RUSI Defence Project Management Seminar Series

Programme Management in Defence: Applying MSP

progress to date and future challenges

Bill EggintonCranfield University

Defence Academy College of Management and Technology

The Context….

“We will create a strong programme management environment around our projects…. oversee the integration of projects and other Lines of

Development into military capability…. invest in managing programme management capabilities and competence

Defence Industrial Strategy, December 2005

“Consideration be given to establishing Board level championship of the most significant new capabilities….Every major new capability in the MOD’s

forward plans should be assigned a 2-star SRO residing in the Equipment Capability Customer”

Enabling Acquisition Change, June 2006

“EAC recommended that DCDS(EC) establish a programme approach to capability delivery….to ensure that all the Defence LoD were brought together at the earliest stages of the acquisition cycle and managed

coherently……by 31 March 2008..…and consistent with the framework established by MSP.”

MoD Capability Delivery Guidance, DCI, 19 March 2008

MSP – what is it?

• 1st Edition in 1999; 2nd Edition 2003; 3rd Sept 2007• Set of principles, processes, roles, activities

and outputs of the programme managementapproach

• Exemplars of Best Practice and a de factor standard for excellence in programme management

• Not as a mature a ‘product’ as its project equivalent – PRINCE2 – but increasing in popularity

• Subject of practitioner qualifications & courses

“Managing Successful Programmes (MSP) is a structured yet flexible framework. It allows you to manage and control all the activities involved in managing a programme

through providing advice on organisation, processes, communication and ways of thinking” OGC

The MSP Framework

Remaining alignedwith corporate strategy

Leading changeEnvisi

onin

g &

com

mun

icatin

g a

bette

r fut

ure

Focus and benefits and

threats to them

Adding value

Des

igni

ng a

nd d

eliv

erin

g

a co

here

nt c

apab

ility

Learning from Experience

OrganisationVision

Leadership &

Stakeholder E

ngmt

Benefits

Managem

ent

Qua

lity

Man

agem

ent

Risk & IssueManagement

Bu

sin

ess

Ca

se

Plannin

g &

Contro

lBlueprint design

& delivery

Defining a Programm

e

Delivering theCapabilities

Realising the Benefits

Closing a Programme

Identifying a

Programme

Managing the Tranches

7 Principles

9 Themes

MSP: Programme Organisation

SeniorResponsible

Owner

Sponsoring Group

Senior BusinessManagement

ProgrammeManager

DeliveringCapability

Business ChangeManager

RealisingBenefits

ProgrammeOffice

Programme Board

Source: Defence Acquisition – High Level Blueprint (October, 2008)

Through Life Capability Management (TLCM) is an approach to the acquisition and in-service management of military capability in which every aspect of new and existing military

capability is planned and managed coherently across all Defence Lines of Development (DLoDs) from cradle to grave.

TLCM and a programme approach

Programme Support Function

Programme Board

Programme Initiation

EJCB

Defence Operating Board

Defence Board

UMGs

CIG / AWGPlanning

Issues

Capability

Planning

Capability

Commercial

Research

Industrial

Finance

Planning Delivery Generation

Pro

ject

Enduring Mandate

Pro

ject

Pro

ject

Pro

ject

Issue Resolution/Direction

Programme Boards - Governance

CIWGs / AWGs

Source: TLCM Phase 4 Implementation, 12 November 2008 (DACP Ind Comms)

Equipment DLoD

User(s) Infrastructure DLOD

Organisation DLoD

Logistics DLoD

Sub-Group Leads

ProgrammeBoard

PSFHead

SROChair

PSF Secretary

Personnel DLoD

Training DLoD

Doctrine DLoD

Information DLoD

SIT (as appropriate)

Industry (as appropriate)

RP (as required)

DEP (as required)

Lead Scrutineer

(as required)

Programme Boards - Composition

Source: TLCM Phase 4 Implementation, 12 November 2008 (DACP Ind Comms)

• Senior people are very open to the principles and practice of programme management

• In defence, SRO roles are – for the most part – part time appointments

• The dual role of DEC acting as SRO represents potential conflict of interest

• The SRO role is only one part of the MSP ‘solution’ – not a complete fix

• The PgM role is a key individual role – not expected to be a committee

• The purpose of the BCM is being recognised - but FLCs need to be able to respond and act in that capacity

• A Sponsoring Group function is required to complete the governance – this is expected to be the Extended JCB - ToRs need to be aligned accordingly

• Programme Support is much more than an administrative function and the appropriate investment in people, processes and systems is required

Some observations…

Future MOD challenges?

1. Getting the ‘right’ number and make-up of coherent defence programmes – aligned to defence strategy, with strategic objectives adequately defined

2. Taking the big decisions around overheated Equipment Programme based on clear criteria of strategic priority and ‘portfolio’ balancing

3. Shaping the role of DECs (as Sponsor), DE&S (as a Customer Representative) and FLCs (as Users) in full view of business needs

4. Having enough people to allocate to key roles with the necessary competence in applying consistent principles and developing fit-for-purpose processes

5. Building a culture that encourages and allows ‘big picture’ thinking with the right information available to enable balanced decisions at all levels

6. Recognising that MOD is at one and the same time a Government Dept. and a Military HQ and that these different roles may require different structures, behaviours and even reward systems for operations vs. programmes and projects

7. Working with the Private Sector in delivering through programmes, with the flexibility required for programme management as part of contracts.

A Further Challenge….

92. Mr Gould acknowledged that the uncertainty over the equipment programme was bound to delay investment by industry. CDM said that he thought:

“industry would like to see an affordable programme and fewer projects properly funded, if that’s what it takes, than a lot of

projects not properly funded”

House of Commons Defence CommitteeDefence Equipment 2008, 27 March 2008

…do we need to think beyond programmes to portfolio management?

Conclusions

1. A great deal of central guidance has been issued during 2008 andthere is tangible evidence of movement in the ‘right’ direction towards a programme approach within defence

2. MSP principles, roles and structures are being adopted and applied, but there remains work to be done in hammering out the details

3. Crucial are:– Governance and an effective Sponsoring Group function– Adequate and appropriate resource allocated to the SRO role– Effective and sustainable involvement from FLCs as Users– Mobilisation of a fit-for-purpose Programme Support Function

4. MOD process and procedure – including finance and commercial – may frustrate efforts to bring about the necessary changes

5. Crucially, the planning round approach and the behaviours this drives potentially cuts across all efforts to define and implement programmes

6. Over and above programme, I believe there remains the opportunity - at the very top of defence - to apply portfolio management principles that would clarify strategic imperatives, align priorities against agreed criteria and so stabilise investment in delivering capability.

MOD is not alone….

“37 …….. So a key challenge going forward will be for the structures to provide clear and quick decision making so the delivery programme is not held up”.

Preparations for the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games –

Risk assessment and management’ NAO, Feb 2007

Thank You