Before reading this post, we’d like to make it clear that this is not a piece based on reviewing dozens of research reports. Our views are based off decades of experience observing the management of projects across dozens of sectors. The real aim of this post is to initiate discussion amongst the project management community on how to boost the importance of ‘outcome and benefits achievement’ in determining a project’s success or likely success.

When asking what should be the key criteria in determining a project’s success, it’s not uncommon to be told: ‘delivering to budget, to timelines’ and sometimes together with these first two performance parameters you may also hear ‘delivering to the customer’s quality expectations’.

‘Achieving the outcomes and benefits the customer is seeking’ often takes a back seat. The question therefore is:

‘How do we get ‘outcomes’ and ‘benefits’ at the forefront of determining a project’s success’?

Part of the problem is ‘cost, ‘time’, ‘quality’ is still too often consciously or perhaps unconsciously seen as the drivers of projects. Yes, agreed they are important performance parameters which project success is assessed against, but the ‘true’ fundamental driver of a project is/should be achieving ‘desired outcomes and benefits’. Therefore, why is achievement of ‘desired outcomes and benefits’ not commonly discussed in project meetings, project reviews, project assessments or missing in project reports and project dashboards? Seems odd, doesn’t it?

What’s the evidence? A simple test for you:

• Check your project progress report template or portfolio reporting dashboard, does it make any reference to outcomes and benefits?
• When was the last time a project you worked in provided in its progress reports an assessment on the likelihood of achieving outcomes and benefits?
• Does your project have a business case, when was the last time it was reviewed, updated and re-approved by the project sponsor?
• Is it clear in your project who is responsible and accountable for the achievement of outcomes and benefits?
• When was the last time your organization conducted a post-project review and confidently reported on outcomes and benefits achieved versus planned to be achieved?

Want more evidence?

Have you ever heard about capability management maturity assessments? One well recognized in the industry is Axelos’ P3M3 model (Portfolio, Programme, and Project Management Maturity Model). It has seven perspectives to assess an organization’s (or division) portfolio, program, project management (PPM) capability. They are:

• Organizational governance
• Management control
• Benefits management
• Risk management
• Stakeholder management
• Finance management
• Resource management.

Speaking with PPM maturity assessors, benefits management is the perspective that typically scores the lowest capability score. Even today there are projects to the value of billions of dollars, that have little evidence of effective benefits management.

We do have to say, things have improved over the last 15 years, admittedly from a low base, when concepts like a business case were not common, but there’s still room for improvement.

If the outcomes of a project are not clearly understood or benefits cannot be clearly articulated in measurable terms, should the value of the project be questioned, it’s very existence and continuation even challenged?

Why do outcomes and benefits often take a back seat when measuring project success?

Here we need to consider some possible causes. The reasons may be many and vary, here’s our take why outcomes and benefits often take a back seat:

1. Academics, training programs, project management standards still referencing the ‘old’ project management paradigm of cost, time, quality and conditioning mindset
2. ‘Output’ focused culture versus a ‘value’ focused culture
3. As for many projects, the benefits from products that projects produce are typically realized sometime after the project, “so who really cares…I’m already working on another project”
4. Outcomes and benefits are just too hard to define and measure!

Let’s breakdown each of the above potential causes:

1. Academics, training programs, project management standards still referencing the ‘old’ project management paradigm of cost, time, quality and conditioning mindset

It may even be argued that this paradigm was first used when humans chose to build pyramids in the plains of Egypt about 3,000 years before present day. It should no longer be acceptable to rely on these 3 parameters alone to determine project success. Benefits, need to be at the centre of the paradigm. Many project management trainings like PRINCE2 training or AgilePM Training are based on a more modern interpretation of the project management paradigm, ensuring project performance is assessed across 6 parameters, being: cost, time, quality, scope, risks and benefits. With emphasis on benefits as the driver for any one project.

Let’s start a conversation about integrating benefits management into every module of project management training!

2. ‘Output’ focused culture versus a ‘value’ focused culture

People naturally like to build things, well maybe not everyone, though if you’re in a project management career, you’re likely to be someone who does. Project products are developed for a reason, projects are not about having a new shiny widget, they’re about producing a widget of value. Unfortunately, as discussed previously many project management training programs, standards and the way some training programs are delivered (with focus on passing an exam), together with organizational management systems, enable an environment where an ‘output’ focus culture predominates and fosters.

One reason agile project management training programs and agile training and methods, such as AgilePM have gained in popularity, is they are focused on ensuring outcomes and value are delivered, delivered quickly and continuously.

Start a conversation with each project team on how outcomes and value can be delivered quickly and continuously!

3. As for many projects, the benefits of the products produced by a project are typically realized sometime after the project, “so who really cares…I’m already working on another project”

Projects need to ensure responsibilities for outcome and benefits achievement (identifying, defining, supporting, reviewing, monitoring, confirming and reporting) are clear and agreed. As important, is that someone is accountable for outcome and benefits achievement! Elements of these tasks may be the responsibility of the project team, though when the project comes to an end, the project sponsor needs to ensure ongoing outcomes and benefits responsibilities are transferred to relevant operations teams. Also to be checked is that benefits accountabilities remain in place and that the organization’s ecosystem and culture supports their realization.

4. Outcomes and benefits are just too hard to define and measure!

This can be true, though sometimes it just requires a little more effort and simple techniques like benefit workshops. Applying ‘proxy measures’ can aid with the benefits management process, especially when it comes to projects that only/also offer ‘intangible’ benefits. They too need to be defined.

Start a conversation with each project team on what the benefits are, how can they measured, are there any proxy measure that can be used? Remember, if a project is part of a wider program, the design and implementation of the benefits management process across the projects falls to the program management team.

Project outcomes and governance

Let’s got back to our title for this post: ‘Should realizing project outcomes be pivotal in determining the success of a project, its management and governance?’

Until now we haven’t made mention of ‘governance.’ The Governance Institute of Australia makes reference that there is no one conclusive definition of corporate governance. The Institute’s own definition:

“Governance encompasses the system by which an organisation is controlled and operates, and the mechanisms by which it, and its people, are held to account. Ethics, risk management, compliance and administration are all elements of governance.”

Mind you, there are several definitions for governance, that make no reference to ‘accountability’.

So how can ‘governance’ help?

Holding people to account, is just another way of helping to ensure outcomes and benefits achievement become a key focus point of any one project.

To also help drive a mindset shift from an output focus to a value focus approach.

Should we start a conversation on whether governance definitions, be it corporate, program or project governance integrate words to the effect of assuring achievement of outcomes and value?

The OECD’s definition starts to imply this with its reference to company objectives:

Corporate governance involves a set of relationships between a company’s management, its board, its shareholders and other stakeholders. Corporate governance also provides the structure through which the objectives of the company are set, and the means of attaining those objectives and monitoring performance are determined.

In conclusion, given the challenges we’ve discussed and the importance of outcomes and benefits as the key drivers for projects, is it time to start a conversation within your organization? Does ‘outcome and benefits achievement’ or if you prefer ‘realization of value’ deserve greater emphasis and focus in your project, management and governance definitions, performance models and culture?