CHAPTER 1

What Is Program Management?

The chapter constructs a time line that depicts key milestones in the evolution of the program and project management industries. It analyzes the program management industry's current state, identifying gaps, the closure of which will ensure future industry growth. It defines a program and compares it to a project and a portfolio, illustrating roles that each play in executing organizational strategy. The chapter also delineates why organizations deploy programs and how organizations execute them.

The chapter includes the following sections:

• Program management industry history and current state;
• Program, project, and portfolio definitions;
• Why organizations deploy programs;
• Program management performance domains; and
• Program life cycle management.

Program Management Industry History and Current State

To ensure the organization is successfully and effectively employing program management, it is important to understand the history of the program management industry as well as its current state. The program management industry is affected by the project management industry in many ways. So, to understand how the program management industry evolved, we will construct a time line that shows key milestones in the evolution of the program and project management industries. We will also analyze the current state of the program management industry and identify gaps, the closure of which will ensure future industry growth.

Program management evolved in the 1940s in the United States military. The Manhattan Project, which created the atomic bomb, first used program management concepts. However, it was not until the 1980s when some commercial companies started to adopt program management concepts and tools in their operations.

Project management evolved at around same time as program management. In the 1950s, organizations started to apply formalized project management approaches, tools, and techniques. However, for thousands of years, dating as far back as to the time of the construction of the Egyptian pyramids and the Great Wall of China, mankind practiced forms of project management.

The time line in Figure 1-1 depicts key milestones in the evolution of the program and project management industries:

1940

1.In the 1940s, the Manhattan Project, which created the atomic bomb, first introduced program management concepts.

1950

2.In the 1950s, the Atlas project that created the first U.S. intercontinental ballistic missile, used program management practices.

3.Project management practice in the modern sense began in the 1950s. Even though in some form, project management concepts were used in early civilizations.

4.Program management's first documented evidence dates back to 1957, when the U.S. Department of the Navy formed the first program office, called the Special Project Office (SPO).

1969

5.Project Management Institute (PMI) was founded in 1969.

1971

6.The first program management course was conducted by The College of Defence Management in 1971.

1974

7.The first PMI chapter was chartered in Houston, Texas in 1974.

1980

8.Program management practice started to expand into public and private organizations in many industries.

9.The manufacturing and software development sectors used project management practices.

1984

10.In 1984, PMI instituted the Project Management Professional (PMP)® certification.

1990

11.Program management practice continued to expand, and organizations began defining program management and started developing homegrown methodologies for program execution. Definitions and methodologies were not standardized and varied significantly among different organizations.

12.Different industries and organizations widely used project management theories, tools, and techniques.

1996

13.PMI first published A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) in 1996. The guide provided the project management industry with standardized definitions and methodologies.

2006

14.PMI first published The Standard for Program Management in 2006. To date, PMI published two subsequent editions. The standard provided the program management industry with standardized definitions and methodologies.

15.Pulse of the Profession®, the project management industry annual report, was first published by PMI in 2006. The program management industry does not have an industry report. However, the project management industry reports frequently include program management industry data.

2007

16.In 2007, PMI instituted the Program Management Professional (PgMP)® certification.

2010

17.The program management industry continued to grow and reported that, in 2010, 62% and in 2011, 65% of organizations always or often used program management.¹

18.The project management industry continued to grow and reported that, in 2010, 59% and in 2011, 63% of organizations used standardized project management across all departments.²

19.Program Management Professional (PgMP)® certification holders included 1,200 persons, as reported by PMI in February 2015.³

2015

20.Project Management Professional (PMP)® certification holders included 647,663 persons, as reported by PMI in February 2015.⁴

21.The Program Management Professional (PgMP)® certification did not have a page in Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia, in December 2015, as shown in Figure 1-2. The Project Management Professional (PMP)® certification does have a page in Wikipedia.

The key milestones in the evolution of the program and project management industries time line contained a few terms that are defined as follows:

The Project Management Institute (PMI) is an international organization advancing the professional field of project management. It does this by setting standards, through certified education and development, and by conducting research and professional conferencing.

The Project Management Professional (PMP)® is the most important industry-recognized certification for project managers.⁵

The Program Management Professional (PgMP)® is a visible sign of your advanced experience and skill and gives you a distinct advantage in employment and promotion.⁶

A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) is a set of standard terminology and guidelines (a body of knowledge) for project management.

The Standard for Program Management is the first document that provided a detailed understanding of program management, defined a standardized approach to it, and outlined methodologies to execute programs.

