A study of numerous organisations in Australia has identified that the implementation of many project management systems for portfolio administration and management, results in failure to realise the desired outcomes and benefits.

Recent recognition by business of the importance of effective project portfolio management, has led to a growing trend to implement Enterprise Project Management toolsets at great expense and effort with the expectation of generating comprehensive project and cost management reports for improved control and decision making for a portfolio of projects.

This paper investigates the appropriateness of the information recorded in project management systems in relation to portfolio management requirements and decision making criteria. The study reviews the different perspectives of senior managers and project managers in relation to the administration of a portfolio of projects as well as the type of information required for each role.

This underlying difference results in a mis-match between senior management's reporting requirements and that which is provided by 'enterprise-wide' project management systems used to report on the portfolio of projects.

In addition to the selection of and implementation of any project management tool to enable portfolio administration and reporting, several factors need to be considered:

• People - with specific focus on training, maturity, accountability
• Processes - that are simple and takes into account existing processes
• Tools - must address the needs of those managing the portfolio
• Information - must be available, appropriate, accurate and timely
• Organisational structure - must encourage the achievement of shared objectives

Research carried out across a broad range of medium and large organisations has revealed that many of the primary 'failings' of portfolio reporting observed can be addressed with:

• Development of reporting processes that allow for the inclusion of project management commentary and forecasts of future risks and events in addition to standard reporting processes
• Inclusion of senior management reporting criteria (service delivery, risk, asset capacity)
• Aggregation only of related quantitative data, for example the total expenditure across a program of works
• Improving the ability to provide qualitative reporting information such as risk mitigations and benefits realisation

However in order to facilitate these ideas, most of the traditional 'stand alone' project management systems are very restrictive and prevent the application of the above recommendations. Fortunately, with the advent web based systems, restrictive project management tools and reporting systems are becoming a thing of the past. Many project management tools are now becoming available in a format that allows for maximum flexibility and configurability to suit the exact needs on the organisation.

Examples of new web based tools that are better adapted to portfolio administration and can aligned asset management objectives include Project Radar and Primavera P6.

Primavera P6 caters for the top end of the market and is particularly suited to project based organisations. Eg, large construction firms.

Project Radar on the other hand is better suited to medium to large organisations where projects are there to deliver specific strategic objectives and the majority of day to day operations are not carried out on a project basis. In these organisations projects typically do not require detailed resource plans or complex program schedules. Project Radar provides a top-down perspective of projects and proposals.

The ability to configure these tools to suit the way the organisation works or wishes to work has enormous benefits and can prevent staff resistance and unnecessary process re-engineering.

In addition, due to the accessibility and flexibility of a Web based format, visibility of project progress has never been better for all project team members and interested stakeholders at all levels.

Some of these new tools are structured so that they can be 'up and running' in a matter of hours with only a high level view of the portfolio loaded, further enhancing opportunities for collaboration and communication with all stakeholders.

The above article is an extract from a paper to be presented in July 2008 at the AACE International's 52^nd Annual Meeting & ICEC's 6th World Congress on Cost Engineering, Project Management and Quantity Surveying in Toronto, Canada.