Written by: Domonkos Végh, PMP, Partner, Senior Consultant
Project-based working has become the dominant approach in most organisations. Strategic initiatives, digitalisation, product development, organisational development - all take the form of projects. The question for most organisations and managers is whether the organisation can deliver these in a structured, transparent and business-controlled way.
Table of contents
1. Typical organisational problems in project management
Decades of experience in organisational project management, feedback from project managers and international surveys show that similar patterns emerge in most organisations:
1. Too many parallel projects. Capacities are fragmented, focus is weakened, leading to slippages, quality compromises and strategic loss of results.
2. Approval points and Stage Gate processes are not formalised. The lack of structured decision control means that projects can go ahead without business justification and risk review.
3. Project managers have considerable responsibility and limited decision-making authority. The imbalance between accountability and decision-making power slows down reaction times and increases operational tensions.
4. Change management is ad hoc. Uncontrolled scope change causes cost overruns, schedule slippage and priority confusion.
5. Lack of involvement of business analysts (BAs), superficial preparation for project launch. Unclear requirements lead to uncertain scope and subsequent redesign cycles.
6. There is no follow-up of the post-closure back-testing and profit realisation. The organisation does not receive feedback on whether the project has delivered the intended business value.
7. Planning and estimation inaccuracies are repeated. Due to the lack of analysis of historical data, the organisation makes the same underestimation errors over and over again.
8. The scope is not sufficiently defined. The lack of clarity of objectives and boundaries leads to constant reinterpretation and conflicts between stakeholders.
9. Methodological inconsistencies appear. The ill-considered tool choices of what are called “hybrid” but are in fact unstructured agile-traditional mixes create ruptures in implementation and open a gap between what is planned and what actually works. The lack of a coherent operational framework creates a lack of accountability and diverging expectations across the team.
10. Reporting and administration rates are disproportionately high. Excessive documentation reduces the focus of project managers on real value-creating activities.
International research confirms that these are widespread phenomena:
- A Project Management Institute Pulse of the Profession reports that a significant proportion of projects fail to achieve their original purpose and a significant proportion of project costs are lost due to inadequate requirements management and scope management.
- According to McKinsey & Company research, a significant proportion of large IT projects (around 45%) end up cost overruns and schedule slippage; unstructured governance and insufficient preparation are key risk factors.
- For years, the Standish Group's CHAOS reports have shown that a significant proportion of projects only partially meet their original business objectives.
These data show a clear pattern: project problems have systemic roots.
2. Project portfolio level pain points
A project portfolio is a structured set of all the organisation's ongoing and planned projects that collectively serve strategic objectives and are managed according to resource and prioritisation decisions. It is often at the portfolio level that difficulties first become visible to senior management:
- There is a lack of transparency, it is not clear which project is in which status.
- Resource allocation conflicts arise, often with hidden or even visible project manager or team workloads above 100%.
- Project prioritisation is shaped by organisational political dynamics or, worse, is entirely reactive and contingent. The value creation dimension is not even present in a structured form when examining priorities.
- Dependencies and impacts between projects are difficult to see.
- Strategic fit cannot be measured objectively, the organisation argues intuitively for the fit of individual project initiatives to the strategy.
According to surveys by the Project Management Institute, organisations with low portfolio maturity report significantly higher rates of project interruptions and failure to meet strategic goals.
McKinsey & Company's research also shows that a significant proportion of strategic initiatives lose momentum during implementation because the organisation lacks a comprehensive portfolio-level control mechanism.
The perception at management level is: high project activity, limited strategic output.
3. Roots - the systemic factors
There are often deeper structural causes behind the phenomena described in the previous chapters. There is a wide range of areas to explore, but it is typically worth looking in more depth at the following, highlighting some typical bad patterns and phenomena:
1. Governance and strategic fit. The lack of formalisation of decision-making mechanisms and the lack of translation of strategic objectives into project level are the causes of priority confusion. If approval points and responsibilities are not clear, the direction of projects can easily deviate from the original business intent.
2. Project implementation and methodology. The absence or inconsistent application of a methodological framework creates uncertainty. In organisations operating without a standard, coherent framework, the quality and success rates of projects vary considerably.
3. Project management and control. The lack of structured status monitoring and forecasting means that problems become visible late, and without aggregated data, management decision-making inevitably becomes reactive.
