Association for Project Management€¦ · 2.3 Evaluation and reporting 11 2.3.1 Evaluation 11 2.3.2 Reporting 12 2.4 Follow-up 13 2.5 Benefits evaluation 13 2.6 Legacy and lessons

C M Y K

C M Y K

C M Y K

C M Y K

Tel. (UK) 0845 458 1944Tel. (Int.) +44 1844 271 640Email [email protected] apm.org.uk

Association for Project Management Ibis House, Regent ParkSummerleys RoadPrinces RisboroughBuckinghamshire HP27 9LE

A Guide toProject Auditing

A Guide to Project Auditing

Association for Project Management

34641_00_FM to End-landscape.indd 1 13/04/2018 14:42

ii

Association for Project Management

Ibis House, Regent Park

Summerleys Road, Princes Risborough

Buckinghamshire

HP27 9LE

© Association for Project Management 2018

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or

transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the express permission in writing of the

Association for Project Management. Within the UK exceptions are allowed in respect of any fair

dealing for the purposes of research or private study, or criticism or review, as permitted under

the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, or in the case of reprographic reproduction in

accordance with the terms of the licences issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency. Enquiries

concerning reproduction outside these terms and in other countries should be sent to the Rights

Department, Association for Project Management at the address above.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data is available.

Paperback ISBN: 978-1-903494-74-5

eISBN: 978-1-903494-75-2

Cover design by Fountainhead Creative Consultants

Typeset by RefineCatch Limited, Bungay, Suffolk

in 10/14pt Foundry Sans


iii

Contents

1 Introduction 11.1 Introduction 11.2 Purpose of the guide 21.3 Structure of the guide 21.4 What is project auditing? 31.5 Principles of project audit 31.6 Project life cycle 41.7 Why do we need project audits? 41.8 Who should use the guide? 5

1.8.1 The project sponsor 51.8.2 The project team 51.8.3 The project auditor 6

2 Project audit process 72.1 Planning the audit 8

2.1.1 Audit prioritisation 82.1.2 Choosing the audit team 82.1.3 Information gathering 82.1.4 Risk assessing a project 92.1.5 The project audit programme 9

2.2 Fieldwork 102.2.1 Elements for review 10

2.3 Evaluation and reporting 112.3.1 Evaluation 112.3.2 Reporting 12

2.4 Follow-up 132.5 Benefits evaluation 132.6 Legacy and lessons learned 13

Appendix 1 14 Matrix of element-based areas of review, risks and controls 14

Appendix 2 31 Comparison of project audit elements for review, with

assurance measures toolkit categories 31


iv

Acknowledgements

The guide was prepared by members of the APM’s Assurance SIG led by Roy Millard as chair. The authors of the guide are Peter Deary, Mushtaq Ali and Mark Reilly.

The authors acknowledge the contributions of Pascal Barras, Wendy Gregory, Tony Hargraves, Julian Harris, Chris Little, Gary Poole, Nicola Read, Pauline Scott and Naveed Sheikh in the preparation of the guide.


1

1

Introduction

1.1 Introduction

Project assurance is a fundamental part of effective project governance. The project audit is the means to provide that assurance and enables the sponsor to have confidence that the governance is working and that the project is being managed as intended. There is currently a considerable amount of information relating to the assurance of projects and programmes, and why it is important. This guide seeks to demonstrate how to plan and undertake a comprehensive audit of a project, thereby providing that assurance.

The guide seeks to explain the role of an audit, how it could be planned and undertaken, the degrees of assurance that can be given, and how project audits can be aligned to organisational governance. Although the guide acknowledges the need for project audits to be integrated with the works of other assurance providers (particularly technical and quality audits) a project audit is a stand-alone process aimed at the three main roles involved in a project.

The three main roles involved in project audits are:

Role Description

Organisation board/audit committee/sponsor/other stakeholders

Those who schedule the project audit and receive the audit findings

Project team Those whose project is being audited, with whom the auditors interact

Project auditor(s) Those who undertake the audit, and report its findings and make recommendations

For any audit to be successful and provide value to all parties, these three main roles must work together and understand each other’s function in the process.

As is common in all projects it is vital that there is a recognition that people undertaking different project roles may have differing interests and perceptions about project outputs, progress and the various stakeholders. This guide therefore



2

refers to how audits relate to the various responsibilities within a project and how to apply the processes associated with auditing in a project context taking project responsibilities into consideration. These processes include: the development of an annual audit plan; choosing the auditor/audit team to undertake the work; developing an audit programme; performing, closing, and reporting the audit; and undertaking follow-ups.

1.2 Purpose of the guide

This guide is principally intended for use by project auditors in developing an audit approach to the review and assurance of projects. However, it is also intended to be of value to anyone involved in the management and administration of projects, as it records areas of project risk, and identifies audit evidence and practices. The guide will also indicate those aspects of a project which the auditors may choose to review, and how the audit will be performed.

This guide is not intended to provide step-by-step instructions on how to carry out audits on any particular type of project; rather, it will provide guidance which can be adapted by the user to the circumstances of their own projects. The audit can then be planned, performed and reported on, and based on the auditor’s preferred approach, adapted to suit the particular project discipline.

In section 2.2.1, and expanded in Appendix 1, the guide proposes some elements and areas of interest for review by project auditors, together with the risks and expected controls to manage those risks. These elements do not form an exhaustive list so it is recommended that further assessment by the project auditor is always necessary to decide upon areas of focus before a project audit is undertaken.

1.3 Structure of the guide

The guide focuses on the various aspects of project audits, to answer the following three questions:

n What is an audit? (And how an audit differs from other assurance methods.)n Why do we undertake project audits?n How should a project audit be planned, performed, evaluated,

reported, and followed up?


3

Introduction

This guide covers the planning of project audits (Section 2.1); suggested elements of a project which are to be reviewed (Section 2.2.1 and Appendix 1); evaluation and reporting (Section 2.3); and follow-up processes (Section 2.4).

1.4 What is project auditing?

Auditing is defined by the Chartered Institute of Internal Auditors as ‘an independent, objective assurance and consulting activity designed to add value and improve an organisation’s operations. It helps an organisation accomplish its objectives by bringing a systematic, disciplined approach to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of risk management, control, and governance processes’.

In any audit, the auditor(s) perceives and recognises the propositions before them for examination, collects evidence, evaluates the same, and on this basis formulates an opinion on the adequacy of controls within the activity being audited.

Throughout this guide we use the term ‘project’ to mean ‘a unique, transient endeavour undertaken to achieve planned objectives’ (see APM Body of Knowledge, 6th edition); the audit of programmes and portfolios will require different techniques. Auditing of a project should be seen in the context of the definition of project, programme and portfolio (P3) assurance set out in the APM Body of Knowledge: P3 Assurance is ‘the process of providing confidence to stakeholders that projects, programmes and portfolios will achieve their scope, time, cost and quality objectives, and realise their benefits’.

1.5 Principles of project audit

The APM publication A Guide to Integrated Assurance identifies the principles governing project audit, which are those established for the provision of assurance generally. Project audit should be:

n independent, and supported in this by the organisation board;n accountable within a governance and reporting system;n planned and coordinated as part of the organisation’s management system;n proportionate to risk potential and the assurance needs of stakeholders;n risk-based, against an independent risk evaluation;n able to allow the impact of identified weaknesses to be reported and addressed,

by follow-up and escalation.



4

1.6 Project life cycle

The APM Body of Knowledge identifies four, and where appropriate five, phases of a project life cycle:

n Concept: an initial idea is developed through production of an outline business case and schedule. At this stage a project sponsor is appointed to lead development of the idea, and to provide the answer to two questions:n Is the project likely to be viable?n Is it definitely worth investing in the next, definition phase?

n Definition: the preferred solution is identified and ways of achieving this are refined. The project management plan (PMP) is developed. Approval of this and the business case must be given by the sponsor before progressing to the development phase.

n Development: the PMP is put into action. The continuing viability of the project may be assessed and reviewed at various stages throughout this phase.

n Handover and closure: the project outputs are handed over and accepted by the sponsor on behalf of the users.

n Where appropriate, Benefits realisation: a project may include a benefits realisation phase.

Throughout the phases of a project there should be provision for independent audit to give assurance to key stakeholders including the project sponsor and executive board, of the likelihood that the objectives of the project will be achieved.

1.7 Why do we need project audits?

The giving of assurance to project stakeholders, including the organisation board, through providing assessment of the likelihood of the project achieving its objectives, is a fundamental aspect of project governance (see APM guides: Directing Change – A Guide to Governance of Project Management, and A Guide to Integrated Assurance). This assurance will cover the identification and management of risk, evaluation of opportunities, and actions being taken to realise those benefits on which approval of the business case was based. Assurance also seeks evidence of effective controls and opportunities to increase


5

Introduction

the likelihood of success of the project. The audit will consider among other things the following elements (see also 2.2.1 below):

n project definition and requirements management;n project organisation and governance;n risks management;n commercial, procurement and commissioning;n configuration management, project change controls and the PMO;n project planning and scheduling;n performance and benefits management;n stakeholder management and communications;n organisational capability and culture;n social responsibility and sustainability.

1.8 Who should use the guide?

1.8.1 The project sponsor

The sponsor must ensure that their projects or programmes meet the organisational requirements. The sponsor can use the audit function to assist them in meeting these needs by understanding the scope of audits available to them, and by selecting specific audits that address the projects’ risks and also take into consideration the position in the project life cycle.

In relation to audits they are responsible for liaising with the audit team in planning a programme of project audits; providing support to the audit team; and ensuring that remedial actions are implemented.

1.8.2 The project team

Delivery of the project and of its ability to achieve the expected outputs and outcomes is the responsibility of the project team. In doing this the project is expected to provide assurance and comfort to the wider organisation that it is being delivered in a structured and controlled manner and in accordance with organisation protocols including controls, systems and procedures. Project audits are a principal way for organisations to review and assess that their projects, programmes and portfolios will deliver the expected outcomes and benefits.



6

In relation to audits, the project team is responsible for ensuring data, information and staff are available to participate in the audit; responding to audit findings; and resolving any issues arising.

