO team just doing

its job (as what was expected of it).

165

“Yes [the IT PMO] does deliver what I want, but… to think [that if] you meet

expectations, you have [delivered] value… no, I disagree.” (SH8)

Not all business stakeholders considered the successful delivery of IT projects alone as

validation of the IT PMO’s value delivery. More important to them was the business benefit

that the IT PMO could help deliver. For example, SH8 argued that if the “end users [of the

application] saw the value of the application” delivered by the IT PMO, then that would

constitute value delivery. For many of the business stakeholders, value was not just

associated with the project being delivered within agreed scope, budget and timeline, but

derived from notions of positive business impact, and supporting the achievement of business

goals.

“The real value in [the IT PMO] is that it realises it’s not just the nuts and bolts to

get [the project] running… It’s more ‘now, let us help you plan this. Let us help

you design solutions that are going to have the best impacts.’” (SH11)

In summary, the IT PMO team was generally considered to be delivering value by virtue of its

effective management and successful delivery of IT projects. The business stakeholders

acknowledged the importance of IT and were heavily dependent on IT to achieve their

business goals and the following comment sums up their satisfaction with the IT PMO team:

“I’d give them a seven or an eight (out of ten) … which means that they’re not bad.”

(SH9).

5.3.3 Theme 2: Service performance of the IT PMO

The IT PMO was considered to be ensuring the successful delivery of IT projects at CONS.

Most business stakeholders interviewed seemed satisfied that the IT PMO was delivering

projects according to scope, and within specified budgets and timelines.

“The [project] was very specific, succinct; it had a project plan; went through to

delivery; it was successfully delivered… That project was really well-run, with

heaps of support from the IT PMO to get it done.” (SH9)

The findings from the questionnaire data (presented in section 5.2) confirm that the IT PMO

was generally meeting business stakeholders’ expectations in its performance of the project

and portfolio management as well as project reporting, tracking and monitoring groups of

functions. Most business stakeholders had expressed confidence in the IT PMO team’s project

management capabilities.

“So, my view is that [the IT PMO] would add significant value to the project. We

would have been able to understand far earlier whether it was going to be

166

successful or not; be able to hold the vendor accountable for delivery; and be able

to project manage what's going on.” (SH7)

However, the questionnaire data findings also indicate that the IT PMO was not perceived to

be performing most of its project management methodology, competency, and knowledge

management functions. Members of the IT PMO team also agreed that the IT PMO was not

performing most of these functions, for example, communicating and leveraging lessons

learned across projects.

“There are multiple projects going on. Everybody just does his/her own thing with

no communication… They’re all doing their own thing. But at the very least, if

somebody actually ran into something and they're talking about it, somebody would

say, Oh, hold on, I need to look out for that… That’s not happening here, whereas

it could have been.” (PM9)

Business stakeholders also expressed their concerns about (what they perceived as) the lack

of formalised IT project management methodologies, policies and processes being practiced

at CONS. Although the project management methodologies, policies and processes had

already been established by the IT PMO leader (PM6), the IT PMO was not given the mandate

(by the CIO) to promote nor enforce them in the organisation, and as a result, businesses

were not aware of these policies and processes.

“I think what’s lacking is a formal process that defines what [the IT PMO] does,

what its role is, and just as importantly, what its role isn’t… At the moment, I don’t

know. So, regarding this project, what am I supposed to do? Should I not come to

them before I’ve done a business case? Or should I come to them before I’ve done

a business case? I don’t know.” (SH7)

The business stakeholders apparently supported the practice of formalised IT PMO standards,

methodologies, policies, and processes, arguing that it would encourage transparency and

consistency in the IT PMO team’s engagement with the business.

“If [the CIO] really wants to go down the path of having a high-level of systems

development, then you’d argue that having formalised IT PMO policies and

processes which encourage transparency and standard practice and consistent

stakeholder engagement would be one of the more important things you could do.”

(SH10)

The virtual arrangement of IT PMO also seemed to be a concern amongst the business as

well as members of the IT PMO team.

167

“It’s maybe the structure around them and the support they get to deliver that

project that could be improved... [The IT PMO] needs a formal structure… and then

visibility of that formal structure.” (SH9)

IT PMO team members complained that because of the informal arrangement, there was lack

of a clear focus for the team. Most members preferred a formal IT PMO structure with a

dedicated team, staffed with skilled and experienced IT project managers to focus on IT project

management and be fully responsible and accountable for the IT projects.

“There’s not an actual fixed [IT PMO] team... there are people who are doing

project management… like [PM8] is managing projects, but he’s also managing

some operations stuff… I feel that we’re using that [virtual] phrase as basically an

excuse for how deficient we are. So, you could say virtual IT PMO or you could just

say a non-functional IT PMO.” (PM6)

Although the IT PMO’s lack of mandate to promote and enforce formalised project

management policies and processes seemed to have impacted the team’s performance in

several of its service functions including project methodology and competency support, and

project knowledge management, the business was generally satisfied with the IT PMO’s

overall service as it seemed to be effectively managing and successfully delivering IT projects.

5.3.4 Theme 3: Engagement and relationships

The CIO ensured that the IT PMO team regularly engaged and worked closely with the

business at CONS, and his appointment of PM7 to promote the services of the IT PMO (and

the IT group) as well as build relationships and educate the various business units

underscored the importance placed on effective engagement and communications.

“… the role that [the CIO] has got [PM7] in to spend his time out talking to people

constantly is so valuable... That’s why [PM7] spends so much time visiting and

travelling and talking to the people.” (SH7)

As a result, business stakeholders seemed satisfied with the IT PMO team’s efforts to engage

with the business.

“I think under [the CIO’s] leadership [the IT PMO] has been engaging the business

considerably better than it has been in the past.” (SH11)

The executive management was also kept regularly updated on the progress of the projects

that the IT PMO team managed via an IT steering committee.

168

“There’s a need for the executive management to be aware of what [the IT PMO

team] is doing… Otherwise, instead of engaging [the IT PMO] to make sure that

we’ve actually got the best solution, [the business] may go off and do it without [the

IT PMO].” (SH7)

A notable difference between the IT PMOs at CONS and the IT PMO at TRANS is the

relationship with business stakeholders. Although both organisations have similar

engineering-based cultures, the business stakeholders at CONS seemed to have an entirely

different attitude (compared to TRANS) towards their IT PMO. The positive attitude at CONS

seems to reflect the relationship and goodwill that the team had built with the business:

“It's really about working with them (business stakeholder) and building

relationships.” (PM9).

“I have a pretty good relationship with all of them (business stakeholders). At least

I’d like to think I do. I’ve maybe been lucky in that most of my projects have been

quite successful and they’ve delivered on what the stakeholders want.” (PM8)

Business stakeholders apparently valued the IT PMO for its technical expertise and were

reliant on it to deliver their projects, and thus also maintained good relationships with the IT

PMO team.

“One of the reasons why we keep very close relationships with these guys (the IT

PMO team) is because to get things done, it’s often about who you know and do

they like you, and therefore they will help you.” (SH7)

The findings from the interviews confirmed that the IT PMO team was engaging closely and

regularly communicating with stakeholders from both the business and management. Most

members of the IT PMO team had been with the organisation for many years and had

established a healthy working relationship, and business stakeholders seemed satisfied with

the IT PMO team in this regard.

5.3.5 Theme 4: Management of tensions and challenges

The IT PMO at CONS was no different to most other IT PMOs in having to face conflicting

challenges and tensions. One notable tension for this IT PMO team was its struggle with heavy

workload despite limited resources.

“The reality at the moment is we shouldn’t be taking on many projects at all

because we don’t have the resources to do it. Either we do less with what we have,

or we get more people. We can’t do a lot more with what we have.” (PM9)

169

As a consequence of the organisation’s scrutiny on costs, resources were limited but there

was still plenty of work to be done for the IT PMO.

“The problem for IT is that as our company revenue over the last couple of years

has dropped and the IT budget has been decimated. But nothing has changed in

terms of the systems and the support required; nor has any project being taken

away. IT now has got less resources.” (SH7)

Some members of the IT PMO felt that the CIO was being overly accommodating with the

business when deciding on projects for the IT PMO to deliver, thus aggravating the situation.

“I think the issues are to do with deciding what projects go ahead or not. It’s

basically the decision made almost solely by [the CIO]. So, when someone from

the business wants something, his first thought is to say ‘Yes’. But sometimes,

probably the correct answer should be ‘No, we don’t have the resources to do it

properly.’ … I think that’s what’s missing.” (PM8)

“I think in some ways [the CIO] tries to be all things to people… In a world of scarce

resources, you can’t do that because you need to put a certain bandwidth on a

project for it to be successful. And if you spread your resources too thin you’ll end

up pleasing no one because you just don’t have the bandwidth to deliver.” (SH10)

This struggle seemed to have affected the morale within the team, and the conversations with

members of the team uncovered their frustrations.

“When we’re starting a new project, people who need to work on that project aren’t

taken away from their normal job and put on to the project. They just get some

additional project responsibilities and still need to keep doing their normal job. I

guess I’m frustrated. But I don’t expect it to change…” (PM8)

The IT PMO team’s struggle with workload was, some business stakeholders believed, a

consequence of the lack of formal policies and processes being practiced and enforced.

“They’re flat out because they haven’t got the structures or the processes. They

might be good project managers and they might be really experienced technical

people. It’s maybe the structures around them and the support that they get to

deliver that project that could be improved.” (SH9)

The lack of formal IT PMO policies and processes was a concern that often surfaced in the

interviews, thereby suggesting the need for the IT PMO team to be given the mandate to

promote, practice, and enforce the project management methodologies, policies, and

processes. However, the culture at CONS appeared to be an informal one, and this informality

170

seemed to encourage an informal IT PMO; but on the other hand, the IT PMO was expected

to apply formal policies and processes; and therein lies an inherent tension for the IT PMO.

“I think it would difficult to set up a formal IT PMO in this corporate environment

because historically the organisation hasn’t been receptive to that type of formality.

In this environment, I’d see it quite difficult to set up an IT PMO which is all about

formality and process and structure. There will have to be some kind of rigidity and

standard procedures.” (SH10)

“When you try to bring structure around that environment, you’ve got to be careful

with [CONS]’ culture, and make sure what you do fits. I think that’s where [the CIO]

tried to position what IT does to fit how [CONS] works. If you’re gonna have an IT

PMO in a company, you need to know that company. You will struggle if you try to

put a square peg in a round hole, trying to push something in that's not gonna fit.”

(SH7)

While the decision to keep the IT PMO informal seemed to have caused concerns amongst

business stakeholders as well as IT PMO team members, a formal IT PMO might not have

been well received in a largely informal organisational culture, thereby raising a conundrum

for the IT PMO.

To summarise, the IT PMO team was not perceived to cope with the tensions it faced, and

this seemed to have impacted business stakeholders’ view of the IT PMO in this regard. Team

members appeared to be grappling with these problems which were mostly beyond their

power, and could only be addressed by the CIO and the senior management at CONS.

5.3.6 Stakeholders’ overall perceptions of the IT PMO

The findings from this study once again confirm that the perceived value of the IT PMO is

dependent on the perspectives of its stakeholders, and based on the researcher’s own

interpretation of the collective findings from the interview and questionnaire data, most

business stakeholders at CONS apparently perceived their IT PMO to be delivering business

value.

As regards the service performance of the IT PMO, the findings in section 5.2 suggest that

business stakeholders were generally positive about the IT PMO team’s service performance

as it was seen to be performing most of the service functions that they considered important.

The IT PMO had been actively engaging and communicating with business and management

and maintaining a healthy working relationship with its stakeholders, and thus a generally

positive view of the IT PMO was apparent in the conversations with the business stakeholders

171

in this study. The stakeholders were however aware of the IT PMO team’s struggle with its

tensions and challenges, and this seemed to affect their overall view of the team’s ability to

manage these tensions and challenges.

My understanding of business stakeholders’ overall perspective with the IT PMO in relation to

the four themes can be summarised in Table 5.10.

Table 5.10 Stakeholders’ overall perceptions of the IT PMO

Compared to the first study, the business stakeholders’ general attitude towards the IT PMO

team at CONS was relatively more positive, and part of the reason could be attributed to the

regular engagement and healthy working relationships that had been built between the IT

PMO team and its stakeholders.

5.4 Discussion and analysis of findings

Both the problem-solving objective (assisting the IT PMO team develop an understanding its

perceived service performance) and the research interest (understanding factors influencing

the perceived value of the IT PMO) of this action research study have been addressed with

the presentation of the results and findings in the preceding sections of this chapter. These

findings are next discussed and analysed with respect to the research questions in the

following sections.

5.4.1 RQ1 and the real-world problem

The first research question (RQ1) posed in this study is: In what ways can the IT PMO team

be assisted to develop a shared understanding of the IT PMO’s perceived service performance

in order to take ameliorating action to improve perceptions of value? Part of the obligations of

172

an action researcher was to work with the IT PMO team to help them assess and demonstrate

their business value in the organisation, therefore also addressing RQ1.

It appears that the findings from the questionnaire data presented at the workshop session

has helped the IT PMO team develop some shared understanding of the expectations and

perceptions of its service performance. These findings helped highlight to the team:

(1) what business stakeholders had really wanted or expected of the IT PMO;

(2) the gaps between business stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions in relation to

each service function;

(3) the differences in views between business stakeholders and themselves; and

(4) the service functions that business stakeholders deemed important so that the IT PMO

team could focus its efforts on.

The findings also suggest that although business stakeholders were not entirely satisfied with

the service performance of the IT PMO in certain service functions (i.e. project knowledge

management, methodology and competency support), they were not dissatisfied, possibly a

consequence of the IT PMO’s effective management and successful delivery of projects which

the business considered important. The IT PMO team however had a generally poorer

perception (compared to business stakeholders) of its own service performance. The data

also highlights some lack of agreement within the team in their perceptions of the IT PMO’s

service performance; and this implies that there was a lack of a common understanding

amongst team members. As a result of the workshop session, the IT PMO team members:

(5) Learnt that not all team members shared a common understanding;

(6) Developed an understanding of how business stakeholders really perceived the IT

PMO’s service performance, and realised that they were less positive about the IT

PMO’s performance than their stakeholders; and

(7) Developed clearer insights into the expectations of their business stakeholders.

The IT PMO team (and the CIO) agreed that the findings presented at the workshop session

were ‘insightful’ (PM6) and helped provide the IT PMO team its “call-to-action” (SH6). As a

result of this study, IT PMO team members were assisted in identifying the areas where there

were gaps in their service performance as perceived by their stakeholders. These gaps in

service performance were highlighted at the workshop, and the IT PMO team’s perceptions of

its own service performance also seemed to confirm this.

173

5.4.2 RQ2 and the research interest

This study also provided the opportunity to understand the implications of the expectations

and perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance and how they are associated with its

perceived value; and this was in line with the second research question (RQ2): What do the

expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance imply for the IT PMO’s

perceived value?

As in the first study, the perceived value of the IT PMO appears to be linked not only to its

service performance, but also other factors such as perceptions of the team’s management of

tensions, and its engagement and relationships with the rest of the organisation. These four

themes surrounding the perceived value of the IT PMO that surfaced from the data analysis

of the interviews in this study also appear to be inter-related, and their inter-relationships are

discussed in the following sections.

5.4.2.1 Perceived value

While the data from the questionnaires demonstrates that the IT PMO was perceived to meet

business expectations about its performance of the service functions considered important by

the business, namely the successful management and delivery of projects, the interview data

indicates that business stakeholders generally considered their IT PMO to be delivering value.

This would suggest an association between perceptions of service performance and perceived

value of the IT PMO.

In addition, the perceived service performance and value of the IT PMO also appears to be

associated with the working relationships between the IT PMO team and the business. Most

business stakeholders interviewed had held the IT PMO team in high regard, likely a result of

the IT PMO team’s emphasis on regularly engaging with the business. The relationships

between the IT PMO team and its business stakeholders were good, and these healthy

relationships seemed to have a positive impact on business stakeholders’ perceptions of the

IT PMO’s service performance and perceived value.

5.4.2.2 Service performance Both the questionnaire and interview data indicate that the IT PMO was contributing to the

successful management and delivery of projects, considered important by the business.

Although not meeting all business expectations of service performance, business

stakeholders, according to the interview data, were generally happy with the IT PMO. This

174

would thus imply that the IT PMO's performance of the service functions that the business

considered important had influenced their perceptions of the IT PMO’s business value.

Business stakeholders’ generally positive view of the IT PMO’s service performance might

also be associated with the IT PMO team’s healthy working relationships with the business as

the interview data confirms that the IT PMO team was well-regarded amongst business

stakeholders. The IT PMO’s lack of performance especially in its project management

methodology and competency support, and project knowledge management service functions,

appears to be a consequence of the IT PMO’s lack of mandate to promote and enforce IT

project management methodologies, policies and processes. The virtual IT PMO structure

also seems to be part of the reason for the team’s struggle with limited resources, and if not

addressed, might eventually affect the team’s ability to successfully deliver on projects.

5.4.2.3 Engagement and relationships

Most members of the IT PMO appeared to have good working relationships with their business

stakeholders. The IT PMO team had placed an emphasis on a close engagement and regular

communications with the business, and business stakeholders’ generally positive perceptions

of the IT PMO team’s service performance and perceived value might be a consequence of

the healthy relationships between the IT PMO and its business stakeholders.

It can therefore be surmised that the IT PMO’s healthy relationships with the rest of the

organisation might have helped improve business perceptions of service performance and

value delivery. Hence, this study suggests that it is important that the IT PMO team develop

healthy relationships and regularly engage with the business and management. Some

business stakeholders were aware of the IT PMO team’s struggle with its tensions, and partly

due to the good working relationships built, stakeholders like SH7 seemed supportive and

empathised with the IT PMO team in its struggle with its tensions.

5.4.2.4 Management of tensions and challenges The empirical data in study had exposed the IT PMO team’s struggle with tensions and

highlighted the importance for the IT PMO team to be perceived to effectively manage these

tensions. However, most of the tensions that the IT PMO team faced were beyond team

members’ control. The IT PMO’s lack of a clear mandate to promote and enforce IT project

management policies and processes was apparently the reason behind the IT PMO’s lack of

performance in several of its service functions (i.e. project management methodology and

competency support, and project knowledge management). This was also considered to be

175

the reason behind the IT PMO team’s struggle with limited resources, and this tension was

starting to impact business perceptions of the IT PMO’s performance of its project

management and delivery service functions.

The findings highlighted to the IT PMO team (and the CIO) that ameliorating action must be

taken in order to improve business perceptions of the IT PMO’s management of its tensions

and challenges. However, the issues it faced seemed beyond the IT PMO team’s control, and

it was important that their senior management (i.e. their CIO) help address them. Besides

relying on their CIO to address these issues, the goodwill and support amongst the business

for the IT PMO as a result of the team’s engagement with the business might help lessen any

negative impact of its tensions and challenges. Hence it is also important that the IT PMO

establish strong and healthy relationships with its business stakeholders.

5.5 Reflections and conclusion

The empirical data from this study corroborates the findings from the first study in that besides

service performance, the IT PMO’s engagement and relationships with business, as well as

its management of tensions and challenges all play a part in the perceived value of the IT

PMO. All four themes also appear to be inter-related, and the development of a theory

surrounding these findings leads to establishing a conceptual model (see Chapter 6) to

address the second research question (RQ2): What do the expectations and perceptions of

the IT PMO’s service performance imply for the IT PMO’s perceived value?

In addition, the overall engagement process, with the workshop in particular, seemed to have

helped the IT PMO team in this study understand business perceptions of the IT PMO’s

service performance. Members of the IT PMO were initially unaware of their stakeholders’

expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance, and this study was shown

to raise their awareness, thus enabling the IT PMO team to develop a shared understanding

of their stakeholders’ perspectives. The radial diagrams presented at the workshop were

useful in highlighting the perceived gaps in the IT PMO team’s performance, thus assisting

the team to identify areas to focus its efforts on to articulate strategies and prioritise action that

might contribute to addressing its real-world problem in demonstrating its business value. The

findings also helped form a perspective of the perceived value of the IT PMO based on

business stakeholders’ satisfaction in relation to the four themes surrounding the IT PMO’s

perceived value. Considering the IT PMO to be responsible for the successful delivery of IT

176

projects at CONS, business stakeholders who had a healthy relationship with the team also

had a generally positive view of the IT PMO and considered it to be somewhat delivering value.

