Portfolio, Programme, and Project Management Maturity Model (P3M3)

Introduction to P3M3

The P3M3 refers to the Portfolio, Programme, and Project Management Maturity Model. It’s a framework crafted by AXELOS, who are behind a range of project, programme, and portfolio management systems. This model is tailored to aid organizations in evaluating and bolstering their project management capabilities, offering a pathway for ongoing advancement.

Capability Maturity Model (CMM)

P3M3 draws inspiration from the Capability Maturity Model (CMM) primarily developed by the Software Engineering Institute at Carnegie Mellon University. Originally named CMM and later evolving to CMMI, it outlined five distinct maturity levels defining the nature of software development organizations.

At the initial level, organizational practices are unpredictable, inefficient, and largely reactive. On the other hand, at the highest level, processes are both stable and adaptable, with an emphasis on continuous enhancement and adaptability to change.

The model equipped organizations with tools to evaluate their current processes and strategize improvements for advanced maturity levels.

In the same vein, P3M3 incorporates a similar five-level framework from CMMI but tailors it to the realms of projects, programmes, and portfolios, rather than strictly software engineering.

The three dimensions of P3M3

P3M3 functions across three facets: project management, programme management, and portfolio management. These dimensions signify varying tiers of business strategy execution, where project management is the most detailed level, and portfolio management stands as the apex.

Project management centres on producing distinct, tactical results. In contrast, programme management orchestrates multiple interconnected projects to achieve strategic goals. Portfolio management, on the other hand, fine-tunes the entirety of the organization’s projects and programmes to resonate with the broader business aims.

P3M3 maturity levels

The model describes five maturity levels, which indicate an organization’s maturity when managing projects, programmes, and portfolios.

Level 1: Awareness of process

At the primary maturity level, organizations possess a degree of understanding of project, programme, or portfolio management procedures. However, their application is sporadic. These processes might be employed in a sporadic or reflexive way, devoid of methodical planning or oversight.

Take, for example, a fledgling startup embarking on its initial software development. It depends on the team’s expertise, acknowledging the importance of project organization, task monitoring, and team dialogue, yet it doesn’t adhere to a specific approach. Steps are mainly reactive, tackling problems when they surface, as opposed to actively overseeing potential risks.

Level 2: Repeatable process

At the second level of maturity, organizations have established standardized procedures for their project, programme, and portfolio management. Yet, the consistent application of these procedures isn’t always ensured.

Consider a mid-sized firm overseeing a new product rollout programme. They might have set standard protocols for initiating, planning, executing, controlling, and closing several interconnected projects. However, the application of these protocols can differ based on the project manager, thus leading to diverse outcomes.

Level 3: Defined process

At the third maturity level, organizations possess thoroughly outlined, documented, and comprehended processes for project, programme, or portfolio management.

Take, for instance, an organization rolling out a portfolio of infrastructure projects. They would have detailed protocols for each stage of project management. Every stakeholder would be familiar with these protocols, guaranteeing a consistent implementation throughout the portfolio. Despite the projects being varied, in essence they adhere to a unified set of norms, boosting both efficiency and predictability.

Level 4: Managed process

At the maturity level 4, organizations go beyond just having defined and standardized procedures; these processes are also subjected to quantitative management. Their performance is measured, overseen, and their efficiency is quantifiable.

Imagine a global corporation embarking on an expansive digital transformation initiative. The firm would employ solid metrics to evaluate its projects’ performance, using tools like earned value analysis or risk trend analysis. Periodic assessment of these metrics empowers the management to base decisions on data and proactively adjust their tactics.

Level 5: Optimizing process

At this highest maturity level, organizations exhibit a continuous improvement culture, wherein their project, programme, or portfolio management procedures are regularly scrutinized and elevated.

Picture a worldwide consultancy agency executing diverse projects for its clientele. This agency would be in an ongoing mode of refining its project management approaches. By harnessing sophisticated analytics and insights from prior projects, the firm would iteratively fine-tune its procedures, aiming to provide superior results for clients and bolster its market standing.

The seven perspectives of P3M3

P3M3 evaluates seven key perspectives, essential for proficient project, programme, and portfolio management. These viewpoints span across all three dimensions, underscoring the notion that effective management extends beyond mere technical execution of projects.

The seven perspectives are:

1. 1. Management control

      This concerns to the systems in place for monitoring and managing the progress of a project or programme to guarantee its adherence to set objectives.

   2. Benefits management

      This focuses on identifying, managing, and realizing the benefits that the project, programme, or portfolio aims to provide.

   3. Financial management

      This deals with the budget formulation, monitoring, and management of the monetary resources designated for the project, programme, or portfolio.

   4. Risk management

      This focuses on identifying, evaluating, and handling risks that might hinder the successful completion of the project, programme, or portfolio.

   5. Stakeholder engagement

      This focuses in on identifying stakeholders, understanding their requirements and expectations, and managing their engagement throughout the lifespan of the project, programme, or portfolio.

   6. Organizational governance

      This concerns the structure of rules, relationships, systems, and procedures through which authority is wielded and regulated within the project, programme, or portfolio.

   7. Resource management

      This entails planning, securing, and managing both human and material resources crucial for the successful delivery of the project, programme, or portfolio.

P3M3 assessment

A P3M3 evaluation comprises seven steps, each crafted to provide an in-depth insight into an organization’s capabilities in project, programme, and portfolio management.