1.8.3 The project auditor

The auditor is not only responsible for undertaking the audit and reporting the findings. They also undertake a key role in working with the sponsor and project community in the management, communication and scheduling of audits across the organisation.

The responsibilities of the auditor in relation to the audits include identifying the risks to be reviewed; planning and carrying out the audit; and reporting to the project sponsor on findings made and overall rating of the audit as defined by the organisation’s audit function.


7

2

Project audit process

In terms of auditing techniques, a project audit is no different from any other form of risk-based or compliance audit. However, unlike other types of audit, the range of topics, disciplines and risks to consider for audit can be wide- ranging. Without careful planning, the scope of a project audit can become too broad to manage or lack sufficient depth to find the real issues. As a result, auditing a project may be broken down into several audits (each with a distinct purpose) over the lifetime of a project. Auditors with a specialist background/discipline may be engaged at different stages e.g. an engineer to audit the design elements of the project; an environmentalist to cover environmental compliance and sustainability; a health and safety expert to see that facility design and construction is safe, etc. Such experts may come from different audit and assurance providers within/outside the organisation. The challenge for the organisation (and the project sponsor) may then be to manage and integrate (see APM: A Guide to Integrated Assurance) all of these audit interventions to ensure that the project is not overwhelmed, there is no duplication and each audit adds value.

Based on APM’s five phases of the project life cycle (concept; definition; development; handover and close; and if required, benefits realisation) the current phase of the project should be determined prior to starting the audit as this will allow the auditor to focus the audit programme/questions to the priority areas of the project. During the project audit, various project areas will be assessed to ensure adequate controls are in place. These project areas change in priority throughout the project life cycle. For example, the priority of assessing controls for developing the business case development is higher at Concept stage than it would be at the Handover and Close phase, and the priority of assessing the controls around project closure would be lower in the Concept phase than it will be at the Handover and Close phase.



8

2.1 Planning the audit

2.1.1 Audit prioritisation

Project audits should be prioritised within the context of the organisation’s annual audit plan and the requirements of its audit committee. Project audits should be planned on the basis of risks to the organisation and to the project.

2.1.2 Choosing the audit team

Conducting a project audit is a specialist skill, so at least one influential member of the audit team should have knowledge and experience of a project environment. The size of the team should be appropriate to the scale and risks faced by the project and the requirements of the audit programme. Most organisations which are developing projects will have access to this skillset, which need not necessarily be held by an experienced auditor; such people could be managed by an experienced audit supervisor. The audit team should have access to specialist technical skills e.g. quality assurance, and should bear in mind the organisation’s appetite for integrated assurance.

2.1.3 Information gathering

This table below is an example of a format that could be used to record relevant information for the audit. The list is not exhaustive and can be amended or adapted:

Background information Results

1 Project name/reference

2 Brief description of the objectives of the project and any relevant notes. Record any information here that will help in assessing risk areas for audit

3 Project value (total)/(this year)

4 Appropriate (outline or full) business case approved/date/value

5 Agreed project audit scope, objectives and name/reference

6 Project governance arrangements including project sponsor, project manager and project team

7 Project management arrangements


9


8 Project phase (Inception, Feasibility, Development, Delivery, Close-out)

9 Overview of project controls including change controls

10 Project Management Plan (PMP) and Project Initiation Document (PID) approved date

11 Project audit team details

12 Organisation policies and procedures to be used as basis for project audit

13 Extent of PMO support required including management, cost and financial reports

14 Risks from corporate and project risk registers, and additional risks from discussion with stakeholders

15 Project and organisation risk management and mitigation measures

16 Integration with other assurance providers

17 Alignment of project with corporate strategy

18 Risk-based audit programme and schedule

19 Audit reporting details including timetable

20 Significant stakeholders (including their influence and interest)

21 Communications strategy

22 Arrangements to hand over to next phase, stage or client of project

2.1.4 Risk assessing a project

The project risk register should be used as the basis of planning a project audit. The risk register should be consistent with the organisation’s own risk register and its risk and opportunity appetite. This should be enhanced by discussion with stakeholders on risks they have identified but which have not been included in the formal register; and on the auditor’s own experience and discussion with the project team.

2.1.5 The project audit programme

The project audit programme should be based on the audit scope and objectives, agreed with the sponsor, or the organisation’s audit committee. The audit team should identify the risks to the project, and the controls and tests which are derived



10

from these. The different phases of the project life cycle should lead to audit programmes and tests appropriate to those phases, and to the nature of the project.

2.2 Fieldwork

The audit team should gather information and documentation, and talk to key stakeholders including (as appropriate) members of the project team, the procurement function and the supply chain. There should be an effective working relationship with the project management office (PMO), to ensure that information, documents and reports are readily available for purposes of the audit, including the procedures and policies which form the basis of evaluation.

2.2.1 Elements for review

The APM publication, Measures for Assuring Projects: APM Toolkit, identifies 10 key categories of criteria for review, around which the project assurance process should be based. We have drawn on those categories stated within the toolkit, as offering guidance to the identification of elements for review in carrying out an audit of a project. In Appendix 1 this guide suggests some aspects of those elements, together with the associated risks and controls, which could be subject to audit review where appropriate. In Appendix 2 we have mapped across from those elements we have identified for project audit and review, to the toolkit’s categories for which assurance should be sought. The selection of elements is not intended to be exhaustive, nor to serve as a project audit checklist; and it is expected that this should be adapted to reflect the circumstances of the project. The elements which have been identified are:

1. Project definition and requirements management – clear and controlled baseline requirements, objectives, success criteria, business case, terms of reference, contracts and benefits realisation.

2. Project organisation and governance – the processes to align the interests and strategic direction of sponsors and stakeholders.

3. Risks management – management of risks and opportunities through the life cycle of the project.

4. Commercial, procurement and commissioning – procurement and contract management, financial controls and engagement with commissioning processes.


11


5. Configuration management, project change controls and PMO – processes and systems to administer and control the project and changes to it.

6. Project planning and scheduling – appropriately detailed execution strategies, plans and schedules.

7. Performance and benefits management – to provide assurance that the benefits stated in the business case can be delivered within the resources made available.

8. Stakeholder management and communications – all stakeholders affected by the project have been identified and are appropriately involved.

9. Organisational capability and culture – people, behaviours, teams and the working environment including the organisation’s culture.

10. Social responsibility and sustainability – managing the impact of project delivery on the social, physical, ecological and economic environment including health and safety.

2.3 Evaluation and reporting

In concluding the audit, the project will need to be evaluated against a clear set of criteria which the organisation expects. It will enable the sponsor to assess the likelihood of a successful outcome from the project and to develop a clear set of actions to address any matters going forward.

Provision of assurance covers not only the investigation and reporting of findings, but also includes the identification and implementation of actions to address those findings. The auditor will need to assess the findings made and how critical these are to success of the project and risk to the organisation.

Reporting requirements will vary between and within organisations and projects, but a sound and useful technique is to rate the findings in accordance with the agreed criteria, and to provide an overall evaluation score for the project. Such clear criteria offer benefits to the sponsor, and the audit and project teams in that consistency and rigour of approach will support objectivity in the audit process.

2.3.1 Evaluation

The overall evaluation of the project will often be directed towards the project sponsor, and the requirement to address the individual issues will be held within the project team.



12

The number of issues identified and their ratings will then determine the overall rating given to the project. There are numerous methods to rate findings and evaluate projects, but the basic idea is to use a grading score to rank each audited element and indicate the extent to which the project has performed.

One method of grading used extensively to measure performance is the ‘traffic light’ system of three ratings: red/amber/green (RAG). During project audits it may be more appropriate to use four or five ratings, with additional definitions and next steps. Definitions of RAG will depend on project and reporting requirements; the traffic light technique is used by many assurance providers and can be tied to reporting of the achievement of key performance indicators (KPIs). One definition of the ratings is:

n Red: there are significant issues with the project (such as tolerances set by the board for cost, time or quality have been exceeded). The matter should be escalated to the sponsor and project board immediately.

n Amber: a problem has had a negative effect on project performance but can be dealt with by the project team. One aspect of project viability is at risk but is within agreed tolerances. The sponsor and project board should be notified.

n Green: the project is performing to plan. All aspects of project performance are within tolerance. No action is needed.

2.3.2 Reporting

Individual organisations have their own reporting requirements, including who should receive the report, who has responsibility for responding to it and to what timescale, and who will be tasked with implementing its findings and recommendations. Provision should be made to issue the report in line with the agreed timetable, or sooner if circumstances require this. As some of the content of the report may be commercially or otherwise sensitive, this should be borne in mind in circulation and distribution of draft and final reports.

Following a close-out meeting with auditees, the preliminary report should be prepared and internally reviewed before issue to those auditees and other stakeholders for comment on findings and recommendations.

Importantly, responses may indicate that the organisation is willing to accept a degree of project risk greater than that on which the audit was based.

The final report, which should contain the evaluation rating based on the responses received, should be distributed in accordance with the


13


requirements of the agreed audit plan. The final report should also be issued to the organisation’s audit committee.

2.4 Follow-up

Follow-up is the final element of the audit process, in which the audit team confirms that the sponsor and project team have implemented the agreed actions to address identified project risks and issues. This can be confirmed by monitoring the implementation process, or by accepting a formal statement from the sponsor or project team that the recommended actions have been carried out.

2.5 Benefits evaluation

Where the scope of the project audit included evaluation or auditing of outcomes on which approval of the business case was based (the benefits realisation phase of the project life cycle), a separate audit process will be required. This will seek to compare recorded benefit outcomes against those proposed in the business case through the use of defined benefit measures, normally by quantitative methods. The organisation should normally have a benefits evaluation process by which it is able to carry out such evaluation itself without instructing the audit team to do so.

2.6 Legacy and lessons learned

The organisation may operate a legacy programme, to capture the intellectual capital within a project before the project team is disbanded. A notable example is the Learning Legacy programme developed by the 2012 Olympic Delivery Authority: this is open to everyone, to share knowledge of construction and event organisation. The results of project audits can provide valuable reference points for the organisation’s legacy and lessons learned process. The audit team should be aware of the organisation’s requirements for confidentiality if involved in the legacy and lessons learned process.