Even though the program and project management industries evolved at about same time and have grown since their inception, the program management industry has grown at a slower pace than the project management industry. As a result, a lot of research has gone into the project management industry and not into the program management industry.

A program management industry expert stated that he has not seen so much research for trends in the program management industry. Also, even in the research for project management, he has noted that there is confusion between the management of a project and program, due to unclear and inconsistent definitions used by many organizations.⁷

We will analyze the current state of the program management industry by comparing it to the current state of the project management industry in the key areas of industry growth, strategy alignment, and standardization.

Program Management Industry Growth

Program management practice exists in the United States; however, it is not widespread. Project management practice is common in the United States, and is widespread. Program management has some global recognition, while project management has wide global recognition. The number of facts confirms limited growth and spread of the program management industry.

In 2010, almost 5.5 million jobs in the United States were in project management. By 2020, that figure is expected to increase to almost 6.2 million, or a double-digit growth of more than 12%. Project management is practiced globally. Between 2010 and 2020, the project management profession is slated to grow globally by US$6.61 trillion.⁸

Program management industry analysis is rather limited; that is why similar data on industry domestic and international current size and future growth are not available. Available data can confirm larger growth in the project management industry compared to the program management industry. For example, 41% of organizations are extremely or very focused on the training and development of employees in project management, while only 18% of organizations are focused on the training and development of employees in program management. Highly developed organizational cultures of agility focus significantly more on the training and development of employees compared with underdeveloped organizational cultures:

• Project management: 66% versus 13% of underdeveloped cultures; and
• Program management: 44% versus 4% of underdeveloped cultures.⁹

Agility refers to an iterative, incremental method of managing the design and build activities of engineering, information technology, and other business areas that aim to provide new product or service development in a highly flexible and interactive manner.¹⁰

More organizations use project management, where 31% always use it, 35% often use it, 22% sometimes use it, 9% rarely use it, and 3% never use it. Fewer organizations use program management, where only 27% always use it, 33% often use it, 24% sometimes use it, 10% rarely use it, and 10% never use it.¹¹ In the study conducted by PMI in late 2011, just over 40% of respondents indicated having project manager roles, while significantly fewer respondents, or only 15%, indicated having program manager roles.¹²

The data presented above confirm that the program management industry experienced slower growth than the project management industry did. This conclusion is further confirmed by the scarce availability of program management industry data, and confusion between project and program management industry data due to unclear definitions.

Program Strategy Alignment

Organizations deploy programs and projects to execute organizational strategy and implement change. “I do not differentiate strategy implementation and project success,” said Daniel Svoboda, PMP, Program Manager, Key Bank. “Every project that a company does should align with the strategy in some way.”¹³

And yet, only a limited number of organizations report program and project alignment with the organizational strategy. Limited data are available on project alignment with organizational strategy. Only 43% of organizations report high alignment of projects with the organizational strategy. Out of the remaining organizations, 47% report medium, and 11% report low alignment of projects with the organizational strategy.¹⁴ No data could be found on program alignment with the organizational strategy. So, we assume that less than a half of organizations achieve high alignment of programs with the organizational strategy.

Program Management Industry Standardization

To date, the program management industry has not achieved the same level of standardization as the project management industry has. As a result, program management industry definitions, methodologies, and tools vary significantly among organizations and industries. Organizations frequently develop program management definitions. And, as there are mostly project management methodologies and tools available, organizations either develop homegrown program management methodologies and tools or adopt them from the project management industry. This further contributes to the significant variations in program management industry definitions, methodologies, and tools.

PMI is one of the key institutions that sets and promotes standardization in the program management and project management industries. To date, the project management industry has benefited from a larger standardization effort, as it grew faster and with greater magnitude than the program management industry. For example, PMI published The Standard for Program Management in 2006, 19 years later than it published A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide).

The PgMP certification was instituted in 2007, 23 years later than the PMP certification was instituted. In the eight years since its institution, the PgMP certification has not achieved growth comparable with PMP certification growth. As of February 2015, PMI reported only 1,200 certified PgMPs, a very small number compared to the 647,663 certified PMPs. A significant discrepancy in the number of PgMP-certified professionals compared to the number of PMP-certified professionals, confirms that only a small number of program managers are well-familiar with the program management industry standards.

PMI instituted PMI local chapters in 1974, providing a forum for project management practitioners. As of January 2016, PMI members did not have local chapters for program management practitioners or for any other certification, identifying a need for a program management community of practice (PgMCoP). The community of practice can serve as an important step in growing the program management industry and as a critical step in achieving standardization around program management definitions, methodologies, and tools. Chapter 11 of this book defines the program management community of practice (PgMCoP) as a forum that allows program managers to share ideas, knowledge, best practices, program execution mechanisms, and tools. The chapter describes the value of the community of practice to program managers and organizations as well as explains how to found, structure, and operate a PgMCoP.

