1. Agile Project Management From delivering on Cost to
delivering Maximum Value and BenefitsClaude mond, BEng, MEng, MBA,
rmc, CD, PMPLes Entreprises QualiScope Inc. Conference to the AACEI
Montreal Section Claude Emond and 1 Tuesday February 19 2013,
SNC-Lavalin QualiScope 2013
2. Claude mond, BEng, MEng, MBA, rmc, CD, PMP A Matanes
Shrimpspeaking like a Beauceron Chemical engineer, BEng RMC, MEng
McGill MBA Queens/Ottawa...and PMP Full time on project-oriented
ventures since 1980 Co-founder of , trainer and project management
coach since 1995 Creator of 2-String Project Management Creator and
developer of Changeboxing Co-writer of the 1st international
standard for portfolio management, The Standard for Portfolio
Management, PMI, 2006 Renowned international expert on
organisational agility and Agile project management (Canada, USA,
Europe, North Africa) Claude Emond and 2 QualiScope 2013
3. AGENDA 5 years ago: Benefits Realisation started its journey
towards becoming the main focus of enterprise strategic management
processes (upper management), replacing LEAN operational cost
reduction for the sake of itToday:Agile project management confirms
itssuperiority in providing the right mindset andtools to enable
and maximise the benefits andvalue of project deliverables through
day-to-dayproject management activities (project teams),replacing
schedule and cost control for the sakeof it Claude Emond and 3
QualiScope 2013
4. AGENDA1. Results and conclusions of the KPMG/TOP-BCG
studies2. Value, benefits and project success3. The Agile
management mindset4. Traditional engineering-construction project
management vs Agile project management (Why, Who, What, When,
Where)5. From delivering on cost to delivering maximum value and
benefits Claude Emond and 4 QualiScope 2013
5. Results and conclusions of the KPMG/TOP-BCG studies1. Around
40% of projects fail to deliver any net improvement2. Of the
remaining 60%: More than half (55%) fail to deliver the available
business value in full.often missing the target by more than 50%
http://productivity.businessspectator.com.au/sites/productivity.businessspectator.com.au/files/
THE%20PRODUCTIVITY%20IMPLEMENTATION%20CHALLENGE_0.pdf Claude Emond
and 5 QualiScope 2013
6. Results and conclusions of the KPMG/TOP-BCG studies Source:
THE CHOICE, Jed Simms and Alex Chapman, 2011 Claude Emond and 6
QualiScope 2013
7. Results and conclusions of the KPMG/TOP-BCG studies Source:
THE CHOICE, Jed Simms and Alex Chapman, 2011 Claude Emond and 7
QualiScope 2013
8. Results and conclusions of the KPMG/TOP-BCG studies Source:
THE CHOICE, Jed Simms and Alex Chapman, 2011 Claude Emond and 8
QualiScope 2013
9. Results and conclusions of the KPMG/TOP-BCG studies Source:
THE CHOICE, Jed Simms and Alex Chapman, 2011 Claude Emond and 9
QualiScope 2013
10. Results and conclusions of the KPMG/TOP-BCG studies Agile
PM Traditional PM Source: THE CHOICE, Jed Simms and Alex Chapman,
2011 Claude Emond and 10 QualiScope 2013
11. Other studiesWithout a structured approach, such asBenefit
Realisation Management, mostorganisations probably achieve between
10%and 25% of potential benefits SOURCE: Gerald Bradley, Benefits
Realisation Management, 2nd edition, Gower, 2010 Claude Emond and
11 QualiScope 2013
12. AGENDA1. Results and conclusions of the KPMG/TOP-BCG
studies2. Value, benefits and project success3. The Agile
management mindset4. Traditional engineering-construction project
management vs Agile project management (Why, Who, What, When,
Where)5. From delivering on cost to delivering maximum value and
benefits Claude Emond and 12 QualiScope 2013
13. Value, benefits and project successProject success, value
and benefits as per PMI? PMIs definition of START FINISH project
SUCCESS ? PMIs definition of Desired State project QUALITY ?
PROJECT The destination ZONE Value Current State The journey Claude
Emond and 13 QualiScope 2013
14. Value, benefits and project successValue and benefits for
WHOM and WHEN? For WHOM: ALL stakeholders this INCLUDES the project
team WHEN: AFTER project completion sometimes over many years, for
the users of the deliverables DURING project realisation both for
the users of the deliverables and those delivering them Claude
Emond and 14 QualiScope 2013
15. Value, benefits and project success COMMITMEMT PRECEDES
PROJECT PERFORMANCE SELF-INTEREST PRECEDES COMMITMEMT PAYMENT
ENSURES LASTING PERFORMANCE AND PROJECT SUCCESS TIME Claude Emond
and 15 QualiScope 2013
16. AGENDA1. Results and conclusions of the KPMG/TOP-BCG
studies2. Value, benefits and project success3. The Agile
management mindset4. Traditional engineering-construction project
management vs Agile project management (Why, Who, What, When,
Where)5. From delivering on cost to delivering maximum value and
benefits Claude Emond and 16 QualiScope 2013
17. The Agile management mindset 10 principles 4 main
techniques 1. Dynamic/Rolling-wave 1. Responsibilisation planning
(O1) Empowerment (P1) 2. Frequent deliveries (O2) 2. Capacity (P2)
