STEP 3. DEVELOPING THE PROGRAM PLAN 16 Given the planning, management, and communication efforts associated with resiliency efforts, setting up a Program Management Office (PMO) is likely necessary. Given that a resiliency program may consist of more than one year of work and require separate approval, special reporting, and is on top of routine work, the use of a PMO to facilitate these needs is frequently used. This group could be parallel and separate from existing engineering and operations functions or could be embedded. There are three tiers to capability that could be established for the PMO and they are detailed below. Program Management Office (PMO) Use & Design The first and most robust option is a full-service PMO with a large scope of services. This approach could be either insourced or outsourced. The strengths and weaknesses of this approach are detailed below: Option Name: PMO Large Scope Option Description: A full-service organization with separate organizational and reporting structure reporting to the head of operations. Services include financial resource or budget development, financial reporting and cash flow functions, capital construction oversight functions, training for and monitoring of project management/project control functions, ownership, and reporting of program performance versus expectations (project-level performance is still the responsibility of individual project managers). Assumptions: Separate organizational and reporting structure. Reporting to SVP or Operations lead. Integrated with both service providers and internal functions. Examples: Infrastructure Ontario (Insource) Pacific Gas & Electric (Outsource) Strengths Weaknesses Highly capable organization. Accurate and detailed reporting at three different tiers/dashboard level. Long term and expensive to develop these internal capabilities. Once the program falls to more normal workload levels, what do you do with this capability? Introduces another layer of management demanding higher/superior performance to afford. A significant increase in other governance/regulatory compliance functions internally and adding this additional large scope PMO perhaps adds too much complexity. Implications Some type of very strong external force must demand this level of services. Significant staffing level and expense to structure and utilize. This level of support would be staffed and run internally – if this level of service was outsourced, it would likely need full outsourcing of project-level activities (i.e. Puget Sound Energy). Very strong technology backbone to support the collection and display of data.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjE3MDU=