© Slide 1

Overview of P3M3 V3

2015

Rod Sowden Geof Leigh

www.aspireeurope.com

© Slide 2

Aspire Europe

Formed 2004 MSP lead author 2007 P3M3 lead author 2008 MSP lead author 2011 P3M3 lead author 2015 BCM Survival Guide 2014 SRO Survival Guide 2015 Programme Manager Survival Guide 2015 Easy guide to planning 2015

© Slide 3

Maturity models – why bother?

“If anything is certain, it is that change is certain. The world we are planning for today will not exist in this form” Phil Crosby

Forbes Leadership

© Slide 4

Organisational Performance Journey

• Level 1 is characterised by

heroic and ad-hoc behaviours • Level 2 is characterised by

groups and teams setting their own ways of working or a central approach that is partially adopted

• Level 3 is characterised by a consistent approach being used across the organisation.

• Level 4 is characterised by continual improvement and analysis of performance

• Level 5 organisations are optimised for their environment

© Slide 5

About P3M3

2005 – P3M3 v1

2008 – P3M3 v2

2015 – P3M3 v3

• Baselining current capability (for later comparison)

• Benchmarking capability against other organisations (possibly to harvest best practice from a community of organisations)

• Discovering capabilities to determine which areas to concentrate on

• Diagnosing systemic weaknesses to eliminate root causes and non-confirming costs

• Prioritising improvement initiatives (based on any of the above)

• Certifying capability through independent assessment

© Slide 6

P3M3 maturity model

People

Tools Process

Assignment

The P3M3 model looks for balance between processes, tools and people, at level 3 these are normally in balance and at level 4 they are becoming more effective and efficient.

© Slide 7

Using P3M3 to optimise

£ Money Spent

Degree of Process / Formality

Point of Optimum Balance

“Cost of Winging it!” “Cost of Prevention”

£ Money Spent

© Slide 8

What did we learn from P3M3 Version 2

People found the style endearing, but not easy to assess Assessments offered too much flexibility Designed for self delivery organisations Self assessments were misleading and needed to be improved Needed to be widened and deepened for accuracy

© Slide 9

What did we achieve with P3M3 Version 2

Transport for London Main UK public sector Transport sector, NR NDA and Sellafield Ltd Australian government FIFA Gatwick Airport London Olympics Queensland Government New Zealand government Measurement of

Suppliers Partner

We got it right !

© Slide 10

P3M3 has provided evidence of the cost of low maturity

Slow or random decision making Poor requirements Duplication and overlap Poor knowledge management Poor team performance Excessive meetings Using poor frameworks and process Hidden operational costs Excessive reporting and documentation

Transport for London - £1bn saving moving from level 1 to 4 in 5 years

PMI - High maturity organisations within 2% of budget, low maturity

normally 30%+

UKBA saved 40% of training budget as a result of a survey

Estimated 500 assessments of 200 organisations, we have done over half

Mandated in Australia and New Zealand. All UK central government and

the core cities

© Slide 11

What's new in P3M3 Version 3

2 years of design, development and testing Increased alignment with industry bodies of knowledge, notably PMI, IPMA, ISO21500 and APM More breadth – e.g. commercial management

More depth – e.g. behaviours, model integration Easier to use – simple on-line self-assessment Better diagnostics – identification of common weaknesses Thread attributes aligned to show incremental improvement

© Slide 12

P3M3 Cube Threads Common assessment areas across each perspective

Tools and techniques Standards and processes

Information and knowledge Organisation

Assurance Behaviours Plans

Org

anis

atio

nal G

over

nanc

e

Man

agem

ent C

ontro

l

Ben

efits

Man

agem

ent

Ris

k M

anag

emen

t

Fina

nce

Man

agem

ent

Sta

keho

lder

Man

agem

ent

Res

ourc

e M

anag

emen

t Perspectives The major process groupings within P3M3

• 3 dimension model • 5 levels (like

CMMI) • 7 perspectives • 3 models; portfolio,

programme & project

• Minimum of 9 threads and up to 13

• Basis for reporting • Threads used for

diagnosis and identification of systemic weaknesses

© Slide 13

Perspectives – process groupings that we measure

Process deficiency

© Slide 14

Threads – common areas we review

Systemic issues

© Slide 15

Aspire adds value – with rich reporting

Thread BM FM MC OG ResM RM SM Thread AvgAsset 3.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 3.29Assurance 3.50 4.00 3.67 3.50 3.50 4.00 3.50 3.67Behaviours 4.00 4.00 3.50 3.17 3.33 3.67 3.00 3.52Commercial Buy 3.00 3.00 3.40 3.17 3.75 3.00 3.00 3.19Commercial Sell 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Information & Know ledge Management 3.50 3.50 3.67 3.40 3.50 4.00 3.20 3.54Infrastructure & tools 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.33 3.00 3.40Model Integration 4.00 3.50 3.80 3.50 3.00 4.00 2.00 3.40Organisation 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.33 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.48Planning 3.50 3.50 3.75 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.25Process 4.00 3.33 3.40 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.00 3.39Standards 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.50 3.00 3.50 3.00 3.29Technique 3.50 3.00 3.75 3.67 2.57 3.40 3.00 3.27

© Slide 16

Aspire adds value – with extensive experience

Been there, done that got the T-shirt

We know what good (and bad) look like because we have experienced both

We have used our experience to provide accurate assessments and practical recommendations which led to real improvement 1. Sellafield 2. Plymouth CC 3. Arcadis 4. Qinetic 5. DECC

© Slide 17

How do successful improvements work?

Attributes Recomendations Reworded into

Prioritised Into a schedule

As improvement is achieved

The new P3M3 score is evidence

Improvement activities

Grouped into

Potential score

Deep diagnosis

Change programme

© Slide 18

Thanks for your time

rod.sowden@aspireeurope.com