Every business report, white paper, and article over a certain length requires some sort of summary, that is, an executive summary or abstract. Quite often, busy executives rely heavily on the executi

Program Report

Darlene Ames

QSO 680

SNHU

1. Overview

Contemporary portfolio management approaches have a critical place in improving the larger productiveness of pharmaceutical R&D. Some major pharmaceutical companies have used portfolio management with minimal success; however, productivity can be affected by numerous factors. Moreover, portfolio management does not automatically lead to prudent or lucid management decisions. Portfolio management process should be above board and involve the whole organization. It needs discipline when developing and continuously relying on a given number of tools, necessary in allocating the limited resources to the most viable projects.

Maintaining portfolio management thriving and operative amidst corporate shakeups and new scientific discoveries is a continuous organizational struggle. A lot of effort should be given to the establishment of the business strategy and alignment with the whole organization behind the approach. The development and continuous update of the target product profile for all projects. Also, go, and no-go criteria for every milestone should be defined. The potential financial value of all projects should be established probably through economic appraisal approaches for those that are at their later stages; alternatively, for those at an early stage, financial modeling approaches can suffice. For pharmaceutical firms, analysis of value facilitates negotiations of licenses is necessary.

When a capacity management system is installed, the company can avoid variances that might occur between the limited resources that are available to the firm and the number of projects existing. Without which the company must take steps to ensure that projects with low values are terminated very fast. A framework where the management of portfolio function has a close link to the core business and project management functions, seem suitable according to the authors, as it increases the effectiveness and efficacy of the more extensive drug development process.

1. Project Hierarchy
   1. Comparison

The project, by its definition, has a definite starting point and an ending time. A point exists, measured in time, when activities ir tasks were nonexistent in a project. This is essential before initiation of the project, when it exists, during the course project, and when it will be nonexistent, which is post completion of the project (Beringer, Jonas & Kock, 2013). Further, this is the key criteria used to distinguish whether some commitment is a project, program or a portfolio. A project has a defined scope, determinate budget, and allocated resources. The other feature of a project is that it always builds on something. Often, a project creates more deliverables, and they should be managed proactively through sound project management processes and techniques.

Some initiatives are quite significant that it makes complete sense to fragment them into small projects. The small projects are easier to conceive, manage and complete successfully. Nevertheless, the issue with fragmenting work into small projects is that every project may begin to make their own separate decisions that will be good for the specific project, but harmful to the program as a whole. The goal of a program is to offer central control and management over a collection of underlying projects which are all created to deliver to a universal solution. The program allows projects to attain a global benefit that would be difficult for every project to attain independently (Young & Conboy, 2013). The program pursued by the pharmaceutical industry is low-cost drugs, which shall drive down the costs incurred in procuring drugs.

A portfolio is a collection of work. In this case study, a portfolio refers to the logical way of grouping, organizing and managing a group of work, related or not. Typically, a portfolio contains projects as well as support, operations and other classes of work. Generally, portfolio management is done by managers. The truth is that projects are introduced, authorized and prioritized at the portfolio levels.

Just remember the fundamental differences. Programs are big initiatives that are fragmented into a collection of small centrally coordinated projects; on the other hand, a portfolio is a collection of work, often project, and it is a way of planning and managing projects from an organizational point of view. In the case of a portfolio, projects cannot necessarily be related (Too & Weaver, 2014).

1. 1. Advantages and Disadvantages

Managing programs leads to fewer conflicts when compared to project management. Also, program management results in the optimal utilization of resources. Program management can lead to the minimization of resource constraints. Program managers communicate and coordinate better among projects. Finally, Program management improves the performance of the organization.

The benefits of portfolio management can be realized when there are optimal allocation and utilization of resources on programs and projects. Portfolio management also provides continuous support to programs or projects. In addition, there are fewer conflicts and improved communication among programs and projects. Portfolio management leads to better coordination of projects and programs.

1. 1. Most Advantageous Organizational Structure

Tiered organizational structures based on hierarchical portfolios and programs are conventional for the organization at a broader scope. For instance, the entire portfolio can be entrusted to an executive vice president.

Figure 1: The tier organizational structure for the program.

