TREAD carefully to transition benefits

Earlier this month, I had the opportunity to deliver the benefits management module as part of the Program Management (PgMP) certification preparation class delivered by Kailash Upadhay from AddOn Skills. Subsequently, I was doing another corporate training where people were discussing about benefit as the financial gain to the organization as part of "Program Increment" planning in Scaled Agile. When I tried to explain the differences, people felt that program management is not relevant in adaptive approaches as agile focuses only on value.

As I reflected on these combined discussions, I felt that there is a larger disconnect on benefits and value and when different emerging frameworks play with words, the fundamental meaning is lost! I would like to call out my reflections from a dental visit blog (Rajagopalan, 2020) where I synthesized the importance of output, capabilities, outcomes, benefits, and value. Consequently, I would like to address two big myths!

• First, in the world of project, program, and portfolio managing focusing on product management, benefits are program level deliverables. Programs represent the integrated outcomes that indicate an operational state. This outcome is derived from the integration of one or more components (which include projects, sub-programs, and program related activities). The utility value of these outcomes represents the benefit and the extent to which the benefits are realized represent the value. So, the concepts of benefits belonging to traditional approaches and value belongs to adaptive approaches are incorrect.
• Second, benefits lifecycle (these include the stages benefits identification, benefits analysis & planning, benefits delivery, benefits transition, and benefits sustenance) is done throughout the program lifecycle (program definition, program delivery, and program closure). Benefits are not related to financial ROI alone as customer satisfaction and employee morale are intangible benefits that can't be measured in financial value. I recall reading about Infosys being the first Indian company to ever record human resources capital and brand value as an asset in the balance sheet. Similarly gain can be increased in non-human capabilities, such as the facilities, equipment, materials, infrastructure, and supplies that can come through vendors, consultants, partners, and suppliers among many things. Companies launch programs constantly to address these types of customer and employee satisfaction initiatives as well as non-human resource capabilities (partner expansion, new vendors in the horizontal and vertical integration, mergers & acquisition, strategic expansion initiatives, etc.) So, to say that programs focus on financial metrics alone is incorrect. 

So, benefits are realized only in the operations and programs as well as the component initiatives are focused on benefit transition (I am sure the Steven Covey's "Start with the End in Mind" is so relevant; this is even more reason, why program management becomes a leadership role). When I managed my PMO, through experience and lessons learned, I created a mnemonic to help my team. It is called,  "TREAD" which helps project/program managers to think of transition activities. These include:

1. Transfer Risks: Risk Register is maintained throughout the program and its components. When we are ready to transition outcomes to operations, some of the risks may not be closed, some risks may be residual, and new risks may be present during the transition (e.g.: Training delivered needed to include subtitles because of the new operational team members have hearing disabilities and will have to have video subtitles for training to be effective).
2. Review Documentation: One of the things that very frequently slips through the cracks is the documentation. Whether it is system or user documentation required for operational success or as part of contractual agreements or for training and maintenance, ensuring that these documentations are accurately reflecting the reality is important. Please don't limit yourself to thinking of software specific documentation alone. For some benefits to be valuable, there may have to be consumer specific documentation (Patient Guide), physician specific documentation (Important Safety Information, Prescribing Information) and branding documentation (brand guide, style guide, annotated visual aid, etc.) will be mandatory.  
3. Evaluate Performance against acceptance criteria and metrics. Now, these are not just test execution and inspection but a deeper governance review with critical success factors (CSF), objectives and key results (OKR), and the key performance indicators (KPI). Ensuring such acceptance criteria against the business case along with potential lessons learned is important.
4. Assess Approval and Readiness: Emerging from all the above is the readiness of the governance to validate against traceability, auditability, and compliance to approve the transition to operations. Based on lessons learned and retrospectives, additional processes may have to be reviewed and modified to facilitate continuous learning and continuous improvement.
5. Dispose Resources: Finally, matching against the guarantee and warranty requirements aligned with the procurement domain as well as resource domain, existing resources (people and non-people resources) may have to be relieved. This makes these resources either available in the resource pool for other capital projects or avoid accumulating costs unnecessarily to the performing organization. 

So, TREAD carefully when transitioning benefits and don't fall victim to benefits are no longer relevant in Agile approaches or benefits only represent the financial ROI.