14

Appendix 1

Matrix of element-based areas of review,

risks and controls


15

Elem

ent 1

. Pro

ject

defi

nitio

n an

d re

quire

men

ts m

anag

emen

t: cl

ear a

nd c

ontr

olle

d ba

selin

e re

quire

men

ts, o

bjec

tives

, suc

cess

cr

iteria

, bus

ines

s ca

se, t

erm

s of

refe

renc

e, c

ontr

acts

and

ben

efits

real

isat

ion

Are

a o

f re

view

Ris

kC

on

tro

lA

ud

it m

eth

od

s in

clu

de

Busi

ness

pla

n al

ignm

ent

The

prog

ram

me/

proj

ect i

s no

t alig

ned

with

org

anis

atio

n or

bus

ines

s st

rate

gyFo

rmal

app

rova

l of p

roje

ct s

tart

-up

reco

rded

and

con

firm

atio

n th

at it

alig

ns

with

str

ateg

ic o

bjec

tives

Revi

ew o

f app

ropr

iate

boa

rd m

inut

es a

nd

docu

men

tatio

n

Revi

ew o

f sta

ge g

ate

(gat

eway

) app

rova

ls

Sche

dule

of d

eleg

ated

aut

horit

y

Busi

ness

cas

eTh

e bu

sine

ss c

ase

is n

ot ro

bust

, or d

oes

not e

xist

or o

utpu

ts a

nd o

utco

mes

are

not

m

easu

rabl

e

Seni

or re

spon

sibl

e ow

ner/

spon

sor

iden

tified

with

app

ropr

iate

aut

horit

y to

de

liver

pro

ject

out

com

es

Revi

ew o

f app

rove

d bu

sine

ss c

ase

to

iden

tify

resp

onsi

bilit

ies

and

ensu

re th

at

busi

ness

cas

e te

mpl

ate

and

guid

ance

is

avai

labl

e

Busi

ness

cas

e do

es n

ot fi

t with

or

gani

satio

n’s

mod

el e

.g. fi

ve c

ase

mod

el:

stra

tegi

c, e

cono

mic

, com

mer

cial

, fina

ncia

l an

d m

anag

emen

t cas

es

Requ

irem

ent t

hat b

usin

ess

case

s ta

ke

acco

unt o

f app

rove

d m

odel

Revi

ew o

f app

rove

d bu

sine

ss c

ase

to

asse

ss e

xten

t of c

ompl

ianc

e

Proj

ect c

ost a

s st

ated

is n

ot d

efine

d ef

fect

ivel

y or

is in

suffi

cien

t to

allo

w

deliv

ery

If al

read

y fu

nded

: Lev

el o

f agr

eed

fund

ing

is in

suffi

cien

t to

deliv

er o

bjec

tives

Cos

ts (i

nclu

ding

life

cyc

le c

osts

) hav

e be

en re

liabl

y es

timat

ed a

nd a

mec

hani

sm

exis

ts fo

r the

se to

be

refin

ed

Due

acc

ount

is ta

ken

of o

ptim

ism

bia

s in

re

spec

t of c

ost

Revi

ew o

f cos

t met

hodo

logy

and

pr

oces

ses

base

d on

app

rove

d bu

sine

ss

case

Revi

ew o

f app

rove

d bu

sine

ss c

ase.

Ens

ure

that

cos

t of r

isk

has

been

acc

ount

ed fo

r

Revi

ew w

heth

er a

dditi

onal

fund

ing

shou

ld

be s

ough

t to

enab

le s

ucce

ssfu

l del

iver

y


16

Are

a o

f re

view

Ris

kC

on

tro

lA

ud

it m

eth

od

s in

clu

de

Targ

et d

ates

are

unr

ealis

tic o

r ove

rly

ambi

tious

Targ

et d

ates

hav

e be

en s

ubje

ct to

a re

ality

ch

eck

and

a m

echa

nism

exi

sts

for t

hese

da

tes

to b

e re

fined

Due

acc

ount

is ta

ken

of o

ptim

ism

bia

s in

re

spec

t of t

arge

t dat

es a

nd s

ched

ules

Revi

ew o

f sch

edul

e an

d pr

ogra

mm

e m

etho

dolo

gy a

nd p

roce

sses

Revi

ew o

f app

rove

d bu

sine

ss c

ase

Busi

ness

cas

es a

re n

ot u

sed

as a

con

trol

ag

ains

t ach

ieve

men

t of t

he p

roje

ct

deliv

erab

les

App

rove

d bu

sine

ss c

ase

is u

sed

as a

ch

ange

con

trol

bas

elin

e do

cum

ent,

and

is

subj

ect t

o pe

riodi

c re

view

Ass

essm

ent o

f cha

nge

cont

rol

mec

hani

sms

appl

icab

le to

pro

ject

and

that

bu

sine

ss c

ase

is ro

utin

ely

upda

ted

Scop

e de

fined

in

clud

ing

chan

ge

cont

rol p

roce

sses

The

proj

ect s

cope

/req

uire

men

ts is

not

cl

early

defi

ned

or u

nder

stoo

dPr

ojec

t sco

pe d

efine

d

Cha

nge

cont

rol p

roce

sses

impl

emen

ted

Proj

ect m

anag

er’s

resp

onsi

bilit

ies

and

limits

of a

utho

rity

defin

ed

Revi

ew o

f app

rove

d bu

sine

ss c

ase

– sc

ope

mus

t be

clea

r and

una

mbi

guou

s

Ass

essm

ent o

f cha

nge

cont

rol p

roce

sses

Sche

dule

of d

eleg

atio

n in

PID

or

appr

oved

bus

ines

s ca

se

Requ

irem

ents

de

finiti

on –

cle

ar/

com

plet

e/un

ders

tood

?

Requ

ired

outc

omes

cl

ear/

agre

ed

The

proj

ect’s

sco

pe/p

lan

is n

ot b

asel

ined

at

tim

e of

pro

ject

sta

rtPr

ojec

t pla

n de

velo

ped

to a

ppro

pria

te

leve

lRe

view

of P

ID a

nd a

ppro

ved

busi

ness

ca

se to

ens

ure

clar

ity o

f sco

pe a

nd

plan

ning

Aut

horis

atio

n in

clud

ing

defin

ition

of

bas

elin

e

The

proj

ect h

as c

omm

ence

d pr

ior t

o fo

rmal

aut

horis

atio

nPr

ojec

t gov

erna

nce

arra

ngem

ents

refle

ct

orga

nisa

tion

requ

irem

ents

Revi

ew o

f pro

ject

gov

erna

nce

arra

ngem

ents

incl

udin

g au

thor

isat

ion

to

star

t pro

ject

s


17

Are

a o

f re

view

Ris

kC

on

tro

lA

ud

it m

eth

od

s in

clu

de

Doc

umen

ting

clie

nt

obje

ctiv

es a

nd

requ

irem

ents

and

su

cces

s cr

iteria

Proj

ect d

eliv

erab

les

and

outc

omes

and

w

hat w

ill re

pres

ent s

ucce

ss h

ave

not b

een

iden

tified

or c

anno

t be

mea

sure

d

Cle

ar a

nd u

nam

bigu

ous

deliv

erab

les

and

obje

ctiv

es s

et o

ut in

PID

and

PM

P

Agr

eed

outc

omes

and

suc

cess

crit

eria

Revi

ew o

f PID

and

PM

P to

ens

ure

clar

ity

and

cons

iste

ncy

with

app

rove

d bu

sine

ss

case

Revi

ew m

easu

rem

ent c

riter

ia

Defi

ning

and

m

anag

ing

expe

cted

be

nefit

s

Proj

ects

are

und

erta

ken

with

out e

xpec

ted

bene

fits

bein

g m

anag

edBu

sine

ss c

ase

cont

ains

sta

ted

and

quan

tified

ben

efits

Real

isat

ion

of b

enefi

ts is

con

trol

led

by

esta

blis

hed

proc

esse

s

Revi

ew o

f app

rove

d bu

sine

ss c

ase

to

ensu

re b

enefi

ts a

re s

tate

d

Revi

ew o

f pro

cess

es to

ens

ure

bene

fits

ca

n be

bas

elin

ed, c

ontr

olle

d an

d ca

n

be m

easu

red

Agr

eein

g an

d do

cum

entin

g ac

cept

ance

pro

cess

Unc

lear

acc

epta

nce

proc

esse

sD

ocum

ente

d ac

cept

ance

pro

cess

es fo

r pr

ojec

t and

its

elem

ents

Con

trac

tual

con

trol

s av

aila

ble

for

impl

emen

tatio

n as

nee

ded

Revi

ew o

f PID

and

pro

ject

gov

erna

nce

to

ens

ure

clea

r acc

epta

nce

proc

esse

s ex

ist

Read

ines

s fo

r ac

cept

ance

and

im

plem

enta

tion

of

proj

ect

Com

mis

sion

ing

proc

esse

s an

d re

sour

ces

are

not a

dequ

ate

to a

ccep

t and

del

iver

pr

ojec

t ben

efits

Com

mis

sion

ing

plan

s an

d pr

oces

ses

are

agre

ed in

adv

ance

Suffi

cien

t res

ourc

es a

re a

vaila

ble

for

com

mis

sion

ing

and

chan

ge

Revi

ew o

f com

mis

sion

ing

plan

s to

ens

ure

cons

iste

ncy

with

app

rove

d bu

sine

ss c

ase

and

bene

fits

man

agem

ent p

roce

sses

Revi

ew re

sour

cing

and

equ

ipm

ent

plan

ning

Revi

ew m

easu

res

in p

lace

for e

mbe

ddin

g be

nefit

s (if

rela

ting

to c

hang

e m

anag

emen

t)


