Transport for London. Projects and Planning Panel

Similar documents
Review of the Assurance and Approval Processes applicable to Investment Projects Progress Update

Integrated Assurance & Approval Strategy and Integrated Assurance & Approval Plans

Project, Programme and Portfolio Management Delivery Plan 6

TRANSPORT FOR LONDON AUDIT COMMITTEE STRATEGIC RISK MANAGEMENT PROGRESS REPORT

A P3M3 Maturity Assessment for Attorney Generals Department Prepared by James Bawtree & Rod Sowden Dated 18 th November 2010

PRINCE2 and governance

Stakeholder management and. communication PROJECT ADVISORY. Leadership Series 3

Project and Programme Management Capability Improvement Study

Blue Fire Thames Court 1 Victoria Street Windsor SL4 1YB enquiries@bluefire-uk.com

Which MPA Assurance Review?

SUMMARY OF MONITOR S WELL-LED FRAMEWORK FOR GOVERNANCE REVIEWS: GUIDANCE FOR NHS FT S PUBLICATION Report by Trust Secretary

Maturity Model. March Version 1.0. P2MM Version 1.0 The OGC logo is a Registered Trade Mark of the Office of Government Commerce

Disability ACT. Policy Management Framework

Network Rail Infrastructure Projects Joint Relationship Management Plan

Transition and Transformation. Transitioning services with minimal risk

APPENDIX C. Internal Audit Report South Holland District Council Project Management

Risk Management Policy and Process Guide

MARCH Strategic Risk Policy Update March 2012 v1.10.doc

Financial Controls over Payments to Contractors on Major Projects (IA F) Leon Daniels, Managing Director, Surface Transport

PORTFOLIO, PROGRAMME & PROJECT MANAGEMENT MATURITY MODEL (P3M3)

Richmond-upon-Thames Performance Management Framework

September IFAC Member Compliance Program Strategy,

AUDIT & PERFORMANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE ON 26 TH SEPTEMBER 2007

Risk Management Strategy & Implementation Plan

Project Management Manual

Contract management: renewal and transition. Report to Parliament 10 :

Ethical Maturity Index: Questionnaire Authors: Elena Demidenko and Patrick McNutt

451 s Procurement and Vendor Management Capability Development Program

Supplier & Contract Management System (SCMS)

Business Plan. Executive Summary UK Shared Business Services Ltd

PM Services. Our Corporate Profile and Credentials

Procurement Transformation Division. Procurement guidance. Engaging and managing consultants. Includes definitions for consultants and contractors

Change and project management

How To Be Accountable To The Health Department

TRANSPORT FOR LONDON BOARD CROXLEY RAIL LINK PROPOSED TRANSPORT AND WORKS ACT ORDER

3.5 The findings from the review will be reported to the next meeting of the Audit and Assurance Committee.

Microsoft Enterprise Project Management. James Wright Christopher Pond

PPM Competency Profiling

Business Operations. Module Db. Capita s Combined Offer for Business & Enforcement Operations delivers many overarching benefits for TfL:

the role of the head of internal audit in public service organisations 2010

White Paper. PPP Governance

Department of Administration Portfolio Management System 1.3 June 30, 2010

Project Management Office Charter

TfNSW Standard Requirements TSR T Technical Management

Shropshire Highways Draft Asset Management and Communications Strategy and Implications of Department for Transport Incentivised funding

Release Management: Effective practices for IT delivery

PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN <PROJECT NAME>

SENIOR MANAGEMENT APPRAISAL

Data Communications Company (DCC) price control guidance: process and procedures

TEC Capital Asset Management Standard January 2011

RISK MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

Communication and Engagement Strategy Final Version 30 th June 2014

Introductory Certificate. The APM Project Fundamentals Qualification

Audit of Project Management Governance. Audit Report

DEVELOPMENT OF A QUALITY FRAMEWORK FOR THE MEDICARE BENEFITS SCHEDULE DISCUSSION PAPER

Governance of the Business Transformation Partnership Responsible Officer: Executive Director (Business Development)