In conclusion, both research questions of this study have been answered in this context. With

respect to RQ1, the IT PMO team at CONS had developed a better understanding of the

expectations and perceptions of its service performance. Team members acknowledged that

the findings and the radial diagrams had helped them gain an understanding of their

stakeholders’ perspectives and provided useful insights for them to focus their efforts on

improving perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance and value delivery. Whilst

confirming findings from the first study (Chapter 4), this study has also helped establish an

understanding of the implications of expectations and perceptions of service performance for

the perceived value delivery of the IT PMO, hence answering RQ2. Besides service

performance, other considerations such as the IT PMO team’s engagement and relationships

with the rest of the organisation, as well as its management of tensions, are also significant

factors influencing its perceived value. These factors, along with their inter-relationships can

be fittingly described in the proposed conceptual model presented in Chapter 6.

177

6 CROSS-STUDY ANALYSIS

In Chapters 4 and 5, the results of both action research studies were presented and the

findings discussed. Hence, the next step is to present the cross-study analysis, interpretation

and synthesis of the findings from both studies where the comparing and contrasting of

insights from both research studies is considered to help sharpen understanding (Miles,

Huberman & Saldaña 2014). In the following sections, the analyses of the findings from the

questionnaire data in both studies are presented and discussed in relation to the problem of

[the lack of] perceived value faced by IT PMOs. Then, the qualitative data findings are

summarised and compared to develop an understanding of the perceived value of the IT PMO,

thus culminating in insights gained from both studies.

6.1 Cross-study comparison of the real-world problem

The following discussion about both IT PMOs in this study establishes the context for the

comparative discussions in the following sections. Both organisations are similar in that they

are well-established and have been in existence for more than fifty years, and they have

project-centric cultures due to their business focus in engineering and construction. TRANS is

a public-sector organisation while CONS is in the private sector. Although both IT PMOs had

been in existence for more than five years, they had transformed over the years. In order to

adapt to changes in the organisation, the IT PMO in TRANS had evolved into managing

projects for the entire organisation, while the IT PMO at CONS had transformed as a result of

the recent acquisition of CONS.

A noticeable difference was how both IT PMO teams were perceived by the rest of the

organisation. Whilst business stakeholders at CONS seemed generally satisfied with the

services rendered by the IT PMO team, business stakeholders at TRANS were not. Business

units in TRANS preferred to run their own projects, suggesting a lack of confidence or

satisfaction with the IT PMO’s project management capabilities. At CONS on the other hand,

businesses seemed comfortable in leaving the running of their IT projects to the IT PMO team.

The need to assess their service performance and justify their business value however

178

seemed to be a common motivator for both IT PMOs to participate in this research study. The

business value of the IT PMO at TRANS was in question, and this study presented the Head

of IT an opportunity to assess the service performance and perceived value of the IT. The CIO

at CONS was also keen to assess the service performance and perceived value of the IT

PMO, apparently motivated by the organisation’s focus on cost reduction. This study

presented the opportunity for both IT PMOs to assess their service performance and justify

their business value in their respective organisations.

6.1.1 Assisting IT PMOs develop a shared understanding

When initially approached, both IT PMO teams in this study did not appear to have a clear

idea of their stakeholders’ perceptions of their service performance and value delivery, and

members’ views of how their IT PMOs were perceived by stakeholders were mostly anecdotal.

The findings from the questionnaire data presented at the workshop sessions appeared to

have been effective in helping both IT PMO teams develop a shared understanding of their

stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions.

In their post-workshop feedback, IT PMO members at TRANS unanimously agreed that the

radial diagrams and findings presented at the workshop session were helpful in highlighting

the differences in expectations and perceptions and between both (IT PMO team and

stakeholders) groups (see Table 4.9 for results of the feedback survey conducted after the

workshop session). Most workshop participants acknowledged that the IT PMO team had

developed a better understanding of business stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions of

the IT PMO. They considered the findings an “eye-opener” (PM4) and agreed that the findings

allowed members of the IT PMO team to focus their efforts on the areas that their key

stakeholders.

“Extremely valuable insights for our group, particularly during a time of major

change. I’m very happy [TRANS] agreed to participate in this study.” (PM1)

Participants at the workshops session during the CONS study which included both IT PMO

team members and business stakeholders were also unanimous in agreeing that the findings

and radial diagrams have helped them develop a better understanding of the expectations and

perceptions of the IT PMO (see Table 5.9 for results of the feedback survey conducted after

the workshop session). Participants commented that the findings presented were “simple,

clear and effective” (SH11) and offered valuable insights:

“Great insights… Pretty much reflects reality quite well.” (PM7)

179

The CIO at CONS also agreed that that the workshop session was effective in helping the IT

PMO team develop a shared understanding of its stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions:

“For sure! The fact that they (IT PMO team members and business stakeholders)

were all in the same room together during the debrief… everyone at the workshop

gained a shared understanding.” (SH6)

Members of the IT PMO team however did not seem to agree with the CIO regarding the

inclusion of business stakeholders at the workshop session. Unlike the discussions at the

workshop session at TRANS, IT PMO team members at CONS appeared to be reserved with

their comments during the discussions, which seemed to be driven more by the business

stakeholders.

Both studies have shown that IT PMO members were not often aware of their stakeholders’

expectations and perceptions of the service performance of their IT PMOs, and it can be

inferred from the empirical data that the raising of awareness (during the workshop sessions)

enables the IT PMO teams to gain a shared understanding of their stakeholders’ expectations

and perceptions. The presentation of findings and radial diagrams during the workshops are

useful in this regard as they highlight the areas of concern, thus supporting the IT PMO teams

in identifying areas for improvement. Equipped with this shared understanding, the IT PMO

teams would therefore be in a better position to prioritise action that would be expected to

improve business stakeholders’ perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance and value

delivery; with the caveat that the IT PMO team has the power and authority to act.

Besides helping both IT PMOs develop a shared understanding of their business stakeholders’

views, the radial diagrams also revealed a disparity in perceptions amongst members within

both IT PMO teams, highlighting another area of concern for both IT PMO leaders to address.

The IT PMO leader at TRANS recognised the gravity of this disparity, and had put in place

ameliorating actions shortly after the workshop session to address the lack of common

understanding within the team itself.

180

6.1.2 Stakeholders’ perceptions of service performance

The findings from the questionnaires were useful in highlighting business stakeholders’

expectations of each service function, and how the IT PMO teams were perceived to be

performing relative to their expectations. These findings also suggested that business

stakeholders might be satisfied if the IT PMO team was perceived by stakeholders to be

performing the function that it was expected to perform, and its performance was either

meeting or exceeding stakeholders’ expectations. Business stakeholders might be dissatisfied

if the IT PMO was not considered to be performing the function they had expected of it.

Based on this notion, the following Table 6.1 compares stakeholders’ perceptions of the Group

1 service performance of both studies and summarises their satisfaction with their respective

IT PMO.

181

Table 6.1 Comparison of stakeholders’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction (Group 1)

IT PMO Function

TRANS CONS

Remarks Expected? Performing?

Meet

expectations? Satisfied? Expected? Performing?

Meet

expectations? Satisfied?


projects or portfolios to senior

management

Yes Yes Below Not satisfied Yes Yes Below Not

satisfied • No. of functions in Group 1 stakeholders

satisfied with: 4 (TRANS) vs 3 (CONS)

• No. of functions in Group 1 stakeholders

dissatisfied with: 2 (TRANS) vs 2

(CONS)

• Business stakeholders were satisfied

with the IT PMO’s performance of half of


• However, most of these are in relation to

the IT PMO’s involvement with only

selected projects.

• Business stakeholders expected the IT

PMO to be involved with all projects.

*The IT PMO was meeting business

expectations of not controlling all projects


monitor all IT projects Yes Yes Below Not satisfied Yes No Below Dissatisfied



projects

Yes Yes Above Satisfied Yes Yes Above Satisfied

1.4 Use appropriate


monitor IT projects

Yes No Below Dissatisfied Yes Undecided Below Not meeting

expectations


projects No No Meet Satisfied* Undecided No Meet

Meeting

expectations


selected IT projects No No Meet Satisfied Yes Yes Meet Satisfied


governance for all IT projects Yes No Below Dissatisfied Yes No Below Dissatisfied


governance for only selected

IT projects

Yes Yes Meet Satisfied Yes Yes Meet Satisfied

182

Table 6.1 indicates that business stakeholders were similar in both organisations as they were

generally satisfied with their respective IT PMO’s service performance involving only selected

projects (1.3, 1.6 and 1.8). They were however either dissatisfied or not entirely satisfied with

their respective IT PMOs performance with regards to the reporting (1.1), tracking (1.2), and

governance (1.7) of all IT projects in both organisations. It was apparently also important for

the businesses that their IT PMO teams were not in full control of all IT-related business

projects (1.5).

In relation to both IT PMOs performance of the first group of IT PMO functions, the findings

thus suggest that business stakeholders at both organisations preferred their IT PMOs to be

involved with all projects (instead of only a selected few). It was also important to business

stakeholders at both organisations that they retain full control over their respective projects.

Business stakeholders’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction with the IT PMO performance of the

remaining four groups of functions at both organisations are also presented and compared in

the following Table 6.2.

183

Table 6.2 Comparison of stakeholders’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction (Groups 2-5)

IT PMO Function

TRANS CONS


Meet


Meet


2.9 Prescribe standardised IT

project management


organisation

Yes No Below Dissatisfied Yes No Below Dissatisfied

• No. of functions in Group 2 stakeholders satisfied with: 0 (TRANS) vs 1 (CONS)

• No. of functions in Group 2 stakeholders dissatisfied with: 12 (TRANS) vs 6 (CONS)

• Business stakeholders were dissatisfied with both IT PMO’s performance in almost all the Group 2 functions.

2.10 Enforce the

implementation of




2.11 Promote the adoption of






project managers

Yes No Below Dissatisfied Yes Yes Below Not

satisfied



staff involved with IT projects

in the organisation

Yes No Below Dissatisfied Undecided No Below Not meeting

expectations



managers


184

IT PMO Function

TRANS CONS


Meet


Meet


2.15 Measure performance of IT

project managers Yes No Below Dissatisfied Yes Yes Below Not satisfied

2.16 Define project management

competency requirements for IT

project managers



managers with required project

management competencies



communications, interpersonal, etc.)

amongst project team members


expectations

2.19 Provide mentoring and project

management advice for IT project

managers


expectations Yes Undecided Below

Not meeting

expectations

2.20 Provide project management

tools for IT project managers and IT

project teams


expectations

2.21 Participate in the employment

activities (i.e. recruitment, selection,

evaluation, etc.) of IT project

managers

Yes No Below Dissatisfied Yes Yes Meet Satisfied

185

IT PMO Function

TRANS CONS


Meet


Meet


3.22 Participate in the selection

and prioritisation of all IT projects Yes No Below Dissatisfied Yes Yes Meet Satisfied

• No. of functions in Group 3

stakeholders satisfied with: 2

(TRANS) vs 5 (CONS)


stakeholders dissatisfied with: 3

(TRANS) vs 0 (CONS)

• Clear distinction between both IT

PMOs’ performance of Group 3

functions

• Clear distinction between business

stakeholders’

satisfaction/dissatisfaction with

both IT PMOs’ performance in

Group 3 functions.

*Both IT PMOs were meeting

business expectations of not having

the power to terminate projects

3.23 Participate in the selection

and prioritisation of selected IT

projects

No No Meet Satisfied* Yes Yes Meet Satisfied

3.24 Participate (i.e. sharing

expertise, experience) in the

development of business case for

IT projects

Yes No Below Dissatisfied Yes Yes Below Not satisfied

3.25 Manage one or more IT

projects or portfolios Undecided No Below

Not meeting

expectations Yes Yes Meet Satisfied

3.26 Manage the allocation of

resources (i.e. staff, assets, etc.)

across IT projects

Yes No Below Dissatisfied Yes Yes Meet Satisfied

3.27 Have the power to terminate

any IT project No No Meet Satisfied* No No Meet Satisfied*

186

IT PMO Function

TRANS CONS


Meet


Meet


4.28 Track and ensure that

IT projects are aligned with

business strategy




(TRANS) vs 0 (CONS)



(TRANS) vs 0 (CONS)

• Clear distinction between both IT

PMOs’ performance of Group 4

functions

• Business stakeholders mostly

dissatisfied/not satisfied with their IT

PMO’s performance of Group 4

functions.


delivery of expected




information and


trends



business trends Yes No Below Dissatisfied Yes Yes Below Not satisfied


management that the IT

PMO delivers business

value


187

IT PMO Function

TRANS CONS


Meet


Meet


5.33 Implement and manage a


base




(TRANS) vs 0 (CONS)



(TRANS) vs 3 (CONS)

• Business stakeholders were mostly

dissatisfied/ not satisfied with their IT

PMO’s performance of Group 5

functions.

5.34 Ensure ‘lessons learned’

are effectively communicated to



5.35 Conduct and document

post-project reviews Yes Undecided Below

Not meeting

expectations Yes No Below Dissatisfied


documentation Yes Undecided Below

Not meeting

expectations Yes Yes Below Not satisfied

188

When comparing the performance of the IT PMO functions between both organisations,

Tables 6.1 and 6.2 indicate that the business stakeholders at TRANS were only satisfied with

their IT PMO’s performance of only one in six of all its service functions. They did not consider

their IT PMO to be performing most of the functions they had expected it to do. Overall,

business stakeholders at TRANS were apparently dissatisfied with the IT PMO team’s service

performance.

In comparison, business stakeholders at CONS seemed less dissatisfied with their IT PMO

team’s performance. However, although the IT PMO was seen to be performing more than

half of the service functions that the business had expected, it was not considered to meet

business stakeholders’ expectations in several functions, though the general sentiment

amongst the business stakeholders at CONS was that they were not unhappy with the service

performance of the IT PMO team. The following remark from one of the business stakeholders

sums up their general impression of the IT PMO:

“I’d give them a seven or an eight (out of ten) … which means that they’re not bad.”

(SH9)

In summary, the questionnaire data findings presented during the workshop sessions were

helpful in highlighting to both IT PMO teams where their business stakeholders’ satisfaction

or dissatisfaction with their performance were. Both IT PMO teams were therefore equipped

with a shared understanding in order that they might address the areas of dissatisfaction and

ameliorate their business stakeholders’ poor perceptions of service performance.

6.1.3 Addressing RQ1

In the case of this action research project, both IT PMO teams were assisted in assessing

their service performance and perceived value, hence addressing the first research question

(RQ1) in this study (In what ways can the IT PMO team be assisted to develop a shared

understanding of the IT PMO’s perceived service performance in order to take ameliorating

action to improve perceptions of value?).

All members of the IT PMO team at TRANS had acknowledged in their feedback that as a

result of the study, the IT PMO was better equipped to address its perceived value in the

organisation (see feedback results in Table 4.9). They also agreed that the workshop session

was helpful in assisting them develop strategies to address the perceived gaps as deemed

appropriate in order to improve the IT PMO’s perceived value in the organisation. By the end

of the study, team members had developed clearer insights into the requirements of their

business stakeholders, appreciating that they had not previously known how their

189

stakeholders really perceived the IT PMO’s performance, or had expected of it. The team felt

that it was empowered to establish strategies to help close the gaps between their

stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions with the goal to improve the IT PMO’s perceived

value.

“The findings help pave the way.... We may not be able to influence or meet all

expectations, but will work towards it.” (PM2)

The team had apparently taken ameliorating action following the workshop session and an

improvement in business perceptions of the IT PMO at TRANS was confirmed during a post-

workshop meeting a year following the workshop session.

Similarly, at CONS, most participants were satisfied with the outcome of the workshop

session, and participants were unanimous in agreeing that the radial diagrams and findings

presented were helpful in highlighting the differences in expectations and perceptions and

between both the IT PMO team and its business stakeholders (see Table 5.9). The workshop

session had resulted in the IT PMO team developing a better awareness of their business

stakeholders’ perspectives of their service performance as well as a clearer understanding of

their stakeholders’ expectations. The CIO and IT PMO team members acknowledged in their

feedback that the findings presented at the workshop session were “insightful” (PM6) and as

a result of this study, the IT PMO team was able to focus its efforts in improving its service

performance and perceived value delivery.

“What’s excited me around this research were the radial diagrams… and those

insights. That would be [the IT PMO team’s] call-to-action.” (SH6)

To summarise, the overall process adopted in both organisations to address the first research

question (In what ways can the IT PMO team be assisted to develop a shared understanding

of the IT PMO’s perceived service performance in order to take ameliorating action to improve

perceptions of value?) can be described as follows:

• The workshop sessions where the findings from the questionnaires were presented

in the form of radial diagrams had apparently benefitted both IT PMO teams. Members

of both IT PMOs had come to realise from the findings that they had not been aware

of how the business really perceived their IT PMO and what exactly the business

expected of them.

• The radial diagrams were also effective in comparing and contrasting the

questionnaire data representing the expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO, and

members from both IT PMOs found the radial diagrams useful in highlighting

similarities and differences in understanding between both groups.

190

• The dialogue sessions that were facilitated amongst workshop participants at both

organisations resulted in team members from both IT PMOs establishing a better

understanding of their business stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions of their IT

PMOs’ service performance. At CONS however, business stakeholder’s involvement

in the workshop, at the invitation of the CIO, seemed to have inhibited inputs from IT

PMO team members. Unlike the discussion that was facilitated during the workshop

session at TRANS where IT PMO team members had participated actively, the

discussions at CONS seemed to be dominated by the business stakeholders instead.

This would therefore suggest that workshop sessions be restricted to only members of

the IT PMO in order to encourage more open and candid responses from team

members.

• With the shared understanding of business stakeholders’ expectations and

perceptions, the IT PMO team at TRANS was ultimately able to identify and put in

place their ameliorating actions. A post-workshop meeting had confirmed that the

changes that were planned were occurring. It is however noted that not all IT PMOs

are empowered to take ameliorating actions despite having developed a shared

understanding, as seen in this study with the IT PMO at CONS.

The empirical data from the feedback surveys in both studies support the premise that the

overall engagement process was effective in assisting both IT PMO teams develop a shared

understanding of business perceptions of their service performance. This engagement

process offers opportunities for dialogue between the IT PMO team and its stakeholders to

capture the multiple (and often diverse) views of performance, as advocated by Aubry et al

(2014). Arguably, once armed with this understanding, the IT PMO team is thus enabled to

target areas important to business stakeholders where improvements in service can be

achieved. It is expected that improving business perceptions of service performance will

improve perceptions of value delivery to the organisation.

6.2 Satisfaction/dissatisfaction with service performance

This research study has also led to an understanding of stakeholders’ satisfaction with the IT

PMO’s service performance. In his dual-factor theory describing job motivation, Herzberg

(1966:94) argues that not meeting dissatisfier conditions might result in dissatisfaction; but on

the other hand, meeting or exceeding dissatisfier conditions might not necessarily result in

satisfaction. He adds that there would be satisfaction only if satisfier conditions were met.

191

Although Herzberg’s research was in relation to job satisfaction, his theory has been applied

in the marketing context (Kano 1984; Oliver 2010) to offer insights into customer satisfaction

and dissatisfaction. The concept of satisfiers and dissatisfiers in establishing an understanding

of stakeholders’ satisfaction with the IT PMO’s service performance is an interesting one to

pursue.

If applied to the context of this study, business stakeholders’ satisfaction or dissatisfaction with

the IT PMO’s service performance could be analysed as follows:

• Stakeholders would be dissatisfied based on the following dissatisfier conditions:

i. the IT PMO was expected to perform a function; but

ii. it was not perceived by stakeholders to be performing that function.

If the IT PMO was seen to be performing a function that was expected of it, it would suggest

that stakeholders would not be dissatisfied.

• However, stakeholders would only be satisfied if the following satisfier conditions were

met:

i. the IT PMO was expected to perform a function;

ii. it was perceived by stakeholders to be performing that function; and

iii. its performance was meeting (or exceeding) stakeholders’ expectations.

Stakeholders might not be satisfied if the IT PMO was performing the functions expected

of it, but was performing below business stakeholders’’ expectations.

• On the other hand, stakeholders would not necessarily be satisfied if:

i. the IT PMO was not expected to perform a function; but

ii. it was perceived by stakeholders to be performing that function.

This would explain why the IT PMO exceeding expectations might not necessarily result

in stakeholders’ satisfaction.

• However, stakeholders might be arguably satisfied if:

i. the IT PMO was not expected to perform a function; and

ii. it was meeting their expectations by not doing so.

The following Table 6.3 summarises business stakeholders’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction with

the IT PMO based on the satisfier/dissatisfier conditions described above.

