CHAPTER 6

Program Governance and Team Management

Using the program management continuum, this chapter defines the program governance domain. It illustrates how the organizational structure defines the program governance structure and program governance roles, and shows how each role fits within the program governance structure. The chapter examines how these roles work together as a program team. The chapter also defines three main functional areas within a program team, showing what roles are included in each functional area and what responsibilities each functional area performs. The chapter concludes by describing how a program manager builds, leads, and off-boards a program team.

The chapter includes the following sections:

• Governance structure;
• Governance roles and functions;
• Team responsibilities; and
• Build, lead, and off-board a program team.

Governance Structure

Program governance creates both the structure and practices to guide the program and provide executive leadership, oversight, and control. Strategically, it encompasses the relationship between the oversight effort and the enterprise business direction. Program governance defines all roles and responsibilities, and it encompasses all the decision-making roles and responsibilities involved in program execution.

Programs require a more complex governing structure than projects do, as programs execute fundamental business changes and deliver significant benefits. A simple management structure typically governs projects. A program manager, acting in a role similar to that of the program governance board, provides project oversight and aids with escalation and resolution of risks. The business sponsor may also play a role in governing a project by ensuring that the deliverables align with business strategy.

The program governance structure is defined by an organizational structure and a program management structure. The organizational structure influences the program governance structure in the following key ways:

• Institutes the level of authority and reporting structure within the program;
• Ensures a balance between organizational horizontal and program vertical structures;
• Establishes management structure across business units;
• Aligns program governance board with the organization-wide structure; and
• Defines a program management structure.

A program management structure has an immediate effect on the program governance structure, as the program governance structure is being adopted to the program management structure. To illustrate this point, we will use the program management continuum and show how the program governance structure changes as an organization moves from project-oriented to program-oriented, as shown in Figure 6-1.

If the organization is far left, or administration-focused, it is likely that no formalized program governance model exists, or is needed. For organizations that operate in the middle of the continuum, it is common to see a traditional controlling approach to program-level governance. This is because a single-project approach with traditional project management methods remains the primary philosophy and influence. The collection, analysis, and reporting of project performance data, with the intent to measure conformance, is the primary approach. For program-focused organizations, those operating on the right side of the continuum, an integrated approach to program-level governance is necessary. The integrated approach recognizes the collaborative relationship between the project teams, the program teams, and the business team of an enterprise.²

Governance Roles and Functions

Creating a program governance structure involves defining roles, assigning each role a certain program function, and granting each role decision-making authority. Depending on the complexity of a program, the program governance structure includes all or many of the following roles.

The program sponsor is the individual responsible for championing the application of organizational resources to the program and for ensuring program success. The program sponsor is frequently a senior executive within the organization who has investment decision-making authority. The program sponsor is personally vested in ensuring the success of the program and may act as a chairperson of the program governance board.

Program governance board members are responsible for authorizing and overseeing a program. As the program evolves, this governing body ensures that it continues to align with the enterprise strategic direction. The board is also responsible for defining and implementing appropriate governance systems and methods. Program governance board members are usually executives who have strategic insight, technical knowledge, functional responsibilities, operational accountabilities, responsibilities for managing the organization's portfolio, and abilities to present to important stakeholder groups. In some organizations, a program governance board is also referred to as a steering committee.

The program manager is responsible for management and oversight of the program interactions with the program governance function. The program manager ensures that the program goals remain aligned to the overall strategic objectives of the organization. The program manager is responsible for setting up and managing the program, and for ensuring that it is performing according to plan.

Program team members are responsible for various aspects of the program. They may contribute to the definition of the program strategy or plan, or oversee and coordinate the activities conducted as part of the program plan, including components and program operational management activities. Program team members include subprogram managers and project managers responsible for subprograms and projects that are components of the program. More complex programs may also include program planner, project planner, risk manager, and program management office manager.