Audit of Procurement Practices

Message from the Chief Executive of the RCM

Audit of Financial Management Governance. Audit Report

Statistics New Zealand is Agile Continued Implementation of AGILE Process at Statistics NZ

Risk Management Plan

Standard 1. Governance for Safety and Quality in Health Service Organisations. Safety and Quality Improvement Guide

Project Governance a board responsibility. Corporate Governance Network

Selecting a project management methodology

WHITE PAPER IT SERVICE MANAGEMENT IT SERVICE DESIGN 101

CSR / Sustainability Governance and Management Assessment By Coro Strandberg Principal, Strandberg Consulting

Honours Degree (top-up) Business Abbreviated Programme Specification Containing Both Core + Supplementary Information

Wilhelmenia Ravenell IT Manager Eli Lilly and Company

The South Staffordshire and Shropshire Health Care NHS Foundation Trust Digital Strategy

Transport for London. Projects and Planning Panel

Informatics: The future. An organisational summary

Operations. Group Standard. Business Operations process forms the core of all our business activities

Strategies to successfully manage your major project

3.2 Our customers and users tell us that they want four things:

State of Minnesota IT Governance Framework

How To Prepare A Configuration Change Change Request For The Tfnsw Cmaac

Best Practice. Change Management. Guidelines

Information Governance Policy

NSW Government ICT Benefits Realisation and Project Management Guidance

The Transport Business Cases

KPMG Advisory. Microsoft Dynamics CRM. Advisory, Design & Delivery Services. A KPMG Service for G-Cloud V. April 2014

Performance Detailed Report. May Review of Performance Management. Norwich City Council. Audit 2007/08

JUNE Assurance for high risk projects

Sound Transit Internal Audit Report - No

Work with the business to establish the priority of the project within the context of QAA's portfolio of initiatives.

Project Management Guidelines

Track and Track Drainage Renewals Programme

Project Risk Management

Transcription:

Agenda Item 4 Transport for London Projects and Planning Panel Subject: TfL Pathway Date: 8 May 2013 1 Purpose 1.1 At its meeting of 8 January 2013 the Panel asked for further information about Pathway, TfL s new project and programme methodology. 1.2 The Panel is asked to note the paper. 2 Background 2.1 In 2012 a pan-tfl Programme Management Office (PMO) was established, creating an opportunity to rationalise project and programme management methodology across TfL. 2.2 A specific requirement as articulated in the Commissioner s 2012 Message was to develop a common project methodology... underpinned by a common management system to ensure a clear approach to how we deliver together. 3 Pathway Development and Implementation 3.1 In September 2011 (re-confirmed in November 2011) the Leadership Team approved the creation of a common project delivery methodology for TfL, now known as TfL Pathway. 3.2 TfL Pathway consists of four main elements: (a) Lifecycles: A common set of lifecycles to cover projects, programme and delivery portfolios the vehicles through which delivery takes place. (b) Product Matrix: This defines the documents and other evidence (products) that are typically expected at each lifecycle stage and which would normally demonstrate satisfactory completion of the key activities of that stage. Some of these documents (products) will be mandatory, for example Requirements, Execution Plan, Schedule, Risk Plan and Budget, while others will be dependent of the characteristics of the project, for example Construction Management Plan for construction projects. (c) Handbooks: There are eleven handbooks covering the core of project delivery and aligned to the separate sections of the Product Matrix. The handbooks provide guidance on best practice for each of the key project management activities. These are: Benefits and Value, Commercial (Procurement and Contract Management), Commission and Handover, Consents, Construction, 1