192

Table 6.3 Conditions for stakeholders’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction with IT PMO service performance

IT PMO expected

to perform this

function?

IT PMO performing this

function?

IT PMO below / meeting /

above expectations?

Satisfied / not satisfied /

dissatisfied?

YES

Not performing this function Dissatisfied

Performing this function Meeting/above expectations Satisfied

Performing this function Below expectations Not Satisfied

NO Performing this function Above expectations Not Satisfied

Not performing this function Meeting expectations Satisfied

Hence, this research makes an important theoretical contribution to understanding

stakeholders’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction with the IT PMO’s service performance: business stakeholders would be satisfied with the IT PMO if firstly, business stakeholders perceive the IT PMO to be performing a particular service function that they expect to be performed, and secondly, if the IT PMO’s performance of that function meets or exceeds their expectations.

6.3 Cross-study comparison of the research interest

This research study also provided the opportunity to address the research interest by

understanding the implications of the expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO’s service

performance and how they are associated with its perceived value. This is aligned with the

second research question (RQ2): What do the expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO’s

service performance imply for the IT PMO’s perceived value?

The data structure representing the qualitative analysis of both studies in this research project

is presented in Figure 6.1.

193

Figure 6.1 Data structure of themes and categories of overall research study

194

6.3.1 Perceived value

The literature has acknowledged the challenge in assessing the perceived value of the PMO

(Bredillet, Tywoniak & Tootoonchy 2017; Hobbs & Aubry 2010; Kutsch et al. 2015; McKay et

al. 2013; Singh, Keil & Kasi 2009), and prior to this study, there was apparently no means to

assess the value delivery of the IT PMO in both organisations. In TRANS for example, the

assessment of the IT PMO’s contribution to the projects, i.e. traditional project metrics such

as being on time, keeping within budget and ensuring the quality of outcomes, was apparently

how the IT PMO team gauged its own value. Most members of the IT PMO believed that the

IT PMO was delivering value because it was “delivering projects within budget on time.” (PM3).

However, project metrics alone is not considered an effective means of assessing the PMO’s

value delivery because it only measures the success of the individual project; but does not

reflect the direct contribution of the PMO (Kutsch et al. 2015; McKay et al. 2013; Ward & Daniel

2013). Not all business stakeholders in this study considered the successful delivery of IT

projects alone as validation of the IT PMO’s value delivery. SH8 said he might acknowledge

value delivery only if the businesses actually did reap business benefits from the

implementation of these projects; and not just the projects being delivered successfully, within

scope, budget and timeline.

This study has demonstrated that the participants’ perspectives of the IT PMO’s perceived

value could be established from the overall engagement process involving the interviews,

questionnaires and workshop sessions. Table 6.4 compares the significant categories that

surfaced from the analyses of the interview data, in particular, in relation to the perceived value

of the IT PMO.

195

Table 6.4 Cross-study comparison of perceived value

Category TRANS CONS Remarks

Category 1:

Perceptions of IT

PMO value

Business stakeholders did not

consider the IT PMO to be delivering

value.

Most business stakeholders

acknowledged that value was being

delivered by the IT PMO

The IT PMO at TRANS did not seem to be valued nor

perceived as delivering value by business stakeholders; on the

other hand, the IT PMO at CONS appeared to be

acknowledged by most business stakeholders as delivering

business value.

Category 2:

Measuring IT PMO

value

No official metrics to measure IT

PMO value.

No official metrics to measure IT

PMO value.

There were no official metrics in both organisations to measure

the value delivery of both IT PMOs.

Category 3:

Satisfaction with IT

PMO

Stakeholders were mostly

dissatisfied with the IT PMO.

Stakeholders were not dissatisfied

with the IT PMO.

Business stakeholders were dissatisfied with the IT PMO at

TRANS mainly for cost reasons. Business stakeholders at

CONS on the other hand did not express any dissatisfaction

with the IT PMO.

Category 4: Just

doing its job

IT PMO considered to be performing

its role as expected, especially in

managing and delivering projects.

IT PMO considered to be performing

its role as expected, especially in

managing and delivering projects.

Business stakeholders at both organisations did not seem to be

entirely satisfied although they considered the IT PMOs to be

delivering projects successfully. This would suggest that they

expected more from the IT PMOs than just managing and

delivering projects.

196


Category 5: Cost

impact of IT PMO

Businesses were directly impacted by

IT PMO costs; IT PMO seen by

businesses as cost overhead.

IT PMO cost not directly allocated to

the businesses; IT PMO not seen as

cost overhead.

The IT PMO at TRANS seen as cost overhead because costs

directly impacted the businesses; on the other hand, IT PMO

costs at CONS were not directly allocated to the business.

Category 6: Valued

for IT and/or project

management

expertise

IT PMO acknowledged and valued for

IT knowledge and expertise, but

businesses unimpressed with IT

PMO's project management

capabilities.

IT PMO acknowledged and valued for

IT knowledge and expertise;

businesses dependent on IT PMO to

manage and deliver their IT-related

projects.

Both IT PMOs appear to be acknowledged and valued for their

knowledge and expertise in IT. The IT PMO at CONS was also

valued for IT project management, but not the IT PMO at

TRANS (as businesses felt that they could manage their own

projects).

Category 7:

Importance of IT in

the organisation

Importance of IT somewhat

recognised at TRANS. Business

stakeholders viewed IT as a means

for achieving their business

objectives.

IT considered important in CONS.

Business stakeholders acknowledged

importance of IT contribution in

achieving their business objectives.

IT generally considered important in both organisations.

Businesses and management at CONS seemed to value IT

more than at TRANS.

197

The PMO must be perceived as delivering business value in its organisations in order to

survive (Kendall & Rollins 2003; Kutsch et al. 2015). With perceived value and effectiveness

essentially dependent on the views and beliefs of stakeholders (Bourne 2011b; Cameron

1986a; Zeithaml 1988), it is therefore through the PMO’s stakeholders’ views that the

perceived value of the PMO is established. Business stakeholders’ satisfaction with the IT

PMO is thus considered to play an important role in the perceived value of the IT PMO.

It was ostensible that there was a general dissatisfaction amongst business stakeholders with

the IT PMO at TRANS although they acknowledged that the IT PMO was responsible for the

successful delivery of projects in the organisation. On the other hand, most business

stakeholders at CONS had a generally positive view of the IT PMO, and commended the IT

PMO team’s efforts in servicing and supporting them towards achieving their business goals.

Cost was also a significant category that surfaced in the analysis of the interviews. Business

stakeholders at TRANS were apparently unhappy with the costs they incurred engaging the

IT PMO’s services. Business stakeholders repeatedly described the IT PMO as an “overhead”.

Most business units were themselves proficient in managing engineering projects, and as they

considered IT project management no different from engineering project management, some

business stakeholders thus saw the IT PMO as an overhead that was unnecessary.

The business stakeholders at CONS, on the other hand, seemed to rely on the IT PMO to run

their projects, likely a consequence of the indirect allocation of the IT PMO’s cost to the

businesses. Unlike TRANS where the business units were being charged on an ad-hoc basis,

the allocation of the IT PMO cost to the business at CONS was fixed (regardless of the amount

of IT PMO resources required) and charged to the business units at the beginning of each

financial year.

How the IT PMO was acknowledged and valued in the organisation also seemed to be

indicative of the perceptions of the IT PMO’s value delivery in that organisation. While IT

projects were generally considered important in both organisations, businesses and

management at CONS seemed to value IT more and relied heavily on the IT PMO team.

Business stakeholders had a generally positive view of the IT PMO team and team members

were regarded as the domain experts and were thus valued. Hence, this would suggest that

business stakeholders’ perceptions of the IT PMO team’s skills and expertise might also

influence their perceptions of the IT PMO’s value delivery.

In summary, an understanding of the perceived value of the IT PMOs in both organisations

was established based on participants’ perspectives through the various forms of

engagement, i.e. interviews, questionnaires, and workshop sessions, adopted in this study.

Despite having established a successful track record in the delivery of projects at TRANS, the

198

IT PMO was not considered by its business stakeholders to be delivering value: “I just don’t

see it at this point in time.” (SH5). On the other hand, businesses at CONS had a generally

positive view of the IT PMO, and the following comment somewhat reflects the general

sentiment amongst most stakeholders at CONS:

“Is the IT PMO delivering value? Look, I think the answer is yes.… Not like it’s done

perfectly but… yes, [the IT PMO] is perceived to be delivering some value.” (SH10)

6.3.2 Service performance

The service performance of the IT PMO as perceived by stakeholders has been empirically

shown in this study to be associated with the perceived value delivery of the IT PMO.

Comparisons between the performance of TRANS and CONS can be drawn on based on the

five groups of IT PMO functions: tracking, reporting, governance and control of IT projects;

project management methodology and competency support; project and portfolio

management; strategic project management; and project knowledge management. Similarly,

the key categories abstracted from the qualitative analyses of both sets of interview data in

relation to the service performance of the IT PMO can also be grouped in these five groups of

IT PMO functions. These categories are presented and compared in Table 6.5.

199

Table 6.5 Cross-study comparison of service performance


Category 8: Successful

delivery of IT projects

IT PMO considered responsible

for the successful delivery of IT

projects

IT PMO considered to be successfully

delivering on IT projects

Considered an important objective of the IT PMO. Both IT

PMOs seen by stakeholders to be responsible for the

successful delivery of IT projects.

Category 9: IT project

reporting and oversight

(Group 1)

IT PMO reporting on project

status and tracking progress; but lacked oversight of all IT projects

IT PMO reporting on project status and

tracking progress; but lacked oversight

of all IT projects

Part of the first group of functions involving the tracking,

reporting, governance and control of projects. Both IT

PMOs were reporting on project progress and status; but

did not have oversight of all IT projects. Some businesses

managed their own IT projects without involving the IT

PMO.


governance (Group 1)

IT PMO enforcing governance of

only selected projects instead of

all projects.

IT PMO enforcing governance of only

selected projects instead of all projects.

Part of the first group of functions involving the tracking,

reporting, governance and control of projects. Inadequate

project governance by both IT PMOs. Both IT PMOs

expected to enforce governance of all IT projects, but

considered to be enforcing only selected projects.


management standards

and methodologies (Group

2)

IT PMO established and

published standards and

methodologies but not promoting

nor enforcing them. Business

aware but not compelled to

adopt.

IT PMO not given the mandate to

promote nor enforce methodologies,

policies and processes. Business

unaware/ unclear about methodologies,

policies, and processes.

Part of the second group of functions involving project

management methodology and competency support. IT

project management standards and methodologies

available but both IT PMOs not promoting nor enforcing

these methodologies, policies and processes.

200




and training (Group 2)

Most IT PMO team members not

considered skilled in both project

management and stakeholder

engagement.

While most IT PMO team members

are skilled in IT, competency

training in project management skills

not emphasised.


management methodology and competency support. Most

members of both IT PMOs lacking in project management and

stakeholder engagement skills. No mandate for IT PMO at

CONS to ensure competency training for team members.

Category 13: Formal IT

PMO structure and

processes (Group 2)

N/A

Operating as a virtual IT PMO.

Lacking the mandate to

promote/enforce formal IT PMO

policies and processes.


management methodology and competency support. IT PMO

at CONS operating in a virtual structure and not given the

mandate to promote/enforce project management policies and

processes. This caused a lack of clarity and frustration

amongst the business and IT PMO team members.

Category 14: IT project and

portfolio management

(Group 3)

IT PMO only just starting to

manage project portfolios; not

managing all business projects.

IT PMO managing selected project

portfolios; not managing all business

projects.

Part of the third group of functions involving project and

portfolio management. Both IT PMOs were not seen by

participants to be managing all portfolios of IT projects; some

business units managed their own projects, and did not

involve the IT PMOs.


prioritisation and selection

(Group 3)

IT PMO not involved with the

prioritisation and selection of IT

projects.

IT PMO team not given the authority

to prioritise and select projects; all

decision made by CIO.

Part of the third group of functions involving project and

portfolio management. Both IT PMOs not involved in the

prioritisation and selection of IT projects. Role performed by

another unit in IT at TRANS; while decision made by CIO at

CONS.

201


Category 16: Strategic IT

project planning (Group 4)

IT PMO not involved in most of

the strategic project planning

activities.

IT PMO seen as involved with

most strategic project planning

activities.

Part of the fourth group of functions involving strategic project

management. Considered very important that the IT PMO was

actively involved in strategic project planning activities. IT PMO at

CONS involved in strategic planning activities for business

projects. IT PMO at TRANS was not involved; a separate unit was

instead involved.

Category 17: Realising

business benefits (Group 4)

IT PMO team did not focus on

realising business benefits;

instead considered this the

responsibility of the business.

IT PMO considered to emphasise

the realisation of business

benefits.

Part of the fourth group of functions involving strategic project

management. The business considered this important. IT PMO

team at TRAN did not think that they were responsible for the

realisation of business benefits. The IT PMO at CONS was seen to

place emphasis on the realisation of business benefits.


learning and knowledge

management (Group 5)

IT PMO performing post

implementation reviews and

archiving documentation.

IT PMO not performing any post

implementation project reviews;

not given mandate to practice

project knowledge management.

Part of the fifth group of functions involving project knowledge

management. Considered an important function for the IT PMO.

Both IT PMOs only performing basic documentation and archiving

but not leveraging nor communicating learnings gained from

completed projects. IT PMO at CONS lacking mandate to do so.

Category 19: Quality of

service performance

IT PMO not seen by

stakeholders to be performing

quality service.

IT PMO not seen by stakeholders

to be performing quality service.

Both IT PMOs were not considered by stakeholders to be to

performing quality service. Service delivery by the IT PMO at

TRANS was inconsistent; while IT PMO team at CONS was

overloaded with work.

202

The first group of IT PMO functions involves the tracking, reporting, governance and control

of IT projects, and the categories established from the interviews that are associated with the

first group of functions are: project reporting and oversight (Category 9) and project

governance (Category 10). Although both IT PMOs in this study were seen to be monitoring

and reporting on most IT projects, they did not appear to have a complete oversight of all IT

projects in their respective organisations. Some business units (in both TRANS and CONS)

were not involving their respective IT PMO in their own IT projects and this seemed to reflect

upon the poor IT governance in both organisations:

“That to me is a failing in the way [IT] projects are managed; that we’re allowing a

significant IT project to be done without the involvement of IT [and the IT PMO].”

(SH7).

The IT PMO team must also be mindful that this might be an indication that businesses wanted

to be in control of their projects.

The categories established from the interviews that are associated with the second group of

functions, in relation to project management methodology and competency support, are:

project management standards and methodologies (Category 11), project management

competency and training (Category 12), and formal IT PMO structure and processes

(Category 13). Although the empirical data from this study suggests that the promotion,

adoption and enforcement of project management standards and methodologies were not of

critical importance to businesses stakeholders, they were nevertheless core functions that IT

PMOs must perform. This study showed that both IT PMOs were considered by stakeholders

to be underperforming these functions, and this adversely affected perceptions of both IT

PMO’s service performance in this regard. At TRANS, the business felt that a standard project

management methodology was not being promoted nor enforced in the organisation.

“It seems to me that there is not a standard methodology. I see every [IT] project

manager doing it completely differently. Some will be producing levels of

documentation that conform to the framework; others don’t.” (SH3)

Business stakeholders at TRANS also seemed to lack confidence in the IT PMO team’s

capabilities in the management of their IT projects, possibly because some IT PMO team

members apparently lacked the soft skills in engaging with their stakeholders, while others

were not proficient in project management. This would hint at the lack of effective training and

a competent project team.

At CONS however, the IT PMO team lacked the mandate to promote/enforce project

management methodologies, policies, and processes. As a result, the businesses were

203

unaware of the policies and processes and this lack of clarity seemed to concern business

stakeholders:

“I don’t know… what am I supposed to do? Should I not come to them [the IT PMO

team] before I’ve done a business case? Or should I come to them before I’ve done

a business case? I don’t know.” (SH7).

The third group of functions is with regard to project and portfolio management, and the

categories that were established from the interview data analysis are: the management of

projects and portfolios (Category 14) and project prioritisation and selection (Category 15).

The IT PMO seemed to be meeting business stakeholders’ expectations with regards to the

management of IT projects at TRANS.

“The projects that I have been involved with actually come in on budget and pretty

close to time and delivering an outcome that’s pretty close to what’s been scoped

in the beginning.” (SH2)

Business stakeholders at CONS were also generally content with the IT PMO team’s

performance in this regard.

This finding from both organisation in this study also demonstrated the importance for the IT

PMO to be more involved with strategic project management (Group 4); and the categories

abstracted from the interviews include: strategic project planning (Category 16) and realising

business benefits (Category 17). Business stakeholders like SH2 had expected the IT PMO

at TRANS to be involved early in the project life cycle to “get into the head-space”; but the IT

PMO team was not directly involved with most strategic project functions as they were

performed by a separate unit within IT and the IT PMO was thus at a disadvantage. The study

findings had made the IT PMO management at TRANS aware of the need for the IT PMO to

get more involved with all strategic aspects of IT project management.

The IT PMO at CONS, on the other hand, was seen to be “meeting business needs” (SH10) and stakeholders were pleased because the IT PMO delivered “exactly what [the business]

wants.” (PM8).

Project learning and knowledge management (Category 18) is the category established from

the analysis of the interviews pertaining to the fifth group, project knowledge management

functions. Both IT PMO teams also realised from this study that their business stakeholders

considered this group of functions to be important, in particular leveraging on lessons learned

from projects and effectively communicating these lessons learned.

A category that also surfaced from the interviews in relation to the service performance of the

IT PMO was its quality of its service performance. At TRANS, there seemed a lack of

204

consistency in the quality of service as experienced by businesses stakeholders, likely due to

the insufficient training amongst team members: some IT PMO team members lacked the

(soft) skills in engaging with their stakeholders, whilst others were not proficient in project

management skills. Similarly, the IT PMO team at CONS was frustrated with heavy workload

and experiencing low morale, and this seemed to have affected its service performance.

Although the effective management and successful delivery of IT projects are considered to

be the main roles of the IT PMO, it appears the IT PMO’s performance of these alone would

not necessarily mean that business stakeholders would be satisfied with the IT PMO’s overall

service performance. Their satisfaction with the IT PMO is apparently influenced by their

perceptions of whether or not the IT PMO team performs the service functions they require of

it and that its performance meets their expectations; and the findings suggest that business

stakeholders’ perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance relative to their expectations

play a very important part in their perceptions of its value delivery.

6.3.3 Engagement and working relationships

Perceptions of the IT PMO’s engagement and working relationship with its business

stakeholders also plays a vital role in how the IT PMO is seen to be delivering value in the

organisation.

The categories that surfaced from the interviews with respect to the IT PMO’s engagement

and working relationship are presented and compared in Table 6.6.

205

Table 6.6 Cross-study comparison of engagement and relationships


Category 20:

Understanding the

business (engagement)

IT PMO not considered to

understand business needs.

IT PMO seen to be engaging

closely with business, and

presumably aware of business

needs.

Important to the business at both organisations. Stakeholders at

TRANS felt IT PMO did not understand the business; IT PMO at

CONS working closely with the business and understanding

business needs.

Category 21:

Communication with

business (engagement)

IT PMO not promoting services

nor educating the business

Strong emphasis for IT PMO to

regularly communicate with the

business

IT PMO at TRANS not communicating effectively nor

promoting/educating the businesses. IT PMO at CONS actively

communicating with business; appointing IT relationship manager.

Category 22:

Communication with

management

(engagement)

No direct communication

between IT PMO and

management.

IT PMO regularly communicated

with management via IT steering

committee.

IT PMO at TRANS did not directly interact with management. IT

PMO at CONS regularly communicated status updates on key IT

projects to management via IT steering committee.

Category 23: Visibility in

the organisation

(engagement)

IT PMO lacked visibility to

management in particular.

IT PMO actively promoted by CIO;

IT PMO regularly engaged with

business and management.

Management at TRANS lacked visibility of IT PMO (all

communications via office of Head of IT). Businesses and

management at CONS regularly engaged by IT PMO.

206


Category 24:

Relationship with

business (relationship)

Most IT PMO working relationships

with the business were not good.

Mostly good IT PMO working

relationships established with the

business.

Healthy relationships established between IT PMO and business at

CONS; but not at TRANS.

Category 25:

Relationship with

management

(relationship)

Minimal relationship because IT

PMO team was not visible to

management.

Strong emphasis for IT PMO to

regularly engage with

management.

