ALIGNMENT AND PORTFOLIO case studies in project program and organizational project management
376 CASE STUDIES
CHAPTER SUMMARY
Name of Case Area Supported
by Case
Case Type Author of Case
LorryMer Information Technology
Strategic Alignment Issue - based Case
Sabin Srivannaboon and Dragan Z.
Milosevic Who Owns the
Portfolio? Portfolio Ownership
Critical Incident Dragan Z. Milosevic
and Peerasit Patanakul Our Portfolio Stinks
Portfolio Balancing Critical Incident
Dragan Z. Milosevic, Peerasit
Patanakul, and Sabin Srivannaboon
377
LorryMer Information Technology
Sabin Srivannaboon and Dragan Z. Milosevic
LorryMer Corporation was a leader in a specialized motor vehicle industry in North America. In the early 2000s its sales began to suffer substantially due to
the recession in the U.S. economy. As a result, the company was forced to change its primary strategic objectives to focus on cost effi ciency. In particular, it needed
to cut operating costs to improve the company ’ s competitive position. This case shows how LorryMer ’ s IT programs were aligned with the company ’ s strategic
goals and business values. The alignment process was tailored for LorryMer ’ s new business strategy and an effective alignment tool was used. The tool is simply
a chart designed to present the alignment between business goals, business val- ues, and the IT programs. The alignment between business strategy and program
execution begins at the top, where strategy drives the desired business results. Effective program management practices then deliver the business results.
IN TROUBLED WATERS
LorryMer specializes in the design, development, and manufacture of a complete line of technologically advanced motor vehicles. The company has been in busi-
ness for more than six decades, and now operates seven major vehicle manufac- turing plants and one parts manufacturing plant in North America. With more than
14,000 employees, its mission is to provide the highest standard of technological innovation and premium quality to its customers. LorryMer remains committed
to the highest degree of innovation and quality, and is dedicated to meeting its customers ’ needs.
Saul McBarney, LorryMer ’
s information technology IT program man- agement officer, has been with the company for 25 years. Saul is proud of the
company ’ s history, strategy, and background. “ We are unique in terms of listening to the customers. We find out what customers ’ business needs are first, and then
develop products for them that meet their needs. ”
However, 2001 was a painful year for LorryMer. As a result of eco- nomic hardship in the motor vehicle industry, the company ’ s sales and profits
dropped, and its losses exceeded 1 billion. In September 2002, the Refrigerated
378 CASE STUDIES
Transporter reported that depressed used automobile prices caused many carriers to extend trade cycles because they owed more on their automobiles than they
could sell them for. As a response to the crisis, the company embarked on a major cost savings
initiative in late 2001, which later produced a number of cost savings programs. Dingo Ostar, a LorryMer business value account manager and a member of the
business advisory group, said, “ It was about cost, cost, cost and nothing else . ” Nevertheless, LorryMer continued to experience substantial business chal-
lenges in the following years. With the economy still suffering, LorryMer ’
s automobile production in 2002 did not meet 2001 production levels, which were
significantly lower than 2000. Funding for any new programs was minimal, espe- cially during 2003. LorryMer needed to change in order to survive.
OVERCOMING STRATEGIC OBSTACLES
John Mennon, chief information offi cer for LorryMer said, “ The business environ- ment for all automobile manufacturers remained depressed and was not expected
to regain its historically high levels until late 2004. We knew we had to make some changes to be ready to compete. ” LorryMer focused on reducing costs quickly.
As a result of relentless cost - cutting programs, LorryMer ’ s operating costs were dramatically reduced, and breakeven profi t was achieved in 2003.
“ However, we knew those changes were tactical and not sufficient, ” John said. “ We had to make additional changes. ” Therefore, during 2005, LorryMer
modified its strategy by focusing on five new core values: providing market leadership and brand coverage; pursuing technological innovation; partnering
with operators for maximum productivity; focusing on the needs of its customers, employees, communities, and the environment; and being an advocate for their
industry.
