Over the past three or four years, several individuals and groups have attempted to develop a maturity model for assessing the project management methods and practices of an institution. Many of these efforts have been thoughtful, and very helpful. However, for reasons that are unclear, they have tended to focus on what the PMBOK Guide would refer to as the Facilitating Processes rather than the Core Processes (Project Scope Management, Project Time Management, Project Cost Management, Project Integration Management, and Project Risk Management).

The expansion of the assessment of the Core Processes in assessing organizational maturity is an absolute must. As Marshall McLuhan suggested: "The medium is the message." The principal media of project management are the techniques, metrics, data input and output, and algorithms of the core processes, as contained to a greater or lesser degree in the commercially-available project management software packages. It is the use, application, and comprehension of these processes and media that will drive both the Facilitating Processes and the other trimmings (linguistic, organizational, educational) of project management capability and maturity in any organization, while simultaneously delivering the enormous benefits provided by core project management techniques that deal with scope, cost, schedule, and project profit.

CORE PROCESS MATURITY LEVELS

(Total Project Control (TPC) methods in bold.)

CPML-0

1. At CPML-0, an organization's maturity in the Core Processes exhibits the following characteristics (typically, sans PMBOK Guide methods):
2. It may be using some project management techniques, but they are haphazard and inconsistent.
3. Project managers are busy doing other jobs, so if they are using software packages to help manage the projects, the packages are probably MS Word or MS Excel!
4. If they are using a real PM package such as MS Project, it's definitely the desktop version (as opposed to on the server), and they are probably using it for little more than drawing Gantt charts.
5. If precedence relationships between activities are included, they are included haphazardly. The critical path is likely to be described as the important or technically difficult activities.
6. Projects have no formal budgets, even in simple manhour terms, and formal schedule optimization processes are not seen as necessary, as "we'll finish when we finish."
7. Although there may be a copy of the PMBOK Guide around, no attempt has ever been made to implement its methods in a systematic way, and most of the PM-specific terminology in its glossary is unfamiliar to project personnel.
8. If any serious attempt has been made at identifying all the work activities, such a compilation is viewed as a "task list" rather than as a work breakdown structure.
9. If the term WBS is known, it's likely to be thought to stand for "work breakdown schedule."

   CPML-1

   At CPML-1, an organization manifests a recognition that something called "project management" exists, as a specific discipline. This may be due to awareness of:

   • The Project Management Institute (PMI) and its publication of the PMBOK Guide, or
   • The International Project Management Association (IPMA), one of its national chapters or its standards, or
   • Some book or books on project management, or
   • The methods and forms or a PM software program.

   Wherever such recognition comes from, one can expect such an organization to implement some basic project management methods and procedures, to engage in some form of project management training, and perhaps even to have a Project Management Office (PMO) that attempts to impose uniformity and bureaucracy in project techniques and documentation. Such an incipient PMO will frequently do more harm than good to both the organization and to the cause of the maturity of project management within it. But if it survives the periodic efforts of the project community to kill it and thus rid themselves of the bureaucratic morass it has likely propogated, it may well go on to become a Level Two or Three PMO, capable of providing real benefit to the organization's project community.

   The processes and documents that typify Core Process project methods and documents at Maturity Level 1 include:

10. Project charter.
11. Functional WBS.
12. Deliverable WBS.
13. Plan and control to strict budget.
14. Use deadline as a target.
15. A simple CPM schedule is generated, with minimal effort at schedule shortening techniques.
16. Simple earned value management may be conducted, and variances reported, on a baseline of workhours and actual workhour reporting and tracking.
17. One-point duration & cost estimates are generated, with activity durations invisibly incorporating anticipated resource sharing and availability delays.

    CPML-2

18. Customer communication WBS.
19. Required business case for all projects.
20. Awareness within projects of the estimated burn rate.
21. Use of budget as a target.
22. SPI and CPI baseline and tracking based on total budget.
23. Three-point duration & cost estimates.
24. Formal CPM optimization process.
25. Resource loaded and leveled schedules.
26. Project selection based on balanced scorecard analysis.