1. Project Methodology
   1. Advantages of having Project Methodology:

The following are some of the benefits that can be realized from having a project methodology:

• It can be relied upon for practical decision making. Clarity on the roles and expected behavior of different participants in a project facilitates effective decision making. Confusions can often cause delays in delivery of a project over roles, accountability, and responsibility.

• A clear roadmap for a project that is backed by a standard set of approaches that have been relied upon before for other projects speeds up the phases of a project, and stakeholders get to know what is needed of them in such a way that projects can be delivered on time and save money too.

• Project scope can be controlled as it is a useful method that assists in the management of the scope, which is a known cause of time over-runs and increases costs

• Clients have an idea of what to expect. It is often too common that the completed project does not meet the needs of the client. A project management method assists in ensuring that the client and project teams are working in tandem to ensure that the project is delivered.

• It helps in improved problem resolution. The risk management process of a project will work in such a way that risks can be anticipated, and the team prepares for them. The interactive process also means that all individuals involved in the process cannot act surprised when the risks do occur.

• Costs can be controlled. A clearly stated project with sufficient time and costs estimates and the process of tracking costs can help in keeping the costs under wraps.

• The methodology can be instrumental in identifying struggling projects quickly; Project management methods expose the projects that have over-run on time and budget or those that cannot be considered to be on track to deliver the expected benefits. Hence, that can be handled early on.

• A more content team implies that projects become better and are more controlled with minimal surprises. Moreover, people can find their work more enjoyable. A team beaming with happiness is motivated and will work more productively to ensure time and money savings.

1. 1. Program Life Cycle

With the numerous and possibly overlapping techniques of managing the complexities of any project, it would be essential to know the project management methodology that is heads and shoulders above the others in any given situation. Project managers can help their organizations to improve the manner in which they execute their projects most efficiently and effectively while eliminating the risks (Korhonen, Laine & Martinsuo, 2014). However, this needs much more than just recognition of just the organizational priorities. It is essential to have a deep understanding of the manner in which every project management methodology can create the best positive impact and how every item might derail the organization’s prospect of project successes. In this section, the components of the project methodology used at every stage of the program life cycle are outlined.

Figure 2: Program lifecycle

1. 1. Methodology of Choice

From the onset, it should be recognized that project methodologies are not too specific. However, the waterfall methodology is time-tested and can provide a program life cycle with the appropriate choices to be relied upon at every stage. The methodology begins from requirement specification, then design, execution, integration, testing, installation and finally maintenance. This process can be used in a backbone program. Because it is sequential, it can be useful in the pharmaceutical industry. It consists of static phases that can be done in a particular order (Martinsuo, 2013). This methodology allows for increased control over the phases but can be highly fixed when the scope of the project changes that is already underway. This methodology provides a more formal planning stage that can increase the chances of obtaining all project requirements beforehand, which reduces the losses of any vital information and conditions at the initial phases.

The process of evaluating, documenting and selecting the appropriate management methodology for every project is time consuming, detailed and complex; however, in the end, it is often worth it, given that the proper project management methodology has been selected. The right methodology assists organizations to identify measure and improve program management capabilities and the process of standardization. Moreover, it helps in solidifying the successful project outcome, which ultimately shows the best practices and consolidates the links between strategic planning and implementation (Kerzner, 2013). The methodology should focus on the general organizational effectiveness and integrates program, project and portfolio management. Within certain standards, it should be realized that high-level processes tailor project management methods that organizations should properly consider and employ when determining the methodologies that work for various projects. Decisions can be based on the factors in customizing the process to maximize strategic advantages.

Because of the different strengths and weaknesses of the various project management methodology, organizations can consider using multiple project methodologies for the program based on the unique nature of the program, the composition of the organization and program goals. In any case, organizations need to develop and standardize best practices that can be polished as different factors change. In this case, the key is to find out how a particular program aligns with the organizations broader objectives. One success or failure criteria can be differentiated from others, and it becomes easier to get the most efficient methodology that will enable the organization to attain the desired business objective successfully.

