Page 70 - Organizational Project Management

Appendix B—Evolution of the OPM3 Standard

tions exist at one of five levels of maturity and, if they choose to do so, can
improve themselves by advancing sequentially through these levels to a
higher state of maturity. The benefit of advancing to a higher level is an
increasing "software process capability," which results in improved software
productivity. Since software is developed through projects, it is natural that
the concept of organizational maturity would migrate from software devel-
opment processes to project management (Peter W. G. Morris, "Researching
the Unanswered Questions of Project Management," Project Management
Research at the Turn of the Millennium: Proceedings of PMI Research Con-
ference 2000 [Project Management Institute, 2000], 87). Possibly as a result
of this, a number of project management maturity models appeared during
the mid-'90s that were more heavily influenced by the thinking of the
project management profession. Some of these incorporate concepts from
®
the PMBOK Guide.
An OMP3 Model Review Team, led by Peter Rogers and Marlies
Egberding, was chartered to examine existing approaches to assessing an
organization's maturity in project management processes. A set of questions
was developed to provide a framework for the review process, covering five
primary areas of examination:
■ Scope of the model being reviewed, including its boundaries, focus,
origin, and purpose
®
■ Capabilities of the model, including its coverage of the PMBOK Guide,
the extent to which paths to maturity are modeled, the working defini-
tion of maturity, and linkages to project success
■ Methodology for assessing maturity and potential for organizational self-
assessment
■ Model structure, including the question of whether it is staged or con-
tinuous, and whether prerequisites are defined
■ Existence of an implementation plan to assist organizations desiring to
become more mature in project management processes.
Twenty-seven contemporary models were identified and reviewed.
Teams of three were assigned to examine seventeen of these in greater
depth. Each team performed an independent model review and submitted
a model review report.
The analysis concluded that existing models left many important ques-
tions about project management maturity unanswered and that the team
should proceed with the development of an original model. Key research
conclusions included:
■ No existing maturity model satisfied the requirements elicited for OPM3
■ No existing model addressed all of the Best Practices identified for OPM3
■ No existing model addressed the constraints on organizational change
that dictate how best practices must be achieved incrementally.
The team agreed that maturity models are products designed to guide
the process of achieving maturity. They also agreed to explore designing a
"causal model" or "engineering" model, based on the premise that the Model
must actually identify and document observable results within organiza-
tions. At this point, the Guidance Team was formed, to assist the program
manager and deputy with decisions surrounding the Model. This team
structure, developed at the beginning of the project, continued until the
project's conclusion. In addition to the core Guidance Team positions, the
Team was made up of the heads of several sub-teams, which were charged

54 ©2003 Project Management Institute, Four Campus Boulevard, Newtown Square, PA 19073-3299 USA