|
|
| |
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ADP - Enterprise Database CalPERS - ACES (G2G/G2B) CalPERS - Network Strategy CalPERS - Self Service (G2P) CalPERS - WCM CDI - OASIS DHS - Project Management DOJ - APPS DOJ - Enterprise Data Sharing DOJ - EQAF DOJ - PDMP SCO - Agile Payment System SJC - County Intranet Portal
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |
Home |
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |
Set Up Your EA Program
The Challenge Programs and projects exist for different purposes. Programs sustain business missions to achieve their ongoing results through operations that can be quality improved through continuous process improvement. Projects are often used to make stepwise improvements in capability, but exist to achieve an outcome within constraints of time, investment and quality of scope one time only. Projects often place significant pressure on programs due to operating at a significantly different pace that may not be coordinated with the program support they need. Leaders of programs generally believe that estimates for projects are as solid as those for operational execution. Projects rarely have a confidence level of over 50% at the initiation phase of the project. Programs supporting projects are often frustrated with the unusual expectations for unique results in unreasonable timeframes. Projects are often frustrated that business needs are not fully reflected in requirements at project initiation and changes are expected with no adjustment in constraints. In truth, programs and projects need to coexist to make each other successful. The Approach Programs and Projects need to understand the dynamics of the other’s performance model. Program managers need to be educated on the nature of projects; and projects need to be oriented to the capacity for programs to support their required pace of performance. Gaps in understanding need to be immediately recognized as risks since the impacts are inevitable. Structured thinking and proven practices can be put in place to help both programs and projects feel confident that they are aligned with one-another. By addressing systemic problems with the relationship through a project Charter or other governing documentation, both entities have greater potential to succeed. Expect that initiation will be much more difficult until the differences become better understood. The Solution Programs survive in today’s market based on their ability to rapidly change their capability and performance through projects. Programs and projects are inseparable, yet serve in completely different dynamics and lifecycles that impede the progress of one another if the conflicts are not understood. By capturing the dynamics of programs and projects and integrating activity to provide structure to build projects that are aligned with enterprise goals and architectures, the two entities can not only coexist, but thrive to deliver valuable results. If programs and projects provide performance and feedback to leaders through targeted dashboards for operational and project contributions it can lead to resolving independent perceptions that divide teams and drive the teams to aligned achievement. With an emphasis on enabling internal resources to carry important roles and capabilities for the company, operational and project improvements can be coupled with organization change practices to achieve incremental and substantial changes that set an organization apart from its peers. The Benefits Project productivity significantly improves for areas of operational contribution. Sub-optimization within silos is replaced with teamwork. Frustration from externally imposed impacts is reduced and replaced with best possible contribution. Resource effectiveness for both programs and projects is highly improved. Individual self esteem increases by being able to contribute effectively to terms they agree to. Performance based on process leads to much greater consistency of performance. Image and credibility of the program is highly improved for ability to enhance positive project impact.Capacity of programs and projects is used much more effectively and is more readily available. Outcomes are achieved more consistently.
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |
© 2010 Delegata Corporation | Terms of Use | Webmaster | |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||