I received a comment from Hanu Karavadi on the Stoutlining post from earlier this month, asking if I would explain the difference between various levels of written guidance typically found in organizations. Well Hanu, here we go.

Whenever this subject comes up (yes, it is a regular topic of discussion), I have a little drawing I use to illustrate the concept of the 'hierarchy of guidance.' (If it seems eerily familiar it may be because it was posted in one of my entries way back in November, 2007 titled, A Schedule and Process Walk into this Bar… In that post, we took a look at the differences between -- you guessed it -- process steps and schedule tasks.)

This time, let's focus more on written guidance. Although this relatively simple graphic does not fully cover all the possibilities or terms that may be applied, it helps get the basic point across that there should be some clear relationship between various forms of guidance. Much like playing Jenga, removing levels from the middle of this hierarchy can send the whole carefully stacked structure tumbling down in a topsy-turvy cacophony of disarray.

Specific to Hanu's question, policies are typically related to providing high-level governance that is broadly applied as formal and specific expectations. Policies, (along with methodologies and standards) presume that some number of options might be considered generally available; of these alternatives, there are one or more prescribed options that are considered acceptable or otherwise constitute a defined approach. From a glass-half-empty perspective, they can also identify what is excluded or NOT acceptable. Gotta love those dress codes, right? "No shoes, no shirt, no salary."

Perhaps we can use IT as a more useful example. A policy states that all IT expenditures will be charged back to the consumer organizations. This policy may drive the adoption of ITIL or CobIT as the selected approach (as a methodology or standard) to manage IT services and thus fulfill the policy.

At the next level, processes are employed to further establish the specifics of what is to be done, and by whom. To continue the example, ITIL offers a general approach and terminology for how to define and catalog IT services; processes are developed by implementing organizations to specifically lay out the underlying steps taken in this environment, along with roles and responsibilities. Note that now we are discussing organizational specifics. To put it loosely in CDPE terms, a process is a set of interrelated activities that are event-triggered where a set of specific inputs result in a specific set of outputs (results).

But all of this guidance discussed thus far has only prescribed what to do, not necessarily how. How-to guidance is established through procedures, which are step-by-step instructions for how to perform one or more tasks. For example, a procedure might define how to perform the month-end close process for determining IT service costs and charges.

Supporting these processes and procedures are best practices and guidelines. A best practice offers amplifying how-to information that reflects a proven approach; for example, a best practice that explains a the best approach for zero-balancing the IT budget each quarter. Unlike procedures or processes, which constitute what we referred to as "Shalls" in the nuclear industry, best practices and guidelines provide "Shoulds" -- they are suggested but optional approaches that infer some situational flexibility on the part of the user. Best practices tend to be more educational in nature, while guidelines are more often structured like 'soft procedures.'

There are additional levels of guidance that can be established, such as work practices and instructions, but this is where the water gets murky, since these detailed documents are often defined differently within each implementing organization. There is also the concept of 'toolbox skills' which defines a set of minimum competencies necessary in order to be able to perform a given task, often by role or performance grade, but that is for another time.

OK, there you have it -- the hierarchy of guidance, understanding that all of these things we discussed should be driven by the missions and objectives of the organization in question.

For the last several years here at Planview, our first glimpse of each new MQ ranking has resembled the opening a much awaited package; not sure exactly what it will contain, but anxious to find out. Everyone gathers around to see the results -- all eyes eagerly take in the layout of those soft yellow dots.

The first time I saw the Magic Quadrant, I was immediately struck with childhood memories of playing four-square, and this relationship has become a permanent mental association ever since. Whether during elementary school recess or out in the street, this action-packed game consumed many hours of my youth. It didn't require much room, and little in the way of equipment -- nothing more than a chunk of chalk, a ball and four willing players.

We usually used a basketball or cheap dime-store ball in the driveway, but this was simply practice for the big leagues. In the school yard, the game took on a whole new dimension by virtue of the heavy-duty red or black professional-grade play balls ceremoniously distributed each recess. To a seven-year old, these things were like playing with nothing less than rubber-coated cannonballs, and just as deadly. I'm sure the teachers simply regarded them as 'sturdy', but to us it seemed as though they weighed twenty pounds and had at least 100 psi of air pressure in them -- awesome bounce action.