18

Elem

ent 2

. Pro

ject

org

anis

atio

n an

d go

vern

ance

: the

pro

cess

es to

alig

n th

e in

tere

sts

and

stra

tegi

c di

rect

ion

of

spon

sors

and

sta

keho

lder

s

Are

a o

f re

view

Ris

kC

on

tro

lA

ud

it m

eth

od

s in

clu

de

Proj

ect g

over

nanc

e st

ruct

ures

Inad

equa

te p

roje

ct g

over

nanc

e st

ruct

ures

or

org

anis

atio

n in

expe

rienc

ed a

t im

plem

entin

g go

vern

ance

Defi

ned

proj

ect g

over

nanc

e st

ruct

ures

ba

sed

on o

rgan

isat

ion

and

proj

ect

requ

irem

ents

Proj

ect s

pons

or a

ppoi

nted

with

ap

prop

riate

aut

horit

y to

allo

cate

reso

urce

s an

d re

info

rce

gove

rnan

ce b

est p

ract

ice

Revi

ew p

roje

ct g

over

nanc

e ar

rang

emen

ts

to e

nsur

e co

nsis

tenc

y w

ith o

rgan

isat

ion

gove

rnan

ce

Term

s of

refe

renc

e fo

r pro

ject

/pro

gram

me

boar

ds

Revi

ew o

rgan

isat

ion

sche

dule

of

dele

gatio

n

Spon

sors

hip

The

proj

ect s

pons

or is

not

an

effe

ctiv

e lin

k be

twee

n th

e or

gani

satio

n an

d pr

ojec

t m

anag

emen

t

Ow

ners

hip

of b

usin

ess

case

and

ac

coun

tabi

lity

for d

eliv

ery

are

appr

oved

at

orga

nisa

tion

boar

d le

vel

Ensu

re ro

le o

f spo

nsor

is s

uppo

rted

by

orga

nisa

tion/

boar

d go

vern

ance

str

uctu

res

and

are

reco

rded

in P

ID

Evid

ence

that

ther

e is

buy

-in to

this

pr

oces

s

Role

s an

d re

spon

sibi

litie

sIn

adeq

uate

ly d

efine

d ro

les

and

resp

onsi

bilit

ies

Defi

ned

role

s an

d re

spon

sibi

litie

s w

ithin

a

form

al p

roje

ct a

nd o

rgan

isat

ion

man

agem

ent s

truc

ture

Ensu

re ro

les

and

resp

onsi

bilit

ies

are

defin

ed w

ithin

a fo

rmal

pro

ject

and

or

gani

satio

n go

vern

ance

and

man

agem

ent

stru

ctur

e an

d ar

e re

cord

ed in

the

PID

Aut

horis

atio

n an

d ap

prov

als

Dec

isio

ns a

nd a

utho

risat

ions

are

mad

e w

ithou

t pro

per a

utho

rity

or a

re m

ade

at a

le

vel u

nsui

ted

to th

e re

quire

men

ts o

f ef

fect

ive

proj

ect c

ontr

ol

App

rova

ls a

nd a

utho

risat

ion

proc

esse

s ar

e de

fined

and

are

bas

ed o

n or

gani

satio

n an

d pr

ojec

t req

uire

men

ts

Ensu

re a

ppro

val a

nd a

utho

risat

ion

proc

esse

s ar

e de

fined

with

in a

form

al

proj

ect a

nd o

rgan

isat

ion

gove

rnan

ce a

nd

man

agem

ent s

truc

ture

and

are

reco

rded

in

the

PID

Ensu

re th

at p

roce

sses

are

bei

ng a

dher

ed

to a

nd th

at a

ppro

pria

te re

cord

ing

of

deci

sion

s is

in p

lace


19

Are

a o

f re

view

Ris

kC

on

tro

lA

ud

it m

eth

od

s in

clu

de

Org

anis

atio

nal

stru

ctur

ePr

ojec

t sta

ffing

and

reso

urce

str

uctu

res

are

unsu

ited

to e

ffec

tive

proj

ect

man

agem

ent

Proj

ect s

truc

ture

refle

cts

requ

irem

ents

of

both

pro

ject

and

the

orga

nisa

tion,

at

vario

us p

hase

s of

the

proj

ect l

ife c

ycle

Revi

ew p

hase

d st

affin

g an

d re

sour

ce p

lans

an

d im

plem

enta

tion

proc

esse

s fo

r var

ious

ph

ases

of t

he p

roje

ct li

fe c

ycle

Repo

rtin

gTi

mel

y, re

leva

nt a

nd re

liabl

e in

form

atio

n is

no

t ava

ilabl

e to

sup

port

the

orga

nisa

tion’

s an

d pr

ojec

t’s d

irect

ion

and

deci

sion

-m

akin

g pr

oces

ses

Repo

rtin

g st

ruct

ures

and

met

hods

are

de

fined

from

the

outs

et a

nd a

ssur

ance

is

obta

ined

per

iodi

cally

that

info

rmat

ion

repo

rted

is ti

mel

y, re

leva

nt a

nd re

liabl

e

Revi

ew P

ID a

nd a

ppro

ved

busi

ness

cas

e fo

r rep

ortin

g re

quire

men

ts a

nd p

roce

sses

Elem

ent 3

. Ris

ks m

anag

emen

t: m

anag

emen

t of r

isks

and

opp

ortu

nitie

s th

roug

h th

e lif

e cy

cle

of th

e pr

ojec

t

Are

a o

f re

view

Ris

kC

on

tro

lA

ud

it m

eth

od

s in

clu

de

Risk

and

op

port

unity

str

ateg

yPr

ojec

t ris

k an

d op

port

unity

str

ateg

y is

not

co

nsis

tent

with

the

orga

nisa

tion’

s ris

k ap

petit

e

Risk

and

opp

ortu

nity

iden

tifica

tion

and

man

agem

ent s

trat

egy

is d

evel

oped

whi

ch

alig

ns w

ith th

at o

f org

anis

atio

n

Revi

ew a

ppro

ved

busi

ness

cas

e fo

r ris

k an

d op

port

unity

man

agem

ent a

nd

proc

esse

s, in

clud

ing

fit w

ith o

rgan

isat

ion’

s ris

k ap

petit

e an

d ev

iden

ce o

f pro

activ

e ris

k m

anag

emen

t app

roac

h

Risk

and

op

port

unity

id

entifi

catio

n,

asse

ssm

ent a

nd

man

agem

ent

proc

esse

s

Proj

ect r

isks

and

opp

ortu

nitie

s ar

e no

t id

entifi

ed a

nd m

anag

ed e

ffec

tivel

yFo

rmal

risk

and

opp

ortu

nity

man

agem

ent

proc

esse

s, in

clud

ing

form

al ri

sk re

gist

er

and

perio

dic

revi

ew, a

re im

plem

ente

d

Revi

ew ri

sk a

nd is

sue

regi

ster

s an

d pr

oces

ses

for p

opul

atin

g th

ese

Ensu

re th

at d

efini

tions

of r

isks

and

issu

es

are

fully

und

erst

ood

Plan

and

impl

emen

t re

spon

ses

to ri

skU

npla

nned

or u

ncon

side

red

resp

onse

to

crys

talli

satio

n of

risk

Resp

onsi

bilit

y fo

r act

ion

on c

ryst

allis

atio

n of

risk

is e

stab

lishe

d, a

nd a

ctio

n pl

an is

de

velo

ped

Revi

ew ri

sk a

nd is

sue

proc

esse

s to

ens

ure

clar

ity o

f ow

ners

hip

on c

ryst

allis

atio

n an

d ab

ility

to d

evel

op a

ctio

n pl

ans


20

Are

a o

f re

view

Ris

kC

on

tro

lA

ud

it m

eth

od

s in

clu

de

Con

tinge

ncy

No

cont

inge

ncy

plan

s, p

roce

sses

or

allo

wan

ces

rela

ted

to o

ccur

renc

e of

ad

vers

e ev

ents

Con

tinge

ncie

s of

tim

e an

d co

st fo

rm p

art

of p

roje

ct p

lann

ing

proc

ess

and

appr

oval

s.

As

elem

ents

of p

lan

are

achi

eved

, co

ntin

genc

y al

low

ance

s ar

e re

leas

ed if

un

used

Ass

ess

time

and

cost

con

tinge

ncy

plan

ning

and

pro

cess

es

Ensu

re th

at c

ontin

genc

y is

real

istic

ally

qu

antifi

ed

Revi

ew p

roce

sses

for r

elea

se o

f co

ntin

genc

ies

Busi

ness

con

tinui

ty

and

disa

ster

re

cove

ry

Resp

onse

to m

ajor

adv

erse

occ

urre

nce

to

proj

ect i

s un

plan

ned

or o

ther

wis

e no

t al

low

ed fo

r

Busi

ness

con

tinui

ty p

lan

and

disa

ster

re

cove

ry p

lan

are

esta

blis

hed

for

impl

emen

tatio

n in

sta

ted

circ

umst

ance

s.

Org

anis

atio

n pr

oces

ses

allo

w a

lloca

tion

of

reso

urce

s to

miti

gate

and

ach

ieve

del

iver

y of

con

tinui

ty a

nd re

cove

ry p

lans

. Pla

ns

revi

ewed

per

iodi

cally

Iden

tify

role

of

busi

ness

con

tinui

ty

in o

rgan

isat

iona

l gov

erna

nce

and

how

this

re

late

s to

the

proj

ect g

over

nanc

e an

d pl

anni

ng

Ass

ess

exte

nt to

whi

ch p

lans

whi

ch c

ould

af

fect

pro

ject

out

com

es a

re re

view

ed

perio

dica

lly

Elem

ent 4

. Com

mer

cial

, pro

cure

men

t and

com

mis

sion

ing:

pro

cure

men

t, co

ntra

ct m

anag

emen

t, fin

anci

al c

ontr

ols

and

enga

gem

ent w

ith c

omm

issi

onin

g pr

oces

ses

Are

a o

f re

view

Ris

kC

on

tro

lA

ud

it m

eth

od

s in

clu

de

Proc

urem

ent

stra

tegy

Proc

urem

ent s

trat

egy

is n

ot c

onsi

sten

t w

ith p

roje

ct a

nd b

usin

ess

case

re

quire

men

ts, p

artic

ular

ly in

resp

ect o

f tim

ing

and

life

cycl

e co

sts

Proc

urem

ent s

trat

egy

is a

gree

d w

ithin

bu

sine

ss c

ase

and

is c

onsi

sten

t with

or

gani

satio

n an

d pr

ojec

t req

uire

men

ts

Revi

ew p

rocu

rem

ent p

lann

ing

proc

esse

s an

d fit

with

pro

ject

and

org

anis

atio

n st

rate

gy

Ensu

re e

ngag

emen

t in

plac

e w

ith

orga

nisa

tion’

