I’ve been thinking about how much an organisation’s project maturity shapes the environment in which projects and programmes are delivered.
Consider two organisations.
In one, there is no established PMO governance or common project framework. Different teams develop their own ways of running projects. Sometimes even PMs within the same vertical have very different approaches.
In the other, there is an established and mature project framework.
The difference is not simply about having more templates or more documentation.
A good PMO framework gives people a map for navigating the organisation.
For a new PM, it provides the fundamentals: how projects are expected to be organised, who makes which decisions, how risks and issues are handled, when something should be escalated, and what stakeholders can expect.
For the broader organisation, it creates a common set of rules. People know what good project management looks like and, importantly, what to expect when they join or interact with a project.
Of course, establishing this does not happen overnight.
Especially in a larger organisation, introducing a common project framework requires significant change management, a clear mandate and strong support from senior management. It takes time and, most importantly, adaptation to the organisation rather than simply copying a methodology from a book.
But once that work is done, the organisation can start taking the benefits of a more mature project environment.
Governance provides safety and structure
For me, good governance provides safety and structure.
It doesn’t eliminate risks, issues or difficult decisions. Projects will always have their ups and downs.
What it does provide is a way of dealing with them.
How do we identify and manage a risk?
When does an issue need to be escalated?
Who needs to make the decision?
What is the appropriate management level?
How do we make sure an issue is addressed before it becomes a crisis?
In that sense, PMO governance can help PM turn chaos into a structured workflow with a clear plan.
And sometimes, simply knowing how to navigate the organisation removes a lot of unnecessary uncertainty from a project manager’s head.
But there is a line
There is a point where the same governance can become a blocker.
When everything needs to be described, presented, aligned, documented and approved, governance can start consuming the energy it was supposed to protect.
This is where I think the real challenge lies.
Where is the sweet spot between governance and bureaucracy?
I’m not arguing that Agile means having no documentation, or that every project should be run with the same level of governance.
The answer is not choosing between governance and agility.
The governance model needs to fit the organisation, the initiative and the level of complexity involved.
Sometimes it is better to travel light and go hunt some orcs.
People, not paperwork
With change accelerating and organisations running multiple initiatives with stretched resources, having well established and fit-for-purpose project governance is, in my view, an important enabler.
The key word is fit-for-purpose.
A project team should not spend more time producing reports than managing stakeholders, resolving dependencies, making decisions and actually delivering the initiative.
Projects are delivered by people, not paperwork.
One of my mentors used to say:
“We are delivering projects, but don’t forget to have fun along the way.”
I think there is something important in that.
Governance should give a project team clarity and confidence, not drain its energy.
Governance should work for the organisation
I currently have the privilege of working in an organisation where PMO governance is not just a fancy word, but a practical part of how projects are delivered.
Project management principles, including PRINCE2, are translated into a practical framework adapted to the organisation and its way of working.
And I think this is where project maturity really starts to show.
A PMO framework should not exist simply because an organisation says it needs one.
It should evolve from organisational experience and best practices, be adapted to how the organisation actually works, and go through iterations and continuous improvement.
This is also where the role of the PMO can evolve.
It can support project teams, provide common standards and tools, help establish good practices and provide the right level of control.
But the objective should never be to create governance for the sake of governance.
The right governance
The goal is not to create more governance.
The goal is to create the right governance.
Enough to provide clarity, consistency and control.
Enough to help project managers organise complexity, manage risks, navigate stakeholders and make decisions.
But not so much that project teams lose the space and energy they need to actually deliver.
For me, that is one of the signs of a mature project organisation.
Not how many templates it has.
Not how many reports it produces.
But whether its governance helps people deliver better projects.
Where do you see the sweet spot between governance and bureaucracy in your organisation?
Over and out.