A classification of development programmes and its consequences for programme management

Abstract

The paper describes the results of an exploratory study of the application of programme management in six companies. A classification of programmes developed may help in understanding the differences between programmes and the managerial impact of these differences. The research shows that the formalised and rigorous approach as described in most programme management handbooks is not widely adopted. The cases show less centralisation, less formalisation and less management of the interdependencies between the projects in the programme than one would expect on the basis of the programme management literature. This is especially the case in programmes that originate as a grouping of a set of existing projects. Yet, formalisation is mentioned as the main success factor in managing programmes.

The selection of supply chain management projects: A case study approach

“…ERP (Nah et al 2003;Huang et al 2004), IT (Irani et al 1997;Jiang and Klein 1999), general project management (Pinto and Slevin 1988;Kaplan and Norton 1996;Stanleigh 2006) best practice literature also echo similar viewpoints. Vereecke et al (2003) mentioned about importance of program management that involves coordinated management of projects with a common strategic objective. It is natural that organization's overall strategies will govern the SCM project evaluation process.…”

Managing strategic improvement programs: the XPS program management framework

“…The one-size-fits-all recipe for program management that has been advocated by the projectbased perspective has been criticised (Vereecke et al 2003;Lycett et al 2004;Pellegrinelli et al 2007). The strategic improvement program perspective is fundamentally different from the mega-implementation projects often referred to by the project-based perspective.…”

“…It is critical, if maximum value is to be reaped from these investments, that organisations, develop program management capabilities and invest in the appropriate infrastructure to support delivery of their programs (Williams & Parr 2004: 42). There are two strands of program management literature (Pellegrinelli et al 2007): project management literature typically describes program management as the management of mega-projects or a portfolio of projects (Ferns 1991;Reiss 1996;Gray 1997;Springer 2001;Vereecke et al 2003;Milosevic et al 2007;OGC 2007OGC , 2011, while strategic management literature typically views program management as an abstract vehicle for bringing about organisational change (Pellegrinelli 1997;Thiry 2002). Where project-type programs are described by linear project plans, strategic programs take the form of frameworks and structures (Pellegrinelli et al 2007).…”

“…In the nascent program management literature (Vereecke et al 2003;Milosevic et al 2007), there are very few contributions that deal with these types of strategic multi-plant improvement programs. The majority of empirical studies in program management theory stem from the project management perspective.…”

“…The majority of empirical studies in program management theory stem from the project management perspective. Vereecke et al (2003), for example, discuss e-business development and organisational redesign in global service firms. Williams and Parr (2004) explain how program management theory can help organisations carry out megaprojects such as improving traffic congestion in London, launching a new multi-company integrative webpage, global re-organisation, etc.…”