s pr

ocur

emen

t tea

ms

to

ensu

re c

ompl

ianc

e w

ith s

trat

egy

Proc

urem

ent

proc

esse

sPr

ocur

emen

t pro

cess

es d

o no

t com

ply

with

lega

l and

org

anis

atio

nal r

equi

rem

ents

an

d ar

e no

t eff

ectiv

ely

plan

ned

and

man

aged

Proc

urem

ent p

roce

sses

are

sub

ject

to

rigor

ous

plan

ning

, eva

luat

ion

and

revi

ew

by b

oth

proj

ect a

nd o

rgan

isat

ion

Revi

ew p

rocu

rem

ent p

roce

sses

incl

udin

g te

nder

ing

and

eval

uatio

n, to

ass

ure

tran

spar

ency

and

com

plia

nce

with

lega

l an

d or

gani

satio

nal r

equi

rem

ents


21

Are

a o

f re

view

Ris

kC

on

tro

lA

ud

it m

eth

od

s in

clu

de

Con

trac

t str

ateg

yC

ontr

act s

trat

egy

is n

ot c

onsi

sten

t with

pr

ocur

emen

t str

ateg

y, o

r leg

al a

nd p

roje

ct

requ

irem

ents

, and

may

not

off

er v

alue

for

mon

ey

Con

trac

t str

ateg

y do

es n

ot a

ppor

tion

risk

to th

e pa

rty

best

abl

e to

bea

r it

Con

trac

t str

ateg

y sh

ould

be

asse

ssed

for

cons

iste

ncy

with

org

anis

atio

n an

d pr

ojec

t re

quire

men

ts

Ass

ess

cont

ract

str

ateg

y an

d pl

anni

ng fo

r co

nsis

tenc

y w

ith o

rgan

isat

ion

and

proj

ect

requ

irem

ents

Ass

ess

whe

ther

con

trac

t and

pro

cure

men

t ris

k is

bor

ne b

y th

e pa

rty

best

abl

e to

bea

r it,

in a

ccor

danc

e w

ith th

e pa

rtie

s’

orga

nisa

tiona

l ris

k ap

petit

e

Con

trac

t ad

min

istr

atio

nA

dmin

istr

atio

n of

con

trac

ts d

oes

not

supp

ort a

chie

vem

ent o

f pro

ject

obj

ectiv

es

or d

oes

not c

ompl

y w

ith re

quire

men

ts o

f co

nditi

ons

of c

ontr

act

Suffi

cien

t res

ourc

e is

ava

ilabl

e to

man

age

and

adm

inis

ter c

ontr

acts

eff

ectiv

ely

Revi

ew p

rocu

rem

ent r

esou

rce

stra

tegy

at

all s

tage

s of

the

proj

ect l

ife c

ycle

.

Revi

ew c

ontr

act a

dmin

istr

atio

n pl

ans

Fina

ncia

l con

trol

Con

trol

of p

roje

ct fi

nanc

e an

d ac

coun

ting

mat

ters

is in

adeq

uate

Robu

st a

nd e

ffec

tive

finan

cial

con

trol

and

m

anag

emen

t pro

cess

es a

re e

stab

lishe

d,

incl

udin

g co

st a

nd c

ashfl

ow re

port

ing

Revi

ew s

tand

ing

finan

cial

inst

ruct

ions

and

pr

ojec

t cos

t rep

ortin

g pr

oced

ures

and

pr

oces

ses

to a

sses

s ex

tent

to w

hich

thes

e su

ppor

t eff

ectiv

e pr

ojec

t gov

erna

nce

Com

mis

sion

ing

with

in th

e or

gani

satio

n

Com

mis

sion

ing

proc

esse

s, re

flect

ing

the

chan

ges

whi

ch w

ill re

sult

from

the

proj

ect,

and

are

to b

e ca

rrie

d ou

t by

stak

ehol

ders

ha

ve n

ot b

een

esta

blis

hed

with

in th

e or

gani

satio

n

Reso

urce

s, p

lans

and

equ

ipm

ent h

ave

been

mad

e av

aila

ble

for t

rain

ing

stak

ehol

ders

in th

e ch

ange

d m

etho

ds o

f pr

ovis

ion

of s

ervi

ces

and

good

s w

hich

will

re

sult

from

intr

oduc

tion

of th

e pr

ojec

t de

liver

able

s

Revi

ew c

omm

issi

onin

g re

sour

ce p

lans

, in

clud

ing

trai

ning

and

pro

visi

on o

f sui

tabl

e eq

uipm

ent t

o su

ppor

t cha

nged

met

hods

of

ser

vice

del

iver

y

Con

trac

t com

plet

ion

and

hand

over

Proj

ect o

r con

trac

t is

hand

ed o

ver o

r ot

herw

ise

acce

pted

and

pay

men

t mad

e al

thou

gh c

ompl

etio

n ha

s no

t bee

n ac

hiev

ed

Robu

st a

ppro

val p

roce

sses

for t

he

acce

ptan

ce o

f con

trac

ts o

r pro

ject

s ha

ve

been

est

ablis

hed,

to e

nsur

e th

at

com

plet

ion

has

been

ach

ieve

d in

ac

cord

ance

with

the

cond

ition

s of

con

trac

t

Revi

ew c

ontr

actu

al a

ppro

val p

roce

sses

to

assu

re th

at p

roje

cts

will

not

be

acce

pted

no

r pay

men

t mad

e if

com

plet

ion

has

not

been

ach

ieve

d


22

Elem

ent 5

. Con

figur

atio

n m

anag

emen

t, pr

ojec

t cha

nge

cont

rols

and

the

PMO

: pro

cess

es a

nd s

yste

ms

to a

dmin

iste

r and

con

trol

th

e pr

ojec

t and

cha

nges

to it

Are

a o

f re

view

Ris

kC

on

tro

lA

ud

it m

eth

od

s in

clu

de

Con

figur

atio

n m

anag

emen

t pr

oces

ses

Con

figur

atio

n m

anag

emen

t is

not

effe

ctiv

ely

plan

ned

or is

not

con

sist

ent

with

the

proj

ect d

eliv

erab

les

as s

peci

fied

Doc

umen

ted

confi

gura

tion

man

agem

ent

proc

esse

s

Resp

onsi

bilit

ies

for a

ctio

ns a

ssig

ned

Revi

ew c

onfig

urat

ion

man

agem

ent

proc

edur

es a

nd p

roce

sses

, inc

ludi

ng

sche

dule

of d

eleg

atio

n

Doc

umen

t m

anag

emen

t sy

stem

Doc

umen

t man

agem

ent s

yste

m is

not

st

ruct

ured

to s

uppo

rt c

hang

e co

ntro

l and

co

nfigu

ratio

n m

anag

emen

t pr

oces

ses

Plan

ned

docu

men

t man

agem

ent s

yste

m

whi

ch is

con

sist

ent w

ith c

onfig

urat

ion

proc

esse

s an

d th

e pr

ojec

t filin

g sy

stem

Revi

ew d

ocum

ent m

anag

emen

t sys

tem

s (in

clud

ing

elec

tron

ic s

yste

ms)

to a

ssur

e ef

fect

ive

supp

ort f

or p

roje

ct

adm

inis

trat

ion

an

d go

vern

ance

Scop

e an

d ch

ange

m

anag

emen

t sy

stem

Cha

nges

to th

e ba

selin

e sc

ope

of a

pro

ject

m

ay n

ot b

e m

ade

in a

con

trol

led

man

ner

Proj

ect a

nd c

ontr

act c

hang

es a

re n

ot

effe

ctiv

ely

cont

rolle

d

Risk

of u

ncon

trol

led

scop

e cr

eep

A s

truc

ture

d an

d rig

orou

s pr

oces

s,

cove

ring

revi

ew a

nd c

hang

es to

bas

elin

e sc

ope

shou

ld b

e in

stitu

ted

Revi

ew p

roce

sses

for m

anag

emen

t of

chan

ges

to s

cope

and

oth

er p

aram

eter

s to

as

sure

thes

e of

fer e

ffec

tive

cont

rol

Revi

ew p

roce

sses

for m

anag

ing

how

ch

ange

s im

pact

on

prog

ram

me

an

d co

sts

Proj

ect fi

ling

syst

emPr

ojec

t filin

g sy

stem

is u

ncle

ar o

r not

ef

fect

ivel

y m

anag

ed a

nd d

oes

not s

uppo

rt

the

proj

ect’s

adm

inis

trat

ion

and

cont

rol

proc

esse

s

A s

truc

ture

d pr

ojec

t filin

g sy

stem

, whi

ch is

co

nsis

tent

with

org

anis

atio

n, p

roje

ct a

nd

confi

gura

tion

man

agem

ent n

eeds

is

impl

emen

ted

Ass

ess

proj

ect fi

ling

syst

em (i

nclu

ding

el

ectr

onic

sys

tem

s) to

ass

ure

supp

ort f

or

effe

ctiv

e ad

min

istr

atio

n an

d m

anag

emen

t of

the

proj

ect

Proj

ect

man

agem

ent o

ffice

(P

MO

)