Investment Governance, Health, Safety and Environment, Manage the Project (focusing on reporting and controls), People Change, Risk Management and Sponsorship and Requirements. In addition there is a Pathway Manual, which acts as an overview guide. (d) Pathway Product Management Plan: A questionnaire to help delivery teams decide which products may be applicable dependent on the characteristics of the project. 3.3 TfL PMO worked with more than 300 practitioners across the business to develop TfL Pathway and its content. This has been one of the first examples of a large number of specialists gathering from across the organisation to develop a tool applicable at a TfL level. 3.4 TfL Pathway is based on accepted good practice project management principles in particular Prince2, Managing Successful Programmes and P3M3. 3.5 Feedback from pilot projects has been very positive. 3.6 A further aspiration for TfL was to develop a common management system to build commonality across different functions. Work is ongoing, for example, to harmonise Human Resources processes and documentation. TfL Pathway is the first element of this developing One-TfL Management System. 3.7 The adoption of TfL Pathway is a fundamental element of TfL s plan for enhancing delivery capability maturity. This can be formally measured through the Cabinet Office s P3M3 model. Multiple processes across an organisation results in low maturity. The creation of a common methodology and successful embedment enhances it and there is a proven link between maturity increase and delivery efficiency/performance. More consistent working in the business should also improve the quality of submissions to the Panel and provide improved confidence in delivery. 3.8 Successful implementation of TfL Pathway is directly in line with significant elements of the TfL Story. TfL Pathway enables consistent and effective working (Value for Money) and hence greater mobility for TfL staff across the organisation (Our People). TfL Pathway is the first element of the proposed TfL Management System and will enable greater integration. The proposed improvements will clarify governance requirements and provide a foundation for increased effectiveness of the governance processes. 3.9 One particular element of TfL Pathway that is new across the TfL business covers Investment Governance. Clearer guidance on this topic was one of the consistent requests arising from project and programme teams and Sponsors across the business. There were instances of poor understanding of the requirements leading to poor submissions, to rejection and then to delay. 3.10 To increase clarity and consistency, five TfL Pathway products have been introduced to support improved investment governance: (a) an Investment Governance Handbook defining governance arrangements expected of all TfL investments; 2

(b) the Integrated Assurance and Approvals Plan, which provides certainty for sponsors and delivery managers by defining, from the outset, the assurance and approvals required throughout the life of the investment. (The National Audit Office strongly recommends such an approach); (c) the Integrated Assurance Review assures the work, prior to entering the Authority process and integrates the current CGAP process with other assurance activities; (d) a new single template has been developed for requesting project authority at operating boards or using delegated authorities, and will replace the existing multiple templates; and (e) published Authority Routes define, for each type of authority, the route a submission should progress through for assurance, endorsement and approval to gain the required authority. 3.11 Guidance has been provided for the establishment of Programme Boards including terms of reference; a more ordered process in programmes should lead to improved oversight at the operating level. The Rail and Underground Board in particular has endorsed this step for all the programmes in The Rail and Underground Plan, but it is optional for other areas. Programme Boards strengthen the operational business focus and leadership for programmes, but they do not replace governance provided at TfL Board or Committee level. 3.12 Appropriate assurance is a condition of gaining authority. Previously, only Estimated Final Cost (EFC) was used as a trigger for the level of scrutiny. EFC has now been complemented by other key risk factors including Technology (new or proven), Complexity, Procurement, Change Impact and Reputational Risk and Planning Consents. The implication of this is that lower value but high risk projects may now be required to provide the correct level of assurance where, previously, they may not have been visible. 3.13 The Governance system will remain under formal change control. A list of individuals and their authority levels will be maintained centrally by TfL PMO and published in TfL Pathway. 3.14 There will be training to improve the competence of those people planning, authoring, assuring, endorsing and approving authority submissions. 3.15 The Rail and Underground and Surface Boards, and the TfL Leadership Team have endorsed the implementation of TfL Pathway. In addition, a formal presentation was made to the Independent Investment Programme Advisory Group (IIPAG) on 8 November 2012 and IIPAG provided guidance on the way forward noting in particular that senior level support was critical for successful implementation. In addition, the Governance elements were presented to the Assurance Delivery Group on 18 January 2013 and noted. 3.16 Substantial completion of implementation of Pathway is targeted for the Financial Year 2013/14. 3