The project manager is responsible for oversight of a project that is a component of the program. The project manager is ultimately responsible for delivery of the project outputs as defined in the project charter and the program plan. Project manager activities include effective project planning, execution, and tracking.³

The program planner is responsible for updating program plans and schedules (e.g., Gantt charts to plan and report project progress). This role may exist in more complex programs.

The project planner is responsible for updating the project plan and schedules (e.g., Gantt charts to plan and report project progress). This role may exist in more complex projects.

The risk manager is responsible for identifying potential risks in advance, analyzing them, and taking precautionary steps to reduce and mitigate the risk.

The project management office manager is responsible for defining and maintaining standards for project management within the program. The program management office manager strives to standardize and introduce economies of repetition in the execution of projects within a program.

Using the call center's process improvement program example, we will create a program governance, as shown in Figure 6-2. The program governance structure uses definitions of the executive sponsor, program governance board, risk manager, and program management office manager roles.

An integrated approach to program-level governance incorporates many elements, with the primary elements centered on three factors:

• Setting and maintaining strategy alignment;
• Reviewing progress; and
• Making decisions that affect program strategy.⁴

Effective governance is critical to program success. Poorly articulated management structure, vaguely defined roles, wrong people appointed to the roles, and overlapping decision-making authority can prevent a program governance body from reaching consensus on critical decisions, and can prevent a program from achieving sustained momentum.

Team Responsibilities

In the previous section, we defined various roles within the program governance structure, including the program sponsor, program governance board members, program manager, program team members, project manager, program planner, project planner, risk manager, and project management office manager. In this section, we will examine how these roles work together as a program team and what responsibilities they perform.

A program team can be broken into three main functional areas, strategy alignment, program management, and program execution. A program sponsor and program governance board members ensure that a program is aligned with the organizational strategy. A program manager and a program management office manage a program. Program team members, project managers, program planner, project planner, and risk manager execute a program. Not all programs have all roles listed, and some programs may have additional roles, as roles and responsibilities may vary in different organizations.

Each of the three functional areas performs a defined set of responsibilities to fulfill its function within a program. To ensure program strategy alignment with the organizational strategy, a program sponsor and program governance board members perform the following responsibilities:

• Provide strategic direction;
• Ensure committed resources;
• Influence teams to remove obstacles;
• Monitor execution and program status; and
• Ensure effective change management.

To manage a program, a program manager and program management office manager perform the following responsibilities:

• Provide program oversight;
• Set up governance structure;
• Deliver status reports;
• Guide project managers;
• Resolve issues and risks; and
• Oversee budget execution.

And, to execute a program, program team members, project managers, program planners, project planners, and risk managers perform the following responsibilities:

• Execute component plans;
• Provide component statuses;
• Manage component risks; and
• Manage component budgets.

Figure 6-3 depicts three main functional areas of the program team, which include strategy alignment, program management, and program execution.

Build, Lead, and Off-Board a Program Team

One of the key responsibilities of a program manager is to build, lead, and off-board a program team. Before examining a program manager role in building, leading, and off-boarding a program team, it is important to discuss a matrix organizational structure, in which programs frequently operate. A matrix organization is defined as one in which there is dual or multiple managerial accountability and responsibility, as was previously defined in Chapter 2.

A more detailed definition describes matrix organizations as organizations where team members do not report directly to the program manager and are not solely focused on program work. A dual reporting structure and multiple conflicting priorities of team members are two big challenges that a program manager faces today in building and leading a program team.

The matrix organizational form may vary from one in which the project manager holds a very strong managerial position to one in which the project manager plays only a coordinating role. To illustrate the organizational principles, a matrix will be considered first in which there is a balance of power between the project and functional managers. It must be recognized that such a balanced situation, considered by some authorities to be ideal, probably seldom occurs in practice. In a balanced matrix organization, various people in the organization have two bosses, as shown in Figure 6-4.

