Example of Client Implementation of Best Practice Portfolio (PowerPoint PPTX Slide Deck)

BENEFITS OF DOCUMENT

1. Project portfolio management - client example
2. Best practice PPM
3. Managing programs and projects

DESCRIPTION

This product (Example of Client Implementation of Best Practice Portfolio) is a 18-slide PPT PowerPoint presentation slide deck (PPTX), which you can download immediately upon purchase.

Project portfolio management (PPM) is the ongoing analysis and optimization of the numerous project "investments" and organization makes. In this example, the best practices of PPM are applied to a banking client, PPM covering dimensions of the costs, resources, technologies and processes for all the projects and programs within the banks project portfolio.

The primary objective of PPM is to make sure alignment of project investments with the strategic goals and business objectives of the organization. The portfolio manager or PMO does this through business analysis, reviewing budgets and forecasting while minimizing risk and managing stakeholder expectations. Often this is done via dedicated PPM tools or via a set of bespoke desktop tools.

To understand where project portfolio management and project management differ, we must first define each and explore the areas where they diverge.

Project management is, quite simply, the management of a project. A project is a temporary endeavor that results in a product or service. It has a beginning and an end. Project goals are defined, and tasks are broken down into a schedule. Cost and budgets are set; resources are assigned, and stakeholders are reported to.

Project portfolio management, on the other hand, is a higher level approach that orchestrates, prioritizes and analyzes the potential value of many projects and programs in a portfolio to manage them simultaneously and optimize resource management. The goal of the portfolio management process is to manage and leverage the life cycle of investments, initiatives, programs, projects and outcomes to best reach the overall goals and objectives of an organization. Therefore, project management is a subset of project portfolio management. It leads to the ultimate objective, which is meeting the strategic goals of the organization.

Although this example does not advocate any particular portfolio management software, it does provide a view of the requirements of such as system from a best practice process perspective that should be provided by leading packages.
Typical PPM software offerings are also used for portfolio optimization to better achieve the financial goals of the organization.

Source: Best Practices in Project Management, Program Management, PMO, Consulting Project Management PowerPoint Slides: Example of Client Implementation of Best Practice Portfolio PowerPoint (PPTX) Presentation Slide Deck, Affinity Consulting Partners

PPT SLIDE DEEP DIVES

Executive Dashboard: Prioritization and Tracking

This PPT slide presents an Executive Project Dashboard designed to assist decision-makers in swiftly understanding project priorities and interdependencies. It categorizes projects based on their funding source, project name, sponsor or manager, current year spend, priority score, required and enabled projects, lifecycle stage, estimated time to delivery, and tracking status.

The dashboard highlights 6 projects, with varying funding sources primarily from business and IT. Each project is assigned a project manager, indicating clear accountability for delivery. The current year spend shows financial commitment, while the priority score ranks projects, helping stakeholders focus on the most critical initiatives. For instance, Project Alpha, managed by T. Smith, has the highest priority score of 2.14, suggesting it is a key focus area.

The "Required Projects" and "Enabled Projects" columns indicate dependencies, showcasing which projects must be completed to ensure others can proceed. This is crucial for understanding resource allocation and potential bottlenecks. The lifecycle stage of each project reveals whether it is in implementation or proposal phases, providing insight into the project's maturity.

The time to delivery ranges from one month to 2 years, indicating varying urgency levels. The tracking status, marked by colors like green, yellow, and red, visually communicates whether projects are on track, at risk, or off course. This visual cue is essential for quick decision-making.

Overall, the dashboard serves as a comprehensive tool for executives to monitor project health, prioritize resources, and ensure alignment with strategic goals.

Framework for Evaluating Attractiveness

This PPT slide presents a structured framework for project prioritization, focusing on 4 key assessment criteria: Strategic Fit, Financial Attractiveness, Opportunity Window, and Project Risk. Each criterion is assigned a specific weighting that contributes to an overall Priority Assessment score, which is crucial for evaluating a project's potential value.

Strategic Fit is weighted at 30%, emphasizing its importance in aligning projects with organizational goals. The scoring ranges from 10 for 'Legislative' and 'Essential' projects to 0 for 'Desired' and 'None.' This indicates a clear preference for projects that directly support strategic objectives.

Financial Attractiveness, also weighted at 30%, assesses the financial viability of projects. Scores range from 10 for 'Very High' financial returns to 0 for 'Poor.' This section highlights the necessity of financial metrics in decision-making processes.