ALIGNING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PROGRAMS TO BUSINESS STRATEGY
During the past several years, the IT strategy at LorryMer has been to maintain legacy systems. Most of the new IT investments were dedicated to e - business
websites for after - market sales, and marketing. Dingo said, “ Eighty - fi ve percent of what we sell is a complete commodity available from thousands of other
people. So the only thing we really have to sell to increase profi t is service. ” The remaining incremental IT spending supported enhancements to keep the legacy
systems compliant with government regulations and provided some basic level of additional functions.
To improve the company ’ s competitive position, radical changes needed to take place to create an IT environment that was better positioned to sup-
port all five of the new core values. As part of the improvement efforts, the IT
Alignment and Portfolio Management 379
department was reorganized and made much more agile in 2005. That was done by replacing the functional structure with a matrix organization, consisting of
application IT application developers and service providers and program man- agement program managers and business system analysts competency centers.
Then, a business advisory group concept was introduced. It consisted of value account managers who provided IT focus in business units and acted as the IT
voice of the customer, which was something LorryMer lacked previously. Also, a joint strategic planning session of business units and IT was initiated in the
middle of 2005. Its purpose was to determine the business needs to be supported by the replacement of legacy IT systems. Saul commented, “ This was previously
unheard of. In the old system, IT goals were either left to IT or imposed on us by the company. Now, our strategic goals and direction were determined by the
end users in the joint strategic planning. ”
In order to ensure IT strategy and business strategy alignment, IT activi- ties and programs had to complement the needs of the business. The IT team
used an alignment chart tool to accomplish this see Figure 19.1 . John explains, “ The alignment chart provides a strategic mapping of the business goals, the busi-
ness values initiatives, and the IT programs. As part of the strategic changes, we were tasked by the company to design the alignment process, part of which was
accomplished by the alignment chart. The chart was designed to help us visualize the alignment between business goals, business value, and the programs. ”
Dingo offered an example of how to read the chart . “ A bubble on the intersec- tion of Business Goal 4 and Business Value 3 means that they are aligned. Further,
a bubble indicates that Business Value 3 intersects with Program 3, meaning they are aligned. In summary, Program 3 delivers Business Value 3, which achieves
Business Goal 4. The alignment is all about IT programs producing business value by helping us achieve our business goals. That is the language we want everyone
to speak. ”
Business Goals Business Value
and Activity IT Programs
Goal 1 Goal 2
Goal 3 Goal 4
Program 1
Program 2
Program 3
Program 4
Business Value Activity 1
Business Value Activity 2
Business Value Activity 3
Business Value Activity 4
Figure 19.1 Sample Alignment Chart Tool
380 CASE STUDIES
The alignment chart is a useful mechanism that not only helps visualize the alignment efforts, but also builds a standard language in the company where
every IT investment must be aligned to an organizational need.
ALIGNMENT BEGINS AT THE TOP
On paper, the alignment chart is straightforward, but the execution of the steps in the alignment process is more complex. LorryMer has a mix of formal and infor-
mal processes for ensuring proper IT strategy and business strategy alignment. The processes are internally embedded within the business strategy formulation
and throughout the program life cycle.
There are six steps in the alignment process see Figure 19.2 : Strategic planning
Informal portfolio management Envisioning
Planning Development
Deployment
In step one, strategic planning, the strategic plan document is developed to help accomplish the goals of IT in support of the company ’ s business strategies
and goals for the three - year planning horizon. According to John, “ Our challenge within IT has always been to take a look at how we treat the goals, whether
they ’ re well defined or not, and determine what our strategic plan is to help accomplish those goals. Our approach is an evolutionary process. Once you know
where you want to go, you take it one step at the time, one program at a time, and each program gets you closer to the goals. ”
Then, business valueactivities, called strategic initiatives and programs, are formulated based on the goals of the business strategy. These are done by
the business advisory group and Program Management Competency Center. Tools at the strategic level, which are used to ensure the quality of the align-
ment, include the strategic plan document, roadmap charts, and alignment charts.
Strategic plan document is a tentative capital plan that shows the snap- shot of all program summaries and types, and estimated headcount and
payback. It is based on the business strategy and goals of different busi- ness units that IT supports.