IT PMO at TRANS was hardly visible to management. IT PMO at

CONS directly engaged management; providing regular updates

through IT steering committee.

Category 26:

Organisational culture

(relationship)

IT PMO not fitting in with

organisational culture; struggling to

be recognised by business.

IT PMO fitting in with

organisational culture; mostly

recognised by the businesses.

Organisational culture important in both organisations. IT PMO at

TRANS struggling to fit in; and businesses were doubtful of IT PMO

team’s capabilities. IT PMO at CONS seemed to fit in with

organisational culture; most businesses relied on the IT PMO to

manage their projects.

Category 27:

Collaboration and team

cohesiveness

(relationship)

IT PMO goals and objectives not

evident. Difference in views

between IT PMO leader and rest of

IT PMO team.

Frustration and low morale

evident within IT PMO team; lack

of authority and work overload.

There seemed a lack of cohesiveness and collaboration in both IT

PMOs. Disparity in views within IT PMO at TRANS; low morale

amongst IT PMO team members at CONS, possibly a consequence

of lack of authority and heavy workload.

207

At TRANS, business stakeholders felt that the IT PMO team lacked an understanding of their

business needs because of what was considered poor engagement and a lack of effective

communication on the part of the IT PMO team: the businesses felt that they were not

sufficiently informed nor educated about how the IT PMO team could assist them. To

compound the problem, the IT PMO at TRANS was not directly visible to the executive

management because the project updates and achievements were not directly reported

upwards by the IT PMO team.

By contrast, the CIO at CONS ensured that the IT PMO team closely engaged with its

stakeholders. In addition, the appointment of an IT relationship manager to promote the

services of the IT group and engage with the various business units in the organisation, and

an IT steering committee established to regularly update executive management about the

ongoing and completed IT projects in the organisation and the IT PMO team’s contributions,

underscore the importance placed on engagement with the business. This would suggest that

regular engagement and communications with stakeholders is important for the IT PMO to

establish a common understanding and maintain healthy relationships with its business

stakeholders.

In the case of the IT PMO at CONS, most members of the IT PMO seemed to have quite

healthy working relationships with its key stakeholders from the business, who also seemed

to display a positive attitude towards the IT PMO team. On the other hand, members of the IT

PMO team at TRANS did not appear to have good working relationships with the business,

and the IT PMO was not surprisingly perceived less favourably by business stakeholders. This

would therefore suggest that it is important for the IT PMO team to have good working

relationships with its stakeholders in order to be perceived favourably in the organisation.

Internally within the IT PMO, it is also imperative that the relationship amongst team members

is healthy, and that the team is cohesive and members collaborate well. However, there

seemed a lack of team cohesion and common understanding in both IT PMO teams. There

were differences in views amongst IT PMO team members at TRANS, whilst morale seemed

low amongst members of the IT PMO team at CONS.

While the IT PMO team at TRANS was not considered to be effective in engaging with its

business stakeholders, the team at CONS was seen to be engaging closely and regularly

communicating with its stakeholders, and had established a healthy working relationship with

business and management. The findings thus emphasise the importance for the IT PMO team

to regularly engage with its stakeholders and build on its relationships in order to foster

goodwill and eventually be perceived favourably and potentially valued in the organisation.

208

6.3.4 Management of tensions

The fourth significant theme that surfaced from the qualitative data analysis is in relation to

the multitude of tensions and challenges that the IT PMO team has to manage. For the IT

PMO team to be perceived as delivering value, it would therefore be important that the team

is seen to be effectively managing these tensions and challenges (see Table 6.7).

209

Table 6.7 Cross-study comparison of management of tensions


Category 28: Diverse

business demands

IT PMO not considered effective in

handling diverse business needs and

expectations.

IT PMO appeared to be coping with the

diverse demands and expectations of


IT PMO at TRANS was struggling to manage the

diverse and competing business demands. IT

PMO at CONS seemed to be coping (only just)

with business demands.

Category 29: Managing

expectations N/A

IT PMO team considered to be

managing business expectations and

demands

The IT PMO team seen to be handling business

demands and expectations; in part due to the

effective engagement and good working

relationships with business.

Category 30: Flexibility vs

standardisation

IT PMO struggling to maintain

standardisation and at the same time meet

business demand for flexibility; business

stakeholders unhappy with the IT PMO’s

lack of flexibility.

IT PMO seemed to be emphasising

flexibility; lacking in standardisation.

Both IT PMOs not effectively managing this

tension. IT PMO at TRANS focused on

standardisation; but business unhappy with lack

of flexibility. IT PMO at CONS seemed to be more

focused on flexibility, lacking standard policies

and processes

Category 31: Lacking

innovation

Business frustrated with IT PMO’s rigid

practice inhibiting innovation and creativity. N/A

Business displeasure with IT PMO at TRANS for

being rigid and inhibiting innovation and creativity.

Category 32: Too

bureaucratic,

administrative

Business complained IT PMO was too

bureaucratic and administrative N/A

The IT PMO at TRANS perceived by business as

being too bureaucratic and administrative; only

focused on ‘ticking the boxes’.

210


Category 33: Too

conservative Business complained IT PMO was

too conservative, at times ‘policing’. N/A

IT PMO at TRANS perceived by stakeholders as being too

conservative, and at times ‘policing’.

Category 34:

Formality in informal

environment

N/A

Lacking mandate to enforce formal IT

PMO processes; resulting in confusion

and lack of clarity.

IT PMO not given mandate to promote/enforce formal IT PMO

policies and processes (in keeping with informal culture);

resulting in confusion and lack of clarity amongst business

and IT PMO team.

Category 35: Power

and control

IT PMO did not have control over

projects; exactly what business

wanted.

IT PMO did not have control over

projects; exactly what business

wanted.

Both IT PMOs did not have much control over IT projects;

exactly what business wanted.

Category 36: Limited

resources

Reduction in resources after

restructure; but increased workload.

IT PMO team struggling with

increasing number of projects; but with

limited resources.

Both IT PMOs challenged with limited resources despite

increased workload. More pronounced at CONS and

adversely affecting IT PMO team morale.

Category 37: Limited

budget N/A

IT PMO working with tight budget;

team members having dual

(operational and IT PMO) roles.

IT PMO at CONS working with limited budget. IT PMO team

members having dual responsibilities (managing projects and

running IT operations).

211


Category 38:

Organisation culture

challenges

IT PMO not fitting in with organisation

culture; not getting much support

from the rest of the organisation

N/A

Engineering-dominated culture at TRANS behind the lack of

respect for IT PMO capabilities; little support from the rest of

the organisation.

Category 39:

Organisational

challenges

IT PMO not involved in strategic

project functions because of

structure. Recent restructure reduced

IT PMO’s resources.

Virtual IT PMO resulting in team

members having dual responsibilities;

members complain of overwork and

morale affected.

IT PMO at TRANS not involved with strategic functions

because of the structural reasons. IT PMO team at CONS

struggling with dual responsibilities because of the virtual

structure of the IT PMO; team morale affected.

Category 40:

Leadership

challenges

Differences in views between IT PMO

leader and most members of the IT

PMO.

CIO in control of the IT PMO; team

members lacked autonomy and voiced

frustration.

IT PMO leader at TRANS was from the business unit and his

views were different compared to rest of IT PMO. IT PMO

team at CONS lacked autonomy; CIO in full control. Morale

low and team members frustrated.

Category 41: External

challenges

Some businesses outsourced their

projects; did not involve the IT PMO

Some businesses outsourced their

projects; did not involve the IT PMO

Some businesses at both organisations outsourced the

management of their projects to external vendors and were

not involving their IT PMOs.

212

Having to interact with diverse groups of stakeholders who come from different parts of the

organisation with different goals and objectives, is indeed a challenge; and the IT PMO at

TRANS appeared to be struggling to meet the different demands of its stakeholders. Although

rather stretched, the IT PMO team at CONS on the other hand appeared to be coping with

business stakeholders’ diverse expectations and demands, and the goodwill built between the

IT PMO team and its business stakeholders seemed to have helped mitigate this tension.

One significant tension that both IT PMOs in this study seemed to be faced with was having

to maintain a balance between the standardisation and control over IT projects and allowing

for flexibility and innovation. On one hand, the concept of the PMO is based on ensuring the

standardisation of project management practice (Andersen, Henriksen & Aarseth 2007; Dai &

Wells 2004; Desouza & Evaristo 2006; Hill 2004; Liu & Yetton 2007). On the other hand,

stakeholders from the business expect the IT PMO to exercise more flexibility in support of

the achievement of their business goals and objectives. Business stakeholders at TRANS

thought that the IT PMO team’s approach was rather “one-type-fits-all” and expected the team

to exercise flexibility and adapt to suit business needs. The IT PMO team was also seen as

being too conservative, risk-averse, bureaucratic, and administrative, overly concerned with

“ticking the boxes”. Hence this tension that the IT PMO team must cope with: exercising

flexibility yet maintaining a standardised practice.

A common tension faced by most IT PMOs is having to work with very limited resources, but

this tension was more obvious at CONS. The IT PMO team appeared to be struggling with

limited resources despite the increasing workload, and members voiced their frustrations with

the CIOs’ inaction at managing business demand when prioritising and selecting projects,

which added on to their current workload. The IT PMO team’s struggle with this tension had

apparently begun to impact its business stakeholders, potentially undermining their

perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance and value delivery.

Another significant tension that surfaced from both studies surrounds the notion of power and

control. Although the business units at both organisations seemed comfortable having their

respective IT PMO manage all their projects, the findings suggested that the businesses still

wanted control. It is therefore important for the IT PMO team to be cognizant of business

stakeholders’ expectations that they must be in control of the projects that will impact their

businesses and not try to take control of the projects. As these projects might impact the

performance of their business, business stakeholders need to be closely involved to ensure

that the project is meeting business requirements and imperatives. The findings were helpful

for both IT PMO teams in this study as they were not initially aware of their stakeholders’

expectations, having instead their own expectations of being in control.

213

Both IT PMOs in this study experienced numerous tensions and challenges, and perceptions

of how the IT PMO copes with these tensions and challenges seemed to have some effect on

perceptions of its service performance as well as relationships with its business stakeholders.

In summary, the study findings indicate that the tensions and challenges facing the IT PMO

are unavoidable and plague most IT PMOs. The IT PMO must therefore be seen by business

stakeholders as being capable in handling these challenges and tensions it faces in order to

maintain business confidence in the IT PMO’s effectiveness and ensure its perceived value.

6.4 Developing the conceptual model

Findings from this study confirm the importance of the IT PMO team developing an

understanding of its stakeholders’ expectations as well as perceptions of its service

performance. This research also revealed that service performance alone was not the only

factor that is associated with the perceived value of the IT PMO: other considerations such as

the IT PMO team’s engagement and relationships with its stakeholders, as well as its

management of the tensions and challenges it faced are also considered to be linked to

perceptions of the IT PMO’s value delivery. The inter-relationships amongst these four themes

is discussed in the following sections.

6.4.1 Service performance and perceived value

Business stakeholders’ perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance has a significant

bearing on its perceived value delivery in the organisation. Despite the IT PMO being

perceived as effectively managing and successfully delivering projects (on time, to budget,

and within scope), not all business stakeholders might be satisfied. When assessing the IT

PMO’s business value, most business stakeholders would also consider the IT PMO team’s

performance of its other service functions (particularly those they deem important), i.e. in the

monitoring, reporting, governance and control of projects, in project management competency

and support, in strategic project management, and in project knowledge management.

With an understanding of business stakeholders’ expectations, the IT PMO team would be

better equipped to adapt/shape its service delivery to close the gaps between business

stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance. The IT PMO

team at TRANS for example, had gained an understanding from findings of the study and put

in place ameliorating actions to address the gaps in their business stakeholders’ expectations

214

and perceptions; and based on a follow up meeting, there was an apparent improvement in

business perceptions of the IT PMO’s value delivery. Hence, these findings establish that it is

important for the IT PMO team to develop an understanding of business stakeholders’

expectations and perceptions of service performance so that that it might adapt and shape its

service delivery in order to be considered as delivering value (see Figure 6.2).

Figure 6.2 Relationship between service performance and perceived value

6.4.2 Engagement and relationship, service performance and perceived value

While the IT PMO’s service performance is considered to play a very important role in the IT

PMO being seen as delivering value, this research study has established that the IT PMO’s

engagement and relationship with its business stakeholders is also another significant factor

that might be associated with perceptions of the IT PMO’s value delivery. Study findings

suggest that stakeholders’ poor perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance (i.e.

perceptions well below expectations) were associated with the IT PMO’s poor relationships

with the business and management. On the other hand, if members of the IT PMO regularly

engage and communicate with their business stakeholders, good working relationship would

be built, and business stakeholders would generally have a positive attitude towards the IT

PMO team. The study at CONS for example indicated that business stakeholders did not

express any dissatisfaction with the IT PMO’s service performance, and this might partly be a

consequence of the healthy relationship between the IT PMO and its business stakeholders.

One might therefore surmise based on the empirical data that improving the IT PMO’s

relationship with the rest of the organisation might help improve its perceived service

215

performance and value delivery. It is thus important for members of the IT PMO team to build

relationships and regularly engage with business and management, as was demonstrated in

this study. Regular IT project updates to the executive management through IT steering

committees and the appointment of an IT relationship manager to regularly engage with the

businesses were some examples of successful practices in this regard. Conversely, improved

perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance might improve its relationships with

stakeholders in the organisation, and result in goodwill and support from the business and

management. Figure 6.3 illustrates the inter-relationships between IT PMO’s engagement and

relationships with its stakeholders, the expectations and perceptions of its service

performance, and its perceived value.

Figure 6.3 Relationships between engagement and relationships, service performance, and perceived value

6.4.3 Management of tensions, engagement and relationships and service performance

Perceptions of the IT PMO’s management of tensions and challenges have also been shown

in this study to be associated with its relationships with its business stakeholders. The findings

indicated that perceptions of the IT PMO’s ineffective management of tensions seemed to

undermine any confidence business stakeholders might have in the IT PMO team’s service

performance as well as adversely affect the working relationships between the IT PMO and

the businesses. This would therefore suggest that poor impressions of the IT PMO’s ability to

216

manage tensions and challenges might adversely impact perceptions of its service

performance and weaken its relationships with the businesses.

If business stakeholders were cognizant of the various tensions confronting the IT PMO and

good working relationships are evident, stakeholders seemed more understanding and

empathetic with the IT PMO team. Therefore, by strengthening its working relationships with

its business stakeholders through effective engagement and regular communications, as well

as meeting stakeholders’ service performance expectations, business stakeholders’

confidence in the IT PMO team might help alleviate these tensions and challenges faced by

the IT PMO team. Figure 6.4 describes the relationships amongst these three themes.

Figure 6.4 Relationships between management of tensions, engagement and relationships, and service performance

6.4.4 The overall conceptual model

Based on the inter-relationships amongst the four themes surrounding the perceived value of

the IT PMO described above, a theoretical model can therefore be established. In the following

diagram (see Figure 6.5) the model describing the perceived value of the IT PMO is presented,

illustrating all four themes and their interlinking relationships.

217

Figure 6.5 Conceptual model of the perceived value of the IT PMO

Based on the proposed conceptual model, the perceived value of the IT PMO can be

described, along with the inter-relationships amongst the four themes as follows:

• Service performance. It is important that the IT PMO team establishes an

understanding of business stakeholders’ expectations of its service performance. With

this understanding, the team would then be better able to adapt and shape its service

delivery according to business stakeholders’ expectations in order to improve

perceptions of its service performance.

• Engagement and relationships. Also of significance to the perceived value of the IT

PMO is its relationships with its stakeholders. Besides ensuring positive business

perceptions of its service performance, the IT PMO must also effectively engage and

regularly communicate with its business stakeholders. While a shared understanding

of business stakeholders’ expectations helps build on the IT PMO’s relationships with

stakeholders, the robust relationships also help moderate shareholders’ expectations

of the IT PMO. In addition, positive perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance

would also enhance its relationships with business stakeholders, and conversely, an

218

effective engagement and healthy relationships would improve business perceptions

of the IT PMO’s service performance.

• Management of tensions and challenges. On the other hand, positive business

stakeholder perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance as well as effective

engagement and relationships between the IT PMO team and its business

stakeholders could help the IT PMO better manage or negotiate its way through the

tensions and challenges it is faced with.

• Perceived value. Both the IT PMO’s service performance and its engagement and

relationships with its business stakeholders have been established as key factors

directly influencing perceptions of its value delivery. However, both factors are also

impacted by the IT PMO’s tensions and challenges; and the IT PMO must therefore

effectively manage these tensions and challenges in order to ultimately lead to

perceptions of its value delivery.

Hence, in conclusion, this research makes an important contribution to understanding the

perceived value of the IT PMO: that perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance, the IT PMO’s engagement and working relationships with business stakeholders, and perceptions of the IT PMO’s effectiveness in managing the tensions and challenges it faces, are all key factors influencing the perceived value delivery of the IT PMO. The

conceptual model is thus established (see Figure 6.5) to further support the understanding of

this perceived value, describing the inter-relationships amongst these four themes.

To summarise, this research builds on the current knowledge of PMOs by confirming the

significance of service performance to the perceived value of the IT PMO. Analysis across

both studies was discussed along with the interpretation and synthesis of the findings from

both studies in order to develop an understanding of the perceived value of the IT PMO. The

questionnaire (quantitative) data and findings from both studies have been demonstrated to

be effective in assisting the IT PMO teams develop a shared understanding of their

stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions of their service performance. The overall

engagement process was effective in assisting both IT PMO teams develop a shared

understanding of business perceptions of their service performance, thus answering RQ1. In

addition to answering RQ1 and helping the IT PMO teams in this study address their real-

world problems, this research has also contributed to knowledge by establishing an

understanding of business stakeholders’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction with the service

performance of the IT PMO.

The qualitative evidence (interview data) in this study, supported with and quantitative

(questionnaire) data, also establishes that perceptions of the IT PMO’s value delivery appears

219

not only to be attributed to perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance, but the IT PMO

team’s engagement and working relationship with the rest of the organisation, as well as its

management of the tensions and challenges it faces. Perceptions of the IT PMO’s service

performance are closely-linked with its engagement and relationships in the organisation, and

together, these are associated with perceptions of the IT PMO’s value delivery. Likewise, if

the IT PMO team was seen to effectively manage these tensions, it could improve its

relationships with business stakeholders as well as business perceptions of its service

performance, and in turn, lead to perceptions of value delivery. Conceptualising based on

these findings thus leads to the articulation of a framework (see Figure 6.5) to develop an

understanding of the perceived value of the IT PMO, and hence RQ2 is also answered.

The findings in this research are supported by the literature which suggest that that the

tensions and challenges faced by PMOs, such as organisational politics and having to contend

with often differing stakeholder demands (Aubry, Richer & Lavoie-Tremblay 2014; Aubry et al.

2011), are some of the factors behind the short lifespan of PMOs (Aubry et al. 2010). While

confirming some of the tensions that IT PMOs face, for example having to balance between

flexibility and control, as well as competing stakeholder expectations and perceptions, the

findings also suggest that perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance as well as the IT

PMO team’s engagement and relationships with its stakeholders are also significantly

associated with the IT PMO’s perceived value. The following Chapter 7 concludes this

research project by summarising the findings in this study and discussing the practical

implications. The limitations of this research as well as suggestions for future work are also

presented and discussed.

220

7 CONCLUSION

The research findings and insights surrounding the service performance and perceived value

of the IT PMO have been presented and discussed in the preceding chapters 4, 5, and 6. In

the following sections, the theoretical implications are first discussed by highlighting the

significant findings of this research, followed by the implications of this research to IT PMO

practice. The strengths and limitations of this research study are also discussed, and

suggestions for future research offered.

7.1 Theoretical implications

7.1.1 Developing a shared understanding

This study empirically supports the claims in the literature that most PMOs struggle to justify

their value delivery (Hobbs & Aubry 2010; McKay et al. 2013; Singh, Keil & Kasi 2009). In

addition, the findings also suggest that in general, IT PMO teams may be unaware of how they

are perceived in their organisations, as was the case for both IT PMOs in this research where

IT PMO members were found to have few insights into how their IT PMO was perceived by

the business.

