Overview of P3M3, Geof Leigh 19th Jan 2016, APM North West Branch, Bolton

1. ©
Slide 1
Overview of
P3M3 V3
2015
Rod Sowden
Geof Leigh
www.aspireeurope.com

2. ©
Slide 2
Aspire Europe
Formed 2004
MSP lead author 2007
P3M3 lead author 2008
MSP lead author 2011
P3M3 lead author 2015
BCM Survival Guide 2014
SRO Survival Guide 2015
Programme Manager Survival
Guide 2015
Easy guide to planning 2015

3. ©
Slide 3
Maturity models – why bother?
“If anything is certain, it is that change
is certain. The world we are planning
for today will not exist in this form”
Phil Crosby
Forbes Leadership

4. ©
Slide 4
Organisational Performance Journey
• Level 1 is characterised by
heroic and ad-hoc behaviours
• Level 2 is characterised by
groups and teams setting
their own ways of working or
a central approach that is
partially adopted
• Level 3 is characterised by a
consistent approach being
used across the organisation.
• Level 4 is characterised by
continual improvement and
analysis of performance
• Level 5 organisations are
optimised for their
environment

5. ©
Slide 5
About P3M3
2005 – P3M3
v1
2008 – P3M3
v2
2015 – P3M3
v3
• Baselining current capability (for later
comparison)
• Benchmarking capability against other
organisations (possibly to harvest best
practice from a community of organisations)
• Discovering capabilities to determine
which areas to concentrate on
• Diagnosing systemic weaknesses to
eliminate root causes and non-confirming
costs
• Prioritising improvement initiatives (based
on any of the above)
• Certifying capability through independent
assessment

6. ©
Slide 6
P3M3 maturity model
People
ToolsProcess
Assignment
The P3M3 model looks for balance between
processes, tools and people, at level 3 these
are normally in balance and at level 4 they are
becoming more effective and efficient.

7. ©
Slide 7
Using P3M3 to optimise
£
Money
Spent
Degree of Process / Formality
Point of
Optimum
Balance
“Cost of Winging it!”“Cost of Prevention”
£
Money
Spent

8. ©
Slide 8
What did we learn from P3M3 Version 2
People found the style
endearing, but not easy to
assess
Assessments offered too
much flexibility
Designed for self delivery
organisations
Self assessments were
misleading and needed to
be improved
Needed to be widened and
deepened for accuracy

9. ©
Slide 9
What did we achieve with P3M3 Version 2
Transport for London
Main UK public sector
Transport sector, NR
NDA and Sellafield Ltd
Australian government
FIFA
Gatwick Airport
London Olympics
Queensland Government
New Zealand government
Measurement of
Suppliers
Partner
We got it
right !

10. ©
Slide 10
P3M3 has provided evidence of the cost of low maturity
Slow or random decision
making
Poor requirements
Duplication and overlap
Poor knowledge management
Poor team performance
Excessive meetings
Using poor frameworks and
process
Hidden operational costs
Excessive reporting and
documentation
Transport for London - £1bn saving
moving from level 1 to 4 in 5 years
PMI - High maturity organisations
within 2% of budget, low maturity
normally 30%+
UKBA saved 40% of training budget as
a result of a survey
Estimated 500 assessments of 200
organisations, we have done over half
Mandated in Australia and New
Zealand. All UK central government and
the core cities

11. ©
Slide 11
What's new in P3M3 Version 3
2 years of design, development and
testing
Increased alignment with industry
bodies of knowledge, notably PMI,
IPMA, ISO21500 and APM
More breadth – e.g. commercial
management
More depth – e.g. behaviours,
model integration
Easier to use – simple on-line self-
assessment
Better diagnostics – identification
of common weaknesses
Thread attributes aligned to show
incremental improvement

12. ©
Slide 12
P3M3 Cube
Threads
Common assessment areas across each perspective
Tools and techniques
Standards and processes
Information and knowledge
Organisation
Assurance
Behaviours
PlansOrganisationalGovernance
ManagementControl
BenefitsManagement
RiskManagement
FinanceManagement
StakeholderManagement
ResourceManagementPerspectives
The major process groupings within P3M3
• 3 dimension model
• 5 levels (like
CMMI)
• 7 perspectives
• 3 models; portfolio,
programme &
project
• Minimum of 9
threads and up to
13
• Basis for reporting
• Threads used for
diagnosis and
identification of
systemic
weaknesses

13. ©
Slide 13
Perspectives – process groupings that we measure
Process deficiency

14. ©
Slide 14
Threads – common areas we review
Systemic issues

15. ©
Slide 15
Aspire adds value – with rich reporting
Thread BM FM MC OG ResM RM SM Thread Avg
Asset 3.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 3.00 3.29
Assurance 3.50 4.00 3.67 3.50 3.50 4.00 3.50 3.67
Behaviours 4.00 4.00 3.50 3.17 3.33 3.67 3.00 3.52
Commercial Buy 3.00 3.00 3.40 3.17 3.75 3.00 3.00 3.19
Commercial Sell 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Information & Know ledge Management 3.50 3.50 3.67 3.40 3.50 4.00 3.20 3.54
Infrastructure & tools 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.33 3.00 3.40
Model Integration 4.00 3.50 3.80 3.50 3.00 4.00 2.00 3.40
Organisation 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.33 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.48
Planning 3.50 3.50 3.75 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.25
Process 4.00 3.33 3.40 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.00 3.39
Standards 3.50 3.50 3.00 3.50 3.00 3.50 3.00 3.29
Technique 3.50 3.00 3.75 3.67 2.57 3.40 3.00 3.27

16. ©
Slide 16
Aspire adds value – with extensive experience
Been there, done that
got the T-shirt
We know what good (and
bad) look like because we
have experienced both
We have used our
experience to provide
accurate assessments
and practical
recommendations
which led to real
improvement
1. Sellafield
2. Plymouth CC
3. Arcadis
4. Qinetic
5. DECC

17. ©
Slide 17
How do successful improvements work?
Attributes Recomend
ations
Reworded into
Prioritised
Into a
schedule
As improvement
is achieved
The new P3M3
score is evidence
Improvement
activities
Grouped into
Potential score
Deep diagnosis
Change programme

18. ©
Slide 18
Thanks for your time
rod.sowden@aspireeurope.com