Chapter 3

Identifying a Programme

In This Chapter

Deciding when to use programme management

Working out whether a change initiative is a programme

Getting the right people involved in decisions

Understanding the roles, responsibilities and requirements of the Sponsoring Group

Identifying a Programme is the first step in the MSP transformational flow, to which I introduce you in Chapter 1. The transformational flow (in effect, the programme's life-cycle) is part of the top-level structure of MSP, and although it's a process model, the authors helpfully use the word flow in order to emphasise that the processes aren't discrete, rigid or formal. Figure 3-1 shows where Identifying a Programme falls within the transformational flow.

In this chapter I describe the steps that the Sponsoring Group – that is, the most senior decision-makers in an organization – takes when it decides to treat the change initiative as a programme. A change initiative is simply a convenient term you can use if you haven't decided if something is a project or a programme. Or you can refer to your change initiatives when you want to cover all your programmes and stand-alone projects. I lead you through answering the vital questions of when to use MSP, what's involved and who's best placed to do the work.

Recognising When to Use MSP

Within the transformational flow, you're often working with very senior managers who don't react well if you tell them that they have to do this or that ‘because it says so in the process model’.

Consequently, the process model (that is, the transformational flow) in MSP places emphasis on how the individual processes merge together and need to be adjusted to suit the environment. Remember also that the scale and impact of programmes can vary enormously (take a look at Chapter 2 for more details).

Another way of thinking about how you can tailor processes in the transformational flow is to look at the principles of programme management (which I cover in Chapter 4). Modify the processes as much as you want.

If you can remain true to the principles of programme management, you're probably on the right track.

Figure 3-2 shows a simple process model of the activities in Identifying a Programme.

As you can see, the inputs are pretty sparse at the beginning of a programme, the people involved are pretty senior and the only really interesting control is an assurance review.

At the beginning of a change initiative, when you're considering whether or not using programme management is sensible, you'll find the three project or programme questions I supply in Chapter 1 helpful. In the following list, I give you a few additional typical circumstances in which considering programme management is a good idea:

• Co-ordinating complex activities
• Coping with scarce resources
• Designing interfaces between projects
• Dealing with economies of scale between projects (doing something once at programme level rather than many times in different projects)
• Needing a framework in an uncertain environment
• Handling high risk across multiple projects

Of course, using programme management for a change initiative isn't always necessary or sensible. For an example, read the nearby sidebar ‘When MSP isn't appropriate’.

When any change initiative starts, it rubs up against (to a greater or lesser extent) other change initiatives that are also going on or are planned. That's when you may need to consider using programme management.

Understanding What's Involved in Identifying a Programme

In this section, I discuss the nature, purpose and (rather authoritative-sounding) Mandate of the Identifying a Programme process.

Discerning the nature of Identifying a Programme

The best way to understand what's involved in Identifying a Programme is to think about where it happens. Imagine that you're working in a fairly large business: now picture the headquarters. Not just the head-office building, but the row of offices where the most senior managers lurk threateningly (sorry, I mean reign majestically!). This area is often called the C-suite, because the CEO, CFO, CIO and so on sit together in close proximity, and the decision to treat a change initiative as a programme is made here. The decision is made in this C-suite, because programmes are about achieving strategic objectives.

The C-suite doesn't take long to decide. The managers recognise that they have to make a decision, so they do some preparation, gather the facts, meet and decide. That's the nature of Identifying a Programme.

Here are some characteristics of this process:

• Lasts only a few weeks
• Displays a cautious commitment to a new programme
• Involves the necessary preparation before committing to the Defining a Programme process (which is more intensive; check out Chapter 7 for more)
• Turns a concept into a tangible business proposition

Clarifying the purpose of Identifying a Programme

The formal purpose of the Identifying a Programme process (refer to the earlier Figure 3-1 to see where it lies in the wider scheme) is to take the Programme Mandate and formalise it in a Programme Brief, which describes what the programme is designed to achieve and its benefits (check out the next section and the later ‘Moving from Mandate to Programme Brief’ for more). The Brief then forms the basis for deciding whether the programme is justified and whether the organization can proceed to the Defining a Programme process.