1. 1. Define the assessment scope

      The initial step sets the stage by defining goals and objectives. It entails deciding the range of the assessment, such as the specific departments or projects to be examined and formulating clear objectives in sync with the organization’s overarching aims.

   2. Form an assessment team

      A team is constructed, typically composed of both in-house and external specialists. The makeup of this team should encapsulate a mix of technical know-how, management expertise, and P3M3-specific knowledge, ensuring a well-rounded evaluation.

   3. Collect data

      Here, the team consolidates all relevant data. Utilizing a blend of questionnaires, interviews, and document evaluations, they gather insights on the organization’s project, programme, and portfolio management protocols.

   4. Analyse data

      After collecting data, the information is examined to discern the organization’s proficiency across P3M3’s seven perspectives. This scrutiny is set against the model’s five designated maturity scales, offering a panoramic view of the organization’s capabilities.

   5. Create assessment report

      A comprehensive report is written by the assessment team, highlighting the organization’s prevailing maturity level, strengths, shortcomings, and areas of enhancement for each perspective. The current maturity standing acts as a reference for tracking ensuing improvements.

   6. Review report

      The assessment team presents and discusses the findings with the organization’s primary stakeholders. This ensures clarity regarding the insights and the suggested enhancement pathways.

   7. Formulate a development plan

      Drawing from the benchmarks in the assessment summary, a strategy is crafted to steer the organization towards advanced maturity tiers. Typically, this strategy is developed in collaboration with stakeholders, ensuring it’s in line with the organization’s strategic vision and its preparedness for evolution. Progress, regarding maturity elevation, will be gauged against this set benchmark.

It’s worth pointing out that the P3M3 assessment process is not something to be done once, and then forgotten. Instead, it should be a continuous journey of improvement, with further assessments being repeated at regular intervals.

Case Study: TechnoTech

TechnoTech, a budding technology firm, struggled with unpredictable project outcomes, inconsistent processes, and reactive solutions. Recognizing the need for structured project management, they opted for a P3M3 assessment to comprehend their current position.

Initial assessment – Level 1

The first assessment showed that TechnoTech only had a rudimentary grasp of project management. Processes were applied sporadically, often depending on individual project managers’ preferences. For instance, while their cloud integration project had some semblance of planning due to an experienced manager, their IoT integration wing functioned chaotically, reacting to issues as they cropped up.

Transition

Determined to improve, over the next 9 months, TechnoTech initiated the following actions based on the P3M3 assessment recommendations:

Standardized processes

TechnoTech hired external project management consultants to help develop standardized guidelines across all projects, ensuring uniformity regardless of the project or manager.

Training

All staff underwent training to familiarize them with these processes, ensuring a unified approach to project management.

Metrics

Key performance indicators were introduced to measure project progress, enabling data-driven decision-making.

Level 2 Achievement

After the earlier transition steps were completed, a 2^nd assessment was done which evaluated the company at level 2 because it exhibited a structured approach to projects. However, while processes were standardized, their application varied, leading to discrepancies in project outcomes. Regular internal audits pinpointed these inconsistencies, marking a need for deeper analysis and metrics evaluation.

Transition

Over the following 6 months, TechnoTech performed further steps to help improved its capabilities.

Quantitative management

TechnoTech began capturing and analyzing data systematically, evaluating project health through metrics like risk trend analysis.

Feedback loops

Regular feedback sessions with project teams ensured real-time adjustments and continuous learning.

Stakeholder engagement

A concerted effort was made to involve all stakeholders, ensuring alignment with business objectives.

Level 3 Achievement

After a further 6 months, a 3^rd assessment indicated that TechnoTech had reached Level 3 because it had begun to exhibit a well-defined and documented approach to project management. Every stakeholder, from managers to technicians, was well-versed with project guidelines, leading to cohesive execution. Their infrastructure projects, for instance, were not only executed in a timely manner but also adhered to cost and quality standards.

Conclusion

TechnoTech’s journey from Level 1 to Level 3 with P3M3 showcased the transformative power of structured project management. The firm, once grappling with inconsistency, became a beacon of efficiency, setting a precedent for its competitors.

P3M3 alternatives

There are several other project, programme, and portfolio management maturity level models, which are all similar to each another.

Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI)

CMMI is an updated version of the original Capability Maturity Model (CMM) and is applicable to a broader range of industries beyond software development.

Organizational Project Management Maturity Model (OPM3)

OPM3 from the Project Management Institute’s (PMI) features a four-tier maturity scale.

Berkeley Project Management Process Maturity Model

The Berkeley (PM)^² Model uses a five-tier scale to assess the project management maturity based on the ten knowledge areas outlined in PMBOK.

PM Solutions Project Management Maturity Model (PMMM^SM)

Similar to the Berkely model, PMMM^SM from PM Solutions employs a five-tier scale to evaluate the maturity of the ten knowledge areas from the PMBOK.

The case for P3M3

As illustrated in this article, integrating P3M3 offers immense advantages to an organization. By bolstering project, programme, and portfolio management proficiencies, it significantly heightens the likelihood of successful change initiatives.

Beyond mere project outcomes, it enhances overall organizational capability and excellence, charting a clear pathway towards maturation. Furthermore, P3M3 instils a rich culture of perpetual learning and refinement, ensuring organizations remain agile and future-ready.