1. 1. Advantages and Disadvantages of Waterfall

When assessing methodologies, it is imperative to consider the following; organizational core strategies and projected goals, fundamental business considerations, limitations, people involved, risk, complexities, cost and size of a program. Once the assessment criteria have been considered in the decision, one needs to develop a process of identifying the best project management methodology choice for a particular project. The process will need to be reconsidered and altered every other time to be consistent with the evolving business and stakeholder needs. It is essential to determine the project drivers through identification and weighing of primary goals and priorities of the program. After establishing the project drivers, it is important to know the criteria that the methodology shall impact and the converse. Later, it would be critical to identify all the possible methodologies that are relevant to the program. One should spend time comparing all the project management methodologies about the program (Nowak, 2013). Consideration on the methodology that produces the best results, while offering the lowest amount of risk should be put on the table. Feedbacks and buy-ins should be considered. Finally, documentation of the methodology and rationale for its consideration should be conducted.

In organizational development, as well as within a program, the assessment of criteria of projects applies. When it comes to a choice of a methodology, a similar criterion should be considered. They can be split into internal and external criterion, with appropriate subcategories. Even though the most significant risk factors possibly fall within organizational capabilities and readiness, any other criterion discussed previously can lead to substantial problems when breaching a critical part of program requirement (Mazelis & Solodukhin, 2013). It is important to reiterate that project management methodologies are not a size fits all process, even within the same organization or industry. In a given situation one particular methodology might work best, and in another, it may be more appropriate to employ a different project management methodology or even a hybrid one. A similar methodology might not work in the same organization for all projects. A more appropriate way is the development and implementation of a streamlined methodology assessment map that produces the best approach to every project. Remember that the process itself needs reassessments and alterations as organizations factor in the changes.

1. Metrics and Measurements
   1. Common Metrics

The primary strategic goal is cost reduction. It is essential to measure this decisive goal against its value, time and the efforts needed in achieving it. When discussing metrics, it is necessary to state the manner in which parameters often dictate behaviors. Mainly because of the non-alignment of goals and objectives, a substantial number of organizations struggle to acknowledge the full business value that drug making can produce. Metrics are meaningful measurement taken over a period that communicates critical information about the processes or activities that lead to fact-based decisions. The subject area often specializes parameters and constructed to ensure effectiveness, efficiency and the required levels of the goals. The characteristics of a useful parameter include the fact that they drive appropriate action, provide meaning to those involved in the program, clearly defined, have data that is economical to collect, shows how organizational goals are being met, simple, understandable and logical. Because it is not resource-effective measuring everything in the program, it is crucial for the organization to select and monitor the standard metrics. To identify the parameters, it is vital to recognize fundamental work processes that create the most value for the organization. To identify them, it is essential to consider the outcome of the program for every project, and document the steps that design, execute and deliver the results (Jordan, 2013). After that consider the support processes that make the member-driven methods appear possible. Once the critical processes have been identified, it would be essential to identify the areas that need improvement and measurements that can fill the tapping hole. Ordinarily, the metrics should pass the SMART test, which is an acronym for Smart, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic and Timely. Even not comprehensive, a list of the common areas measured by association metrics consists of the following; active pharmaceutical ingredient synthesis, new analytical methods, formulation, clinical trial and finally nonclinical.

1. 1. Balanced Scorecard Metrics

Figure 3: Program Management Perspectives

An alternative system for developing metrics could be the Balanced Scorecard system, which was initially designed by Kaplan and Norton. Unlike traditional performance metrics, the Balance Scorecard system can have a more refined future performance indicator or how well the strategic plan can be accomplished. Moreover, the Balanced Scorecard system is a continuous and cyclic process that is focused on the internal processes and external results. The systems control is pegged on performance metrics that are continuously trailed all the time to check for changes, a right and ineffective way of doing things and where to improve. It offers data to program managers which guide them to make their decisions (Mosavi, 2014). The Balanced Scorecard provides a view of an organization from four perspectives, which include: user, financial, change and growth, and internal processes.

From the four perspectives, the association must state the strategic objectives, which then defines about three or four elements that each measure for every objective and identify the target value required for every step. Finally, the organization can determine the initiatives it might undertake to attain the targets. The Balanced Scorecard depends on a well-defined strategy and an understanding of the links from initiatives to objectives. Past and lagging measures can be identified by organizations and then used as a measure of future performance. Lastly, organizations should establish steps that are most appropriate for their goals and not just adopting the favorable metrics of other organizations.

