Executive involvement will be necessary to make sure that whatever is recommended by middle management will not result in unwanted changes to the corporate culture. Senior management sponsored the implementation process to make sure that the entire organization bought in to the methodology and used it. After implementation, executive sponsorship diminished. This resulted in a very weak continuous improvement process because nobody was driving the change process from the top down. . Level 1Common language: In this level, the organization recognizes the importance of project management and the need for a good understanding of the basic knowledge on project management and the accompanying language/ terminology. Not all companies agree on project management terminology. The terminology used in A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide) is not the only acceptable terminology. Level 2Common processes: In this level, the organization recognizes that common processes need to be defined and developed such that successes on one project can be repeated on other projects. Also included in this level is the recognition of the application and support of the project management principles to other methodologies employed by the company. Level 3Singular methodology: In this level, the organization recognizes the synergistic effect of combining all corporate methodologies into a singular methodology, the center of which is project management. The synergistic effects also make process control easier with a single methodology than with multiple methodologies. Companies that reach Level 3 for traditional project management maturity may then desire to go to a flexible project management approach whereby each project manager can customize the tools for a given client. Level 4Benchmarking: This level contains the recognition that process improvement is necessary to maintain a competitive advantage. Benchmarking must be performed on a continuous basis. The company must decide whom to benchmark and what to benchmark. Level 5Continuous improvement: In this level, the organization evaluates the information obtained through benchmarking and must then decide whether this information will enhance the use of project management processes. When we talk about levels of maturity (and even life-cycle phases), there exists a common misbelief that all work must be accomplished sequentially (i.e., in series). This is not necessarily true. Certain levels can and do overlap. The magnitude of the overlap is based on the amount of risk the organization is willing to tolerate. For example, a company can begin the development of project management checklists to support the methodology while it is still providing project management training for the workforce. A company can create a center of excellence (COE) in project management or a project management office (PMO) before benchmarking isundertaken.Although overlapping does occur, the order in which the phases are completed cannot change. For example, even though Level 1 and Level 2 can overlap, Level 1 must still be completed before Level 2 can be completed. Overlapping of several of the levels can take place, as shown in Figure 4.2: Overlap of Level 1 and Level 2: This overlap will occur because the organization can begin the development of project management processes either while refinements are being made to the common language or during training. Overlap of Level 3 and Level 4: This overlap occurs because, while the organization is developing a singular methodology, plans are being made as to the process for improving the methodology. Overlap of Level 4 and Level 5: As the organization becomes more and more committed to benchmarking and continuous improvement, the speed at which the organization wants changes to be made can cause these two levels to have significant overlap. The feedback from Level 5 back to Level 4 and Level 3, as shown in Figure 4.3, implies that these three levels form a continuous improvement cycle, and it may even be possible for all three of these levels to overlap. Level 2 and Level 3 generally do not overlap. It may be possible to begin some of the Level 3 work before Level 2 is completed, but this is highly unlikely. Once a company is committed to a singular methodology, work on other methodologies generally terminates. Also, if a company is truly astute in project management, it may be possible to begin benchmarking efforts even as early as Level 1. This way the company may learn from the mistakes of others rather than from its own mistakes. It is possible for Level 4 to overlap all of the first three levels Examples include the creation of project management methodologies, policies, and procedures, as well as decentralization of authority and decision-making. Level 3 has the highest risks and degree of difficulty for the organization. . Achieving Level 3, however, may require a major shift in the corporate culture. Opportunities for Customizing Level 1 Level 1 assessment questions can be customized based on the knowledge areas most commonly used in the company. At present, there are 10 knowledge areas in the PMBOK Guide, but only 8 areas were tested on here. Some companies prefer customization to expand on the knowledge areas that are of a greater concern to the firm. For example, the questions related to quality management may be more appropriate to a firm that has manufacturing capability and uses statistical process-control charts. If this is not the case, then the quality management questions could be replaced with questions related to integration management or stakeholder management. Some of the questions could be replaced with questions related to other knowledge areas or even processes that are commonly used by the firm but are not part of the PMBOK Guide. Level 1 is probably the easiest level for customization.Life Cycles for Level 2 Common processes require a good process-definition effort accompanied by the necessary organizational behavior needed for the execution of the processes. Level 2, common processes, can be broken down into five life-cycle phases, as shown in Figure 6.2. These life-cycle phases are actually subphases or steps within Level 2 of the project management maturity model (PMMM) in order to develop common processes. The first life-cycle phase of Level 2 is the embryonic phase, which is where the organization recognizes that project management can benefit the organization. The embryonic phase includes: Recognizing the need for project management Recognizing the potential benefits of project management Recognizing the applications of project management to the various parts of the business Recognizing some of the changes necessary to implement project management Companies do not generally promote the acceptance of project management unless they understand a sound basis for wanting project management. The six most common driving forces for project management are as follows: Capital projects: High-dollar-value capital projects require effective planning and scheduling. Without project management, ineffective use of manufacturing resources may occur. Customer expectations: Customers have the right to expect the contractor to manage the customers work requirements efficiently and effectively. Internal competitiveness: Executives want employees to focus on external competition rather than internal competition, power struggles, and gamesmanship. Level 3 is the level at which the organization recognizes that synergism and process control can best be achieved