4. Finance and resource management. Lack of capacity planning leads to overload. Without integration of financial monitoring at project and portfolio level, cost risks cannot be controlled in a timely manner.
5. Risk management. Risk identification often remains a formal exercise, without any real impact and probability analysis. The lack of a forward-looking approach means that the organisation reacts rather than anticipates.
6. Stakeholders and communication. The involvement of the beneficiaries is not structured, their expectations are not clearly addressed and often not even collected. Gaps in communication channels lead to loss of trust and resistance.
7. Role and competences of the Project Management Office (PMO). The role of the PMO is often limited to administrative coordination. In the absence of a strategic mandate and a mandate for competence development, it is not able to fulfil an integrating function.
8. Technology, data and data analysis. The data are found in fragmented systems. Without an integrated PPM platform and data-driven analysis, decisions are based on a limited information base.
9. Organisational culture. The level of ownership, cooperation and willingness to learn determines the quality of project cooperation. The lack of learning from mistakes preserves recurring problems.
4. What is organisational project management maturity?
Organizational project management maturity is the ability of an organization to implement its projects within a structured governance framework, consistent methodology, data-driven control and strategic alignment, with consistent performance.
In international practice, several maturity models are known (e.g. Project Management Institute - OPM3, AXELOS - P3M3, ISACA - COBIT-based approaches), but according to our approach, organisational project management maturity is defined by the integrated development of the 9 factors presented in chapter 3.
According to research by the Project Management Institute, organisations with high levels of maturity:
- achieve their project objectives at a higher rate,
- suffer fewer cost losses,
- implement their strategic initiatives in a more stable way.
Studies by McKinsey & Company show that companies with structured governance and advanced portfolio management have significantly better strategic execution indicators, so maturity is directly linked to business performance.
5. Measuring organisational project management maturity in practice
Maturity can be assessed and evaluated using several instruments:
- Self-assessment surveys and workshops. They provide an opportunity to understand the current (as-is) state of play. Self-assessment is only useful if it is not treated as an administrative questionnaire and attempts to identify typical gaps between organisational actors (e.g. senior management sees stable and controlled operations, but project managers talk about overload and conflicting priorities). These gaps are themselves indicators of maturity. In exploring the as-is state, we look not only at whether processes are in place, but also whether they are actually being used.
- Project audits. They give an objective picture of the process and level of documentation of the projects. It is worth looking for recurring patterns in projects, such as regular scope slippage, recurring cost overruns, late risk identification. These are often organisational level problems, not individual performance issues.
- Running an organisational project quality assurance process. Ensures consistent application of standards, processes and continuous improvement through feedback from project managers and team members. Quality assurance is valuable when it is not a policing function, the aim is not to find fault but to institutionalise learning.
- Project portfolio screening. The portfolio review examines the performance of projects at organisational level and their strategic fit. It can reveal negative patterns and practices at portfolio level.
- KPI, indicator analysis. It quantifies the value delivered by projects or the achievement of various success criteria. Typical examples might include schedule achievement, cost variance, resource utilisation, profit realisation, but it is a common mistake not to examine the relationships, causal or correlational effects between KPIs in isolation.
The periodic repetition of maturity measurement provides a good basis for monitoring progress and development, but the real value lies in the continuous feedback and implementation of improvement measures.
6. How can the maturity of organisational project management be improved?
The development process is unique for each organisation, as the industry environment, size, culture and strategic priorities are different. The steps provide a framework, the specific solutions need to be tailored to the organisational specifications.
1. Diagnosis
It aims to provide an objective view of the situation along the 9 factors. It can be achieved through interviews, document analysis, KPI assessment and workshops. It is worth involving senior managers, project managers, functional managers and designated key stakeholders to ensure that the voices of different levels/areas are heard. If there is a significant perception gap between senior management and project managers, this in itself is an area for improvement.
2. Target state definition
Determining the desired level of organisational project management maturity based on benchmarking, environmental analysis, organisational capability assessment, analysis of business objectives and assessment of the organisation's risk profile. It should be added that not all organisations need to reach the highest level of maturity, the ideal target state also depends on the strategic context.
3. Governance, redesigning the governance framework
A mature governance system does not increase the number of rules, but clarifies the decision logic. In many organisations, there are apparent decision processes and approval levels, yet it is unclear who actually decides what, on the basis of what information and with what consequences. This lack of clarity leads to informal deals, backroom deals and often other hidden factors determining the fate of projects.
