These are exciting times for those eager to see the government improve its management of projects and programs. Cameron Leuthy, senior budget analyst, Bloomberg Government, pointed out at a recent event that there are several reasons to be optimistic, citing the change in administration and the sustained effort and attention from Congress. “Every time there is a new administration, there is an enthusiasm for improving program management,” Leuthy said. “It’s hard to sustain it, but it’s there.”
Leuthy’s comments were made July 19 as part of his presentation at a joint policy breakfast between Bloomberg Government and Project Management Institute (PMI): “Outlook for Federal Agency Program Management and Acquisition.”
Certainly there is momentum, most notably with the passage of the Program Management Improvement and Accountability Act (PMIAA), which was signed into law prior to the close of 2016. Yet implementation will take time, as new policies, practices and standards are spread across government agencies.
Successful implementation of PMIAA depends on strong executive sponsorship. This is one area of project and program management that agencies and those who run them are required by PMIAA to focus on. To ensure that a necessary level of executive sponsorship is met within the federal government, the legislation specifically calls for the designation of program management improvement officers within each agency that will be responsible for program management policy and strategy, promoting greater accountability and recognizing the essential role of executive sponsorship. This designation is a core pillar of the legislation.
PMI research has consistently found that the single most important determinant of project and program success is having an executive sponsor who will act as a champion and provide support before, during, and after implementation of the project or program.
Effective executive sponsors have thorough knowledge of a project and how it connects to strategy. And owing to their position and experience, they have the necessary skills and authority to clear roadblocks, the confidence to make quick and effective decisions, and the influence to champion the project with senior management and position it as a top priority. The best executive sponsors can also motivate and engage a project team.
The stakes of having poorly engaged executive sponsors are high, as are the consequences and costs: PMI research in collaboration with the Boston Consulting Group (BCG) shows that one in three unsuccessful projects fail to meet goals due to poorly engaged executive sponsors. The same research has also shed light on the primary factors that can limit or inhibit a sponsor’s ability to be effective: A culture that leads to sponsors being overextended; inefficient communication; and lack of professional development of sponsors. Remedial steps around these three areas can improve the effectiveness of this key resource.
Previous PMI research has also demonstrated serious disconnect between project managers and executive sponsors. In fact, in PMI’s 2014 Pulse of the Profession In-Depth Report: Executive Sponsor Engagement — Top Driver of Project and Program Success, 82 percent of executive sponsors surveyed stated that they managed change, whereas only 37 percent of project managers surveyed thought executive sponsors managed change. Additionally, 82 percent of executive sponsors surveyed felt that they motivated their team versus only 34 percent of project managers thinking that executive sponsors motivated team members. The difference in percentages is eye-catching.
Overextension
Overextension is a serious threat to the ability to execute on strategic initiatives. This affects sponsors’ abilities to perform the most important actions expected and needed from them including demonstration of the most critical skills and exerting influence where it is most needed. PMI’s 2017 Pulse of the Profession report showed that for the first time in five years, more projects worldwide are meeting original goals and business intent while being completed within budget — and that fewer projects are deemed failures. The fact that PMI has also seen an uptick in actively engaged sponsors since one year ago as well is no coincidence.
Efficient Communication
Efficient communication is vital because people both above and below the sponsor are relying on him or her to influence and align stakeholders, exhibit leadership, and make decisions. Communication to the sponsor is just as important as communication from the sponsor. Too often such communication is either nonexistent or is heavy on quantity but lacking in quality.
Practices such as giving regular updates and feedback against clear, forward-looking milestones or on operational or economic impacts provide useful insight and help executive sponsors to be actively engaged but not overburdened. This, in turn, helps produce better project and program outcomes.
Development
Feedback is also critical for the development and cultivation of the skills needed to be an effective executive sponsor. While on-the-job training is the most common way for executive sponsors to acquire knowledge and skills, better project and program outcomes are achieved when formal development is offered (including from the program management office, mentoring and external development opportunities).
Bridging the communications gap can significantly increase collaboration and support project success. In turn, actively engaged sponsors can positively impact the strategic initiatives that will define an organization’s future and determine success.
PMIAA makes executive sponsorship a priority because of the clear benefits of having actively engaged executive sponsors. By understanding the factors that influence sponsors success, government agencies can effectively implement PMIAA requirements while improving the outcome of their projects and programs.
Mike Morgan is the manager of government relations for the Project Management Institute (PMI). Mike manages PMI’s Washington, D.C. team, leads strategic engagement with federal and state government agencies and advances relationships with regional development banks headquartered in Washington, D.C.