Adm

inis

trat

ive

proc

esse

s, a

s su

pplie

d th

roug

h th

e PM

O, a

re u

nsui

tabl

e,

insu

ffici

ent o

r too

one

rous

for e

ffec

tive

adm

inis

trat

ion

of p

roje

ct a

ctiv

ities

A fo

rmal

PM

O s

truc

ture

, app

ropr

iate

to

the

size

and

nat

ure

of th

e pr

ojec

t and

ad

equa

tely

reso

urce

d, s

houl

d be

es

tabl

ishe

d

Ass

ess

PMO

str

uctu

re a

nd re

sour

cing

, to

assu

re e

ffec

tive

and

supp

ort,

scal

ed to

the

size

and

nee

ds o

f the

pro

ject

Proj

ect d

eliv

erab

les

Ther

e is

not

a p

roce

ss to

adm

inis

ter

achi

evem

ent o

f del

iver

able

sFo

rmal

pro

cess

es fo

r rec

ordi

ng

achi

evem

ent o

f del

iver

able

s of

the

proj

ect

and

its e

lem

ents

are

est

ablis

hed

Revi

ew p

roce

sses

for r

ecor

ding

and

ap

prov

ing

achi

evem

ent o

f del

iver

able

s,

whi

ch m

ay b

e lin

ked

to c

ontr

actu

al

paym

ent p

roce

sses


23

Elem

ent 6

. Pla

nnin

g an

d sc

hedu

ling:

app

ropr

iate

ly d

etai

led

exec

utio

n st

rate

gies

, pla

ns a

nd s

ched

ules

Are

a o

f re

view

Ris

kC

on

tro

lA

ud

it m

eth

od

s in

clu

de

Inte

grat

ed

appr

oach

to

plan

ning

Plan

ning

pro

cess

es a

re n

ot c

onsi

sten

t with

th

ose

of th

e or

gani

satio

n or

oth

er p

arts

of

prog

ram

me

Plan

ning

pro

cess

es a

nd a

ctiv

ities

are

de

fined

at h

igh

leve

l with

in th

e or

gani

satio

n an

d w

ith s

take

hold

ers

Ass

ess

plan

ning

pro

cess

es fo

r con

sist

ency

w

ith p

roje

ct a

nd o

rgan

isat

ion

requ

irem

ents

and

with

sta

keho

lder

s

Hig

h le

vel p

lann

ing

Ther

e is

not

a h

igh

leve

l pla

n in

pla

ce fo

r th

e w

hole

pro

ject

life

cyc

leO

rgan

isat

ion

boar

d ap

prov

al o

f hig

h le

vel

plan

and

sch

edul

e th

roug

h bu

sine

ss c

ase

proc

ess

Hig

h le

vel p

lan

and

sche

dule

use

d as

bas

is

of p

rogr

ess

and

cost

con

trol

and

m

anag

emen

t

Revi

ew h

igh

leve

l pla

n an

d re

port

ing

agai

nst i

t to

orga

nisa

tion

boar

d

Con

firm

that

the

high

leve

l pla

n is

re

gula

rly u

pdat

ed to

acc

ount

for c

hang

es

to s

cope

Det

aile

d pl

anni

ngM

ore

deta

iled

plan

s ar

e no

t alig

ned

to

high

leve

l pla

nsFo

rmal

pla

nnin

g pr

oces

s fo

r det

aile

d pl

anni

ng h

eld

at p

roje

ct b

oard

leve

l

Reco

ncili

atio

n pr

oces

s be

twee

n hi

gh le

vel

and

deta

iled

plan

s

Ass

ess

gove

rnan

ce a

rran

gem

ents

for

plan

ning

pro

cess

es

Revi

ew d

etai

led

plan

and

repo

rtin

g w

ithin

or

gani

satio

n

Defi

ning

act

iviti

esU

ncle

ar m

ilest

ones

, wor

k br

eakd

own

stru

ctur

e (W

BS)

and

dat

esEn

sure

cle

arly

defi

ned

desc

riptio

ns o

f de

liver

able

s an

d re

alis

tic p

lan

for

achi

evem

ent

Reco

ncili

atio

n be

twee

n de

taile

d pl

anni

ng

proc

ess

and

activ

ity a

nd re

sour

ce

sche

dule

s

Ensu

re a

ppro

pria

te s

kill

leve

l of p

roje

ct

team

(inc

ludi

ng tr

aini

ng if

requ

ired)

Ass

ess

plan

ning

, rev

iew

and

repo

rtin

g pr

oces

ses

to a

ssur

e cl

arity

and

co

mpr

ehen

sive

ness

to p

roje

ct te

am a

nd

stak

ehol

ders

as

requ

ired


24

Are

a o

f re

view

Ris

kC

on

tro

lA

ud

it m

eth

od

s in

clu

de

Sche

dule

inte

grity

Unr

ealis

tic a

ssum

ptio

ns m

ade

in re

spec

t of

tim

e an

d co

st (t

his

coul

d be

by

the

proj

ect t

eam

or s

pons

or)

Form

al re

view

of b

asis

of p

lann

ing

assu

mpt

ions

in re

spec

t of t

ime

and

cost

Ensu

re th

at re

alis

tic ti

mes

cale

s ha

ve b

een

agre

ed a

t boa

rd le

vel

Revi

ew b

asis

of p

lann

ing

assu

mpt

ions

in

clud

ing

taki

ng e

xper

t adv

ice

to a

ssur

e th

at th

ose

assu

mpt

ions

are

real

istic

Prog

ress

repo

rtin

gPr

ogre

ss re

port

s ar

e no

t pro

vide

d or

ta

ilore

d to

the

appr

opria

te le

vel w

ithin

the

orga

nisa

tion

App

ropr

iate

ly d

etai

led

plan

ning

and

pr

ogre

ss re

port

s ar

e pr

ovid

ed a

s pe

r the

pr

ojec

t’s g

over

nanc

e st

ruct

ure

and

proj

ect

assu

ranc

e re

quire

men

ts

Ass

ess

arra

ngem

ents

for e

ffec

tive

gove

rnan

ce o

f pro

ject

, inc

ludi

ng re

port

ing

and

assu

ranc

e re

quire

men

ts

Ensu

re th

at re

port

ing

is b

eing

im

plem

ente

d as

per

the

gove

rnan

ce

and

assu

ranc

e re

com

men

datio

ns

Cha

nge

Proj

ect c

hang

es a

re m

ade

with

out e

arly

w

arni

ng, f

orm

al d

ocum

enta

tion

or c

lear

de

cisi

on-m

akin

g

Cha

nge

proc

esse

s m

ake

prov

isio

n fo

r ea

rly w

arni

ng o

f cha

nges

and

thei

r im

pact

s

Ass

ess

all l

ogs

for r

isks

, iss

ues,

act

ions

and

de

cisi

ons

and

ensu

re th

at c

ost a

nd ti

me

impl

icat

ions

are

bei

ng c

aptu

red

and

that

an

y si

gnifi

cant

or s

ensi

tive

deci

sion

s ar

e be

ing

reco

rded

.

Com

mis

sion

ing

Requ

irem

ents

for n

ew a

nd c

hang

ed

serv

ice

prov

isio

n ha

ve n

ot b

een

plan

ned

for

Plan

ning

for c

omm

issi

onin

g of

futu

re

serv

ice

prov

isio

n fo

rms

part

of o

vera

ll lif

e cy

cle

proj

ect p

lann

ing

Revi

ew c

omm

issi

onin

g pl

ans

incl

udin

g tr

aini

ng a

nd re

sour

cing

, to

assu

re fi

t with

ch

ange

d se

rvic

e pr

ovis

ion

Ensu

re th

at th

ere

is a

pro

cess

in p

lace

for

cont

inua

l em

bedd

ing

of

cha

nge

Proj

ect c

ompl

etio

n an

d cl

osur

ePr

oces

ses

for c

ompl

etio

n, h

ando

ver a

nd

proj

ect c

losu

re h

ave

not b

een

plan

ned

for

or a

re u

ncle

ar

Plan

ning

for c

ompl

etio

n, h

ando

ver a

nd

proj

ect c

losu

re is

par

t of p

roje

ct p

lann

ing

proc

ess

from

the

outs

et

Revi

ew a

ppro

ved

busi

ness

cas

e an

d su

bseq

uent

com

plet

ion,

han

dove

r and

pr

ojec

t clo

sure

pla

ns a

nd p

roce

sses


25

Elem

ent 7

. Per

form

ance

and

ben

efits

man

agem

ent:

to p

rovi

de a

ssur

ance

that

the

bene

fits

stat

ed in

the

busi

ness

cas

e ca

n be

de

liver

ed w

ithin

the

reso

urce

s m

ade

avai

labl

e

Are

a o

f re

view

Ris

kC

on

tro

lA

ud

it m

eth

od

s in

clu

de

Proj

ect b

enefi

ts

stra

tegy

Ther

e is

not

a p

roje

ct b

enefi

ts s

trat

egy

A b

enefi

ts s

trat

egy

form

s pa

rt o

f the

ap

prov

ed b

usin

ess

case

, and

is c

ontr

olle

d an

d m

easu

red

agai

nst a

bas

elin

e

Revi

ew a

ppro

ved

busi

ness

cas

e fo

r be

nefit

s st

rate

gy, a

nd re

view

sub

sequ

ent

repo

rts

agai

nst i

t and

che

ck th

at m

etric

s ar

e in

pla

ce

Alig

nmen

t of

bene

fits

with

or

gani

satio

n st

rate

gy

Proj

ect b

enefi

ts d

o no

t alig

n w

ith

orga

nisa

tion

stra

tegy

or o

bjec

tives

Alig

nmen

t of p

roje

ct b

enefi

ts w

ith

orga

nisa

tion’

