We’ve all had the feeling. You step into a lift (elevator for those of you who don’t speak the Queen’s English) and there’s the CFO. Or the CEO. There’s nowhere to hide. She turns to you and says something along the lines;
“I’m heading to a budget review and the project portfolio is under pressure. How do we KNOW we’re investing in the right things?”
Well, for most PMOs there is no good answer.
An honest answer would typically be; “Well, we had a meeting with our stakeholders and picked a bunch of projects that don’t really seem all that-well aligned with any strategic direction. Project selection was really based on politics and salesmanship and I reckon there are a few lemons and pet projects in there!”
Not an ideal answer.
Well, now there is a way you can quantify and justify the portfolio selection and it’s validated through academic research.
Project prioritization – the wrong way
I’m not going to spend a lot of time on this – I’ve covered it elsewhere.
Many organizations feel like they have a rigorous process based on their PPM tool (or even spreadsheets), but those are not typically valid project prioritization tools. Simple scoring mechanisms may make it feel scientific, but they typically leave you open to bias and to an ultimate lack of support for the portfolio. This is why it’s still hard to pick a portfolio that can be delivered with the resources you have, and it’s why people still try to “jam projects in”.
Well, the bottom line is that it lets you answer your CEO’s question clearly. Using AHP you can clearly explain why you are making the investments in projects that you are and you can demonstrate how value-for-money has been optimized.
How does this happen? Well, crucially (and unlike PPM tools or hacked together spreadsheets), it’s based on decision science. It starts with a structured process, one that’s designed to minimize bias and to maximize the benefits of collaboration, for agreeing what “value” means (this webinar explains the hows-and-whys).
This is where pretty much every other method fails and it’s a critical failure.
Once you’ve agreed what “value” means, it’s a relatively straight forward process to score projects against that definition and to then review which projects are most valuable…
Boom! Now we can answer the CFO’s and CEO’s questions and we can do it with the confidence that we got there with a defensible, independently validated methodology.
1 Danesh*, Ryan and Abbasi (2017), School of Engineering and Information Technology, University of New South Wales