Implicit in the definition of the matrix organization is the recognition that the project is temporary, whereas the functional departments are more permanent. Although all organizations are temporary in that they are constantly changing, the matrix is designed to be temporary, and a particular organizational structure lasts only for the finite life of the project.⁵

Matrix organizations may impose various conflicts of interest between the program and departmental objectives for team members. For example, a team member may aspire to advance business skills and not project management skills; however, program work requires gaining project management skills. Another example of a conflict may be that a project manager is receiving different directions on how to build a project management plan, as a department and a program may have different requirements as related to the project management plan structure and content.

During the program life cycle, a program manager builds, leads, and off-boards a program team. A program manager starts building a program team early in the program life cycle, during the definition phase. During the program benefits delivery phase, a program manager leads a program team. And, during the closure phase, a program manager off-boards a program team. Figure 6-5 shows activities related to the program team building, leading, and off-boarding.

The program manager can use multiple tools to build a program team as well as to hold team members accountable for timely task execution. Among key team building techniques are:

• Facilitate relationship building;
• Recognize accomplishments and milestones completion; and
• Create ways to celebrate success.

One of the key tools a program manager can use to hold team members accountable for timely task execution is to work with the functional managers to add program goals to team members’ performance goals. Other techniques to hold program team members accountable for timely task execution include:

• Conduct regular meetings with each team member to discuss work progress;
• Set deadlines, establish deliverables time lines, and develop guidelines around deliverables execution;
• Establish clear measurement metrics and allowable thresholds;
• Assist team members in learning and advancing their professional knowledge; and
• Assist team members in fulfilling their professional goals within the scope of the program.

The human aspect of team building is really important. That is why a successful program manager needs to establish a personal connection with the team members. If a program team is colocated, a program manager should conduct in-person meetings where possible and may establish a practice of making rounds in the office to talk to program team members.

Many project team members do not work in the same location—even those working in the government sector. Even if they are in the same location, team members rely extensively on virtual communication tools rather than face-to-face communication. Using communication and collaboration technology tools is the norm—and we're not even addressing all the cool software tools designed specifically to manage projects.⁶

Virtual program management adds additional requirements to building and managing a program team. And, program team building and management take up more of the program manager's time. A program manager may face the virtual team challenges of not having a physical and social presence as well as additional cultural and language barriers. Success in virtual team building and management heavily relies on technology, requires additional program manager proficiencies, and employs supplementary program team building and management techniques.

Effective use of the appropriate technologies during different project phases is crucial to the success of “global project teams,” or really, any team in which team members collaborate virtually. In my experience leading a project team collaborating between two continents, I have found that the use of multiple communication technologies—carefully chosen depending on the current project phase—is needed to keep global project teams collaborating effectively and on schedule. Deciding which communication technologies project teams use to collaborate during each of the project phases, and learning to use them most effectively, is key to project success.⁷

A program manager operating in the virtual program environment, may employ supplementary techniques to build trust and motivate a program team:

• Conduct telepresence meetings and video conferences;
• Communicate effectively and regularly, daily via email and a few times a week by phone;
• Conduct in-person team sessions especially early on, during the definition phase; and
• Visit team members in their geographical locations.

¹ Martinelli, R. J., Waddell, J. M., & Rahschulte, T. J. (2014). Program management for improved business results. (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

² Martinelli, R. J., Waddell, J. M., Rahschulte, T. J. (2014). Program management for improved business results. (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

³ PMI. (2013). The standard for program management – Third edition. Newtown Square, PA: Author.

⁴ Martinelli, R. J., Waddell, J. M., & Rahschulte, T. J. (2014). Program management for improved business results. (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

⁵ Stuckenbruck, L. C. (1979, September). The matrix organization. Project Management Quarterly. Retrieved from https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/matrix-organization-structure-reason-evolution-1837

⁶ LaBrosse, M. (n. d.). Email or phone conference? Making the most of communication technologies in each project phase. Retrieved from https://www.pmiwdc.org/article/email-or-phone-conference-making-most-communication-technologies

⁷ LaBrosse, M. (n. d.). Email or phone conference? Making the most of communication technologies in each project phase. Retrieved from https://www.pmiwdc.org/article/email-or-phone-conference-making-most-communication-technologies