PMO Success Metrics: Proceed With Caution

Based on Benjamin Disraeli's well-known statement about the three types of lies, "lies, damned lies, and statistics," Jeannette Cabanis-Brewin wrote an interesting article in Developer.com about the many faulty assumptions people make based on so-called statistics about PMOs.

Cabanis-Brewin is editor-in-chief for PM Solutions' Center for Business Practices, so she's seen her share of statistics. Some key points:

- There are many interpretations on what constitutes a PMO, so many statistics on PMOs are skewed from the start.

- Some reports indicated high project failure rates in organizations with PMOs. That's likely due to the fact that organizations without PMOs don't tend to measure project success. Without measures, there are no failures.

- Many surveys are poorly designed and miss crucial clarifying questions.

Cabanis-Brewin recommends going to the source and digging into the supporting details to draw your own conclusions. She also reminds us that surveys usually do not contain the definitive answer, but rather serve as a starting point for more research. Finally, she cautions us to beware of the Hawthorne Effect, which states that the act of observing often changes the observed.

I would add that it's also important to be careful what you ask for. Many organizations want to begin using metrics, but are surprised to see success rates so low. They pressure project managers too soon and expect success rates to instantly soar to above 90%. It's vital to give the organization time to address problem areas and develop maturity.

Yes, it's important to capture metrics, but it's equally important to create a blameless reporting environment, by which people will report accurate data without fear of retribution. It's also critical to think about how you measure success. True success doesn't always correspond to on-time and on-budget. But that's another story.

Here's the article...

Lies, Statistics, and the PMO