Considering the Programme Mandate

One vital idea is important to grasp about the Programme Mandate: the programme doesn't exist at this point, so the programme or MSP can't dictate the form of the Programme Mandate.

Indeed if someone is dictating the form of a Programme Mandate, things are probably getting off to a less-than-great start. Ideally a Programme Mandate is some sort of external trigger that comes in at the strategic level and makes the organization think that it needs to respond (read the nearby sidebar ‘Locating the origins of Programme Mandates’ for an example).

Of course, you hope that it describes the outcomes from the programme based on strategic policy objectives, but a Programme Mandate is more likely to be a consultant's report than a document labelled ‘Programme Mandate’. Strategic policy and objectives aren't terms most of us use every day, but the strategic planners in your organization may well use them. They just describe where the organization wants to be in the medium to long term.

Here's what you hope to see in a Programme Mandate (though you may not always be that lucky):

• Boundaries of the programme
• Constraints
• Context
• Critical success factors
• Current initiatives
• External drivers
• How assurance is to be carried out initially
• How the Mandate's going to fit into the corporate arena
• Initial budget
• Intended organizational improvements
• Nature of the organization improvement
• Related strategic objectives
• Relevant strategies and approaches
• Something about the ‘as is’ state (I explain about ‘as is’ and ‘to be’ states in Chapter 6)

As I say, you're unlikely to have all these pieces of information available when you receive an initial Programme Mandate.

Meeting the People Who Identify an Initiative as a Programme

In the earlier section ‘Discerning the nature of Identifying a Programme’, I talk about senior management in your organization being called the C-suite. Well, in MSP the term is the Sponsoring Group (which I look at in more detail in Chapter 9).

In this section, I describe who makes up the Sponsoring Group and what the members do in the context of Identifying a Programme.

The first thing to say is that you don't find committees calling themselves Sponsoring Groups. Therefore, when I'm with clients, the first thing I do is I ask them the name of their top-level management team. Usually, they come up with phrases such as the Corporate Board or the Executive Management Team. I replace Sponsoring Group with this local term and that's what I suggest you do as you read through this chapter and, more importantly, while you're implementing programme management.

Making up the Sponsoring Group

The Sponsoring Group contains the people who have the strategic overview of your organization and decide on strategic direction. Of course, lots of non-strategic initiatives are going on in all organizations and various other governance bodies approve this type of change initiative. But some initiatives are so significant that they're sure to come to the attention of the Sponsoring Group. They may be projects and so outside the scope of this book, but some are potentially going to be programmes.

The Sponsoring Group considers an appropriate initiative, thinks about how important it is and whether to invest in it. The members are unlikely to manage (or perhaps a better term is ‘direct’) the programme as a committee. The best approach that the group can take is to choose a member of the Sponsoring Group to own the programme.

MSP calls this person the Senior Responsible Owner (SRO).

Here are three things to be wary of when choosing the SRO:

• If the organization feels that it has to appoint several SROs for one programme, it suggests that the managers aren't comfortable delegating a major strategic change to just one member of the Sponsoring Group. This situation may indicate that problems lie ahead in making decisions quickly enough to achieve the necessary transformational change.
• Be careful if a slightly more junior manager (though still at a very senior level within the organization) is appointed as SRO. The person may not have the authority to make the decisions that are needed when directing the programme.
• If the SRO is accountable for delivering the programme, that person ideally needs to remain with the programme for its whole life, which may mean being in the same position for an uncomfortably long time – perhaps three to five years.

The ideal solution to this last point is when an organization is bold and says to an SRO, ‘we want you to remain with this programme for a long period and we'll reward you suitably if the programme is successful’. I've come across organizations that have done so. The situation to worry about, however, is when the SRO changes every six months or every year in a programme that's running for four or five years: inevitably, the individual's interests are short term whereas the programme's interests are longer term. I know of many programmes that failed badly because the SRO changed too frequently.

Sponsoring the programme

The Sponsoring Group is made up of senior executives on whom the programme impacts and who are required to bring about change. They need to have:

• Strategic interest
• Responsibility for the investment

All the members need to clarify their perspectives and interests, confirm their levels of engagement and commitment, and understand other change initiatives and any overlaps, conflicts and gaps that may apply.