s st

rate

gy fo

rms

part

of

appr

oved

bus

ines

s ca

se a

nd is

con

trol

led

agai

nst

Con

tinua

l rev

iew

of b

usin

ess

case

at k

ey

proj

ect s

tage

s

Revi

ew a

ppro

ved

busi

ness

cas

e fo

r st

rate

gic

fit o

f ben

efits

Che

ck th

at b

usin

ess

case

is re

view

ed a

t ea

ch p

roje

ct g

atew

ay

Acc

ount

abili

ty fo

r ac

hiev

emen

t of

bene

fits

Acc

ount

abili

ty fo

r ach

ieve

men

t of b

enefi

ts

is n

ot a

lloca

ted

to th

e pr

ojec

t spo

nsor

Proj

ect s

pons

or is

reco

rded

in a

ppro

ved

busi

ness

cas

e as

bei

ng a

ccou

ntab

le fo

r ac

hiev

emen

t of b

enefi

ts, a

nd is

an

appr

opria

te p

erso

n to

be

acco

unta

ble

Acc

ount

abili

ty s

urvi

ves

proj

ect c

ompl

etio

n an

d ha

ndov

er

Revi

ew a

ppro

ved

busi

ness

cas

e an

d PI

D

for g

over

nanc

e ar

rang

emen

ts a

nd a

sses

s w

heth

er th

ese

are

exta

nt

Ass

ess

arra

ngem

ents

for s

urvi

val o

f ac

coun

tabi

lity

Bene

fits

real

isat

ion

plan

ning

No

bene

fits

real

isat

ion

plan

A fo

rmal

ben

efits

real

isat

ion

plan

ning

pr

oces

s is

est

ablis

hed,

repo

rtin

g to

or

gani

satio

n an

d pr

ojec

t boa

rds

Revi

ew a

ppro

ved

busi

ness

cas

e an

d as

sess

whe

ther

a b

enefi

ts re

alis

atio

n pl

an

has

resu

lted

from

it


26


Are

a o

f re

view

Ris

kC

on

tro

lA

ud

it m

eth

od

s in

clu

de

Mea

sure

men

t of

bene

fits

Proj

ect b

enefi

ts a

re n

ot e

xpre

ssed

in

mea

sura

ble

form

Proj

ect b

enefi

ts a

re e

xpre

ssed

in

mea

sura

ble

form

whi

ch c

an b

e ba

selin

ed

Perf

orm

ance

is tr

acke

d ag

ains

t ben

efits

re

alis

atio

n pl

an

Bene

fits

real

isat

ion

mea

sure

men

t co

ntin

ues

thro

ugho

ut th

e pr

ojec

t life

cyc

le

and

appr

opria

te a

ctio

n ta

ken

to p

rese

rve

and

cont

inue

to e

mbe

d be

nefit

s as

re

quire

d

Revi

ew a

ppro

ved

busi

ness

cas

e an

d be

nefit

s re

alis

atio

n pl

an fo

r ext

ent o

f m

easu

rabl

e be

nefit

s, w

here

thes

e ar

e co

nsis

tent

with

the

proj

ect o

bjec

tives

Revi

ew if

the

proj

ect i

s ab

le to

de

mon

stra

te th

at it

is d

eliv

erin

g bo

th

outp

uts

and

outc

omes

(ach

ieve

men

t of

bene

fits

real

isat

ion)

Bene

fits

real

isat

ion

revi

ew a

nd

post

-pro

ject

ev

alua

tion

Prov

isio

n no

t mad

e to

revi

ew b

enefi

ts

real

isat

ion

nor t

o ev

alua

te p

roje

ct

perf

orm

ance

Bene

fits

real

isat

ion

revi

ew is

pla

nned

for

from

the

outs

et, b

ased

on

appr

oved

bu

sine

ss c

ase

Post

-pro

ject

eva

luat

ions

are

pla

nned

from

th

e ou

tset

to ta

ke p

lace

at a

ppro

pria

te

times

, par

ticul

arly

bef

ore

th

e pr

ojec

t tea

m is

bro

ken

up

Revi

ew a

ppro

ved

busi

ness

cas

e fo

r pr

ovis

ion

for b

enefi

ts re

alis

atio

n pl

anni

ng

and

man

agem

ent

Revi

ew if

reso

urce

is in

pla

ce to

ens

ure

that

ben

efits

real

isat

ion

plan

ca

n be

pro

perly

impl

emen

ted

Ass

ess

arra

ngem

ents

for p

ost-

proj

ect

eval

uatio

ns a

nd le

gacy

lear

ning

(whe

re

appr

opria

te).

Suc

h ar

rang

emen

ts s

houl

d be

con

sist

ent w

ith c

omm

erci

al

confi

dent

ialit

y re

quire

men

ts o

f the

or

gani

satio

n

Ass

ess

that

pro

ject

has

a p

lan

for

man

agin

g tr

ansi

tion

to ‘b

usin

ess-

as-u

sual

to

ens

ure

that

ben

efits

are

not

lost

’


27

Elem

ent 8

. Sta

keho

lder

man

agem

ent a

nd c

omm

unic

atio

ns: a

ll st

akeh

olde

rs a

ffec

ted

by th

e pr

ojec

t hav

e be

en id

entifi

ed a

nd a

re

appr

opria

tely

invo

lved

Are

a o

f re

view

Ris

kC

on

tro

lA

ud

it m

eth

od

s in

clu

de

Stak

ehol

der

man

agem

ent

stra

tegy

A s

take

hold

er m

anag

emen

t str

ateg

y ha

s no

t bee

n es

tabl

ishe

dA

sta

keho

lder

man

agem

ent s

trat

egy

form

s pa

rt o

f the

app

rove

d bu

sine

ss c

ase,

en

surin

g du

e co

nsid

erat

ion

is g

iven

to th

e re

quire

men

ts o

f all

stak

ehol

ders

Ensu

re s

uffic

ient

reso

urce

in p

lace

to

deliv

ery

stak

ehol

der m

anag

emen

t str

ateg

y

Revi

ew a

ppro

ved

busi

ness

cas

e fo

r st

akeh

olde

r man

agem

ent s

trat

egy

requ

irem

ents

, and

ass

ess

resu

lting

pr

oces

ses

and

activ

ities

Revi

ew th

at s

uffic

ient

reso

urce

is in

pla

ce

to a

ddre

ss s

take

hold

er m

anag

emen

t

Com

mun

icat

ion

stra

tegy

A c

omm

unic

atio

n st

rate

gy h

as n

ot b

een

esta

blis

hed

A c

omm

unic

atio

ns s

trat

egy

is e

stab

lishe

d,

to ta

ke a

ccou

nt o

f the

nee

d fo

r all

stak

ehol

ders

to b

e in

form

ed to

the

nece

ssar

y ex

tent

Revi

ew a

ppro

ved

busi

ness

cas

e fo

r co

mm

unic

atio

ns s

trat

egy

requ

irem

ents

an

d as

sess

resu

lting

pro

cess

es a

nd

activ

ities

Iden

tifica

tion

of

stak

ehol

ders

Not

all

stak

ehol

ders

hav

e be

en id

entifi

edSt

akeh

olde

rs m

appe

d to

reco

rd le

vels

of

influ

ence

, int

eres

t and

invo

lvem

ent,

and

capa

city

to d

isru

pt p

rogr

ess

Revi

ew s

take

hold

er m

anag

emen

t pla

n fo

r m

appi

ng p

roce

sses

and

com

plet

enes

s

Revi

ew p

roce

ss fo

r man

agin

g m

ost

influ

entia

l/in

tere

sted

sta

keho

lder

s

Stak

ehol

der

man

agem

ent p

lan

Stak

ehol

der i

nter

ests

are

not

iden

tified

Stak

ehol

der m

anag

emen

t pla

n es

tabl

ishe

d

Polic

ies

to e

ngag

e st

akeh

olde

rs

com

men

sura

te w

ith th

eir n

eeds

are

es

tabl

ishe

d

Regu

lar r

epor

ting

to s

take

hold

ers

Revi

ew s

take

hold

er m

anag

emen

t pla

n an

d su

bseq

uent

repo

rts

for p

olic

ies

and

activ

ities

to e

ngag

e st

akeh

olde

rs

Com

mun

icat

ion

plan

Ther

e is

not

a s

truc

ture

d co

mm

unic

atio

ns

fram

ewor

k an

d pl

an fo

r the

pro

ject

Com

mun

icat

ions

str

uctu

re a

nd p

lan

esta

blis

hed

to d

efine

com

mun

icat

ion

requ

irem

ents

for t

he p

roje

ct a

nd

orga

nisa

tion

and

how

thes

e w

ill b

e di

strib

uted

Revi

ew c

omm

unic

atio

ns p

lan

and

subs

eque

nt re

port

s fo

r pol

icie

s an

d ac

tions

to c

omm

unic

ate

with

sta

keho

lder

s an

d ot

hers


28

Are

a o

f re

view

Ris

kC

on

tro

lA

ud

it m

eth

od

s in

clu

de

Inte

grat

ion

with

co

ntra

ctor

s’

com

mun

icat

ions

st

rate

gies

and

pla

ns

Und

esira

ble

rele

ase

or re

tent

ion

of p

roje

ct

info

rmat

ion

Agr

eed

prot

ocol

s fo

r con

trac

tors

’ co

mm

unic

atio

ns fo

rm p

art o

f con

trac

tual

do

cum

enta

tion

Join

t com

mun

icat

ions

pla

n de

velo

ped,

to

be o

pera

ted

unde

r con

trol

of p

roje

ct

man

ager

Revi

ew c

ontr

actu

al d

ocum

ents

to a

sses

s ex

tent

and

con

sist

ency

of p

roto

cols

be

twee

n co

ntra

ctin

g pa

rtie

s on

co

mm

unic

atio

n

Revi

ew jo

int c

omm

unic

atio

ns p

lan

and

its

gove

rnan

ce a

rran

gem

ents

Elem

ent 9

. Org

anis

atio

nal c

apab

ility

and

cul

ture

:peo

ple,

beh

avio

urs,

team

s, p

roce

sses

, sys

tem

s an

d th

e w

orki

ng e

nviro

nmen

t in

clud

ing

the

orga

nisa

tion’