From the review of the literature (see Chapter 2), it can be established that the quality of the

IT PMO’s services is indicative of its perceived value, and with perceived value being directly

linked to the views of the stakeholder (Bourne 2011b; Mendelow 1981). It is therefore

important for the IT PMO team to develop a shared understanding of its stakeholders’

perspectives of the IT PMO’s service performance in order that it is better equipped to address

its perceived value. The findings reveal that the IT PMO team can be assisted in developing

a shared understanding of the IT PMO’s perceived service performance with the aim to take

ameliorating action to improve its perceived value (in relation to RQ1), and the ways in which

this can be achieved are presented as follows:

• The overall process adopted in this research has been demonstrated to be effective in

assisting the IT PMOs develop a shared understanding of the expectations and

perceptions of their service performance, and potentially empower the teams to

221

improve their perceived value. This overall process involves the interviews, the

administration of questionnaires, and the workshops where the findings from the

questionnaire data are presented in the form of radial diagrams along with the

discussions that follow.

• The comparison between both IT PMO team members’ and stakeholders’ expectations

and perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance has been shown to be helpful

for the IT PMO team to develop a shared understanding of business stakeholders’

perspectives of its service performance. By gathering participants’ expectations and

perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance and mapping the data onto radial

diagrams for comparison, the gaps between stakeholders’ expectations and

perceptions as well as the differences between both groups’ expectations and

perceptions can be highlighted for the IT PMO team in order that it might take

ameliorating actions.

• Equipped with a shared understanding of its service performance, the IT PMO team

can be aided in developing and articulating strategies to address gaps between

stakeholders’ perceptions and expectations. The information from the radial diagrams

has been shown to be useful for the IT PMO team to identify the differences between

the team’s and stakeholders’ perceptions and expectations. With this information, IT

PMO team members can re-focus their efforts on service functions that stakeholders

considered important for the IT PMO to perform. Conversely, this information could

also indicate to the team the service functions that the business considers unimportant

or do not value so that the team might consider reallocating its resources and efforts

elsewhere.

• However, while IT PMO teams may be empowered to address the perceived gaps and

subsequently improve perceptions of their value in their organisations, structural and

empowerment issues faced by some IT PMO teams might not allow members to

address some of the gaps in their stakeholders’ perceptions of the IT PMO’s service

performance. This would imply that a formalised structure with standardised policies

and processes are necessary for an IT PMO to function effectively.

• The radial diagrams have been demonstrated to help highlight areas of agreement or

disagreement amongst members within the IT PMO team. This is important for IT PMO

teams because a collective understanding must first be established amongst the IT

PMO team members before the IT PMO can begin to address the gaps in their service

performance as perceived by their stakeholders.

Aubry et al. (2014) advocate for some mode of dialogue in order to capture the multiple (and

often diverse) perspectives of PMO performance delivery, and the overall engagement

222

process in this study has been empirically shown to effectively accomplish this. While both IT

PMO teams in this study have been successfully assisted in developing a shared

understanding of their stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions of their IT PMO’s service

performance, the effectiveness of this overall process for all IT PMOs in practice cannot be

concluded based only on two studies. Additional studies must be conducted as part of future

research work before it can be concluded that this process is indeed effective. In summary,

both IT PMO teams were assisted in identifying the areas where there were gaps in their

service performance as perceived by their stakeholders, suggesting the effectiveness of the

overall engagement process employed in this study in helping members of IT PMO teams

develop a shared understanding of their stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions of service

performance.

7.1.2 Understanding perceived value

The second objective of this study is to develop an understanding of the IT PMO’s service

performance and the implications to its perceived value. This objective has also been achieved

in this research, and the major findings can be summarised as follows:

• The IT PMO’s service performance has been confirmed to be a significant factor

associated with the perceived value of the IT PMO, and this perceived value can be

established based on perceptions of its service quality which can be assessed by

comparing the expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance.

Perceptions of the IT PMO’ service performance meeting service expectations, for

example, might imply good quality of service performance.

• Stakeholders’ perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance has also been

demonstrated to be a significant factor influencing the perceived value of the IT PMO.

It is therefore important for the IT PMO team to gain a shared understanding of its

stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions of its service performance in order that it

might be better equipped to take action to ameliorate business perceptions of the IT

PMO’s service performance and value delivery.

• This study has also revealed that the IT PMO’s perceived value is not associated with

perceptions of its service performance alone. Other factors such as the IT PMO team’s

engagement and working relationships with its stakeholders, and its management of

the tensions and challenges it faces are also factors that are significantly linked to its

perceived value.

• It was shown that improving the IT PMO team’s working relationships with the rest of

the organisation might help improve perceptions of its value delivery, and it is therefore

223

important for members of the IT PMO team to build relationships and regularly engage

with its stakeholders. Having a ‘relationship manager’ to regularly engage and

communicate with the business could help the IT PMO accomplish this by bridging any

potential gap between the IT PMO and the business.

• The PMO can also be a ‘battleground’ of tensions and challenges (Pellegrinelli &

Garagna 2009), and the inability of the IT PMO team to manage these tensions could

impact perceptions of its abilities and performance. It is therefore also important that

business stakeholders are assured of the IT PMO team’s ability to manage the

tensions and challenges it is faced with to maintain positive business perceptions of

the IT PMO.

• All four themes surrounding the perceived value of the IT PMO that surfaced in this

study can be represented in a conceptual model (see Chapter 6, Figure 6.5), and the

inter-relationships amongst the four themes can be described as follows:

i. Firstly, it is important that the IT PMO team establishes an understanding of

business stakeholders’ expectations of its service performance; and with this

understanding, the team would then be better able to adapt and shape its

service delivery according to business stakeholders’ expectations in order to

improve perceptions of its service performance.

ii. Also of significance to the perceived value of the IT PMO is its relationships

with its stakeholders, where the IT PMO must effectively engage and regularly

communicate with its business stakeholders. While effective engagement and

healthy relationships might positively influence business perceptions of the IT

PMO’s service performance, positive perceptions of the IT PMO’s service

performance could also enhance the team’s relationships with its stakeholders.

iii. The IT PMO team’s inability to manage the tensions and challenges it faces

could undermine its relationships with its business stakeholders along with their

perceptions of its service performance. Although both the IT PMO’s service

performance and its engagement and relationships with its business

stakeholders have been established as key factors directly influencing

perceptions of its value delivery, these factors are also impacted by the IT

PMO’s tensions and challenges; and the IT PMO team’s perceived

effectiveness in managing these tensions and challenges might lead to

business stakeholders’ perceptions of its business value.8 Positive business

perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance as well as effective

8 Business value is not necessarily associated with only monetary or economic value (Project Management Institute 2013; Thomas & Mullaly 2007). An effective project management capability, for example, would better equip the organisation to meet its strategic goals, and hence deliver business value.

224

engagement and relationships between the IT PMO team and its business

stakeholders might also help the IT PMO team better manage or negotiate its

way through these tensions and challenges.

To summarise, this investigation supports the assertions in the literature (Brady & Cronin

2001; DeLone & McLean 2003; Kuo, Wu & Deng 2009; Tam 2004) that the perceived quality

of service performance of a service provider (such as the IT PMO) is indicative of its perceived

value. Study findings also reveal that service performance is not the only factor influencing the

perceived value of the IT PMO. Other considerations such as the IT PMO’s engagement and

relationship with its key stakeholders, as well as how effective it is in managing the tensions

and challenges it faces are also seen to be associated with its perceived value in the

organisation; and that inter-relationships exist amongst these four themes (see Figure 6.5).

Although the findings from this study have helped establish an understanding of the significant

inter-relationships amongst the IT PMO’s perceived value, its service performance,

engagement and relationships, and its management of tensions, more research must be

conducted before any direct causal links, especially amidst real-life organisational complexity,

can be established. This research has nevertheless contributed to some understanding of the

perceived value of the IT PMO.

7.1.3 Understanding stakeholder satisfaction/dissatisfaction

This study has also culminated in an understanding of stakeholders’ satisfaction with the IT

PMO’s service performance. Adopting Herzberg’s (1966) concept of satisfiers and dissatisfiers

in the context of this study, business stakeholders’ satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the IT

PMO’s service performance can be ascertained (see Table 6.3).

In Chapter 6, it has been established that stakeholders are likely to be satisfied if these satisfier

conditions are met: (i) the IT PMO was expected by stakeholders to perform a function; (ii) it

was perceived by the stakeholder to be performing that function; and (iii) its performance was

meeting (or above) the stakeholder’s expectations, and that they would be dissatisfied if: (i)

the IT PMO was expected to perform a function; but (ii) it was not perceived by the stakeholder

to be performing that function. On the other hand, if stakeholders did not expect the IT PMO

to perform a certain function but considered it to be doing so, they would not necessarily be

satisfied. This would explain why the IT PMO exceeding expectations might not necessarily

result in stakeholders’ satisfaction.

225

This research has thus resulted in a potentially significant theoretical contribution to

understanding stakeholders’ satisfaction/dissatisfaction with the IT PMO’s service

performance.

7.2 Implications for practice

Although the findings from this research might not necessarily be representative of all IT

PMOs, these findings are nevertheless indicative of the issues faced by the IT PMO, especially

the struggle with justifying its business value in the organisation. Hence, there is a need to

reflect upon these findings on how they might imply for IT PMOs in practice:

• Assessing IT PMO service performance and assisting the IT PMO team develop a shared understanding. In both studies, almost all participants were in agreement that the

overall engagement process and the workshop session were helpful in assisting IT PMO

team members develop a shared understanding of the expectations and perceptions of

the IT PMO’s service performance. This would therefore suggest that the overall process

adopted in this study involving the administration of questionnaires, the presentation of the

questionnaire data in the form of radial diagrams, and the workshop session, might be an

effective approach to assessing the service performance of the IT PMO. In addition, this

approach is seen to also help IT PMO team members develop a shared understanding of

their stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions, and hence assisting them to identify the

gaps in their IT PMO’s service performance.

• Addressing the perceived value of the IT PMO. In addition to assisting the IT PMO team

develop a shared understanding of its service performance, there is also a need to reflect

upon whether the IT PMO team developing a shared understanding of its service

performance would assist it in taking ameliorating actions to improve its perceived value.

The empirical data in this research shows an improvement in business stakeholders’

perceptions of one IT PMO’s value delivery after the team had taken ameliorating actions

to address the gaps in stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions. However, not all IT

PMO teams might necessarily be empowered to take ameliorating actions to address their

perceived value for reasons such as the lack of a formal IT PMO structure, or the lack of

empowerment. This is an important implication for IT PMOs in practice as the findings

suggest that a formalised IT PMO structure with standardised policies and processes, as

226

well as the empowerment of the IT PMO are necessary for the effective functioning of an

IT PMO.

• Factors associated with the perceived value of the IT PMO. While confirming that

service performance is significantly linked to the perceived value of the IT PMO, this study

also suggests that other factors such as the IT PMO team’s engagement and relationships

with its stakeholders, as well perceptions of its management of tensions and challenges,

are also associated with the perceived value of the IT PMO. Therefore, it is also important

for the IT PMO team to also maintain a close working relationship with its business

stakeholders and regularly engage and communicate with them to build sound

relationships the business. Most IT PMOs are faced with inherently opposing tensions and

challenges and it is therefore also important that the IT PMO team is seen by its

stakeholders to be able to cope with them, or else their perceptions of the IT PMO team’s

capabilities and value delivery might be adversely affected.

• Stakeholder satisfaction with IT PMO service performance. An understanding of

business stakeholders’ satisfaction with the IT PMO team’s service performance was also

established in this research study, and the findings can help IT PMO teams in practice to

ensure that their business stakeholders are satisfied with their service performance.

• Applicability to non-IT-related IT PMOs. Although this study is mainly pertaining to IT-

related PMOs, the practical implications discussed above might also be applicable to all

PMOs.

7.3 Strengths and limitations

7.3.1 Reflections on the grounding of this research

One of the strengths of this research is that the claims, findings and outcomes of this study

are grounded in the data gathered in the real world, and this is complemented by the

conceptual underpinnings that were adopted in this research that are also grounded in the

relevant literature. The empirical research in this study has supported the development of an

understanding of the perceived value of the IT PMO by studying the expectations and

perceptions of the service performance of the IT PMO. In addition, by comparing the

227

expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO’s stakeholders, this research has yielded valuable

insights into understanding the issues surrounding the service performance and perceived

value of the IT PMO.

7.3.2 Reflections on the research approach

The adoption of action research seemed to be an appropriate choice of method for the conduct

of this research as the researcher could bring about improvements through making changes

in a problematic situation and also generate new knowledge and new insights. This approach

has allowed this researcher to bridge the practice-research gap (Van de Ven 2007) and work

closely with IT PMO teams in the real world to help them solve their problems, while at the

same time build knowledge by developing an understanding of the implications of perceptions

of their service performance to their perceived value. In Chapter 3, reflection and learning

were considered as key components of the action research cycle (Checkland 1991; McKay

2002), and it can be confirmed that both reflection and learning have indeed taken place this

study with respect to the conceptual framework employed (F), the methodology used (M), and

the implications of actions taken in a real-world problem situation (P) in relation to the area of

interest (A).

One of the strengths of this action research study is that the intervention adopted was effective

in achieving the desired practical outcomes for the IT PMOs in the real-world situation. The

nature of action research requires the intervention of the researcher in the problem-solving,

and the overall process adopted in this study involving questionnaires, interviews, and

workshop sessions had proven to be useful in helping the IT PMO teams develop an

understanding of their business stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO’s

service performance. The concerns when undertaking collaborative research highlighted in

the literature (Denis & Lehoux 2009; Van de Ven 2007) were acknowledged and taken into

consideration, and as a result, this intervention allowed for the confirmation of practical

outcomes, for example, improved business perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance

and value delivery as a result of the IT PMO team being equipped with a shared understanding

and taking ameliorating actions.

The adoption of pragmatism as the paradigm underpinning this research allowed for the mixing

of both qualitative and quantitative methods of inquiry and data collection, drawing from their

strengths while minimising their weaknesses (Greene & Hall 2010), in order to focus on the

research problem. In addition to improving data credibility (Creswell 2010; Yin 2009), the use

of both qualitative (interviews and workshops) and quantitative (questionnaires) types of data

228

collection methods in this study allowed for the triangulation of data during analysis and

confirmation of findings, thus strengthening this research.

Also, since part of the aim of this research was to also assist IT PMO teams in the real world

to better understand their service performance and value delivery, the senior IT management

who were approached in both studies were also more receptive to participating in this research

as they had anticipated that the study findings would be beneficial for their IT PMO teams.

7.3.3 Reflections on the research quality

This research has been conducted while being mindful of the quality considerations to ensure

good and convincing research findings. In Chapter 3 (section 3.8), it was argued that quality

considerations are critical to ensure a good and convincing set of research findings. The

research quality for this study is therefore discussed based on the trustworthiness (credibility,

dependability, transferability, and confirmability) and authenticity (fairness, ontological and

educative authenticity, catalytic and tactical authenticity) criteria (Lincoln & Guba 1986;

Lincoln, Lynham & Guba 2018):

• Credibility. The detailed representation of participants’ perspectives and views in this

study support the credibility of this research. Action research allowed for a closer

engagement within the study environment and develop an in-depth understanding of the

phenomenon, and the different types of data collected (questionnaire and interviews) from

multiple sources (business and management stakeholders, and members of the IT PMO

teams) helped validate and confirm the researcher’s interpretations. The use of multiple

methods for data analysis (radial diagrams for the analysis of the questionnaire data,

grounded theory analysis of the interview data, and the triangulation of both types of data)

were useful in corroborating the evidence obtained. When discussing the results of the

studies (in Chapters 4, 5, and 6), this researcher had also articulated his own reflections

as the researcher to strengthen the interpretation of the findings. In addition, peer

debriefing with colleagues who have many years of experience in the fields of IS and

project management, examining and verifying this research data and results also helped

establish confidence in the accuracy of interpretation in addressing the credibility of this

research.

• Dependability refers to ability for others to track the process and procedures used to

collect and interpret the data, while confirmability links the research data with the

researcher’s own interpretations (Lincoln & Guba 1986; Lincoln, Lynham & Guba 2018).

In addition to the design of this research study, and the inclusion of a detailed and thorough

229

explanation of the data collection and data analysis (in Chapter 3), all documentation and

procedures used for data collection and analysis in this study provide an audit trail of this

research process. Using CAQDAS and Excel, as well as writing of notes and memos have

also helped maintain consistency in meaning or interpretation during the coding process.

• Transferability refers to how lessons learned in this study might assist the reader to

decide whether similar processes would work in his/her own settings (Lincoln & Guba

1986; Lincoln, Lynham & Guba 2018), and the narrative descriptions incorporated in

presenting the results of both studies helps provide a holistic and realistic portrayal of this

study to the reader. In addition to presenting the research data and findings, references

were also made to the context and background of participants, IT PMOs, organisations,

and even myself as researcher in this study.

In addition to trustworthiness in assessing qualitative research rigour, Guba and Lincoln also

proposed authenticity (i.e. fairness, ontological and educative authenticity, catalytic and

tactical authenticity) to support the assessment of quality of [qualitative] research (Guba &

Lincoln 1989; Lincoln & Guba 1986; Lincoln, Lynham & Guba 2018):

• Fairness ensures that all participants’ views, values, claims, concerns, and voices are

presented fairly. The relevant comments and views of all participants in this study have

been included and discussed, along with the radial diagrams representing the collective

views and opinions of all participants

• Ontological authenticity is defined as the criteria for determining a higher level of self-

awareness by individual research participants, whilst educative authenticity refers to

participants’ awareness about the people with whom these participants encounter in their

respective organisations (Lincoln, Lynham & Guba 2018). The engagement of participants

through the interviews, questionnaires, and workshop sessions in this study has raised

awareness amongst the IT PMO team members about their own perceptions and

expectations of the IT PMO, as well as those of their stakeholders; addresses both criteria

for ontological and educative authenticity.

• Catalytic authenticity refers to the ability to prompt action on the part of research

participants, whilst tactical authenticity involves the researcher in the training of the

participants (Lincoln, Lynham & Guba 2018). Both criteria are met in this study as the

presentation of the findings at the workshop session and the facilitation of discussion

amongst participants has helped the members of the IT PMO teams develop some level

230

of shared understanding, and thus be empowered to articulate strategies to address any

gap in their respective IT PMO’s perceived value.

To summarise, this study has fulfilled the quality considerations to ensure good and convincing

set of research findings.

7.3.4 Limitations

This research is not without its limitations. As this researcher reflects back over this research,

there are a few limitations which need to be acknowledged.

Firstly, the length of this researcher’s involvement at the organisations could have been longer.

Had the researcher’s involvement been extended, more insights might have been gathered. It

would also have been interesting to incorporate a longitudinal element in the design, to track

the changes in the expectations and perceptions of IT PMO’s service performance and

perceived value over time, as well as to gain some impression of the impact of the

interventions in this study. Whilst acknowledging that direct causal links are impossible to

establish amidst real-life organisational complexity, it would have been interesting to revisit

the participants’ expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO’s service performance and

perceived value at some later stage in time9.

Another limitation is that the findings are based on studies at two organisations, involving data

collected from twenty-one participants. Therefore, it cannot be claimed with certainty that

these findings are representative of IT PMOs in practice. With only two research studies, it

cannot be established with certainty that additional studies might not yield new and additional

significant insights. The findings might perhaps have greater credibility if more studies were

conducted in different types of contexts, for example IT PMOs from different industry sectors.

Perhaps this is a limitation, but it can also be considered for future research.

The questionnaire in this research study was designed around the IT PMO’s service

performance, comparing participants’ expectations and perceptions. Therein lies another

limitation, where other factors such as the IT PMO’s engagement and relationships with its

stakeholders, as well as its management of tensions and challenges were not taken into

consideration in the design of the questionnaire in this study. For future consideration, this

questionnaire could potentially yield more valuable insights if it was further developed to

incorporate assessments on the IT PMO’s engagement and relationships with its business

stakeholders, as well as its management of these tensions and challenges.

9 I had the opportunity to meet with some of the participants at TRANS a year after the workshop session was conducted, and managed to gather some very useful insights during the follow-up meeting.

231

7.4 Suggestions for future research

While this research study has helped answer questions about the service performance and

perceived value of the IT PMO, some questions have also been raised. In this section, some

of the possible areas which may deserve additional investigation are explored.

As a result of this research study, an approach for assessing the service performance of the

IT PMO by gathering and comparing business stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions of

service performance has been established. Although the data from the interviews and the

workshop were helpful in analysing the findings in relation to both themes, there is potential

for more extensive future research in both the IT PMO’s engagement and relationships with

its stakeholders and its management of tensions and challenges to the perceived value of the

IT PMO. Further research in both these areas could help further understanding of their

implications to the perceived value of the IT PMO. The incorporation of both these themes into

the design of the questionnaire could also be explored in future research. While it may not be

appropriate at this juncture to claim a causal relationship between these factors and the

perceived value of the IT PMO, further in-depth research might help establish such a

relationship. These study findings could also be presented at industry forums or published in

the industry press in order to gather feedback and insights as to how practitioners could benefit

from these findings.