PMI currently publishes the Project Management Journal® (PMJ), which sometimes includes articles on program management. However, as of December 2016, PMI did not have a program management industry journal. Since 2006, PMI has been publishing the Pulse of the Profession®, its annual project management industry survey that sometimes includes program management industry data. However, as of January 2016, PMI has not had a program management industry annual survey. As the program management industry continues to grow, it is important to improve industry standardization around definitions, methodologies, and tools.

Program, Project, and Portfolio Definitions

Many organizations still struggle to distinguish program management from project management, and research confirms that program management definitions vary significantly among companies and industries. Often, program management is defined as the management of multiple projects that have common funding and stakeholders. As program management definitions vary, so do program management approaches, methodologies, and tools.

A program is a group of related projects, subprojects, and program operational management activities, managed in a coordinated way to obtain benefits not available from managing them individually.¹⁵ Among numerous examples of programs, is a program to develop a new product, to implement a process improvement effort, to modernize business, and to ensure regulatory compliance.

Programs include individual projects and subprograms. A subprogram is a program that includes individual projects and is managed as a part of another program. Programs also include elements of related work outside the scope of the discrete projects in the program, called program operational management. Any part of the program described earlier, including subprogram, projects, and program operational management activities, can be referred to as a program component.

A project is a temporary endeavor undertaken to create a unique product, service, or result. The temporary nature of the project indicates that a project has a definite beginning and end.¹⁶ Among numerous examples of projects is a project to improve a specific process, to develop a product or a process, to implement a change, and to implement a new industry standard or regulatory requirement.

A key difference between program management and project management is the strategic focus of programs. Programs are designed to align with organizational strategy and ensure organizational benefits are recognized.¹⁷ We will discuss program strategy alignment in detail in Chapter 3: Program Strategy Alignment.

Using program and project definitions provided above, we can depict program structure, as shown in Figure 1-3.

We can illustrate program structure using a call center's process improvement program as an example. The program goal is to provide the highest call response quality and fastest call response time. The program includes subprogram one, which consists of two projects: Project one improves call response quality, and project two decreases call response time. The program also includes operational management activities, such as setting up program infrastructure, managing program costs and risks, managing links between program components, and coordinating resources across the program.

Programs add value to organizations by delivering a variety of benefits. Examples of benefits include launching new products, developing new and enhancing existing organizational capabilities, facilitating business changes, and implementing process improvements. Programs also realize a benefit of managing related projects as a program, a benefit that cannot be obtained if projects are managed individually.

Program benefits can be realized all at once or in increments, depending on how the projects included in the program deliver their benefits—at once or in phases. An example of a program that realizes benefits at once may be a program to develop a new product; an example of a program that realizes benefits in increments is the call center's process improvement program, which implements process improvement projects in call centers one at a time.

A portfolio is a collection of projects, programs, subportfolios, and portfolio operational management activities grouped together to facilitate the effective management of work to meet strategic business objectives.¹⁸ It is important to note that the projects and programs within the portfolio are not always directly related; however, they are linked to the organizational strategic plan using the organizational portfolio. Examples of portfolios may include a process improvement portfolio, a strategic initiatives portfolio, a government programs portfolio, and a market strategies portfolio.

Organizational strategy is the critical force that drives portfolio, program, and project management, and the organizational strategy is a key element that links all three together. However, each of the three—portfolio, program, and project—contributes to the organizational strategy execution in a different way:

• Portfolios select the right programs and projects, prioritizing the work and providing resources;

  

• Programs control interdependencies between subprograms and projects; and
• Projects execute specific scope.

Using the definitions above, we can depict portfolio structure, as shown in Figure 1-4.

To successfully manage a program, it is important to clearly understand the differences between portfolio, program, and project management. Table 1-1 compares portfolios, programs, and projects across key dimensions.

Table 1-1 introduced the term return on investment (ROI), which is a benefit to an investor, resulting from an investment of some resource.¹⁹ ROI is usually expressed in percentage and is calculated using the following formula:

Why Do Organizations Deploy Programs?

Organizations deploy programs to execute organizational strategy. Programs provide a critical link between organizational strategy and its execution. And, through program execution, organizations realize benefits. In this section, we will discuss how to achieve program alignment with the organizational strategy. We also will define program benefits management.

