Download First Things First: Putting Project Prioritization before

First Things First
Putting Project
Prioritization
Before Project
Management
Suzanne Bonefas, ACS Technology Center
Robert M. Johnson, Jr., Rhodes College
First Things First Putting Project
Prioritization Before Project Management
Copyright Suzanne Bonefas and Robert M. Johnson, Jr., 2005.
This work is the intellectual property of the authors.
Permission is granted for this material to be shared for
non-commercial, educational purposes, provided that this copyright
statement appears on the reproduced materials and notice is given
that the copying is by permission of the author. To disseminate
otherwise or to republish requires written permission from the
authors.
Introduction
The power of emotional appeals in
resource allocation decisions creates its
own cost.
 Many campuses look to project
management as a way to get better value
from their projects or to limit cost and time
overruns.

Project Management:
has become more than an art but also a
science.
 focuses on doing things right, stressing
efficiency and organization.
 doesn’t do the whole job.

Why Project Prioritization?
It’s not enough to do things right. One must
also be sure of doing the right things. For
that we need a framework and process for
project prioritization.
Framework for Discussion—
Christensen’s RPV Framework
Clayton M. Christensen, Seeing What’s
Next (2004)
 RPV=“Resources, Processes, and
Values.”
 An organization’s resources, processes,
and values affect, if not determine, “what
an organization can and cannot do.”

Christensen’s RPV Framework --
Resources
“Resources are the most visible of the
factors that contribute to what an
organization can and cannot do.”
 All assets, including people, equipment,
relationships, $$$
 They are both valuable and flexible
 Easiest to assess, but don’t tell the whole
story of an organization’s capabilities

Christensen’s RPV Framework --
Processes



“Organizations create value as employees
transform inputs of resources into products
and services of greater worth. The patterns
of interaction, coordination, communication,
and decision making through which they
accomplish these transformations are
processes…”
Processes are inherently inflexible.
Balance between flexibility (ability to change)
and efficiency.
Christensen’s RPV Framework --
Values



Values in this framework refer to the strategic
interests and directions of an organization
All employees should understand the
organization’s values in order to make good
decisions about project prioritization and day-today operations.
“A key metric of good management, in fact, is
whether such clear and consistent values have
permeated the organization.”
Applying Christensen’s RPV Framework
to Project Prioritization 1
Values—Reaffirm Them!
 Christensen writes: “An organization's
values are the criteria by which
employees make decisions about
priorities”

Applying Christensen’s RPV Framework
to Project Prioritization 2



Processes—Reengineer Them!
Christensen writes: “Organizations create
value as employees transform inputs of
resources into products and services of greater
worth. The patterns of interaction, coordination,
communication, and decision making through
which they accomplish these transformations
are processes.”
To reengineer processes, first understand your
organizational culture!
Applying Christensen’s RPV Framework
to Project Prioritization 3



Resources—Redeploy Them!
Christensen writes: “Resources are the most
visible of the factors that contribute to what an
organization can and cannot do. Resources
include people, equipment, technology, product
designs, brands, information, cash, and
relationships with suppliers, distributors, and
customers.”
Ensure that your resources are as flexible as
they need to be.
8 Steps to Applying Christensen’s RPV
Framework to Project Prioritization
If Project Management is not getting you
the results you need and you cannot
change the inputs, then you must change
the processes and do so in a way that is
consistent with your culture.
8 Steps to Applying Christensen’s RPV
Framework to Project Prioritization
Step 1: Ensure Executive Support
Step 2: Assess Capacity
Step 3: Assess Culture
Step 4: Inventory Needs
Step 5: Clarify Criteria for Valuation
Step 6: Create/Adopt a Discipline
Step 7: Do the Valuation!
Step 8: Improve the Process
8 Steps to Applying Christensen’s RPV
Framework to Project Prioritization
First, prepare!
 Step 1: executive support
 In most institutions, this is critical
 Goal of step 1 is to ensure you have the
support you need to institute a new
practice through a campus-wide process.