This instrument could also be used to benchmark and track the service performance of IT

PMOs over time; and this would be particularly significant for IT PMOs in practice. Future

research involving longitudinal studies could further substantiate the effectiveness of this

instrument by tracking the changes in the expectations and perceptions of the IT PMO’s

service performance over time. Also, while this study has led to a potentially useful instrument

(involving the questionnaires and radial diagrams) for assessing the service performance of

the IT PMO, future research work with larger sample sizes might confirm the effectiveness of

this instrument.

Another potential area for future research might be to compare the service performance of IT

PMOs across the various industry sectors. Research could also be extended outside the

organisation, for example assessing the service performance of IT PMO functions that are

outsourced to external parties.

Furthermore, while this study has been focused on understanding the service performance

and perceived value of the IT PMO, its conceptual underpinnings of comparing expectations

232

and perceptions of service performance could also be adopted in future research studies to

understand the perceived value of other organisational IS entities.

7.5 Final reflections

This research study is concluded by reflecting on the journey undertaken. The researcher’s

personal work experiences with a PMO had motivated this research to understand the value

of the IT PMO. The years of work, together with the invaluable experiences and insights of all

parties involved in this research has yielded in a deeper understanding of both the service

performance and the perceived value of the IT PMO value. In addition, both IT PMO teams in

this study have been assisted in developing a shared understanding of their service

performance. The exploratory and participatory nature of this research has also helped provide

practical implications and useful insights into the IT PMO practice and at the same time led to

suggestions for future research.

------------- END --------------

233

REFERENCES

Adams, RJ, Smart, P & Huff, AS 2017, 'Shades of grey: guidelines for working with the grey literature in systematic reviews for management and organizational studies', International Journal of Management Reviews, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 432-454.

Ågerfalk, P, J. 2010, 'Getting pragmatic', European Journal of Information Systems, vol. 19, no. 3, p. 251.

Allen, IE & Seaman, CA 2007, 'Likert scales and data analyses', Quality progress, vol. 40, no. 7, p. 64.

Altheide, DL & Johnson, JM 1994, 'Criteria for Assessing Interpretive Validity in Qualitative Research', in NK Denzin and YS Lincoln (eds), Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, California and London.

Altheide, DL & Johnson, JM 2011, 'Reflections on interpretive adequacy in qualitative research', The SAGE handbook of qualitative research, vol. 4, pp. 581-594.

Alvesson, M & Sandberg, J 2011, 'Generating research questions through problematization', Academy of management review, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 247-271.

Andersen, B, Henriksen, B & Aarseth, W 2007, 'Benchmarking of Project Management Office Establishment: Extracting Best Practices', Journal of Management in Engineering, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 97-104.

Arias, E, Eden, H, Fischer, G, Gorman, A & Scharff, E 2000, 'Transcending the individual human mind—creating shared understanding through collaborative design', ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 84-113.

Artto, K, Kulvik, I, Poskela, J & Turkulainen, V 2011, 'The integrative role of the project management office in the front end of innovation', International Journal of Project Management, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 408-421.

Asubonteng, P, McCleary, KJ & Swan, JE 1996, 'SERVQUAL revisited: a critical review of service quality', Journal of Services marketing, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 62-81.

Aubry, M 2013, 'The Design of Research Programs: Example from a PMO Research Program', in D Nathalie, M Ralf and S Shankar (eds), Novel Approaches to Organizational Project Management Research : Translational and Transformational, Samfundslitteratur, Frederiksberg, DENMARK, pp. 237-265.

Aubry, M & Hobbs, B 2011, 'A Fresh Look at the Contribution of Project Management to Organizational Performance', Project Management Journal, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 3-16.

Aubry, M, Hobbs, B & Thuillier, D 2007, 'A New Framework for Understanding Organisational Project Management Through the PMO', International Journal of Project Management, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 328-336.

Aubry, M, Hobbs, B & Thuillier, D 2009, in International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, Vol. 2, p. 8.

Aubry, M, Müller, R, Hobbs, B & Blomquist, T 2010, 'Project Management Offices in Transition', International Journal of Project Management, vol. 28, no. 8, pp. 766-778.

234

Aubry, M, Richer, M-C & Lavoie-Tremblay, M 2014, 'Governance performance in complex environment: The case of a major transformation in a university hospital', International Journal of Project Management, vol. 32, no. 8, pp. 1333-1345.

Aubry, M, Richer, M-C, Lavoie-Tremblay, M & Cyr, G 2011, 'Pluralism in PMO Performance: The case of a PMO Dedicated to a Major Organizational Transformation', Project Management Journal, vol. 42, no. 6, pp. 60-77.

Avison, D, Lau, F, Myers, M & Nielsen, PA 1999, 'Action Research', Communications of the ACM, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 94-97.

Avison, DE 1993, 'Research in information systems development and the discipline of information systems,' Proceedings of the 4th Australian Conference on Information Systems, 1-27.

Baskerville, R & Myers, MD 2004, 'Special Issue on Action Research in Information Systems: Making IS Research Relevant to Practice--Foreword', MIS Quarterly., vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 329-335.

Baskerville, RL & Wood-Harper, AT 1996, 'A Critical Perspective on Action Research as a Method for Information Systems Research', Journal of Information Technology (Routledge, Ltd.), vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 235-246.

Benson, JK 1983, 'Paradigm and Praxis in Organizational Analysis', Research in Organizational Behavior, vol. 5, pp. 33-56.

Biesta, G 2010, 'Pragmatism and the philosophical foundations of mixed methods research', SAGE handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research, vol. 2, pp. 95-117.

Bloomberg, LD & Volpe, M 2012, Completing your qualitative dissertation: A road map from beginning to end, Sage Publications.

Bolton, RN & Drew, JH 1991, 'A Multistage Model of Customers' Assessments of Service Quality and Value', Journal of Consumer Research, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 375-384.

Bolton, RN & Lemon, KN 1999, 'A dynamic model of customers' usage of services: Usage as an antecedent and consequence of satisfaction', Journal of marketing research, pp. 171-186.

Booth, WC, Colomb, GG & Williams, JM 2008, The Craft of Research, University of Chicago Press.

Bourne, L 2011a, 'Advising Upwards: Managing the Perceptions and Expectations of Senior Management Stakeholders', Management Decision, vol. 49, no. 6, pp. 1001-1023.

Bourne, L 2011b, 'Stakeholder Relationship Management: Enhancing PMO Services through Effective Engagement and Communication', in C Letavec and D Bolles (eds), The PMOSIG Program Management Office Handbook: Strategic and Tactical Insights for Improving Results, J Ross Publishing, USA, pp. pp 47-74.

Bourne, L & Walker, DHT 2005, 'Visualising and Mapping Stakeholder Influence', Management Decision, vol. 43, no. 5, pp. 649-660.

Bourne, L & Walker, DHT 2006, 'Visualising Stakeholder Influence - Two Australian Examples', Project Management Journal, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 5-21.

Brady, MK & Cronin, JJ 2001, 'Customer orientation: Effects on customer service perceptions and outcome behaviors', Journal of service Research, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 241-251.

235

Bredillet, C, Tywoniak, S & Tootoonchy, M 2017, 'Exploring the dynamics of project management office and portfolio management co-evolution: A routine lens', International Journal of Project Management, vol. (article in press), pp. 1-16.

Buchholz, RA & Rosenthal, SB 1996, 'Toward a New Understanding of Moral Pluralism', Business Ethics Quarterly, vol. 6, no. 03, pp. 263-275.

Burrell, G & Morgan, G 1979, Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis : Elements of the Sociology of Corporate Life, Heinemann.

Buttle, F 1996, 'SERVQUAL: review, critique, research agenda', European Journal of marketing, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 8-32.

Cameron, KS 1986a, 'Effectiveness as Paradox: Consensus and Conflict in Conceptions of Organizational Effectiveness', Management Science, vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 539-553.

Cameron, KS 1986b, 'A Study of Organizational Effectiveness and its Predictors', Management Science, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 87-112.

Cameron, KS & Quinn, RE 2011, Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture : Based on the Competing Values Framework, Jossey-Bass, John Wiley & Sons Inc, 432 Elizabeth Ave, Somerset, NJ, 08873.

Charmaz, K 2008, 'Grounded Theory as an Emergent Method', in SN Hesse-Biber and P Leavy (eds), Handbook of Emergent Methods, The Guilford Press, New York, pp. 155-172.

Charmaz, K 2014, Constructing Grounded Theory, Second edn., SAGE Publications.

Checkland, P 1991, 'From Framework through Experience to Learning: The Essential Nature of Action Research', in HE Nissen, HK Klein and R Hirschheim (eds), Information Systems Research Contemporary Approaches and Emergent Traditions, Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 397-403.

Checkland, P & Holwell, S 1998, 'Action Research: Its Nature and Validity', Systemic Practice and Action Research, vol. 11, no. 1, p. 9.

Chen, W & Hirschheim, R 2004, 'A Paradigmatic and Methodological Examination of Information Systems Research from 1991 to 2001', Information Systems Journal, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 197-235.

Cherryholmes, CH 1992, 'Notes on pragmatism and scientific realism', Educational researcher, vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 13-17.

Chua, WF 1986, 'Radical Developments in Accounting Thought', The Accounting Review, vol. 61, no. 4, pp. 601-632.

Clark, HH & Brennan, SE 1991, 'Grounding in Communication', in LB Resnick, JM Levine and SD Teasley (eds), Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition, American Psychological Association., pp. 127-149.

Computer Economics 2011, Project Managers and Project Management Offices Both Gaining Ground in the Enterprise, 3.

Corley, KG & Gioia, DA 2004, 'Identity Ambiguity and Change in the Wake of a Corporate Spin-Off', Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 173-208.

Creswell, J 2009, Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Method Approaches, Third edn., Sage Publications.

236

Creswell, JW 2010, 'Mapping the Developing Landscape of Mixed Methods Research ', in A Tashakkori and C Teddlie (eds), Sage Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research, Sage Publications, USA, pp. 45-68.

Creswell, JW & Creswell, JD 2005, 'Mixed methods research: Developments, debates, and dilemmas', Research in organizations: Foundations and methods of inquiry, pp. 315-326.

Creswell, JW & Miller, DL 2000, 'Determining validity in qualitative inquiry', Theory into practice, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 124-130.

Cronin, JJ, Brady, MK, Brand, RR, Hightower Jr, R & Shemwell, DJ 1997, 'A cross-sectional test of the effect and conceptualization of service value', Journal of services Marketing, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 375-391.

Cronin, JJ, Brady, MK & Hult, GTM 2000, 'Assessing the Effects of Quality, Value, and Customer Satisfaction on Consumer Behavioral Intentions in Service Environments', Journal of Retailing, vol. 76, no. 2, Summer2000, p. 193.

Crotty, M 1998, The Foundations of Social Research: Meaning & Perspective in the Research Process, St Leonards, NSW : Allen & Unwin, St Leonards, NSW.

Curlee, W 2008, 'Modern Virtual Project Management: The Effects of a Centralized and Decentralized Project Management Office', Project Management Journal, vol. 39, pp. S83-S96.

Dai, CX & Wells, WG 2004, 'An Exploration of Project Management Office Features and Their Relationship to Project Performance', International Journal of Project Management, vol. 22, no. 7, pp. 523-532.

Daniel, EM, Ward, JM & Franken, A 2014, 'A dynamic capabilities perspective of IS project portfolio management', The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 95-111.

Darling, EJ & Whitty, SJ 2016, 'The Project Management Office: It’s Just Not What It Used To Be', International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 282-308.

de Almeida, CC 2012, 'The Methodological Influence of Peirce's Pragmatism on Knowledge Organization', Knowledge Organization, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 204-215.

DeLone, WH & McLean, ER 1992, 'Information Systems Success: The Quest for the Dependent Variable', Information Systems Research, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 60-95.

DeLone, WH & McLean, ER 2003, 'The DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: A Ten-Year Update', Journal of Management Information Systems, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 9-30.

Denis, J-L & Lehoux, P 2009, 'Collaborative research: Renewing action and governing science', The Sage handbook of organizational research methods, pp. 363-380.

Denzin, NK 2001, Interpretive interactionism, Sage.

Denzin, NK 2012, 'Triangulation 2.0', Journal of Mixed Methods Research, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 80-88.

Desouza, KC & Evaristo, JR 2006, 'Project Management Offices: A Case of Knowledge-Based Archetypes', International Journal of Information Management, vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 414-423.

Dey, I 1999, Grounding grounded theory: Guidelines for qualitative inquiry, JSTOR.

237

Dey, I 2005, Qualitative data analysis: A user friendly guide for social scientists, Routledge.

Dickinson, W 2010, 'Visual displays for mixed methods findings', in SAGE Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, Sage, pp. 469-504.

Dierckx de Casterlé, B, Gastmans, C, Bryon, E & Denier, Y 2012, 'QUAGOL: A guide for Qualitative Data Analysis', International Journal of Nursing Studies, vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 360-371.

do Valle, JAS, e Silvia, WdS & Soares, CAP 2008, 'Project Management Office (PMO) - Principles in Practice', AACE International Transactions, pp. 1-9.

Eisenhardt, KM 1989, 'Building theories from case study research', Academy of management review, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 532-550.

Englund, RL, Graham, RJ & Dinsmore, PC 2003, Creating the project office: A manager's guide to leading organizational change, John Wiley & Sons.

ESI International 2011, The Global State of the PMO in 2011: Its Value, Effectiveness and Role as the Hub of Training, 1.

ESI International 2013, The Global State of the PMO: An Analysis for 2013, 1.

ESI International 2015, The Global State of the PMO: An analysis for 2015, 1.

Eveleens, JL & Verhoef, C 2010, 'The rise and fall of the chaos report figures', IEEE software, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 30-36.

Fernandes, G, Ward, S & Araújo, M 2013, 'Developing a Framework to Improve and Embed Project Management Practices in Organisations', Procedia Technology, vol. 9, pp. 846-856.

Ferreira, H, Tereso, AP & Fernandes, AGG 2016, 'Conceptualization of project management offices structures,' ICOPEV 2016-3rd International Conference on Project Evaluation, University of Minho, 261-266.

Frels, RK & Onwuegbuzie, AJ 2013, 'Administering Quantitative Instruments With Qualitative Interviews: A Mixed Research Approach', Journal of Counseling & Development, vol. 91, no. 2, 04//, pp. 184-194.

Galliers, RD 1991, 'Choosing Appropriate Information Systems Research Approaches: A Revised Taxonomy ', in HE Nissen, HK Klein and R Hirschheim (eds), Information Systems Research: Contemporary Approaches and Emergent Traditions, Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., North-Holland, pp. pp 327-345.

Galliers, RD 2011, 'In celebration of diversity in information systems research', Journal of Information Technology, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 299-301.

Gioia, DA, Corley, KG & Hamilton, AL 2012, 'Seeking Qualitative Rigor in Inductive Research: Notes on the Gioia Methodology', Organizational Research Methods, vol. 16, no. 1, January 1, 2013, pp. 15-31.

Glaser, BG, Strauss, AL & Strutzel, E 1968, 'The discovery of grounded theory; strategies for qualitative research', Nursing research, vol. 17, no. 4, p. 364.

Glass, RL 2005, 'IT Failure Rates-70% or 10-15%?', IEEE Software, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 110-112.

238

Göb, R, McCollin, C & Ramalhoto, MF 2007, 'Ordinal methodology in the analysis of Likert scales', Quality & Quantity, vol. 41, no. 5, pp. 601-626.

Goldkuhl, G 2011, 'Pragmatism vs interpretivism in qualitative information systems research', European Journal of Information Systems, vol. 21, no. 2, p. 135.

Goles, T & Hirschheim, R 2000, 'The paradigm is dead, the paradigm is dead…long live the paradigm: the legacy of Burrell and Morgan', Omega, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 249-268.

Grainger, N, McKay, J & Marshall, P 2009, 'Learning from a strategic failure,' The 20th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, Melbourne, Victoria: ACIS, 362-372.

Gray, DE 2009, 'Theoretical Perspectives and Research Methodologies', in Doing Research in the Real World, Sage Publications Inc, USA, pp. 39-67.

Greene, JC & Hall, JN 2010, 'Dialectics and Pragmatism', in A Tashakkori and C Teddlie (eds), Sage Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research, Sage Publications, USA, pp. 119-143.

Gronroos, C 1983, 'Strategic Management andMarketingintheServiceSector', Marketing Science Institute, Cambridge, Massachusetts, Report,no. 83-104

Guba, EG 1990, The Paradigm dialog, Sage, Newbury Park, California.

Guba, EG & Lincoln, YS 1989, Fourth generation evaluation, Sage.

Guba, EG & Lincoln, YS 1994, 'Competing Paradigms in Qualitative Research', in NK Denzin and YS Lincoln (eds), Handbook of Qualitative Research., Sage Publications, Inc, Thousand Oaks, CA US, pp. 105-117.

Hannan, MT & Freeman, J 1977, 'The population ecology of organizations', American journal of sociology, vol. 82, no. 5, pp. 929-964.

Herzberg, F 1966, Work and the Nature of Man, Cleveland, Ohio : World Pub. Co., Cleveland, Ohio.

Hevner, AR, March, ST, Park, J & Ram, S 2004, 'Design Science in Information Systems Research', MIS Quarterly, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 75-105.

Hill, G 2004, 'Evolving the Project Management Office: A Competency Continuum', Information systems management, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 45-51.

Hobbs, B & Aubry, M 2007, 'A Multi-Phase Research Program Investigating Project Management Offices (PMOs): The Results of Phase 1', Project Management Journal, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 74-86.

Hobbs, B & Aubry, M 2010, The Project Management Office (PMO): A Quest For Understanding, Project Management Institute, Newtown Square, Pa.

Hobbs, B, Aubry, M & Thuillier, D 2008, 'The Project Management Office as an Organisational Innovation', International Journal of Project Management, vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 547-555.

Hunt, W 2000, 'Shared Understanding: Implications for Computer Supported Cooperative Work', URL: http://www. dgp. utoronto. ca/people/WilliamHunt/qualifier. html,

Hurt, M & Thomas, JL 2009, 'Building Value Through Sustainable Project Management Offices', Project Management Journal, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 55-72.

239

Jiang, J, Klein, G, Parolia, N & Li, Y 2012, 'An Analysis of Three SERVQUAL Variations in Measuring Information System Service Quality', Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 149-162.

Johnson, RB & Onwuegbuzie, AJ 2004, 'Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come', Educational Researcher, vol. 33, no. 7, October 1, 2004, pp. 14-26.

Jugdev, K & Müller, R 2005, 'A retrospective look at our evolving understanding of project success,' Project Management Institute, 19-31.

Kano, N 1984, 'Attractive quality and must-be quality', J. Jpn. Soc. Quality Control, vol. 14, pp. 39-48.

Kaufman, C & Korrapati, RB 2007, 'A project management office (PMO) framework for successful implementation of information technology projects,' Allied Academies International Conference. Academy of Management Information and Decision Sciences. Proceedings, Jordan Whitney Enterprises, Inc, 1-6.

Kelley, J & Walker, MR 1989, 'The origins of CPM: A personal history', pm network, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 7-22.

Kendall, GI & Rollins, SC 2003, Advanced Project Portfolio Management and the PMO : Multiplying ROI at Warp Speed, J. Ross Publishing, Conyers, GA.

Kerzner, H 2003, 'Strategic Planning for a Project Office', Project Management Journal, vol. 34, no. 2, p. 13.

Kerzner, HR & Saladis, FP 2009, Value-Driven Project Management, 1 edn., Wiley, Hoboken.

Kettinger, WJ & Lee, CC 1994, 'Perceived service quality and user satisfaction with the information services function', Decision sciences, vol. 25, no. 5‐6, pp. 737-766.

Kettinger, WJ & Lee, CC 1997, 'Pragmatic Perspectives on the Measurement of Information Systems Service Quality', MIS Quarterly, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 223-240.

KPMG 2013, Project Management Survey Report 2013: Strategies to Capture Business Value, 1.

Kuo, Y-F, Wu, C-M & Deng, W-J 2009, 'The relationships among service quality, perceived value, customer satisfaction, and post-purchase intention in mobile value-added services', Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 887-896.