3. Frequent alignment 3. Desirability (P3) meetings (SCRUM) (O3) 4.
Creativity (P4) 4. PPC (Percent promises 5. Simplicity (P5)
completed - REAL value tracking) (O4) Agile 4 values Management
1.Projects are realised by and for HUMAN BEINGS 6. Managing
individual promises (P6) Agile (V1) 2.Promote collaboration 7.
Integrated teams(P7) Mindset over control (V2) 8. Togetherness (P8)
(rev01, 2012) 3.Adapt, embrace and 9. No surprise (P9) welcome
change (V3) 10.Accelerate and maximise 4.Produce benefits and
benefits production (P10) value for ALL (V4) Claude Emond and 17
QualiScope 2013
18. AGENDA1. Results and conclusions of the KPMG/TOP-BCG
studies2. Value, benefits and project success3. The Agile
management mindset4. Traditional engineering-construction project
management vs Agile project management (Why, Who, What, When,
Where)5. From delivering on cost to delivering maximum value and
benefits Claude Emond and 18 QualiScope 2013
19. Traditional engineering-construction projectmanagement vs
Agile project management TRADITIONAL Project Management is: In
response to the global and turbulent business environment that
characterises the 2010s, the only one that exists, (very complex,
highly competitive, uncertain, permanently changing, requiring
great velocity as well as a high level of creativity to constantly
innovate and adapt) (WHERE) things (deliverables and activities)
for a DIFFERENT WHO that MUST realise in a highly conflictual
manner, more often trhough confrontation a limited number of
persons WHO respect given (initial) delays and costs that are not
always realistic than through collaboration, (and/or not
necessarily producing the RIGHT OUTPUT/OUTCOMES) (output/input
ratio subsequently sub-optimal) (A RESTRICTED AND NON-ALIGNED WHO)
(A WHAT DELIVERED including as part of the WHAT a FROZEN WHEN and
(A HOW, WHEN AND HOW MUCH that are conflictual and chaotic) HOW
MUCH, for a RESTRICTED FOR WHOM, often without knowing WHY) The
DELIVERED WHAT= - A solution delivered as per specifications not
necessarily aligned with the needs (the WHY and FOR WHAT the
deliverables are expected to be used) (any distortion between the
WHAT and the WHY will result in a LOST of - Constant disagreements
and contractual litigations between BENEFITS and inferior project
value)A RESTRICTED AND NON-ALIGNED WHO= - Deliverables realised on
time and on cost, the WHEN and the HOW MUCH stakeholdersEXECUTING
PARTY = Consulting firms, suppliers and being perceived as TRUE
additional deliverables, instead of being treated as - silo
deliveries, deliverables integration ultimately occurring
onlycontractors who materialise given specifications, CONSTRAINTS
on site with last-minute corrective actions impacting
negativelymany not having congruent and converging individual .
both project schedules and project costsand corporate objectives A
WHY= - The major stakeholders (The executing party-WHO differs from
based on rigid specifications rather than on needs (requirements)
that can evolve the receiving party-WHO) see one another more as an
adversary through time than a partner and use a winner-loser
approach to conflict . . resolution rather than a win-win mindset A
RESTRICTED FOR WHOM = The PAYING PARTY, NOT NECESSARILY THE
END-USERS AND CERTAINLY NOT THE EXECUTING PARTIES = Excluding both
excuting stakeholders and other stakeholders impacted by the
project and its deliverables, the former perceived as adversaries,
the latter just being ignored. SUB-OPTIMAL EFFICIENCY (E1) AN
EFFECTIVENESS WHICH IS IMPOSSIBLE TO MEASURE (E2) ????