Roadmap charts are used to define where the company wants to be in IT in the next three - year timeframe. They address all of the business goals of
different business units that IT attempts to support and their timeframes. Alignment charts are the mapping of the business goals, the business
values, or strategic initiatives, and the IT programs.
● ●
● ●
● ●
●
● ●
Alignment and Portfolio Management 381
Step two, the informal program portfolio management process, is a significant part of LorryMer ’ s alignment process. Once the portfolio management process
is completed, it produces information about a set of candidate programs, their investment opportunities and program priorities. In short, the process reveals
Strategic Planning
• Strategic planning document
• Roadmap charts • Alignment charts
Envisioning
• Use case development • Traceability matrix
• Customer sign-off • PMO involvement
Informal Portfolio Management
• Business value assessment
• Customer sign-off • PMO involvement
Planning
• Use case development • Traceability matrix
• Customer sign-off
• PMO involvement
Development
• Program matrix • Customer sign-off
• PMO involvement
Development
• Customer sign-off • PMO involvement
Rejected Killed
Figure 19.2 The Program to Business Strategy Alignment Process
382 CASE STUDIES
Business Value Weighting 1 - Lowest
10 - Highest
Business Risk Weighting 1 - Highest
10 - Lowest Generates at least 1 million
in revenue per year. Regulatory requirement.
Cost savings of at least 500,000 per year.
Necessary cost of doing business and key business
processes will cease if not done.
Improves employee communication, culture, or
morale, resulting in a 10 increase in the next annual
employee survey results. Required to support new
product.
Product quality that directly affects JD Powers
measurement. Replaces legacy systems
that inhibit required business process
changes.
Improves dealercustomer experience, resulting in an
increase of 12 market share. Synergy with ZBZ.
Cost avoidance of at least 500,000 per year.
Affects existing product build capability.
Payback in less than 18 months.
Affects existing motor vehicle and parts sales
capability. Current customer
satisfaction level will decrease as measured by
JD Powers.
Competitive threat will result in the loss of
market share andor net profit.
TOTAL TOTAL
Note: the higher the total, the better
Table 19.1 LorryMer Business Value Assessment
the most viable programs and possible risks that could occur in the envisioning, planning, development, and deployment phases of their life cycles. Saul said,
“ Portfolios help to assess and monitor programs that are the best investment. ” Currently, this assessment is done in the portfolio process through business value
assessment BVA. BVA consists of a set of questions prepared by value account managers . The program management office PMO is asked to first answer the
Alignment and Portfolio Management 383
questions regarding business value weighting, which is expressed on a 1 - to - 10 scale, 1 being the lowest value, 10 being the highest value. Second, it assesses
business risk, also expressed on a 1 - to - 10 scale, 1 being the highest risk, 10 being the lowest risk. An example of BVA questions is shown in Table 19.1 .
Programs then are evaluated based on BVA, program type, program size, pri- ority and business area, and are selected accordingly. Once programs are selected,
they go through the standard life cycle phases: envisioning, planning, develop- ment, and deployment. A program manager is usually assigned at the end of the
portfolio process or the beginning of the envisioning phase, which is step three of the alignment process. Saul commented, “ Ideally, we like to have a program
manager on board when envisioning is just ready to begin. That allows enough time to develop a close relationship with the business system analyst, who is
responsible for detailed planning and execution of the program. Sometimes we engage a program manager immediately at the time the portfolio process starts.