    CPML-3

27. Multiple WBS's for a given project.
28. WBS template.
29. Effort to identify all project value drivers.
30. Estimate of marching army costs.
31. Complex earned value metrics.
32. Monte Carlo system for determining risk and management reserve.
33. Activity DRAG computation. Focuses schedule concerns onto the critical path and shows which activities are delaying project completion the most and by how much.
34. Emphasis on tracking against Cost ETC baseline curve. Focuses decisions on future work and avoids wallowing in past problems and sunk costs.
35. Manpower planning system tied to portfolio-wide project management system.
36. Project selection accounting for resource bottlenecks as identified in portfolio-wide project scheduling system.

    CPML-4

37. WBS template for collecting and using metrics.
38. Separation of value drivers into internal and customer drivers.
39. Value drivers monetized. Enables scope/cost/schedule trade-offs to be analyzed on the basis of competing stakeholder values.
40. Estimated reduction in EMV per unit of time delay. Emphasizes importance of schedule in monetized terms, and allows analysis of scope/cost/schedule trade-offs on project value/profit basis.
41. Planning and control to a project profit target. Decreases cost/schedule "fixation".
42. Duration estimates based on dedicated resources. Divides schedule delays into two groups: those caused by work logic and those caused by resource limitations and multitasking (about which something can often be done!).
43. As-built critical path (ABCP) analysis during project postmortem for process improvement.
44. Activity DRAG Cost computation. Shows how much each critical path activity is costing the project in terms of the cost of schedule delay.
45. Project-based costs of leveling with unresolved bottlenecks (CLUB) for resource types. Shows the cost of resource insufficiency/bottlenecks due to their impact on schedule completion and project value/profit for a single project.
46. Project selection based on monetized project profit driven by value drivers.

    CPML-5

47. Value Breakdown Structure (VBS). Determines which work is mandatory and which optional, and estimates the value that optional WBS elements add to the project's overall expected monetary value. Allows product and project scope to be optimized based on overall project value and profit.
48. Project expected monetary value (EMV) based on monetized value drivers estimated and known by project manager. Provides the project team (and SMEs) with the data to seek opportunities in specific work details for increased project value/profit on the basis of scope/cost/schedule trade-offs.
49. Estimated increase in EMV per unit of time acceleration. Emphasizes the value of schedule acceleration and provides concrete project profit metrics for exceeding "target" goals on scope/cost/schedule.
50. Planning and control to a project profit target for customer. Decreases cost/schedule "fixation", and emphasizes customer satisfaction as a major, but measurable, value driver.
51. Plan and control to a project profitability target (DIPP). Provides a project-long metric to keep team and stakeholders focused on the most important project goal, i.e., project profit and profitability.
52. Project profit tracking.
53. DIPP baseline and tracking (DIPP Barometer Index). Provides a simple and unified project-long metric to track the most important project goal, i.e., project profit and profitability.
54. DRED estimates. Provides the planning team with a quick metric of an activity's duration elasticity in response to added resources. (CPML-5)
55. Schedule optimization process based on project profit. Allows schedule analysis and scope/cost/schedule optimization based on project value and profit.
56. Pareto analysis of multiproject-based CLUBs for manpower planning. Allows enterprise-wide analysis of the cost (in terms of schedule delays) of resource bottlenecks of specific resources across the portfolio of projects.
57. Project selection based on optimized portfolio profit and taking into account identified delays due to resource bottlenecks.

WBS

1. Functional WBS (Core Process Maturity Level 1)
2. Deliverable WBS (CPML-1)
3. Customer communication WBS (CPML-2)
4. Multiple WBS's for a given project (CPML-3)
5. WBS template (CPML-3)
6. WBS template for collecting and using metrics (CPML-4)
7. Value Breakdown Structure (VBS). Determines which work is mandatory and which optional, and estimates the value that optional WBS elements add to the project's overall expected monetary value. Allows product and project scope to be optimized based on overall project value and profit. (CPML-5)