Table 1: Typical Balance Scorecard for the Organization

1. 1. Benefits and Drawbacks of a Balanced Scorecard

The balanced scorecard provides program managers with the actionable framework of strategies and goals which are essential in increasing or maintaining performance levels. The method of resource management offers clear communication lines between different mutually inclusive projects by providing a rigorous structure of analysis. The balanced scorecard provides a broader reflection of all program elements including economic and internal processes. Moreover, it takes into account how every part impacts another, instead of just a focus on the performance of a single element. One the system is in place, it allows for continuous monitoring of goals and strategies. However, the major drawback is that the scorecard can fail in looking at the individual element as it mainly focuses on the whole. Also, the scorecard can be debauched and used by program managers as exclusively for monitoring rather than a tool to measure performance. Finally, when considering the large number of variables taken into consideration to provide a dependable balanced scorecard, it can be cumbersome and lead to a job in itself.

1. 1. Key Measurement in the Program Cycle

Implementing a measurement system to measure program performance will help the organization to accomplish its strategic goals. The goals are based on establishing the value of applying program management initiatives in the industry. The success of a program can be illusory and complicated, but crucial towards effective implementation of the projects in the program. This section dwells on key measurement as related to the success of a program drawn from the achievements of the projects under the program. The success of projects is thought to have serious elements: issues that deal with the program alone and issues that deal with the output. The sub-issues consists of the following, cost, time, usage, satisfaction, performance and effectiveness that are presented along with the elements for their measurement. To determine the critical analysis, it is imperative to consider the normative data that will enable the program manager to compare the projects on the dimensions with the numerous projects in the portfolio. The successful program management will realize the issues involved with any success measurements, in particular, at the early stages in the lives of the projects. Nevertheless, the successful manager will create specific and adequately stated software to monitor the success of the program as it moves forward in time. It will provide an early warning system vital for prompts identification of troubled areas and potential risks.

1. 1. Capturing Realized Benefits

Obviously, the software provides the most appropriate way of obtaining realized benefits. Implementing a value measurement system to achieve realized gains will help the organization attain the strategic goals. The system should compile an extensive list of possible measures for consideration. The measures are the beginning point for Scorecard development process. This part of the list as the beginning point to consider the actions are the most important to the organizations’ goals. At least three to seven measures for the measurement system should be considered. A project can be regarded as a tiny program, with the only difference between the two is that for a program, the head of a program manages the projects, while a project head handles the tasks of a project.

Beringer, C., Jonas, D., & Kock, A. (2013). Behavior of internal stakeholders in project portfolio management and its impact on success. International Journal of Project Management, https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/roles-executive-sponsors-project-management

Jordan, A. (2013). Risk management for project-driven organizations: A strategic guide to portfolio, Program and PMO Success. J. Ross Publishing, http://www.jrosspub.com/risk-management-for-project-driven-organizations.html

Kerzner, H. (2013). Project management: a systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling. John Wiley & Sons, http://www.books.mec.biz/tmp/books/55F1OL4WQC7HL2OBCGHS.pdf

Korhonen, T., Laine, T., & Martinsuo, M. (2014). Management control of project portfolio uncertainty: A managerial role perspective. Project Management Journal, 45(1), 21-37.

Martinsuo, M. (2013). Project portfolio management in practice and in context. International Journal of Project Management, https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/theory-practice-learning-project-management-systems-8975

Mazelis, L. S., & Solodukhin, K. S. (2013). Multi-period models for optimizing an institution’s project portfolio inclusive of risks and corporate social responsibility. Middle-east journal of scientific research, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/298632494_Multi-period_models_for_optimizing_an_institution%27s_project_portfolio_inclusive_of_risks_and_corporate_social_responsibility

Mosavi, A. (2014). Exploring the roles of portfolio steering committees in project portfolio governance. International Journal of Project Management, 32(3), 388-399.

Nowak, M. (2013). Project portfolio selection using interactive approach. Procedia Engineering, http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/citedby/10.1086/466942

Too, E. G., & Weaver, P. (2014). The management of project management: A conceptual framework for project governance. International Journal of Project Management, https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/project-governance-sustainability-10354

Young, M., & Conboy, K. (2013). Contemporary project portfolio management: Reflections on the development of an Australian Competency Standard for Project Portfolio Management. International Journal of Project management, https://viejournal.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40327-017-0049-y