Therefore, the program manager is responsible, along with the value account manager, for the business value of the program, and solely responsible for achiev-
ing the program ’ s other requirements . ”
In the envisioning and planning stages, the ball is in the program manager ’ s court. Jeff Barrison, a program manager, said, “ Use case development and trace-
ability matrixes are used to develop the program plan. A program manager maps the details of the program with the use case, describing a series of tasks that users
will accomplish using the software, which also includes the responses of the soft- ware to user actions . The program manager also traces program actions back to
the initial requirements traceability matrix to ensure that the plan is still aligned with the requirements. In addition, the business system analyst and the program
manager meet with the business members and end users to get sign - off, as part of a mechanism to make sure that the program is still in line with the business
goals and requirements. ”
After the program plan is approved, the program team starts to implement step five, or the development stage, of the alignment process and later, the
deployment stage. According to Jeff, “ Program metrics are used as a mecha- nism to track progress to plan. At the end of each program life cycle phase, a
program manager is required to present the program status to the PMO and get customer sign - off to be able to proceed from one phase to the next. Therefore,
customer sign - off and PMO involvement are the other control mechanisms to make sure that the program is still in line with the expectation throughout the
program life cycle. ”
The program status report is used as a vehicle to communicate between the program team, PMO, and customers. When a program does not meet the require-
ments at each of the phase gates, adjustments are required if the program is not killed. This mechanism is referred to as a corrective approach, in which a new
strategy or action emerges from a stream of managerial decisions through time.
384 CASE STUDIES
CLOSING
Aligning programs to business strategy is new to LorryMer. John remarked, “ We are learning the alignment process, and I am happy with its results. For the fi rst
time, we are aligning IT programs with the business strategy — and it works. ” The LorryMer experience offers a good example of the use of an integrated
management system in practice to achieve strategic business objectives. Key elements of the LorryMer experience include the following:
Alignment starts at the top — strategy drives intended business results and competitive advantage.
To execute on strategy, a company needs to consistently select, fund, and resource the programs that best align with the strategic objectives and con-
tribute the highest business value. Effective program management practices deliver the intended strategic
business results and create a competitive advantage for a company.
Discussion item
1. Suggest an approach to align a projectprogram to the organization ’ s business strategy.
● ●
●
385
Who Owns the Portfolio?
Dragan Z. Milosevic and Peerasit Patanakul
He knew something was wrong with his project mix after reading a three - month report showing the cumulative number of projects done for the current year. To Ian
Plachy, Vice - President of Engineering for Interconnecting Cable, Inc. ICC, the report showed that his engineers, for the fi rst three months of the year, completed 48
small projects and 11 medium projects. None of the big projects were completed.
ICC, INC.
ICC makes custom - made interconnecting cables for the health, computer, and other industries, with annual sales of 140 million. Typically, ICC would develop
platform cables big projects, per customer requirements. These platform cables could be changed to a minor degree, e.g., color and small changes of material
small projects or to a great degree, e.g., color, major changes of materials, and length medium projects. Platform cables were not very lucrative to make
because they were costly to develop. In addition, buyers usually do not pay the full price, but share the cost with ICC. This is a main reason why ICC did not
want to pursue too many platform cables. They, however, had to have enough of them to be able to adapt to small and medium projects, which would be the
sources of their future revenue. In truth, the more small and medium projects were sold, the more would ICC ’ s cost sharing of platform projects be depreci-
ated. Even though margin on small and medium projects was not big, it was certain. Moreover, it was easy to implement these “ bread and butter ” projects.
OUR FUTURE IS IN PERIL
Ian ’ s business instinct told him that having completed none of the big projects was a mistake. But he decided to wait and research the issue further. When the
six - month report arrived, and showed that his engineers did 90 small projects, 20 medium projects, but no large ones, he was ready to make a splash. In the
meantime, he called his project management consultant and explained the situ- ation. The consultant told him that this was a frequent issue in companies as a
386 CASE STUDIES
result of some types of projects being overemphasized, eventually leading to the unbalanced project mix or project portfolio. Ian agreed and explained that if this
problem persists, the skills of his company ’ s best engineering talent will go rusty. If they constantly worked on small and medium projects, his engineers would not
be up for the challenges of the big projects in the future. Without working on the big projects, they wouldn ’ t be able to develop their skills further. The technical
competencies of ICC would be in peril.
The consultant said the best approach to the problem would be to talk it over in a four - hour workshop with the engineering and marketing department ’ s
leadership. Ian accepted the consultant ’ s idea, and scheduled the workshop in two months, but could not guarantee that marketing leaders would attend, although
he ’ d do his best. Later that day Ian called the vice - president of marketing, Dustin Miller. Dustin agreed with the idea and the date. He confirmed that he and his
main people would attend the workshop.