The Opportunity Window, weighted at 20%, evaluates the timing and urgency of project execution. A score of 10 is awarded for projects with a 12-month window, while a 0 is given for those with a 3-year horizon. This criterion underscores the significance of market timing in project selection.

Lastly, Project Risk, weighted at 20%, assesses potential risks associated with each project. Scores range from 10 for 'Low' risk to 0 for 'Very High' risk. This aspect is critical for understanding the risk-reward balance in project investments.

Overall, this framework provides a comprehensive method for assessing project attractiveness, enabling organizations to make informed decisions based on a balanced evaluation of strategic alignment, financial potential, timing, and risk factors.

Structured Risk Assessment Framework

This PPT slide presents a structured approach to assessing project risk, emphasizing the likelihood of project success based on various risk-related factors. It outlines key dimensions that influence risk evaluation, including project duration, dependency on other projects, technical difficulty, team size, and deployment complexity. Each dimension is assigned a score ranging from 0 to 3, reflecting the severity of the risk associated with that factor.

The risk factors are detailed in a table format, where specific conditions are listed under each score. For instance, a project duration of less than 6 months is rated as 0, while a duration exceeding 24 months is rated as 3. This scoring system allows for a nuanced understanding of how different aspects of a project contribute to its overall risk profile.

The overall risk category is determined by summing the scores across all ten dimensions, leading to classifications of Low, Medium, High, or Very High risk. The assessment score correlates with these categories, providing a clear framework for decision-making. This systematic evaluation enables stakeholders to identify potential pitfalls early in the project lifecycle, facilitating proactive risk management.

Understanding this risk assessment framework can significantly aid executives in making informed decisions regarding project investments. By recognizing the critical factors that influence project success, organizations can better allocate resources, manage expectations, and ultimately enhance project outcomes.

Strategic IT Planning and Budgeting Framework

This PPT slide outlines the objectives and expected benefits of a structured approach to IT planning and budgeting over a three-year horizon. The left section details the objectives, emphasizing the need to establish and annually review an IT roadmap that aligns with the overarching business strategy. This roadmap serves as a foundation for identifying IT projects that address both business and technology needs for the upcoming financial year.

A key focus is on creating realistic project budgets that reflect current activities and anticipated future requirements. The slide suggests splitting budgets into distinct categories: maintenance, enhancements, operations, new projects, business technology, infrastructure, and ongoing projects. This categorization aids in better financial management and ensures that resources are allocated efficiently.

On the right side, the expected benefits are clearly articulated. The alignment of project resources with business strategy is highlighted, ensuring that IT initiatives directly support organizational goals. The slide also points out that a well-defined budget reduces the risk of unexpected costs, which can derail financial planning.

Furthermore, having a three-year outlook on the IT budget allows for more effective planning within the broader context of the business's cost structure. Transparency in budgeting is also emphasized, enabling project offices to report on progress and resource utilization effectively. This structured approach not only enhances accountability, but also fosters a culture of strategic alignment within the organization. Overall, the slide presents a comprehensive framework for IT planning and budgeting that can significantly improve operational efficiency and strategic execution.

Project Assessment Framework for Strategic Alignment

This PPT slide presents a framework for evaluating a project's alignment with strategic objectives through a classification system known as "Strategic Fit." This assessment categorizes projects into 4 distinct types: Legislative, Essential, Important, and Desired. Each type serves a specific purpose in relation to the organization's strategic goals.

Legislative projects are mandated by external factors, such as legal and audit requirements, and thus hold a high priority. Both Essential and Important projects are critical for achieving particular strategic objectives, with Essential projects being foundational for delivering on other objectives. Desired projects, while beneficial, are not essential for success and carry the lowest priority.

The slide includes a scoring system that assigns numerical values to each category, with Legislative and Essential projects receiving the highest scores of 10, Important projects scoring 5, and Desired projects scoring 0. Notably, projects that do not fit into any of these categories are labeled as "Not Assessable," indicating a disconnect from strategic priorities. This classification raises the question of whether such projects should proceed, despite their potential merits.

The framework emphasizes the importance of aligning projects with strategic objectives, providing a clear method for prioritization. It also highlights the necessity of assessing projects not just on their individual merits, but on their relevance to overarching goals. This structured approach aids decision-makers in determining resource allocation and strategic focus, ensuring that efforts are directed toward initiatives that drive organizational success.