Program Strategy Alignment

Many organizations do not fully understand the value that program management can create and benefits that can be realized through it. Organizations do not always recognize that every strategic initiative is essentially a project or program, and that all strategic changes in an organization occur through projects and programs.²⁰ That is why program alignment with the organizational strategy is critical for organizational success. And, for organizations to successfully execute strategy through program execution, it is important to understand the value that programs can generate.

As the global advocate for the project, program, and portfolio management profession, PMI has been conducting the Pulse of the Profession study since 2006 to provide evidence that implementing strategy successfully is inextricably linked to an organization's capability to deliver successful projects and programs.²¹ Organizations that invest in project management waste 13 times less money because their strategic initiatives are completed more successfully. We know project management is essential to any organization's success, yet the message is not being realized.²²

Organizations achieve program and project strategy alignment by creating a program management office, engaging executive sponsors, and aligning talent management with the organizational strategy. However, more work needs to be done, as program and project management industries’ current analysis shows that many programs and projects are not aligned with the organizational strategy. Less than half of organizations report high alignment of projects to organizational strategy.²³ And, there are no published statistics around alignment of programs to organizational strategy. Program strategy alignment will be discussed in detail in Chapter 3: Program Strategy Alignment.

Program Benefits Realization

Benefits realization is a foundational element of program management, as a program should be aimed at the achievement of the anticipated business results. Organizations are more likely to nurture a culture of project management when they fully understand the value it brings and how projects and programs drive change. They also understand that when programs and projects fail, so do profits, because organizations are less likely to achieve strategic goals.²⁴

Program management adds business value by serving as the mechanism by which the work of the various operating functions within a company is integrated to create an effective business model. For example, consider the business functions of marketing, engineering, manufacturing, and finance. Each function has its own language and jargon. Marketing language talks about the four Ps (product, price, place, promotion), finance discusses discounted cash flow, engineering discusses technical performance, and manufacturing is interested in production yield and defect rates. To say that experts from different functions often do not understand one another, let alone often do not work well together, is an understatement.

The inclusion of program management in a firm's business model provides value to those organizations seeking to integrate the efforts of their business functions to achieve business results through the development and delivery of new capabilities or transformative change. When program management is properly defined and implemented, it helps to execute business strategies through the collective efforts of the business functions of an enterprise.

Program management integrates the collective efforts by focusing the various functions on a common purpose: achievement of improved business results even though they may speak in different jargon; commonality is established with a collective purpose and goal. The integration of cross-organizational efforts increases the probability of successfully achieving the intended business results in a repeatable manner.²⁵ Program benefits realization will be discussed in more detail in Chapter 4: Program Benefits Realization.

Program Management Performance Domains

In the previous section, we defined programs, projects, and portfolios, and showed relationships among them. We also compared program, project, and portfolio management across key dimensions within the organization. In this section, we will define program management in the broader organizational context and describe how to execute a program by defining and deploying program management performance domains.

Program management performance domains are complementary groupings of related areas of activity, concern, or function that uniquely characterize and differentiate the activities found in one performance domain from the others within the full scope of program management work. Program managers actively carry out work within multiple program management performance domains during all program management phases.²⁶ There are five program management performance domains (see Figure 1-5):

• Program strategy alignment;
• Program benefits realization;
• Program stakeholder engagement;
• Program governance; and
• Program life cycle management (as in Figure 1-5).

The following are definitions of each performance domain:

• Program strategy alignment identifies opportunities and benefits to achieve the organization's strategic objectives through program implementation.
• Program benefits realization defines, creates, maximizes, delivers, and sustains the benefits provided by the program.
• Program stakeholder engagement captures and understands stakeholder needs, desires, and expectations, and analyzes the impact of the program on the stakeholders, gaining and maintaining stakeholder support, managing stakeholder communications, and mitigating stakeholder resistance.
• Program governance establishes processes and procedures for maintaining program management oversight and decision-making support for applicable policies and practices throughout the course of the program.
• Program life cycle management manages all of the program activities related to program definition, program benefit delivery, and program closure.²⁷

These domains run concurrently during the entire program life cycle. Every program requires some activity in each of the five performance domains. The nature and the complexity of the program determine the degree of activity that a program manager performs within a particular domain. The work performed in each domain is iterative and repeated as needed. A program manager and program team perform tasks within all five domains. And work in these domains is critical to effective and efficient program execution.

Program Life Cycle

Programs are undertaken to deliver benefits by achieving business value and producing anticipated business results. A program has a sponsor who approves funding and assigns a program manager. A program manager integrates and manages multiple subprograms and projects, and handles program operational management activities. To realize program benefits, a program manager executes a program using three phases: definition, benefits delivery, and closure. This set of phases, that are followed to deliver program benefits, is called a program life cycle.