References

Rajagopalan, S. (2020). Lessons Learned on Strategic Project Management from a Dental Visit. https://agilesriram.blogspot.com/2020/08/lessons-learned-on-strategic-project.html

Singh, J.V. & Trivedi, B. (1999). Infosys Technologies Limited (A). The Wharton School of Management, University of Pennsylvania. 

Governance: The seeds of Operational Excellence

I am sure many of us have heard phrases like "we are in a constant fire-fighting mode," or "Pick your battles to win", etc. Somehow, these phrases have become so much a cliche that they have become part of our core management DNA principles. Recently, I was in a training session when I heard participants claim, "we are so much agile that we don't have time for iterations." Ignoring to immediately respond by focusing on principles of agile, grooming the backlog, and planning for iterations on this paradoxical phrase, I started questioning further. Not to most people's surprise, my finding revealed the lack of governance structure in strategic execution.

As I played archery game with my younger son on the Wii-U, he was explaining that I need to pay attention to the wind and distance before I can release the arrow. "It is not just a focus and strength game," he reasoned when I kept missing the target. It dawned on me immediately why people were failing to pay attention to strategy in execution, while strategy from the steering committee tells the archer which target to shoot the arrow, the archer still needs to have a specific strategy on how to execute to ensure the benefits align to the expectations of the steering committee. It is, therefore, management's responsibility to ensure that there are metrics and measures in place to inform the archer to take appropriate corrective and preventive actions.

However, when the managers and leaders fail to provide the required tools for people to upskill or reskill their talents, then they inherently suck the oxygen out of operational excellence. So, for an organization to continuously improve, they need to learn from past lessons and face new challenges and problems rather than relearn the same lessons or revisit the same challenges. It is leadership's failure to put the appropriate governance framework to ensure that execution is constantly aligned with the strategy.

The essential factors for operational excellence may vary within industries but they all should be having five important facts that I would like to call with a mnemonic phrase, "Strategy coordinates complex deliverable optimization." Let me expand on these five keywords:

Strategic Benefits - The strategy should deliver more than PowerPoints that make it into high-level objectives in people's scorecard. The leaders are accountable to provide clear measurable benefits that the execution should deliver. One of the important artifacts from program management domain is the benefits register that leaders should produce as an outcome from their strategic planning.

Coordinated Planning - While top management may have the vision, only the middle management knows the challenges of execution. So, top management should identify groomable talents within the organization involving them in the planning exercise with actionable outcomes. One of the best tools that the program and portfolio management domains recommend is a roadmap that orchestrates when the incremental and consolidated benefits will be realized (remember I just didn't say delivered) to help with adequate prioritization of customer and business value-add.

Complex Interdependencies - Whether benefits are delivered incrementally or consolidated, the complex interdependencies among projects and the operations still must be conceived by leadership and management. The middle management should be empowered to reskill their competencies in such a way that they are able to articulate around the political, economic, societal, technical, legal, environmental, ethnic and demographic (PESTLEED) dimensions leading to operational excellence. The best way to hold the top and middle management accountable is to have frequent management checkpoints (besides the health gate reviews) to inculcate the risks to delivery and the costs of non-delivery as part of their program or project design including the considerations for transition and succession planning.

Deliverable Integration - Particularly when benefits are incremental, but also as benefits become consolidated, integration of several benefits is a change management exercise. Understanding how changes impact the organization and evaluating the sensitivity around it as the projects and programs. This may take the form of standard operating procedures and transition and succession planning agreements (note that I didn't say just a plan or meeting but agreement) but most importantly having a controlled approach to releasing both the products to production as well as people to other projects.

Optimized Pace - Having a closed eye to how people will stretch themselves to deliver when benefits are not prioritized with multiple high-level priorities with interdependent resources is waiting for accidents to happen with the hope they don't. The most important assets to replace are the people and not having the above measures in places increases the stress level. Allowing people to decompress by requiring them to work on personal stretch goals aligned to the strategic benefits will help them reskill themselves to deliver on complex initiatives. They can't firefight forever and choose different battles to fight leading to employee attrition in the absence of execution treated with strategic outcomes aligned to the organizational benefits.

These five elements, in my humble opinion, are the governance fabric that lays the foundation for operational excellence. What do you think?