through the development of a singular methodology rather than by using multiple methodologies for the same group or domain of projects. There may exist a separate methodology for new product development and another methodology for information systems. The goal, however, should be to determine the minimum number of domains or groups and have one methodology for each. When companies first start out in project management, the goal is a singular methodology that allows the organization (especially at the senior management levels) to maintain some degree of standardization and control over projects. As companies develop some degree of maturity, the singular approach becomes a flexible approach where each project manager can create their own methodology from the existing forms, guidelines, templates, and checklists to satisfy a client. As organizations progress in the maturity process, flexible methodologies and frameworks, such as with agile and Scrum, appear. However, the assumption made at this level is that the organization may just be starting out in project management. Modifications can be made to this level to account for flexible methodologies. At this level, the organization is totally committed to the concept of project management. The characteristics of Level 3, as shown in Integrated processes: The organization recognizes that multiple processes can be streamlined into a single integrated process encompassing all other processes. (However, not all companies have the luxury of using a single methodology nor do they desire to do so.) Cultural support: Integrated processes create a singular methodology. It is through this singular methodology that exceptional benefits are achieved. The execution of the methodology is through the corporate culture, which now wholeheartedly supports the project management approach. The culture becomes a cooperative culture. Informal Project Management With informal project management, the organization recognizes the high cost of paperwork. Informal project management does not eliminate paperwork. Instead, paperwork requirements are reduced to the minimum acceptable levels. The development of project management methodologies at Level 2 are based on rigid policies and procedures. But at Level 3, with a singular methodology based more on informal project management, methodologies are written in the format of general guidelines and checklists. This drastically lowers methodology execution cost and execution time. Dashboard reporting systems have allowed companies to provide additional information without words. As an example, one company uses a traffic light beside each work breakdown structure (WBS) work package in the status report. Training and Education At Level 3, there is a recognition that there exists a return on investment for training dollars. The benefits, or return on investment, can be measured quantitatively and qualitatively. Quantitative results include: Shorter product development time Faster, higher-quality decisions Lower costs Higher profit margins Level 4 Project management benchmarking is the process of continuously comparing the project management practices of your organization with the practices of leaders anywhere in the world; its goal is to gain information to help you improve your own performance. The information obtained through benchmarking might be used to help you improve your processes and the way in which those processes are executed, or the information might be used to help your company become more competitive in the marketplace. Benchmarking is a continuous effort of analysis and evaluation. Deciding what information to benchmark against is usually easier than obtaining that information. Locating some information will require a critical search. Some information may be hard to find. Some information you would find helpful might not be available for release because the organization that has it views it as proprietary.Project management knowledge is now considered as essential for the survival of the firm. To centralize the knowledge regarding project management, organizations have created a project management office (PMO) or a center of excellence (COE) for project management. Major responsibilities for a PMO/COE include: A strategic planning focal point of project management An organization dedicated to benchmarking for project management An organization dedicated to continuous improvements in project management An organization that provides mentorship for inexperienced project managers A centralized data bank of lessons learned, possibly with a best practices library An organization for sharing project management ideas and experiences A hotline for problem-solving that does not automatically inform senior management An organization for creating project management standards and processes A focal point for centralized planning and scheduling activities A focal point for centralized cost control and reporting An organization to assist Human Resources in the creation of a project management career path An organization to assist Human Resources in Benchmarking Opportunities Historically, benchmarking has been accomplished using two approaches: competitive benchmarking and process benchmarking. Competitive benchmarking concentrates on deliverables and quantitative critical success factors. Process benchmarking focuses on process performance and functionality. Process benchmarking is most closely aligned to project management. For simplicitys sake, we will consider only process improvement benchmarking. We can break it down into quantitative (i.e., integration) process improvement opportunities and qualitative process improvement opportunities. Figure 8.3 shows the quantitative process improvement opportunities, which center on enhancements due to integration opportunities. The five major areas identified in Figure 8.3 are the five integrated processes described in Level 3 of the project management maturity model (PMMM). : Corporate acceptance: This includes getting the entire organization to accept a project management approach. Pockets of project management support tend to hinder rapid acceptance of project management by the rest of the organization Increase the usage and support of existing users Attract new internal users, those who have been providing resistance to project management Discourage the unnecessary development of parallel methodologies, which can create further pockets of project management. This is done by showing the added costs of parallelization. Emphasize the present and future benefits to the corporation that will result from using a singular methodology as a starting point to project management maturity. Integrated processes: This is a recognition that the singular methodology can be enhanced further by integrating other existing processes into the singular methodology. Typically, this includes business processes such as capital budgeting, feasibility studies, cost-benefit analyses, and return-on-investment analyses. . Software enhancements: Although off-the-shelf software packages exist, most firms still need some type of customization. This can be done through internal upgrades for customization or by new purchases, with the software vendor developing the customization. Should address 3 ideas from the above concept.Should be aligned the main ideas to the PMMM using their personal experience and/or personal research on a case study. Must provided one page of quality content (12 pt font, single spaced, 4-6 paragraphs, 5 sentences per paragraph)