aacei montreal-20130219

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

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

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

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

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

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

aacei montreal-20130219

Documents