4 Internal Communication and engagement 4.1 The implementation plan for each business area will include a clear communication plan for cascading the information from senior management to the delivery teams. 4.2 TfL PMO will provide a series of training events and provide significant one-to-one support. 4.3 This follows the model undertaken by the same PMO team in implementing successfully the Project Management Framework in London Underground and draws on the experience of similar work done in DLR, Surface and Tube Lines. 4.4 Each business area will create, in conjunction with TfL PMO, a customised Implementation Plan for embedding TfL Pathway. Each will have a series of milestones taking into account individual and local needs; a one-size-fits-all solution would not be suitable. 4.5 TfL PMO will support each business area to implement TfL Pathway. Substantial completion of implementation of Pathway is targeted for the Financial Year 2013/14. 5 Recommendation 5.1 The Panel is asked to NOTE the paper. 6 Appendix 6.1 Appendix 1 provides a slide presentation of TfL Pathway. 7 Contact 7.1 Contact: Andy Eastaugh, Head of Programme Management Office Number: 020 7918 0055 Email: Andy.Eastaugh@tube.tfl.gov.uk 4

Appendix 1 TfL Pathway TfL s Delivery Methodology Projects and Planning Panel

What is it? The integrated project, programme and portfolio delivery methodology for TfL Imperative from the TfL Commissioner s 2012 message:... common project methodology, assurance processes... underpinned by a common management system to ensure a clear approach to how we deliver together.

Why does TfL need it? Spearmint DLRL TLMS Legacy Delivery Issues: Multiple delivery frameworks/ways of doing things Lack of a common project management language Not all methodologies fit-for-purpose Varying levels of adherence to methodologies Focus on project-level, ignoring programme/portfolio Not scalable enough for different types of projects Inconsistency an obstacle to people development and organisational maturity CGAP PMF EnGauge Corporate CIMM

What TfL Pathway offers: A scalable and pragmatic approach to managing projects, programmes and delivery portfolios Project, programme and delivery portfolio lifecycles to reflect the spectrum of activity at TfL A set of delivery principles based on common good practice A common delivery vocabulary Transparent Investment Governance and Assurance rules: agreed map for assurance and investment based on transparent rules rationalised Authority Submissions Designed by working with more than 300 delivery staff around the TfL business

Lifecycles

Transition Principles Focus on not interfering with/slowing down current work No requirement to create products retrospectively Decisions based on professional judgement and local needs

Implementation How it will roll Communications: senior management, delivery teams and other stakeholders briefed Basic data compiled in (24) local areas: list of projects, programmes and delivery portfolios, associated sponsors and project managers, delivery staff, functional leads Data consolidation: map each item on list against relevant Pathway lifecycle Pathway Product Management Plans: created for each item and signed-off Local processes: aligned to TfL Pathway, ensure complementary approach Training Approach: Senior management 1:1s and 1:1support for at desk as needed Account Management approach (single point of contact and consistent relationship) Road Show Briefings (multiple slots in local buildings) Clinics (extended and repeated topic-focused working sessions) Half Day Training Course by external training company

Transition Guidelines Projects in early phases (Stages 1-2) Unless stage gate is imminent, adopt TfL Pathway Projects in later phases (Stages 3 5) Adopt TfL Pathway if it will be to the project s advantage Time Limit From September 2013, all new projects to be using TfL Pathway Support TfL PMO Pathway team will work with individual project teams Transition will be a key part of the Implementation Plan

Implementation Support from Senior Management Understand why TfL Pathway was started Support the initiative Change management fundamental: visible leadership Nominate accountable local manager(s) to work with TfL PMO on implementation Sign off local Implementation Plan in their respective areas Be prepared to receive updates and support corrective action if required

Implementation of TfL Pathway: December 2012: Design and development complete, published January-March 2013: Pilot projects in 24 TfL business areas that deliver projects March 2013: Local (24) Implementation Plans negotiated and signed off April 2013: TfL Launch - briefings, clinics, training, support... September 2013: All new projects on TfL Pathway 2013-14: Ordered transition to new way of working; not a digital switch April 2014: All local (24) Implementation Plan commitments fulfilled