RESULTS/OUTCOMES: ?? PRODUCTIVITY = E1 X E2?? = NON MEASURABLE
PROJECT PERFORMANCE/SUCCESS Claude Emond and 19 QualiScope
2013
20. Traditional engineering-construction projectmanagement vs
Agile project management AGILE Project Management is: In response
to the global and turbulent business environment that characterises
the 2010s, the only one that exists, (very complex, highly
competitive, uncertain, permanently changing, requiring great
velocity as well as a high level of creativity to constantly
innovate and adapt) (WHERE) ALL the project Stakeholders realise
successfully, meeting everyones day-to-day expectations, THE right
things, meaning SHOWING PROACTIVITY, CREATIVITY, GREAT REACTIVITY,
DELIVERABLES OPTIMISING VALUE FOR ALL A COLLECTIVELY COMMITTED WHO
FLEXIBILITY AND ADAPTABILITY (MAXIMUM BENEFITS WHAT/WHY, FOR ALL)
(An ALIGNED WHO) (CONTINUOUS AGILITY OF THE HOW, WHEN, HOW MUCH)
realise successfully, using AGILE approaches and tools (HOW, WHEN,
THE right things, meaning THE DELIVERABLES ALLOWINGALIGNED WHO= An
integrated project team (P7) = HOW MUCH), in particular:
MATERIALISATION OF THE PROJECT WHY (V4):All Stakeholders, who,
thanks to: - openness and capacity to adapt to change (V3,P2) -
NEGOTIATED DELIVERABLES (WHAT) (P3) - shared values (V1,V2,V3,V4) +
a structure, an organisation, tools, technologies that are -
ACCELERATING (P10) MATERIALISATION AND - a shared vision of the
project objectives flexible and adaptable (P5, P6,O1,O2,O3,O4) and
sufficient resources MAXIMISING PROJECT EXPECTED BENEFITS (O4) (its
WHY, its raison dtre) (P2) (WHY) - converging interests (V4) +
responsible and autonomous human resources (P1, P2), - FOR ALL
STAKEHOLDERS (V4) - Shared success criteria (P10) reactive,
flexible and adaptable (FOR WHOM) - required knowledge and
sufficient resources (P2) + continuous change communication and
management (P8,P9) - collaborative behaviour (V2) + continuous
learning and capitalisation of lessons learned (P10) .are committed
to succeed together (P3) - monitoring and innovation practices (P4)
for optimal value (benefits) . . . creation (V4, P10) - practices
valuing HR and encouraging collaboration (V1,V2) . . OPTIMAL
STAKEHOLERS ALIGNMENT (A1) OPTIMAL AGILITY IN PROJECT EXECUTION
(A2) ACCELERATED BENEFITS (AB) AND OPTIMAL VALUE (V)
RESULTS/OUTCOMES: PRODUCTIVITY = A1 + A2 = AB + V = OPTIMAL
MEASURABLE PROJECT PERFORMANCE/SUCCESS Claude Emond and 20
QualiScope 2013
21. AGENDA1. Results and conclusions of the KPMG/TOP-BCG
studies2. Value, benefits and project success3. The Agile
management mindset4. Traditional engineering-construction project
management vs Agile project management (Why, Who, What, When,
Where)5. From delivering on cost to delivering maximum value and
benefits Claude Emond and 21 QualiScope 2013
22. From delivering on cost to delivering maximumvalue and
benefitsHow do we measure REAL value and benefits ? This 20 M$
bridge is 70% complete. What is its earned value ? What is its REAL
value if we never complete it ? REAL value and benefits come from
USING the project deliverables at least as anticipated Claude Emond
and 22 QualiScope 2013
23. From delivering on cost to delivering maximumvalue and
benefitsHow do we measure REAL value and benefits ? Sydney Opera
House (Utzon) Montreal Olympic Stadium (Talibert) 1957 cost
estimate: 7 M (Au)$ 1970 cost estimate: 134 M$ Due date 1963 ?? 15
X more 12 X more 1976 partially finished: 264 M$ 1973 completed for
102 M$ Au (10 years late) 2006 final cost (including repairs,
renovations, Among the busiest performing arts centres in the
world, construction, interest, and inflation): 1 610 M$ hosting
over 1,500 performances each year attended by some 1.2 million
people. Avg revenue since 1977: 20 M$/yr 2012: DIRECT revenues of
177 M$ (Au) and net 2011: DIRECT revenues of 39 M$ (50% from
profits(surplus) 37M$ (Au) subsidies) and a deficit of 1,1 M$
Payback period = achieved a long time ago Payback period = infinite
?? Claude Emond and 23 QualiScope 2013
24. From delivering on cost to delivering maximumvalue and
benefits Claude Emond and 24 QualiScope 2013
25. From delivering on cost to delivering maximumvalue and
benefits Claude Emond and 25 QualiScope 2013
26. From delivering on cost to delivering maximumvalue and
benefits A Project is a temporary structure created to deliver a
set of agreed desired business (AND INDIVIDUAL)*outcomes, benefits
and value .. Its your choice whether you deliver projects, programs
and portfolios the orthodox view or choose to deliver strategy,
business outcomes and value Jed Simms Agile project management *my
addition BENEFITS COSTS Claude Emond and 26 QualiScope 2013
27. From delivering on cost to delivering maximumvalue and
benefits Questions and discussion Claude Emond and 27 QualiScope
2013