Kutsch, E, Ward, J, Hall, M & Algar, J 2015, 'The Contribution of the Project Management Office: A Balanced Scorecard Perspective', Information Systems Management, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 105-118.

Lee, AS & Nickerson, JV 2010, 'Theory As a Case of Design: Lessons for Design from the Philosophy of Science,' 2010 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 1-8.

Leemann, T 2002, 'Project management: managing the chaos of change', Journal of business strategy, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 11-15.

Lehtinen, U & Lehtinen, JR 1982, Service quality: a study of quality dimensions, Service Management Institute.

Leininger, M 1994, 'Evaluation criteria and critique of qualitative research studies', Critical issues in qualitative research methods, pp. 95-115.

240

Letavec, CJ 2006, The program management office: Establishing, managing and growing the value of a PMO, J. Ross Publishing.

Letavec, D & Bolles, C 2011, The PMOSIG Program Management Office Handbook, 1st edn., J Ross Publishing Inc, Fort Lauderdale, Florida.

Lewin, K 1935, A dynamic theory of personality: Selected papers McGraw Hill, New York & London.

Lewis, RC & Booms, BH 1983, 'The Marketing Aspect of Service Quality', in L Berry, G Shostack and G Upah (eds), Emerging Perspective on Service Marketing, American Marketing Association, Chicago, IL., pp. 99-107.

Lincoln, YS & Guba, EG 1986, 'But is it rigorous? Trustworthiness and authenticity in naturalistic evaluation', New directions for evaluation, vol. 1986, no. 30, pp. 73-84.

Lincoln, YS, Lynham, SA & Guba, EG 2018, 'Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences, revisited', in NK Denzin and YS Lincoln (eds), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage Publications Inc, USA, pp. 97-150.

Liu, L & Yetton, P 2007, 'The contingent effects on project performance of conducting project reviews and deploying project management offices', IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 789-799.

Martin, NL, Pearson, JM & Furumo, K 2007, 'IS project management: Size, practices and the project management office', Journal of Computer Information Systems, vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 52-60.

Mathiassen, L 2017, 'Designing Engaged Scholarship: From Real-World Problems to Research Publications', Engaged Management Review, vol. 1, no. 1, p. 2.

Mathiassen, L, Chiasson, M & Germonprez, M 2012, Vol. 36 MIS Quarterly & The Society for Information Management, pp. 347-363.

Maxwell, JA & Mittapalli, K 2010, 'Realism as a stance for mixed methods research', Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research, pp. 145-168.

McDougall, GH & Levesque, T 2000, 'Customer satisfaction with services: putting perceived value into the equation', Journal of services marketing, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 392-410.

McKay, J 2002, Soft Operational Research/Management Science Applied to Information Requirement Determination: A Study Using Cognitive Mapping and the SODA Methodology, thesis, Edith Cowan University.

McKay, J & Marshall, P 2001, 'The Dual Imperatives of Action Research', Information Technology and People, vol. 14, no. 1, 2001, pp. pp. 46-59.

McKay, J, Marshall, P, Arumugam, S & Grainger, N 2013, 'Setting a Research Agenda for IT Project Management Offices,' Proceedings of the 46th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-46), IEEE, 4364-4373.

Mendelow, AL 1981, 'Environmental Scanning-The Impact of the Stakeholder Concept,' ICIS, 20.

Merriam-Webster.com 2017.

Miles, MB, Huberman, AM & Saldaña, J 2014, Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook, Third edn., SAGE Publications Inc, Thousand Oaks, California.

241

Milosevic, D & Patanakul, P 2005, 'Standardized project management may increase development projects success', International Journal of Project Management, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 181-192.

Mohr, LA & Bitner, MJ 1991, 'Mutual understanding between customers and employees in service encounters', ACR North American Advances Advances in Consumer Research, vol. 18, pp. 611-617.

Morgan, DL 2007, 'Paradigms Lost and Pragmatism Regained', Journal of Mixed Methods Research, vol. 1, no. 1, January 2007, pp. 48-76.

Morgan, DL 2014, 'Pragmatism as a paradigm for social research', Qualitative Inquiry, vol. 20, no. 8, pp. 1045-1053.

Morse, JM, Barrett, M, Mayan, M, Olson, K & Spiers, J 2002, 'Verification Strategies for Establishing Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research', International Journal of Qualitative Methods, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 13-22.

Mulder, I, Swaak, J & Kessels, J 2002, 'Assessing Group Learning and Shared Understanding in Technology-Mediated Interaction', Educational Technology & Society, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 35-47.

Mullaly, M 2017, in Project HEADWAY Webinar PMI.

Müller, R, Glückler, J & Aubry, M 2013, 'A Relational Typology of Project Management Offices', Project Management Journal, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 59-76.

Myers, MD 1997, 'Qualitative Research in Information Systems', MIS Quarterly, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 241-242.

Nyeck, S, Morales, M, Ladhari, R & Pons, F 2002, '10 years of service quality measurement: reviewing the use of the SERVQUAL instrument', The bi-annual academic publication of Universidad ESAN, vol. 7, no. 13

O’Cathain, A 2010, 'Assessing the Quality of Mixed Methods Research: Toward a Comprehensive Framework', in Sage Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research, Sage Publications Inc, pp. 531-555.

Oliver, RL 2010, Satisfaction : A Behavioral Perspective on the Consumer, Second edn., M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, N.Y.

Oliver, RL & DeSarbo, WS 1988, 'Response Determinants in Satisfaction Judgments', Journal of Consumer Research, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 495-507.

Orlikowski, W & Baroudi, JJ 1991, 'Studying Information Technology in Organizations: Research Approaches and Assumptions', Information Systems Research, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 1-28.

Oxford Dictionaries 2017, Oxford University Press.

Pansiri, J 2005, 'Pragmatism: A methodological approach to researching strategic alliances in tourism', Tourism and Hospitality Planning & Development, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 191-206.

Parasuraman, A, Zeithaml, VA & Berry, LL 1985, 'A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and Its Implications for Future Research', Journal of Marketing, vol. 49, no. 4, Fall1985, pp. 41-50.

242

Parasuraman, A, Zeithaml, VA & Berry, LL 1988, 'SERVQUAL: A Multiple-Item Scale for Measuring Consumer Perceptions of Service Quality', Journal of Retailing, vol. 64, no. 1, Spring88, pp. 12-40.

Patterson, PG & Spreng, RA 1997, 'Modelling the relationship between perceived value, satisfaction and repurchase intentions in a business-to-business, services context: an empirical examination', International Journal of service Industry management, vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 414-434.

Pellegrinelli, S & Garagna, L 2009, 'Towards a Conceptualisation of PMOs as Agents and Subjects of Change and Renewal', International Journal of Project Management, vol. 27, no. 7, pp. 649-656.

Petter, S 2008, 'Managing user expectations on software projects: Lessons from the trenches', International Journal of Project Management, vol. 26, no. 7, pp. 700-712.

Pitt, LF, Watson, RT & Kavan, CB 1995, 'Service Quality: A Measure of Information Systems Effectiveness', MIS Quarterly, vol. 19, no. 2, 06//, pp. 173-187.

Pitt, LF, Watson, RT & Kavan, CB 1997, 'Measuring Information Systems Service Quality: Concerns for a Complete Canvas', MIS Quarterly, vol. 21, no. 2, 06//, pp. 209-221.

Plouffe, CR, Williams, BC & Leigh, TW 2004, 'Who's on First? Stakeholder Differences in Customer Relationship Management and the Elusive Notion of "Shared Understanding"', Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, vol. 24, no. 4, Fall2004, pp. 323-338.

PM Solutions 2014, The State of the Project Management Office (PMO) 2014,

Pratt, M 2008, 'Fitting Oval Pegs Into Round Holes: Tensions in Evaluating and Publishing Qualitative Research in Top-Tier North American Journals', Organizational Research Methods, vol. 11, no. 3, p. 481.

Project Management Institute 2013, A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide), Fifth edn., Project Management Institute.

Quinn, RE & Rohrbaugh, J 1983, 'A Spatial Model of Effectiveness Criteria: Towards A Competing Values Approach to Organizational Analysis', Management Science, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 363-377.

Rapoport, RN 1970, 'Three Dilemmas in Action Research', Human Relations, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 499-513.

Reich, BH, Gemino, A & Sauer, C 2014, 'How knowledge management impacts performance in projects: An empirical study', International Journal of Project Management, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 590-602.

Rosenthal, SB & Thayer, HS 2017, in Encyclopædia Britannica Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.

Roulston, K 2010, 'Considering quality in qualitative interviewing', Qualitative Research, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 199-228.

Santosus, M 2003, 'Office Discipline: Why You Need a Project Management Office; Companies seeking more efficiency and tighter monitoring of IT projects are opening project management offices in growing numbers. But don't expect a quick fix, easy metrics or an immediate payback', CIO, pp. 1-1.

243

Sauer, C, Gemino, A & Reich, BH 2007, 'The Impact of Size and Volatility on IT Project Performance', Communications of the ACM, vol. 50, no. 11, pp. 79-84.

Sauer, C & Reich, BH 2009, 'Rethinking IT Project Management: Evidence of a New Mindset and Its Implications', International Journal of Project Management, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 182-193.

Schwandt, TA, Lincoln, YS & Guba, EG 2007, 'Judging interpretations: But is it rigorous? trustworthiness and authenticity in naturalistic evaluation', New Directions for Evaluation, vol. 2007, no. 114, pp. 11-25.

Seidman, I 2013, Interviewing as Qualitative Research: A Guide for Researchers in Education and the Social Sciences, Fourth edn., Teachers College Columbia University, New York.

Silverman, D 2017, 'How was it for you? The Interview Society and the irresistible rise of the (poorly analyzed) interview', Qualitative Research, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 144-158.

Singh, R, Keil, M & Kasi, V 2009, 'Identifying and Overcoming the Challenges of Implementing a Project Management Office', European Journal of Information Systems: An Official Journal of the Operational Research Society, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 409-427.

Sonderegger, P 2009, 'Creating Shared Understanding in Research Across Distance: Distance Collaboratiion across Cultures in R&D', in NW Jankowski (ed.) E-Research: Transformation in Scholarly Practice, Routledge, pp. 129-146.

Stanleigh, M 2006, 'From Crisis to Control: New Standards for Project Management', Ivey Business Journal, p. 6.

Strauss, A & Corbin, J 1994, 'Grounded theory methodology', Handbook of qualitative research, vol. 17, pp. 273-85.

Sweeney, J 1995, An Investigation of a Theoretical Model of Consumer Perceptions of Value, School of Management and Marketing, Curtin University of Technology.

Sweeney, JC, Soutar, GN & Johnson, LW 1999, 'The role of perceived risk in the quality-value relationship: a study in a retail environment', Journal of retailing, vol. 75, no. 1, pp. 77-105.

Szajna, B & Scamell, RW 1993, 'The effects of information system user expectations on their performance and perceptions', Mis Quarterly, pp. 493-516.

Tam, JL 2004, 'Customer satisfaction, service quality and perceived value: an integrative model', Journal of marketing management, vol. 20, no. 7-8, pp. 897-917.

Tan, W-G, Cater-Steel, A & Toleman, M 2009, 'Implementing it service management: A case study focussing on critical success factors', Journal of Computer Information Systems, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 1-12.

Tashakkori, A & Teddlie, C 1998, Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches, Sage.

Teas, RK 1993, 'Expectations, Performance Evaluation, and Consumers' Perceptions of Quality', Journal of Marketing, vol. 57, no. 4, p. 18.

Tesch, D, Miller, R, Jiang, JJ & Klein, G 2005, 'Perception & Expectation Gaps of Information Systems Provider Skills: The Impact on User Satisfaction', Information Systems Journal, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 343-355.

The Standish Group 2016, CHAOS Report 2016, 1.

244

Thomas, J & Mullaly, M 2007, 'Understanding the Value of Project Management: First Steps on an International Investigation in Search of Value', Project Management Journal, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 74-89.

Thomas, J & Mullaly, M 2008, Researching the Value of Project Management, Project Management Institute Inc, 14 Campus Boulevard, Newton Square, Pennsylvania

Too, EG & Weaver, P 2013, 'The management of project management: A conceptual framework for project governance', International Journal of Project Management, vol. 32, no. 8, pp. 1382-1394.

Tracy, SJ 2010, 'Qualitative Quality: Eight “Big-Tent” Criteria for Excellent Qualitative Research', Qualitative Inquiry, vol. 16, no. 10, pp. 837-851.

UMT Consulting Group 2014, PMO best practices are no longer good enough, 1.

Unger, BN, Gemünden, HG & Aubry, M 2012, 'The Three Roles of a Project Portfolio Management Office: Their Impact on Portfolio Management Execution and Success', International Journal of Project Management, vol. 30, no. 5, pp. 608-620.

Van de Ven, AH 2007, Engaged Scholarship : A Guide for Organizational and Social Research, OUP Oxford, Oxford.

van Dyke, TP, Kappelman, LA & Prybutok, VR 1997, 'Measuring Information Systems Service Quality: Concerns on the Use of the SERVQUAL Questionnaire', MIS Quarterly, vol. 21, no. 2, 06//, pp. 195-208.

Vashist, R 2012, A boundary practice perspective on the roles and practice of business analysts, thesis, Swinburne University of, Technology, Melbourne.

Viglioni, TG, Cunha, JAO & Moura, HP 2016, 'A Performance Evaluation Model for Project Management Office Based on a Multicriteria Approach', Procedia Computer Science, vol. 100, pp. 955-962.

Wainer, H 1990, 'Graphical Visions from William Playfair to John Tukey', Statistical Science, pp. 340-346.

Walker, DHT, Bourne, L & Rowlinson, S 2008, 'Stakeholders and the Supply Chain', in Procurement Systems: A Cross-Industry Project Management Perspective, Taylor & Francis, Psychology Press, pp. pp 70-100.

Ward, J & Daniel, E 2013, 'The role of project management offices (PMOs) in IS project success and management satisfaction', Journal of Enterprise Information Management, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 316-336.

Weaver, P 2007, 'The origins of modern project management,' Fourth annual PMI college of scheduling conference, 15-18.

Wellingtone Project Management & APM PMO SIG 2017, The State of Project Management 2017 Survey by Wellingtone Project Management and the APM PMO SIG, 1.

Wicks, AC & Freeman, RE 1998, 'Organization studies and the new pragmatism: Positivism, anti-positivism, and the search for ethics', Organization science, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 123-140.

Wilkin, C & Hewitt, B 1999, 'Quality in a respecification of DeLone and McLean’s IS success model,' Proceedings of 1999 IRMA international conference, 663-672.

245

Yang, Z & Peterson, RT 2004, 'Customer perceived value, satisfaction, and loyalty: The role of switching costs', Psychology & Marketing, vol. 21, no. 10, pp. 799-822.

Yin, RK 2009, Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Fourth edn., Sage Publications Inc.

Zeithaml, VA 1988, 'Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means-end model and synthesis of evidence', The Journal of marketing, pp. 2-22.

Zhai, L, Xin, Y & Cheng, C 2009, 'Understanding the value of project management from a stakeholder's perspective: Case study of mega‐project management', Project Management Journal, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 99-109.

246

APPENDIX 1: MAIN INTERVIEW PROTOCOL

Part 1: Demographic information (to be collected prior to interview).

Demographic information sourced, where possible, from official publications, organisation website, etc. Where not available, information will be sought directly from participants during the interview.

Theme Information to be sought on: About the

organisation

a. Type of organisation. (Public/Private/Non-profit NGO)

b. Economic sector.

c. Primary activities of organisation. Business drivers, etc.

d. Size of organisation. (Number of Employees)

e. Location(s) organisation operates. (Local/Regional/Global)

f. Any other background or historical information about the organisation.

Part 2A: Interview questions for stakeholders

Theme Information to be sought on: About the

participant

1. Participant’s current role. Description of roles and responsibilities.

2. Length of time in current role. Length of time in organisation.

3. Extent of participant’s IT, project management knowledge and experience.

4. How participant interacts with the IT PMO. Person(s) in IT PMO participant mainly

interacts with.

About the

participant’s

perceptions of the

effectiveness of

the IT PMO

5. Participant’s experiences and perceptions of the success rates of IT projects in the

organisation.

6. Participant’s perceptions of the main issues (if any) with IT projects in the organisation.

Participant’s opinions as to how these IT project issues could be addressed.

7. Participant’s perceptions of the contributions (if any) of the IT PMO to the success of IT

projects in the organisation. Participant’s recollection of a situation (if any).

8. Participant’s perceptions of the value or contributions (if any) of the IT PMO to the

organisation as a whole. Participant’s recollection of a situation (if any).

9. Participant’s perceptions and experiences with the IT PMO. Participant’s recollection of

any positive and/or negative situations.

10. Participant’s perceptions of the effectiveness of the IT PMO (or lack thereof) in the

organisation. Participant’s recollection of a situation (if any).

11. Is an IT PMO that is perceived to be effective considered by the participant to be

contributing to the organisation?

12. Has the participant ever questioned the relevance (or even existence) of the IT PMO?

Participant’s recollection of a situation (if any).

13. What are the strong points of the IT PMO (if any) in the opinion of the participant?

Conversely, what are the weak points, if any?

247

14. What does the participant suggest that the IT PMO could work on to improve its

perceived value in the organisation? In the participant’s opinion, how could the

organisation benefit more from the IT PMO?

15. Does the participant perceive senior management support for the IT PMO? Does the

participant perceive business support (own/other) for the IT PMO?

16. What is, in the participant’s opinion, the IT PMO’s performance measures and KPIs? Is

this officially communicated? Does the participant consider that to be a fair and accurate

measure? If not, what should it be?

17. How is the IT PMO funded? How does the cost of running the IT PMO impact the

participant’s business?

About the

participant’s

perceptions and

expectations of

the IT PMO

18. What are, in the participant’s opinion, the top most important functions of IT PMO? How

well does the participant feel that the IT PMO is performing these functions relative to

expectations?

19. Have these roles and functions been officially communicated? How and by whom? How

effective, in the participant’s opinion, has this communication been?

20. Are there any functions that have been officially communicated and performed by the IT

PMO that the participant considers not important? If so, what are they?

21. What other important functions that the participant expects of the IT PMO but is not

being performed by the IT PMO? Or has not been officially communicated?

22. Should the IT PMO, in the participant’s opinion, be managing all IT projects in the

organisation? Participant’s reason(s) for answer.

23. Should the IT PMO, in the participant’s opinion, be only providing project management

support to all IT projects in the organisation? Participant’s reason(s) for answer.

24. Does the participant consider the performance of its roles and functions to be important

for the perceived effectiveness of the IT PMO? What about the perceived value of the

IT PMO?

25. Does participant consider the IT PMO to be more pro-business? Or procedure-driven?

26. Does the IT PMO emphasise more on flexibility? Or stability and control? What does the

participant expect the IT PMO to emphasise?

27. Is the IT PMO more goal-oriented or people-focused? What does the participant expect

the IT PMO to emphasise?

28. What other factors, in the opinion of the participant, are important to the perceived

effectiveness of the IT PMO? To the perceived value of the IT PMO in the organisation?

248

Part 2B: Interview questions for the IT PMO team

Theme Information to be sought on: About the IT PMO

leader and team

members

1. Participant’s current role. Description of roles and responsibilities.

2. Length of time in current role. Length of time in organisation.

3. Extent of participant’s IT, project management knowledge and experience.

About IT projects 4. Participant’s experiences and perceptions of the success rates of IT projects in the

organisation.

5. Participant’s perceptions of the main issues (if any) with IT projects in the organisation.

Participant’s opinions as to how these IT project issues could be addressed.

6. Participant’s perceptions of the contributions (if any) of the IT PMO to the success of IT

projects in the organisation. Participant’s recollection of a situation (if any).

About the IT PMO

and participant’s

perceptions of the

effectiveness of

the IT PMO

7. Age of IT PMO. (When setup). Size of IT PMO. (No. of employees)

8. Structure of IT PMO. (Directly manage projects/Provide project support). Location of IT

PMO within organisation (Central/Business Unit/IT)

9. History and background info. Why was the PMO setup? What were the issues before

the PMO was setup? Has the PMO addressed these issues?

10. Participant’s perceptions of the value or contributions (if any) of the IT PMO to the

organisation as a whole. Participant’s recollection of a situation (if any).

11. Participant’s perceptions and experiences with management and business

stakeholders. Participant’s recollection of any positive and/or negative situations.

12. Participant’s perceptions of the effectiveness of the IT PMO (or lack thereof) in the

organisation. Participant’s recollection of a situation (if any).