Program definition is the first phase of the program life cycle. During this phase, a program sponsor approves program funding and assigns a program manager. A program manager expands the business case and strategic plan objectives, and fully defines expected program outcomes.

Program benefits delivery is a second and iterative phase of the program life cycle. During this phase, a program manager plans, integrates, and manages program components to facilitate delivery of the intended program benefits.

Program closure is the third and last phase of the program life cycle. During this phase, a program manager executes a controlled closure of the program.²⁸

Using the definitions above, the program life cycle and its phases are presented in the graphical image shown in Figure 1-6. We will discuss program life cycle phases in more detail in Chapter 7: Program Life Cycle Management.

The program manager plays a key role throughout the entire program life cycle. Overall, a program manager coordinates and prioritizes resources across components, manages links between components, and manages costs and risks of the program as a whole. However, a program manager role is different during each phase of the program life cycle. Subsequently, a program manager level of oversight, actions, priorities, and hours spent on a program as a whole, and each component within it, vary during each phase.

---

¹ PMI. (2012). Pulse of the profession®: Driving success in challenging times. Newtown Square, PA: Author.

² PMI. (2012). Pulse of the profession®: Driving success in challenging times. Newtown Square, PA: Author.

³ PMI. (2015). PMI-Certification-Overview-Kronos.pptx. Newtown Square, PA: Author.

⁴ PMI. (2015). PMI-Certification-Overview-Kronos.pptx. Newtown Square, PA: Author.

⁵ http://http://www.pmi.org/certifications/types/project-management-pmp

⁶ http://http://www.pmi.org/certifications/types/program-management-pgmp

⁷ Interview with Sankaran Ramani, MoP, MSP, P3O, CM, PMP, PgMP, PfMP, Director, GRT Consulting LLP

⁸ PMI. (2013). PMI's industry growth forecast: Project management between 2010 + 2020. Retrieved from http://www.pmi.org/-/media/pmi/documents/public/pdf/business-solutions/project-management-skills-gap-report.pdf

⁹ PMI. (2015). Pulse of the profession®: Capturing the value of project management through organizational agility. Newtown Square, PA: Author.

¹⁰ Agile management. (n.d.). In Wikipedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agile_management

¹¹ PMI. (2015). Pulse of the profession®: Capturing the value of project management. Newtown Square, PA: Author.

¹² PMI. (2012). Pulse of the profession®: Driving success in challenging times. Newtown Square, PA: Author.

¹³ (PMI). (2015). Pulse of the profession®: Capturing the value of project management. Newtown Square, PA: Author.

¹⁴ PMI. (2015). Pulse of the profession®: Capturing the value of project management. Newtown Square, PA: Author.

¹⁵ PMI. (2013). The standard for program management – Third edition. Newtown Square, PA: Author.

¹⁶ PMI. (2013). A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK® guide) – Fifth edition. Newtown Square, PA: Author.

¹⁷ Martinelli, R. J., Waddell, J. M., & Rahschulte, T. J. (2014). Transitioning to program management. PM World (3)9, 1–3. Retrieved from http://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/pmwj26-sep2014-Martinelli-Raschulte-Waddell-Introduction-to-Transitioning-to-program-management.pdf

¹⁸ PMI. (2013). The standard for program management – Third edition. Newtown Square, PA: Author.

¹⁹ Return on investment. (n. d.). In Wikipedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Return_on_investment

²⁰ PMI. (2013). Pulse of the profession®: The high cost of low performance. Newtown Square, PA: Author.

²¹ PMI. (2015). Pulse of the profession®: Capturing the value of project management. Newtown Square, PA: Author.

²² PMI. (2016). Pulse of the profession®: The high cost of low performance—How will you improve business results? Newtown Square, PA: Author.

²³ PMI. (2016). Pulse of the profession®: The high cost of low performance—How will you improve business results? Newtown Square, PA: Author.

²⁴ PMI. (2015). Pulse of the profession®: Capturing the value of project management. Newtown Square, PA: Author.

²⁵ Martinelli, R. J., Wadell, J. M., & Rahschulte, T. J. (2014). Program management for improved business results (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley & Sons, Inc.

²⁶ PMI. (2013). The standard for program management – Third edition. Newtown Square, PA: Author.

²⁷ PMI. (2013). The standard for program management – Third edition. Newtown Square, PA: Author.

²⁸ PMI. (2013). The standard for program management – Third edition. Newtown Square, PA: Author.