8 Steps to Applying Christensen’s RPV
Framework to Project Prioritization
Step 2: Capacity assessment
 Take a snapshot of your projects and how
they map onto your personnel (time), your
dollars, and your skill sets
 Goal of step 2 is clear understanding of
how you currently expend your
organizational capacity.

8 Steps to Applying Christensen’s RPV
Framework to Project Prioritization

Step 3: Culture Assessment

To understand culture, ask yourself how
decisions are made, budgets are set, etc. Who
is involved? What is their role? (Cameron and
Quinn)
Goal is to find an institutionally appropriate
mode for project prioritization process (culturally
acceptable process)

8 Steps to Applying Christensen’s RPV
Framework to Project Prioritization
Step 4: Needs Inventory
 Take inventory of each unit’s (division’s)
IT needs as they relate to its operational
objectives and to strategic plans.
 Goal is a high-level 30,000 ft. perspective
(real needs, not wish lists, to the extent
possible)

8 Steps to Applying Christensen’s RPV
Framework to Project Prioritization

Step 5: Clarify strategic objectives for use as
valuation principles or criteria.

Where to look: mission statements, strategic plans as
well as non-codified values
 For example, “keeping up with the Joneses”
 Look for tensions and inconsistencies among values
and opportunities to publicly resolve these tensions
(culture plays a role). Some values may need to go!

Goal is a list of criteria that will be the basis for
prioritization process
8 Steps to Applying Christensen’s RPV
Framework to Project Prioritization
Step 6: Adopt a discipline for valuing
projects
 Existing disciplines, e.g. Balanced
Scorecard or Project Portfolio
Management
 OR Simple home-grown rubrics
 Goal is to create framework for making
good decisions.

(Step 6 continued)
Example 1: Rhodes College
N
o.
Institutional Goals
1.
Lowering costs by
$x/student.
2.
Increasing student
retention by x%
3.
Improving student
satisfaction by x%
4.
Improving workplace
satisfaction by x%
5.
Improving learning
outcomes by x%.
VP(s) Director(s)
Staff
(Step 6 continued)
Example 2: ACSTC
Criteria
Resources required
Relevance to mission
Impact (#schools,
institutional, strategic)
Replicability
Asst.
Directors
Other
staff
Advisors
8 Steps to Applying Christensen’s RPV
Framework to Project Prioritization
Now, begin the process!
 Step 7: Perform the valuation
 Determine relationship of projects to
institutional goals
 Goal is to make good decisions

(Step 7 continued)
Tips & Consequences
•Evaluate projects in a batch – use a regular
project evaluation cycle (e.g., once a term).
•Know value of your assets and be able to
explain it. E.g., set rates on time, check ROI, or
use other payback metrics.
•Assign sunset clauses based on overruns in
initial cost, recurring cost, or payback failures.
•Business units will get smarter and kill projects
before you do.
8 Steps to Applying Christensen’s RPV
Framework to Project Prioritization
Step 8: Refine the Process
 Determine what you can do differently


For example:
• Are there some projects you can stop
now?
• Are there some workers who need
different jobs?

Goal is continuous improvement.
CONCLUSIONS




Project management by itself is not enough. A campus needs
the disciplines of project prioritization first.
Values: Without culturally sound project prioritization
disciplines, the campus community will be dissatisfied with
the project management it gets, no matter how good it is.
Processes: Without sound project prioritization processes,
ITS, for its part, will always be reactive rather than
responsive.
Resources: Without sound project prioritization, the
institution will waste its resources—money, time, and
personnel-- without getting proper payback from its projects
or its personnel.
RESOURCES




Cameron, K. S. & Quinn, R. E. (1999). Diagnosing and
changing organizational culture. Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Christensen, Clayton M. “Assessing Your Organization's
Innovation Capabilities, Leader to Leader.” No. 21
Summer 2001. See:
www.pfdf.org/leaderbooks/l2l/summer2001/christensen.
html.
Henig, Peter D. “The Efficient Frontier.” CIO Insight,
June, 2004, pp. 28-36.
Bob Johnson, [email protected]
Suzanne Bonefas, [email protected]