Copyright to Arnab Banerjee © 2012.
The original version of this paper was published in the Imperial Engineer, Issue #15, Autumn 2011, pp18-19
Published here January 2013.

Introduction | Analysis - Understanding What Was Happening and Measuring Improvement 
Addressing Weaknesses | Implementing and Embedding the Change | And Finally

Analysis - Understanding What Was Happening and Measuring Improvement

The disciplined change methodology that was adopted is shown progressively in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Three stage disciplined change methodology
Figure 1: Three stage disciplined change methodology

The UK Government's P3M3 model was used as the vehicle for assessment. Through questionnaires and interviews, carried out by an independent assessor, the model reviewed CPD against seven dimensions: Organizational Governance, Management Control, Finance Management, Benefits Management, Risk Management, Resource Management and Stakeholder Engagement.

In December 2007, an initial result of 0.8, on a Maturity scale up to 5, indicated weaknesses in terms of ad-hoc processes across the organization and low uniformity. Following the actions described below, a result of 2.1 in November 2009 showed that processes were in place but that there was low evidence of consistent application. Further embedment work followed and CPD achieved a certification at Level 3 in March 2011 that verified that the new methodology was being followed across the organization.

And the assessment was rigorous with 29 one-to-one interviews and 234 returned questionnaires from project managers out of 660 distributed. While waiting to be interviewed, one project manager said, "We must have improved surely: it just feels a different place from even a year ago."

Introduction  Introduction

Home | Issacons | PM Glossary | Papers & Books | Max's Musings
Guest Articles | Contact Info | Search My Site | Site Map | Top of Page