I’m working on the Return on Investment of Project Management this week and I’ve come across a fascinating reference to how expectations can have a remarkable effect. Freek Vermeulen notes that just the expectation of better performance seems to be able to deliver it – up to 6% worth! That’s serious money when you’re talking about project management improvements. If we add this to the well-documented Hawthorne Effect which I’ve written about here before which can improve…
One of the biggest and earliest challenges in implementing enterprise project management is defining the benefits to management. Talking about epm system features or the intricacies of your project management process is of little interest to management unless you can tie it to how this will impact the organization overall. This article looks at how to define the business benefits of epm.
How does one define the first critical phase of an EPM deployment? What is the minimum deployment possible that will ensure a successful EPM implementation?. This article looks at the first EPM hurdle.
There are so many articles and books on Enterprise Project Management but one of the first and biggest challenges comes when you discover that not everyone means the same thing by EPM. Each vendor, consultant and expert is colored by their experience and background. Making sure that everyone on your team is singing from the same hymn book when you’re starting an EPM project can make all the difference to success or failure.
I was asked lately how to find the great reports and dashboards that Microsoft shows in its sales demonstrations. Happily, Microsoft makes those example files available online for anyone who has Project Server 2007. The reports are based on Microsoft SQL Reporting Services which has a wide range of reporting functionality. You could, for example, create reports which are scheduled to leave the report file in a particular area and then automatically send an email…
There is a movement afoot to promoted only centralized project management and you’d think you’d be most likely to hear that lecture on a site dedicated to enterprise project management like this one is. However, there’s nothing about the project management industry or the project management systems industry that makes centralized project management the ideal solution for every problem. Even here on EPM Guidance, we can come up with an argument for being more effective by having a de-centralized project management architecture. This article debunks the myth that only centralized project management is effective.
One of the grand debates in enterprise systems is whether you should be looking for one all-in-one tool or whether it’s better to look for the “best-of-breed” in each type of tool that you need. Can’t you do both? Use the all-in-one when it’s appropriate and the best-of-breed when the functionality outweighs the value of integration?
One of the classic problems that those creating new Project Management Offices (PMOs) fail to deal with is the challenge of having enormous responsibility with miniscule authority. It’s a challenge caused by where the PMO is placed within the organization’s organigram. Dealing with this dichotomy early is often a key success factor in the PMO’s evolution. Find out more in this article on the PMO’s dotted line.
Scorecard and Business Intelligence software is the hot button of the IT world these days but the display, as beautiful as it might be, is only as good as the data it comes from. In fact, a dashboard display that shows bad indictors because there is no business process behind the metrics is more dangerous than no display at all.
There are two big methods to deploying enterprise software. The most popular and espoused by the big-box consulting firms we can term the “Big Bang” approach. We make a complete design, take 2 years to deploy but when it finally comes out it’s hopefully everything you ever hoped for. The other way to go is the “Phased” approach. Here we get an approach that may take longer to get to the complete solution and may even never get there but it carries the advantage of paying dividends along the way and being adjustable to change direction if the company changes over time. Which one’s better? Take a read of this article to find out.