9CQMG4TUUK3Q
We started off the PMO series with a basic introduction about the PMO – terminologies, the different types of PMO and some of its typical functions.
Let’s talk about one very important part of a PMO function – Change Management. Change is the only constant in life – cliched? Of course, but true nevertheless. It is also one of the biggest causes of “project death” – those projects which go on indefinitely, but always overdue and a cost sink (read an extreme example of how change in scope resulted in a 12-year project that was also a massive failure!).
In a large project/program, change management becomes very important to ensure that something remains stable or atleast manageable.
Change Management has become the norm in the industry today and there are dedicated “Change Managers” too sometimes, but there is enough change mismanagement too. One of the biggest reasons for this mismanagement is because it is used synonymously with managing Requirements Change.
Managing change does not only mean managing changes to scope (“scope creep”, as it is called, but that is a creepy term). Architecture/Design decisions, standards and tools also must be controlled to prevent chaos. This is where most change management processes fail.
Let us look at some change management mechanisms and then we will revisit how change management can be applied.
Change Control Board (CCB):
One of the most common responses/techniques, but often under utilized. The CCB need not be a single, all-powerful entity, but there can be more distributed ones at different levels. For example, for large architectural changes, there can be a high-level CCB, but smaller design decisions can be changed by a lower level CCB. It is usually good to organize such mini-CCBs by the amount of control they have rather than by phase – this will create cross-functional teams at all levels, rather than more silos by function
Change Request Creation and Tracking processes:
Having a formal Change processes itself is a barrier to most spur-of-the-moment change decisions. At the minimum, change request processes should describe how a change request is created, who reviews it, criteria for escalation, stakeholders to be involved and change closure. It also needs to tie in Configuration Control for effectiveness.
Incorporating change (and its consequences) into planning:
Usually this is a fatality in most change processes. Changes to non-scope areas of the project are considered to be immune to schedule or cost effects, which is rather unlikely. Sometimes, the development team is asked to absorb the effect as the price for not understanding or doing it right the first time. Managers in charge of change control must resist this thought process or risk losing much more at a later stage in the project.
Stricter controls as Project progresses
At the start, change is more likely, since everyone is feeling around in the dark, establishing sign-posts and installing lights, figuratively, but as you progress in the project, it is important to ensure that every change request is asked “why” several times. Any change later in the lifecycle, especially with respect to decisions, is likely to affect work products already produced and accepted. A common victim of this syndrome in an application development project is the User Interface, which is thought to be like a skin – easily replaced, but is it? In services, Change is more tightly connect to configuration than with Application development, but the principle still holds true.
Having looked at some mechanisms for managing change, let us go back on how and where to apply change management. Change Management in an application development scenario can be used at:
- Scope management
- Technology stacks
- Architecture
- Design
- Standards to be followed, such as branding, user interface etc
- Third-party components
- Development environments
In a services environment, change needs to be managed for
- Hardware
- System Software (OS, standard application software etc)
- Communication equipment
- Services and their endpoints
- Processes and
- knowledge databases
Note: In IT Service Management circles, the CCB is termed as CAB, shortened for Change Advisory Board (though why it just “advises” stumps me).
That’s alright, I know this stuff, but where does the PMO fit in, you ask? PMO must be the oversight for managing change. The PMO establishes the procedures for change control and provides necessary direction to the Program on the levels of CCB (scope of change control, escalation criteria etc). It is also the final arbiter for changes to Project scope, schedule or cost.
In fact, for rescuing troubled projects, one of the first things a PMO should do is to take a hard look at the project for change leaks and based on the amount of leakage, institute an appropriate level of change control. I say “take a hard look” since it is almost guaranteed that a typical derailed project has issues managing change.
What are you experiences in managing change in your projects or services? Is there something else? Think and let me know about it.
Tags:
Change Management,
PMO,
Program Management,
Project Management