s cu

lture

Are

a o

f re

view

Ris

kC

on

tro

lA

ud

it m

eth

od

s in

clu

de

Peop

le a

nd s

taffi

ngPr

ojec

t sta

ff re

sour

ce re

quire

men

ts a

re

unpl

anne

dPr

ojec

t sta

ffing

pla

n is

est

ablis

hed

as p

art

of a

ppro

ved

busi

ness

cas

e, a

nd

achi

evem

ent i

s re

port

ed to

org

anis

atio

n an

d pr

ojec

t boa

rds

Revi

ew a

ppro

ved

busi

ness

cas

e an

d PI

D

to a

ssur

e st

affin

g pl

an h

as b

een

esta

blis

hed

and

is re

port

ed o

n un

der

gove

rnan

ce a

rran

gem

ents

Team

wor

kTe

ams

are

not i

nteg

rate

d su

ffici

ently

to

supp

ort p

roje

ct a

nd o

rgan

isat

ion

obje

ctiv

es

Emph

asis

by

proj

ect m

anag

er o

n en

surin

g st

aff r

esou

rces

form

eff

ectiv

e te

ams

who

se p

erfo

rman

ce is

sub

ject

to re

view

Dis

cuss

with

pro

ject

man

ager

the

stru

ctur

e an

d pe

rfor

man

ce o

f the

pro

ject

te

am(s

), an

d ro

les

and

resp

onsi

bilit

ies

Cul

ture

Proj

ect o

r con

trac

tor c

ultu

re d

oes

not a

lign

with

that

of o

rgan

isat

ion

Inte

grat

ed c

ultu

re re

quire

men

ts s

tate

men

t fo

rms

part

of b

usin

ess

case

or c

ultu

ral

expe

ctat

ions

incl

uded

in c

ontr

actu

al

docu

men

ts

Revi

ew a

ppro

ved

busi

ness

cas

e an

d co

ntra

ctua

l doc

umen

ts fo

r det

ails

of

cultu

ral a

rran

gem

ents

incl

udin

g go

vern

ance

arr

ange

men

ts


29

Are

a o

f re

view

Ris

kC

on

tro

lA

ud

it m

eth

od

s in

clu

de

Proc

esse

s an

d sy

stem

sPr

oces

ses

and

syst

ems

in o

pera

tion

do n

ot

enha

nce

deliv

ery

or d

eliv

erab

ility

of

proj

ect a

nd it

s be

nefit

s

Revi

ew o

f all

syst

ems

to e

nsur

e fle

xibl

e flo

w is

mai

ntai

ned

and

disr

uptio

n to

ac

hiev

emen

t of o

bjec

tives

is m

inim

ised

Dis

cuss

with

pro

ject

man

agem

ent a

nd

revi

ew to

ass

ure

flexi

bilit

y is

mai

ntai

ned

and

disr

uptio

n ca

used

by

inap

prop

riate

sy

stem

s is

min

imis

ed

Wor

king

en

viro

nmen

tSu

itabl

e pr

emis

es/l

ocat

ions

to w

ork

from

fo

r eff

ectiv

e de

liver

y ar

e no

t sup

plie

d or

ot

herw

ise

are

not a

vaila

ble

for s

taff

and

ot

her r

esou

rces

Requ

irem

ent f

or s

uita

ble

wor

king

en

viro

nmen

t/s

in a

ppro

pria

te lo

catio

ns to

be

sta

ted

in b

usin

ess

case

and

in

cont

ract

ual d

ocum

ents

as

nece

ssar

y

Com

plia

nce

with

sta

tuto

ry a

nd o

ther

re

quire

men

ts a

sses

sed

End

of p

roje

ct re

leas

e of

acc

omm

odat

ion

and

faci

litie

s pl

anne

d fr

om th

e ou

tset

Revi

ew a

ppro

ved

busi

ness

cas

e an

d PI

D

for p

rovi

sion

bei

ng m

ade

in re

spec

t of

suita

ble

wor

king

env

ironm

ent a

nd

acco

mm

odat

ion,

in c

onju

nctio

n w

ith

revi

ew o

f sta

ffing

and

oth

er p

roje

ct

reso

urce

pla

ns

Lead

ersh

ipU

nide

ntifi

ed o

r ine

ffec

tive

proj

ect

lead

ersh

ip d

oes

not a

llow

pro

ject

and

its

staf

f to

flour

ish

Lead

ersh

ip a

sses

smen

t aud

its, r

elat

ed to

th

e ou

tcom

es o

f pro

ject

ass

uran

ce

activ

ities

, sho

uld

be in

stig

ated

to im

prov

e pe

rfor

man

ce o

f pro

ject

man

agem

ent a

nd

staf

f

Ensu

re s

pons

or a

nd b

oard

fully

un

ders

tand

thei

r pro

ject

role

s

Revi

ew o

utco

mes

of l

eade

rshi

p as

sess

men

t aud

its a

nd s

ubse

quen

t ac

tions

, to

asse

ss h

ow p

erfo

rman

ce o

f pr

ojec

t man

agem

ent i

s im

prov

ing

Adm

inis

trat

ive

and

IT re

sour

ces

Adm

inis

trat

ive

and

IT s

ervi

ces,

sof

twar

e an

d eq

uipm

ent d

o no

t eff

ectiv

ely

supp

ort

deliv

ery

of th

e pr

ojec

t obj

ectiv

es

Prov

isio

n of

eff

ectiv

e ad

min

istr

ativ

e an

d IT

re

sour

ces

form

s pa

rt o

f app

rove

d bu

sine

ss

case

Ava

ilabl

e ad

min

istr

ativ

e an

d IT

reso

urce

s ar

e su

bjec

t to

revi

ew, w

ith th

e ob

ject

of

best

sup

port

ing

achi

evem

ent o

f pro

ject

ob

ject

ives

Revi

ew a

ppro

ved

busi

ness

cas

e an

d PI

D,

to a

sses

s ex

tent

to w

hich

adm

inis

trat

ive

and

IT re

sour

ces

have

bee

n pr

ovid

ed, a

nd

are

subj

ect t

o re

view


30

Elem

ent 1

0. S

ocia

l res

pons

ibili

ty a

nd s

usta

inab

ility

: man

agin

g th

e im

pact

of p

roje

ct d

eliv

ery

on th

e so

cial

, phy

sica

l, ec

olog

ical

an

d ec

onom

ic e

nviro

nmen

t inc

ludi

ng h

ealth

and

saf

ety

Are

a o

f re

view

Ris

kC

on

tro

lA

ud

it m

eth

od

s in

clu

de

Soci

al re

spon

sibi

lity

and

risks

Proj

ect s

cope

, del

iver

y an

d be

nefit

s ar

e no

t alig

ned

with

the

orga

nisa

tion’

s re

puta

tiona

l ris

k or

soc

ial r

espo

nsib

ility

ap

petit

e

Org

anis

atio

n bo

ard

shou

ld a

sses

s re

puta

tiona

l ris

ks to

the

orga

nisa

tion

durin

g th

e pr

oces

s of

app

rovi

ng th

e bu

sine

ss c

ase

Proj

ect-

rela

ted

repu

tatio

nal r

isk

shou

ld b

e pl

aced

on

the

orga

nisa

tions

risk

regi

ster

an

d be

sub

ject

to re

view

as

requ

ired

Ass

ess

cons

ider

atio

n by

org

anis

atio

n bo

ard

durin

g ap

prov

al o

f bus

ines

s ca

se

proc

ess

Revi

ew o

rgan

isat

ion

risk

regi

ster

for

proj

ect-

rela

ted

pote

ntia

l cau

ses

of

repu

tatio

nal r

isk

Hea

lth, s

afet

y an

d se

curit

yH

ealth

, saf

ety

and

secu

rity

man

agem

ent

syst

ems

have

not

bee

n de

velo

ped

or

impl

emen

ted

Hea

lth, s

afet

y an

d se

curit

y re

quire

men

ts

are

subj

ect o

f a c

ompr

ehen

sive

m

anag

emen

t pla

n, p

rogr

ess

agai

nst w

hich

is

repo

rted

to o

rgan

isat

ion

and

proj

ect

boar

ds

Revi

ew h

ealth

saf

ety

and

secu

rity

plan

ning

pr

oces

ses,

and

sub

sequ

ent r

epor

ts to

or

gani

satio

n an

d pr

ojec

t boa

rds


31

Appendix 2

Comparison of project audit elements for review, with assurance measures

toolkit categories(see para 2.2.1)

Project audit elements

Element Description Comparable toolkit criteria – ref:

1 Project definition and requirements management – clear and controlled baseline requirements, objectives, success criteria, business case, terms of reference, contracts and benefits realisation.

1 Client and scope

2 Project organisation and governance – the processes to align the interests and strategic direction of sponsors and stakeholders.

10 Governance

3 Risks management – management of risks and opportunities through the life cycle of the project.

2 Risks and opportunities

4 Commercial, procurement and commissioning management – procurement and contract management, financial controls and engagement with commissioning processes.

5 Supply chain

5 Configuration management, project and change controls and PMO – processes and systems to administer and control the project and changes to it.

6 Solution

6 Project planning and scheduling – appropriately detailed execution strategies, plans and schedules.

3 Planning and scheduling

7 Performance and benefits management – to provide assurance that the benefits stated in the business case can be delivered within the resources made available.

9 Performance


32


Element Description Comparable toolkit criteria – ref:

8 Stakeholder management and communications – all stakeholders affected by the project have been identified and are appropriately involved.

1 Client and scope;

10 Governance

9 Organisational capability and culture – people, behaviours, teams and the working environment including the organisation’s culture.

4 Organisational capability and culture

10 Social responsibility and sustainability – managing the impact of project delivery on the social, physical, ecological and economic environment including health and safety.

8 Social responsibility and sustainability

Toolkit criteria

Criteria Description

1 Client and scope – clear and controlled baseline requirements, objectives, success criteria, business case, terms of reference, contracts and benefits realisation.

2 Risks and opportunities – management of risk and opportunity through the life cycle of the project.

3 Planning and scheduling – appropriately detailed execution strategies, plans and schedules.

4 Organisational capability and culture – people, behaviours, teams, processes, systems and the working environment.

5 Supply chain – procurement processes, engagement with, and capability of, both the internal and external supply chain.

6 Solution – the deliverables and outcomes that meet the client requirements. This includes product and/or service quality and the impact of the finished product or service on the social, physical and economic environment.

7 Finance – commercial management and administration.

8 Social responsibility and sustainability – managing the impact of project delivery on the social, physical, ecological and economic environment; this includes health and safety.

9 Performance – measuring all facets of performance against the baseline requirements, variance analysis and management action.

10 Governance – the processes to align the interests and strategic direction of sponsors and stakeholders.

Criteria are taken from the APM publication, Measures for Assuring Projects: APM Toolkit (2016)


Documents

Association for Project Management€¦ · 2.3 Evaluation and reporting 11 2.3.1 Evaluation 11 2.3.2 Reporting 12 2.4 Follow-up 13 2.5 Benefits evaluation 13 2.6 Legacy and lessons