Question

You might agree with me that policy deployment and project portfolio management (PPM) go hand-in-hand. At ProjectLink we place much emphasis on "balanced portfolio" as a concept. By this we mean that in a matrix and project-based organisation it has to be ensured that the mix of projects in the business at any given point in time optimally aligns to policy (i.e. vision, mission, values, objectives, etc.) Such an approach means that projects that have to be killed because of changing circumstances (as in change in legislation, erosion of its business case due to any single or a combination of factors, emergencies, etc.) must be terminated expediently, projects that are waiting in the pipeline must have a priority status, projects that have to be realigned must be able to undergo the necessary realignment effectively and efficiently, etc. The link between portfolio level objectives with portfolio success factors that are achieved through individual projects and points out how contributes to strategic fit, use of synergies, etc. As you have probably experienced many times in your dealings with projects, often projects within a single organisation compete for the same resources and this then logically leads to conflict that could be very harmful to the organisation if not managed correctly. We try to avoid this through optimal portfolio management, which then seems to serve the same function as "quality policy deployment" which has the aim of reducing such types of conflict.

Would you agree with me that portfolio balancing is essentially about maintaining the optimal balance of the most optimal projects (i.e. portfolio quality) and that this is a logical extension of or perhaps a practical manifestation of policy deployment? I would like to hear your thoughts in this regard.

Reference style: Harvard style