The lack of governance is not typically manifested in spectacular breakdowns but in constant frictions. Managers and project leaders compete for the same key resources, projects slip quietly and senior management is confronted with problems after the event.
4. Redefining the PMO role
The real value of the PMO depends on its ability to move beyond the role of administrative coordination. If it merely manages templates and collects reports, it remains a support function. But if it has a systemic view of the whole portfolio, it becomes a strategic player, not just providing data but interpreting and making sense of it.
A mature PMO aggregates and analyses at portfolio level, identifying recurring risks, capacity congestion and performance patterns. Thus, decisions are not made along project lines, but based on organisation-wide characteristics. If the PMO does not see the whole picture, it cannot draw systemic conclusions and remains an administrative rather than a strategic unit.
The PMO can play a strategic driving and integrating role by assigning the following functions:
- coordination at portfolio level,
- resource balancing,
- standardisation,
- project staff competence development.
The aim is to develop a central function that can provide data-driven decision support.
5. Standardisation of tools and reporting
For larger portfolios, individual tables with different logic can quickly distort the overall picture. Here, standardisation can be based not only on the choice of system, but also on the standardisation of data definitions. What is readiness, how to measure cost variance, when a risk is critical. The use of integrated PPM platforms will increase data quality and transparency, where AI solutions will also play an increasing role.
Some typical AI use cases:
- Risk forecasting: pattern recognition based on data from historical projects. It aims at early identification of potential slippages and cost overruns. It has the advantage of allowing proactive intervention.
- Automated status report: executive summary generated from structured data. It saves time and provides consistent information.
- Resource optimisation: propose a capacity reallocation based on an analysis of load data. Reduce congestion and increase portfolio efficiency.
- Planning support: increase estimation accuracy using historical project data, prepare WBS and project plans based on scope. Requirement lists, schedules and listing of planned tasks.
6. Change management and culture development
Structural improvements can only be sustained if they are supported by the organisational culture. If management is inconsistent in prioritising, stopping underperforming projects or making exceptions to the rules, the system becomes malleable. Maturity requires transparent communication, conscious competence development and regular learning cycles.
7. Conclusion
Developing organisational project management maturity has a direct impact on project and portfolio performance. Structured governance, data-driven operations and a strong PMO function lead to more robust strategic execution.
Increasing maturity is a long-term investment that pays off in project predictability, cost efficiency and improved organisational performance.
If you are curious about where your organisation is in the project management field, or if you want to increase the project management maturity of your organisation, contact us with confidence!
Frequently asked questions:
What is organisational project management maturity?
Organisational project management maturity is the ability of an organisation to deliver its projects with a consistent methodology, governance, data-driven control and strategic alignment, with consistent performance.
What are the most common symptoms of low project management maturity?
Typical symptoms include too many parallel projects, ad hoc change management, unformalised stage gate decisions, unclear scope, excessive administration and lack of back-testing of benefits.
Why do problems appear at portfolio level in the first place?
At the portfolio level, the lack of transparency, priority confusion, resource conflict and unmanageable interdependencies between projects are the first to be seen, and this is where senior management perceives systemic tension the earliest.
Which areas are considered to be at the root of project management maturity?
Common root causes are lack of governance and strategic fit, methodological inconsistency, weaknesses in control and forecasting, weaknesses in financial and capacity management, formalisation of risk management, and culture and communication problems.
How can organisational project management maturity be measured in practice?
Common methods include self-assessment surveys and workshops, project audits, quality assurance process, portfolio reviews, KPI and indicator analysis, supplemented by interviews and document analysis.
What is the most effective development sequence to increase maturity?
Typically, it is worth starting with a diagnosis, then defining a target state, followed by redesigning governance and decision logic, clarifying the role of the PMO, standardising tools and reporting, and finally embedding change management and culture.
What makes a PMO truly value-creating at organisational level?
A mature PMO aggregates and analyses at the portfolio level, identifies capacity and risk patterns, standardises, develops competencies and provides data-driven decision support, not just administrative coordination.
When should you start an organisational project management maturity survey?
It is worthwhile when there are persistent delays and cost overruns, too many parallel projects, resource conflicts, ad hoc prioritisation, or management does not have an objective view of the status of the portfolio and the realisation of benefits.