Project Initiation

1. Project charter (CPML-1)
2. Project business case (CPML-2)
3. Effort to identify all project value drivers (CPML-3)
4. Separation of value drivers into internal and customer drivers (CPML-4)
5. Value drivers monetized. Enables scope/cost/schedule trade-offs to be analyzed on the basis of competing stakeholder values. (CPML-4)
6. Project expected monetary value (EMV) based on monetized value drivers estimated and known by project manager. Provides the project team (and SMEs) with the data to seek opportunities in specific work details for increased project value/profit on the basis of scope/cost/schedule trade-offs. (CPML-5)

Project Time/Cost/Profit Function

1. Estimated burn rate (CPML-2)
2. Estimate of marching army costs (CPML-3)
3. Emphasis on tracking against Cost ETC baseline curve. Focuses decisions on future work and avoids wallowing in past problems and sunk costs. (CPML-3)
4. Estimated reduction in EMV per unit of time delay. Emphasizes importance of schedule in monetized terms, and allows analysis of scope/cost/schedule trade-offs on project value/profit basis. (CPML-4)
5. Estimated increase in EMV per unit of time acceleration. Emphasizes the value of schedule acceleration and provides concrete project profit metrics for exceeding "target" goals on scope/cost/schedule. (CPML-5)

Project Parameters and Tracking

1. Plan and control to strict deadline (CPML-0)
2. Plan and control to strict budget (CPML-1)
3. Use deadline as a target (CPML-1)
4. Use budget as a target (CPML-2)
5. Planning and control to a project profit target. Decreases cost/schedule "fixation". (CPML-4)
6. Planning and control to a project profit target for customer. Decreases cost/schedule "fixation", and emphasizes customer satisfaction as a major, but measurable, value driver. (CPML-5)
7. Plan and control to a project profitability target (DIPP). Provides a project-long metric to keep team and stakeholders focused on the most important project goal, i.e., project profit and profitability. (CPML-5)

Project Control and EVM

1. SPI and CPI baseline and tracking based on workhours (CPML-1)
2. SPI and CPI baseline and tracking based on total budget (CPML-2)
3. Complex earned value metrics (CPML-3)
4. Project profit tracking (CPML-5)
5. DIPP baseline and tracking (DIPP Barometer Index). Provides a simple and unified project-long metric to track the most important project goal, i.e., project profit and profitability. (CPML-5)

Project Estimating

1. One-point duration & cost estimates (CPML-1)
2. Three-point duration & cost estimates (CPML-2)
3. Monte Carlo system for determining risk and management reserve (CPML-3)
4. Duration estimates based on dedicated resources. Divides schedule delays into two groups: those caused by work logic and those caused by resource limitations and multitasking (about which something can often be done!). (CPML-4)
5. DRED estimates. Provides the planning team with a quick metric of an activity's duration elasticity in response to added resources. (CPML-5)

Project Schedule and Schedule Optimization

1. CPM schedule (CPML-1)
2. Formal CPM optimization process (CPML-2)
3. Activity DRAG computation. Focuses schedule concerns onto the critical path and shows which activities are delaying project completion the most and by how much. (CPML-3)
4. As-built critical path (ABCP) analysis during postmortem for process improvement (CPML-4)
5. Activity DRAG Cost computation. Shows how much each critical path activity is costing the project in terms of the cost of schedule delay. (CPML-4)
6. Schedule optimization process based on project profit. Allows schedule analysis and scope/cost/schedule optimization based on project value and profit. (CPML-5)

Project and Portfolio Resource Schedules and Manpower Planning

1. Resource loaded and leveled schedules (CPML-2)
2. Multiproject resource scheduling and leveling based on a portfolio-wide resource library located and maintained on the server (CPML-3)
3. Manpower planning system tied to portfolio-wide project management system (CPML-3)
4. Project-based costs of leveling with unresolved bottlenecks (CLUB) for resource types. Shows the cost of resource insufficiency/bottlenecks due to their impact on schedule completion and project value/profit for a single project. (CPML-4)
5. Pareto analysis of multiproject-based CLUBs for manpower planning. Allows enterprise-wide analysis of the cost (in terms of schedule delays) of resource bottlenecks of specific resources across the portfolio of projects. (CPML-5)

Project and Portfolio Selection and Integration