On the day of the workshop, 11 people showed up. This included Ian and Dustin and their direct reports. Because the workshop was not designed for an
educational purpose, it was rather short but informative. The consultant discussed the characteristics of the project portfolio and the responsibilities in managing
ICC ’ s portfolio. The discussion on the responsibility for managing ICC ’ s project portfolio took an interesting turn.
Asked how that issue is seen, Dustin Miller answered that the marketing department owns the portfolio, but really does not manage it. He explained,
“ What we do is we have a guy, called a bidder, who reviews customers ’ requests and strives to pick those with the highest net present value NPV. ” Ian added that
he would like to have a say in selecting projects because it had a lot to do with the development of their skill set, ICC ’ s competencies, and market position. Ian,
actually, would prefer that ICC form a portfolio interdepartmental committee to manage the portfolio. Now, the power struggle developed as Dustin jumped in
and insisted that some changes would be made in marketing to manage project portfolio in the way it was discussed in the workshop, but beyond these no other
changes would be made. Dustin saw no need for real changes, nor for any single department except marketing, to be involved.
Discussion items
1. Who should manage project portfolio? Marketing? Engineering? Both? Some other groups?
2. How does project portfolio management influence engineers
’ skill sets, a
company ’ s competencies, and market position? 3. Does the use of only NPV as a project selection method carry certain risks?
What are they? 4. Why is it risky if ICC ’ s portfolio consists of 80 percent of the bread and butter
projects?
387
Our Portfolio Stinks
Dragan Z. Milosevic, Peerasit Patanakul, and Sabin Srivannaboon
The Edge Tech business unit within a major electronics company was almost blindsided by its new product portfolio problems. The focus of their strategy was
on the development of many new products, which leveraged its core competen- cies. The business unit developed and put in place a formal new product process,
in which the role of a gatekeeper belonged to the newly hired general manager of the unit. After several months on the job, he convened a portfolio review meet-
ing. The meeting ’ s purpose was to provide an overview of the status of product development projects.
PORTFOLIO ISSUES
The meeting went very well and helped the general manager learn a lot about the current direction of the new product development. As he pondered about the
learning, he tried to systematize and group the issues he discovered. His groups of issues contained the following:
Projects were taking far too long. To tell the truth, some of the projects were in the pipeline for years. When he asked why, the standard answer he heard was that
project teams were working hard, but they were stretched across too many proj- ects. His feeling was that the pipeline was clogged, with too many projects in it.
Apparently, there were some real good projects. In every aspect, they looked like winners. What perplexed him was the large number of subpar projects in the
pipeline. Searching for clues about the survival of these marginal - value projects, he asked about the project reviews. The answers he got indicated that the reviews
were not doing the job of killing poor projects.
There were 28 projects in the pipeline. No two of them were in the same product performancemarket segment area. In all fairness, this approach was as
a strategic scattergun. Projects aimed at a large number of different markets — consumer, automotive, computer manufacturers, musical equipment, and so on.
Some of these markets the business did not sell to, and some were off - strategy.
388 CASE STUDIES
It was quite obvious that the proposed products offered a wide variety of benefits in many different performance segments. Practically, there was no real glue to
bond all those projects — the total lack of focus was more than evident. All of the projects held a promise of high reward, obviously a good sign. The
problem was that all of them also were highly risky, with a reasonable probability to fail technically or commercially.
Almost all projects were long - term. The absence of “ quick hits ” to balance the long - term development projects was apparent.
TO SUMMARIZE
“ Okay, ” the general manager thought to himself. “ Now, the groups of issues seem clear. In order to talk to my direct reports, I need to summarize this into a few
words, describing where our portfolio is as of now. Would the following descrip- tion make sense? ”
Overall, our portfolio stinks Our portfolio is unfocused
Too many projects, resources spread too thinly Too many poor projects
Our portfolio is poorly balanced Our portfolio does not support our business strategy
Discussion items
1. Do you agree with his verdict? Why, or why not? 2. Suggest a way to improve the current situation.
● ●
● ●
● ●
389