13. Is an IT PMO that is perceived to be effective considered by the participant to be

contributing to the organisation?

14. Has the relevance (or even existence) of the IT PMO in the organisation been in

question? Participant’s recollection of a situation (if any).

15. What are the strong points of the IT PMO (if any) in the opinion of the participant?

Conversely, what are the weak points, if any?

16. What does the participant suggest that the IT PMO could work on to improve its

perceived value in the organisation? In the participant’s opinion, how could the

organisation benefit more from the IT PMO?

17. Does the participant perceive senior management support for the IT PMO? Does the

participant perceive business support for the IT PMO?

18. What is, in the participant’s opinion, the IT PMO’s performance measures and KPIs? Is

this officially communicated? Does the participant consider that to be a fair and accurate

measure? If not, what should it be?

19. How is the IT PMO funded? How does the cost of running the IT PMO impact the

business and the organisation as a whole?

249

IT PMO team’s

perceptions of the

IT PMO and

stakeholders

20. What are, in the participant’s opinion, the top most important functions of IT PMO? How

well does the participant feel that the IT PMO is performing these functions relative to

stakeholders’ expectations? Does the participant feel that these expectations are

reasonable and fair?

21. Have these roles and functions been officially communicated to the rest of the

organisation? How and by whom? How effective, in the participant’s opinion, has this

communication been?

22. Have these roles and functions been officially communicated to the rest of the

organisation? How and by whom? How effective, in the participant’s opinion, has this

communication been?

23. Does the participant think that stakeholders clearly understand the roles and functions

of the IT PMO?

24. Are there any functions that have been officially communicated and performed by the IT

PMO that the participant considers not important? If so, what are they?

25. What other important functions that the participant expects of the IT PMO but is not

being performed by the IT PMO?

26. Should the IT PMO, in the participant’s opinion, be managing all IT projects in the

organisation? Participant’s reason(s) for answer.

27. Should the IT PMO, in the participant’s opinion, be only providing project management

support to all IT projects in the organisation? Participant’s reason(s) for answer.

28. Does the participant consider the performance of its roles and functions to be important

for the perceived effectiveness of the IT PMO? What about the perceived value of the

IT PMO?

29. Does participant consider the IT PMO to be more pro-business? Or procedure-driven?

30. Does the IT PMO emphasise more on flexibility? Or stability and control? What does the

participant think the IT PMO should emphasise?

31. Is the IT PMO more goal-oriented or people-focused? What does the participant expect

the IT PMO to emphasise?

32. What are the tensions that the IT PMO faces? Are they conflicting? What about political

tensions? How does the participant perceive the IT PMO to be addressing these

tensions?

33. What other factors, in the opinion of the participant, are important to the perceived

effectiveness of the IT PMO? To the perceived value of the IT PMO in the organisation?

250

APPENDIX 2: MAIN QUESTIONNAIRE PMO Questionnaire

Please rate (from 1=Strongly Disagree to 5=Strongly Agree) the following PMO functions according to what you think the IT PMO is currently doing (your perceptions) and what you think it should be doing (your expectations):

PMO Functions

What I think the IT PMO is currently doing (circle one)

Strongly Somewhat Neither Somewhat Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree nor Agree Agree Disagree

What I think the IT PMO should be doing (circle one)

Strongly Somewhat Neither Somewhat Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree nor Agree Agree

Disagree 1 Report status of IT projects, IT programs

(groups of IT projects), or IT portfolios (groups of IT programs) to senior management

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

2 Regularly track/monitor all IT projects

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

3 Regularly track/monitor only selected IT projects

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

4 Use appropriate computer-based tools to monitor IT projects

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

5 Directly control all IT projects

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

6 Directly control only selected IT projects

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

7 Enforce project governance for all IT projects

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

8 Enforce project governance for only selected IT projects

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

251

PMO Functions





Disagree 9 Prescribe standardised IT project

management methodologies for the organisation

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

10 Enforce the implementation of standardised IT project management methodologies

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

11 Promote the adoption of standardised IT project management methodologies

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

12 Provide project management training for IT project managers

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

13 Provide project management training for all staff involved with IT projects in the organisation

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

14 Develop performance measures for IT project managers

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

15 Measure performance of IT project managers

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

16 Define project management competency requirements for IT project managers

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

17 Employ only IT project managers with required project management competencies

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

18 Promote soft skills (i.e. communications, interpersonal, etc.) amongst project team members

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

19 Provide mentoring and project management advice for IT project managers

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

20 Provide project management tools for IT project managers and IT project teams

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

21 Participate in the employment activities (i.e. recruit, select, evaluate, etc.) of IT project managers

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

252

PMO Functions





Disagree 22 Participate in the selection and

prioritisation of all IT projects

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

23 Participate in the selection and prioritisation of only selected IT projects

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

24 Participate (i.e. sharing expertise, experience) in the development of business case for IT projects

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

25 Manage one or more IT programs (groups of IT projects) and/or IT portfolios (groups of IT programs)

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

26 Manage the allocation of resources (i.e. staff, assets, etc.) across IT projects

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

27 Have the power to terminate any IT project

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

PMO Functions





Disagree 28 Track and ensure that IT projects are

aligned with business strategy

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

29 Track and ensure the delivery of expected benefits from IT projects

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

30 Keep up with current information and communications technology trends

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

31 Keep up with current business trends

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

32 Demonstrate to senior management that it delivers business value

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

253

PMO Functions





Disagree 33 Implement and manage a ‘lessons-


1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

34 Ensure ‘lessons learned’ are effectively communicated to subsequent IT projects

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

35 Conduct and document post-project reviews

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

36 Archive project documentation

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

254

APPENDIX 3: CONSENT FORMS

ORGANISATIONAL CONSENT FORM

1. On behalf of my organisation ____________________________________________________________, I authorise employees to participate in this research project.

2. In relation to this project, please circle your response to the following:

I agree that he/she can be interviewed by the researcher Yes No I agree that the interview can be recorded by an electronic device Yes No I agree that he/she can participate in the questionnaire administered by the researcher Yes No

3. I acknowledge that the data collected for the Swinburne project will be used for research purposes only and

not for direct profit; research purposes may include publishable/peer-reviewed outcomes.

4. I acknowledge that participation in this project is voluntary and hence no pressure will be brought to bear on any employees to participate in this project.

5. I acknowledge that the researcher will not share the interviews, the transcripts, the questionnaire data, or

any other information with anyone within the organisation or outside the research team, which will in any way infringe on the privacy and safety of the participants.

Name of Person of Authority: _____________________________________________________ Position: ______________________________________________________________________

Signature & Date: _______________________________________________________________

255

PARTICIPANT CONSENT FORM

1. I consent to participate in the project named above. I have been provided a copy of the project consent information statement to which this consent form relates and any questions I have asked

have been answered to my satisfaction.

2. In relation to this project, please circle your response to the following:

▪ I agree to be interviewed by the researcher Yes No ▪ I agree that the interview can be recorded by an electronic device Yes No ▪ I agree to participate in the questionnaire administered by the researcher Yes No

3. I acknowledge that:

(a) My participation is voluntary and that I am free to withdraw from this research project at any

time without explanation.

(b) This Swinburne project is for the purpose of research and not for profit.

(c) Any information about me which is gathered in the course of the interviews and questionnaires

will be: (i) collected and retained for the purpose of this project; (ii) accessed and analysed by

the researcher for the purpose of this project; and (iii) subsequently destroyed after the

completion of this project.

(d) No information about me would be shared with my line manager or anyone within the

organisation.

(d) My anonymity will be preserved, and I will not be identified in the thesis, publications or reports

that arise from this research without my written consent.

(e) Any publication that might result from this research would be shared with me if I request for the

same.

By signing this document, I agree to participate in this project.

Name of Participant: __________________________________________________________

Position: ____________________________________________________________________ Signature & Date: _____________________________________________________________

256

APPENDIX 4: ETHICS CLEARANCE

257

258

APPENDIX 5: TRANS RADIAL DIAGRAMS (IT PMO PERCEPTIONS)

Figure A5-1: Individual TRANS IT PMO team members’ perceptions (Group 1)

259




260


261

APPENDIX 6: CONS RADIAL DIAGRAMS (IT PMO PERCEPTIONS)

Figure A6-1: Individual CONS IT PMO team members’ perceptions (Group 1)


262



263


264

APPENDIX 7: FEEDBACK QUESTIONNAIRE

Additional comments: ________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Questions

Feedback Response Rating (Please circle one)

Strongly Somewhat Neither Agree Somewhat Strongly Disagree Disagree nor Disagree Agree Agree

1 The diagrams were helpful in illustrating the perceptions and expectations of the IT PMO and its stakeholders.

1 2 3 4 5

2 The diagrams were effective in highlighting the congruence and gaps in perceptions and expectations of the IT PMO and its stakeholders.

1 2 3 4 5

3 The overall framework was effective in helping me understand the perceived value of the IT PMO.

1 2 3 4 5

4 The workshop revealed interesting insights I had not previously thought of.

1 2 3 4 5

5 As a result of the workshop, I believe I have developed a better understanding of the perceptions and expectations of the IT PMO.

1 2 3 4 5

6 As a result of the workshop, the IT PMO is better equipped to develop and articulate strategies to manage perceptions and expectations.

1 2 3 4 5

7 As a result of the workshop, I am satisfied our IT PMO team is now equipped to work towards improving the perceived value of the IT PMO.

1 2 3 4 5

8 I am satisfied with the outcomes of the workshop session.

1 2 3 4 5

265

APPENDIX 8: FEEDBACK SURVEY RESULTS (TRANS & CONS)

Feedback

Questionnaire

TRANS CONS

Agree Disagre

e

Neither Agree Disagree Neither

Q1

.

The radial diagrams were helpful in

illustrating the perceptions & expectations

of the IT PMO

100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0%

Q2

.

The radial diagrams were effective in

highlighting the differences in perceptions

& expectations

100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0%

Q3

.

The overall findings were effective in

helping me understand the IT PMO's

perceived value

100% 0% 0% 90% 0% 10%

Q4

.

This workshop session revealed

interesting insights I had not previously

thought of

100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0%

Q5

.

As a result of this workshop, I have a

better understanding of the perceptions &

expectations of the IT PMO

80% 0% 20% 100% 0% 0%

Q6

.

As a result of this workshop, the IT PMO

is better equipped to develop strategies

to manage stakeholders' perceptions &

expectations

100% 0% 0% 80% 0% 20%

Q7

.

As a result of this workshop, I am

satisfied the IT PMO team is better

equipped to improve its perceived value

100% 0% 0% 80% 0% 20%

Q8

.

I am satisfied with the outcomes of this

workshop session

100% 0% 0% 90% 0% 10%

266

APPENDIX 9: THEMES, CATEGORIES & FOCUSED CODES

Themes AR1 AR2

T1. Perceived value C1 Perceptions of IT PMO value FC1 Perception of delivering & adding value Y Y

FC2 Perception of being effective Y Y

FC3 Perception of delivering/meeting business needs Y Y

FC4 Improved perceptions of IT PMO Y Y

FC5 Contribution by IT PMO Y Y

FC6 IT PMO value in question Y Y

FC7 Historical perceptions of IT PMO Y Y

FC8 Differences in perceptions amongst business Y Y

C2 Measuring IT PMO value FC9 Measurement of value delivery Y Y

FC10 Assessment based on IT project delivery Y Y

FC87 Benchmarking against industry/externally Y

FC88 Informal measurement/metrics Y

C3 Satisfaction with IT PMO FC11 Satisfied with IT PMO support Y Y

FC12 Entrusted with more responsibilities Y Y

FC89 Perception of being responsive Y

FC90 Perception of being responsible Y

C4 Cost impact of IT PMO FC13 Project costs Y Y

FC14 Project timelines Y Y

FC15 Demonstrating productivity, efficiency Y Y

FC16 IT PMO cost-effectiveness Y Y

FC 91 Cost transparency, accountability Y

FC 92 Effectiveness of costing model Y

C5 Valued for IT & project management expertise FC17 Valued for IT expertise Y Y

FC18 Valued for project management expertise Y Y

FC93 Dependency on IT PMO for IT & project management expertise Y

C6 Importance of IT in the organisation FC19 Importance & relevance of information, IT in organisation Y Y

FC20 Importance of IT change Y Y

C7 "Just doing its job" FC21 Just doing its job as expected Y Y

Categories Focused Codes

267

Themes AR1 AR2

T2. Service performance C8 Successful delivery of IT projects FC22 Successful IT project delivery (technical perspective) Y Y

FC23 Emphasis on project goals & objectives Y Y

FC24 Ensuring quality IT project delivery Y Y

FC94 Business expectations of successful IT project delivery Y

C9 IT project & portfolio management FC25 Effective management of IT projects Y Y

FC26 Management of multiple projects, programs, portfolios Y Y

C10 IT project management standards & methodologies FC27 Provision of project management tools & methodologies Y Y

FC28 Promotiion of the adoption of project management tools & methodologies Y Y

FC29 Quality & consistency of project management methodologies Y Y

C11 IT project management competency & training FC30 Having IT skills & expertise Y Y

FC31 Having project management skills & expertise Y Y

FC32 Emphasis on human resource development, training Y Y

FC33 Ability to communicate effectively Y Y

FC34 Ability to engage stakeholders effectively Y Y

FC95 Keeping up with technology trends Y

C12 Strategic IT project planning FC35 Emphasis on IT project planning activities Y Y

FC36 Involvement in strategic planning Y Y

FC96 Prototyping and pilot phases Y

C13 IT project prioritisation & selection FC37 Emphasis on project prioritisation & selection Y Y

C14 IT project reporting & oversight FC38 Oversight & visibility of IT projects Y Y

FC39 Effective reporting on IT projects Y Y

C15 IT project governance FC40 Effective IT project risk management Y

FC41 Effective IT project governance Y Y

FC42 Effective decision-making framework Y Y

C16 IT project learning & knowledge management FC43 Active learning & KM from projects Y Y

FC44 Effective adoption of lessons learned from projects Y Y

FC45 Project learning & KM discipline, formal processes Y Y

FC46 Project documentation & archival Y Y

C17 Realising business benefits FC47 Participation in business benefits identification, analysis, planning Y Y

FC48 Active tracking & alignment with business benefits Y Y

FC97 Active realisation of business benefits Y

C18 Quality of service performance FC53 Consistency in IT PMO service Y Y

FC100 Emphasis on service quality Y

C19 Formal IT PMO structure and processes FC101 Clarity in IT PMO structure Y

FC102 Availability, clarity of formal IT PMO, project management processes Y


268

Themes AR1 AR2

T3. Engagement & relationship C20 Relationship with business FC54 Engagement with business (regularly, consistently) Y Y

FC55 Support from business Y Y

FC56 Being approachable Y Y

FC103 Engagement with business at multiple levels Y

FC104 Getting feedback from business Y

FC105 Being open, transparent with business Y

FC106 Supporting the business Y

C21 Understanding the business FC57 Effort to understand the business Y Y

FC58 Knowing business needs Y Y

FC107 Consulting with business Y

C22 Relationship with management FC59 Engagement with management Y Y

FC60 Consulting with management Y Y

FC61 Support, commitment from management Y Y

FC108 Feedback from management Y

C23 Communication with business FC62 Effective communications with the business Y Y

FC63 Educating & training the business Y Y

FC109 Effectiveness of communications medium Y

C24 Communication with management FC64 Effective communications with management Y Y

FC110 Educating management Y

C25 Organisational culture FC65 Aligning with organisational culture Y Y

FC66 Strong, dominant culture Y Y

FC111 Conservative, controlling culture Y

FC112 Culture emphasising informality Y

C26 Collaboration & team cohesiveness FC67 Effective communications within IT PMO Y Y

FC68 IT PMO objectives & goals Y Y

FC69 Collaboration, cohesiveness and support within IT PMO Y Y

C27 Visibility in the organisation FC70 Visibility of IT PMO to rest of organisation Y Y

FC113 Visibility of IT PMO contributions to rest of organisation Y


269

Themes AR1 AR2

T4. Tensions & challenges C28 Diverse & competing demands FC71 Management of conflicting demands & expectations Y Y

FC72 Engaging with multiple parties with different expectations Y Y

C29 Too bureaucratic, administrative FC68 Being bureaucratic, administrative, just "ticking the boxes" Y

C30 Too conservative FC69 Being too conservative, controlling Y

FC70 Being reactive rather than proactive Y

C31 Managing expectations FC114 Management of business expectations Y

FC115 Management of management expectations Y

C32 Flexibility vs standardisation FC49 Flexibility in management of IT projects Y Y

FC50 Flexibility in working with business Y Y

FC51 Emphasis on flexibility and adaptibility Y Y

FC98 Avoiding bureaucracy Y

FC99 Culture encouraging flexibility Y

C33 Lacking innovation FC52 Lacking emphasis on being innovative Y

C34 Limited resources FC73 Management of limited project resources Y Y

FC74 Growing demand with limited resources Y Y

FC75 Resources being over-stretched Y Y

C35 Limited budget FC76 Management of limited project budget, finances Y Y

C36 Power & control FC77 Ownership of IT projects Y Y

FC78 Decision-making power over IT projects Y Y

FC79 Prioritisation, selection of IT projects Y Y

FC116 Responsibility, accountability of IT projects Y

C37 External challenges FC80 Business engaging external parties to manage IT projects Y Y

FC81 Internal vs outsourced development Y Y

FC117 Control over external contractors Y

FC118 Managing IT projects globally Y

C38 Organisational culture challenges FC82 Aligning with organisational culture Y Y

FC83 Political culture Y Y

FC119 Challenge realising organisation-level benefit Y

FC120 Challenge of silo-thinking culture Y

C39 Organisational challenges FC84 Organisational restructure Y Y

C40 Leadership challenges FC85 Lacking clear objectives Y Y

FC86 Lacking common vision Y Y

FC121 Lacking effective decision making framework Y

C41 Formality in informal environment FC122 Lacking formal structure Y

FC123 Lacking formal processes Y

FC124 Formal practice in an informal culture Y


270

APPENDIX 10: LIST OF CATEGORIES CONSTRUCTED

1. Perceptions of IT PMO

value

2. Measuring IT PMO value

3. Satisfaction with ITPMO

4. Cost impact of IT PMO

5. Valued for IT and project

management expertise

6. Importance of IT in the

organisation

7. Just doing its job

8. Successful delivery of IT

projects

9. IT project and portfolio

management

10. IT project management

standards and

methodologies

11. IT project management

competency and training

12. Strategic IT project

planning

13. IT project prioritisation

and selection

14. IT project reporting and

oversight

15. IT project governance

16. IT project learning and

knowledge management

17. Realising business

benefits

18. Quality of service

performance

19. Formal IT PMO structure

and processes

20. Relationship with

business

21. Understanding the

business

22. Relationship with

management

23. Communication with

business

24. Communication with

management

25. Organisational culture

26. Collaboration and team

cohesiveness

27. Visibility in the

organisation

28. Diverse business

demands

29. Too bureaucratic,

administrative

30. Too conservative

31. Managing expectations

32. Flexibility vs

standardisation

33. Lacking innovation

34. Limited resources

35. Limited budget

36. Power and control

37. External challenges

38. Organisational culture

challenges

39. Organisational

challenges

40. Leadership challenges

41. Formality in informal

environment

271

APPENDIX 11: LIST OF PEER-REVIEWED PUBLICATIONS

• McKay, J., Marshall, P., Arumugam, S., Grainger, N. (2013). “Setting a

Research Agenda for IT Project Management Offices”. 46th Hawaii

International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) 2013.

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6480371/

• Arumugam, S. (2013). “Perceptions & Expectations of the Roles & Functions

of the IT Project Management Office”. Pacific Asia Conference on Information

Systems (PACIS) 2013 Proceedings. Paper 277.

http://aisel.aisnet.org/pacis2013/277

• Arumugam, S., McKay, J., Grainger, N. (2013). "Delivering IT PMO Value:

Understanding Stakeholder Perceptions & Expectations". International

Research Workshop on IT Project Management (IRWITPM) at ICIS

(International Conference on Information Systems) 2013. Paper 12.

http://aisel.aisnet.org/irwitpm2013/12

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6480371/

http://aisel.aisnet.org/pacis2013/277

http://aisel.aisnet.org/irwitpm2013/12

Date post:	08-May-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	3 times
Download:	0 times

8QGHUVWDQGLQJ FHLYH 9DOX H ,7 HF IILFH ( ) · 2018-05-24 · 8QGHUVWDQGLQJ FHLYH 9DOX H ,7 HF IILFH...

Documents