Taking these considerations into account, appoint as SRO the most appropriate individual from the Sponsoring Group to lead and direct the programme.

Moving from Mandate to Programme Brief

Some work behind the scenes is necessary when moving from Mandate to Programme Brief. The SRO gets this work done by the newly appointed Programme Manager or by some consultants, so draft documents such as a Programme Brief and Programme Preparation Plan can be presented to the Sponsoring Group.

Bringing on the Programme Brief

As I say in the earlier section ‘Considering the Programme Mandate’, the Mandate may be incomplete. Therefore, the Programme Brief is simply the result of refining and filling out that Programme Mandate.

The key purpose of a Programme Brief is to allow the Sponsoring Group to assess whether the programme is viable and achievable.

The initiative is likely to be Vision-based, so understanding the Vision right from the very beginning and including an outline Vision in the Programme Brief is worthwhile. Make sure to outline the benefits, plus familiar items such as expected costs, timescales and effort, risks, constraints and assumptions, and perhaps options. Table 3-1 shows the contents of a Programme Brief.

Table 3-1 Contents of a Programme Brief

You may already have some idea of the candidate projects, particularly for an emergent programme. But don't focus too much on these projects, otherwise the result is a project-focused initiative not a benefits-focused initiative. Also, remember to include something about the current state of the part of the organization that will eventually be changed by the programme.

Outlining the Vision Statement

The Programme Brief includes an outline Vision. Here I give only a very brief summary of the purpose of a Vision. Check out Chapter 5 for more details, where I also give you tips on what makes a good Vision.

The Vision:

• Paints a simple picture of the required outcome
• Describes what's going to be different for the organization(s) because of the programme
• Expresses benefits such as:
  • Capability
  • Capacity
  • Effectiveness
  • Efficiency
  • Performance
  • Resilience
  • Risk levels
  • Services
• Expresses how stakeholders (anyone affected by or who can affect the programme) will see the benefit(s) and how these improvements are to be measured.

Here are the characteristics of a great Vision Statement:

• Written in future state
• Understandable by all stakeholders, with the broadest group being the target audience
• Describes a compelling future, not just dry facts
• May well include targets and constraints
• Memorable

Considering the Characteristics of Your Programme

I look at different types and aspects of programmes in Chapter 2, but certain other ideas are relevant when Identifying a Programme with the Sponsoring Group: how much control needs to be exerted; creating a plan for the Defining a Programme process; and gaining that all-important approval to go ahead.

Staying loose or tightening up your programme

As you study MSP, you may come to believe that programmes have to be centrally and tightly controlled. But in fact some of the most successful programmes I've been involved with were very loosely controlled by a very small central team.

Organizational culture plays an important role in helping the Sponsoring Group decide whether the programme needs to be loose or tight. As Table 3-2 reveals, loose and tight programmes have their own advantages.

Table 3-2 Loose and Tight Programme Advantages

As regards control, right not tight is the way to go.

Preparing for the programme

I describe what you need to do when Defining a Programme in Chapter 7, but for now just note that it may require a substantial amount of work. Therefore, you need to have a plan for Defining a Programme. This document is called the Programme Preparation Plan and it details how to undertake Defining a Programme.

A Programme Preparation Plan is a pretty conventional plan that covers the following:

• Assurance
• Boundaries
• Deliverables
• Estimates of effort and cost
• Governance and controls
• Resources
• Schedule
• Role of the Programme Board (which I discuss more in Chapter 9)

Gaining approval to proceed

The Programme Brief and the Programme Preparation Plan from the preceding section set the context for the programme and its initial direction. The formal approval that the Sponsoring Group gives means that the SRO confirms the following aspects (see the earlier section ‘Making up the Sponsoring Group’ if you've still to select this person):

• The programme meets some set of business requirements
• The Programme Board commits to supporting delivery of the programme
• The Sponsoring Group authorises the programme and commits to support and resource the Defining a Programme stage.

The authorisation is relatively short term, because it's only up to the end of Defining a Programme; although you hope to go ahead with the programme, it may be a distinctly different shape by the end of Defining a Programme.