While they were no doubt designed primarily for kickball, their combined features of weight, firmness and responsiveness became a lethal combination when used in more animated activities that involved personal impact. Everyone soon realized that these spherical ICBMs could take off a limb in dodge ball so their use for that particular game was banned by the UN back in the 60's. But when applied to the close-quarter combat of four-square, they were perfect. A good low transverse spike at an unprepared opponent would leave a satisfying welt, while delivery of a properly placed glancing lateral blow enabled their asphalt-roughened pebble surface to remove a layer of skin.

What, it seems I have digressed…

Anyway, in some respects, that's how I think of the MQ: corporate four-square. Highly competitive, sometimes ruthless, and greatly satisfying for those who can be a leader on this double-bifurcated rectangular field. Of the 19 vendors listed, this year finds us tightly clustered at the upper right with -- you guessed it -- three other players. On paper, the degree of separation between us is measured in scant millimeters. Functionally, perhaps the difference is even less when considered in context with the overall range of possibilities.

We are humbled by the recognition that comes with the results of the 2009 MQ assessment, but proud knowing we earned this spot through years of hard work and making sure we keep customer success as our focal point. That is an important point we can't forget -- PPM vendors are in the business of leading horses to water; ultimately it is the ability of our customers to take what we offer and improve their business that is the true (and most important) measure of our success. Customer interviews are a big part of the assessment, and I can't imagine a vendor getting very far if every customer Gartner contacted related how their PPM initiative was a disappointment. So, in some ways the magic quadrant is a measure of the ability of our customers to succeed as much as it is of our products and organization; a great deal of thanks goes out to all of you who partner with us and demonstrate what is possible.

It is gratifying to know there is still room for an independent provider that chooses to put their exclusive focus on excellence in portfolio management. It means a lot to us and I hope that it is meaningful to you as well.

I finally got my copy and couldn't help diving right in. Warning: once you do, don't be surprised to find it hard to come up for air, as these are inviting waters. Now, I know what you are probably thinking; "Crimanently Terry, it's a PMO book, not some kinda' toe-curling whodunit best seller headed for a cable mini-series."  Trust me -- this is one business management book you will actually WANT to read, rather than force yourself to slog through every page.

OK, full disclosure time: Mark is a friend of mine, and yes, I am honored to have been given an opportunity to make a small contribution to this endeavor. That having been said, I am stunned by the richness and practicality of content throughout this book, from Mark's excellent insights to those provided by the 19 other guest contributors that add immensely to its value.

There are so many new ideas and different topics covered by such a diverse blend of experts, the net effect is much like taking everything you like about a really well done PMO symposium with top-notch speakers and compressing all of it into a single 500-page book. The wonderful difference is that, unlike a symposium where you are often left reeling from input overload and soon forget what was heard, you control the rate of consumption and its always there as an ongoing reference (oh yeah, don't forget that it's also much less expensive, no travel is involved and the food is probably better too).

Having it as a ready reference is a good thing, because there is no way you are going to be able to soak up all the information in a single pass. That is due to the truly unique format of this of this book. Like a themed collection of moderated short stories, Mark initially sets the stage and provides the thread of continuity by opening each of the thirteen chapters with insights from his own immense experience with setting up PMOs around the world. Contributing authors, either as practitioners or industry subject matter experts, then add their own particular insights to each topic.

The idea is brilliant, and no doubt you will see it emulated many times over in the future. Besides the obvious benefit of being able to capitalize on the different points of view and expertise of so many contributors, each one brings their own subtle differences in writing style into play. The impact this has on readability is amazing. No matter how accomplished the writer, the work of any single author is in essence a monologue, and as a result it often eventually becomes tiresome. The approach Mark takes in this book creates a dialogue; it's as if you are reading the illustrated transcript of a huge and very informative panel discussion that Mark is actively participating in and moderating.

As to the content itself, be prepared to have some of your closely held PMO preconceptions and paradigms masterfully challenged. I consider myself a forward-thinking person when it comes to all things PMO, but the discussion in this book really makes you stop and ruminate, rolling around ideas and practical guidance like you would the flavors of a complex wine.

OK, if I haven't convinced you by now, then there is no hope. Enjoy it, be sure to share your review comments and tell your associates.

• I hope you find both relevant and useful

Being able to get your point across in written form accurately and succinctly is a critical business skill, whether:

• drafting a mission statement
• writing a project charter
• documenting a personnel review
• creating a curriculum
• or developing a policy manual

If you find this is something that you or your staff can improve upon, read on…

When we first began to develop our PRISMS best practices several years ago, it surprised me to find that so few people possess good writing skills, regardless of their intelligence, spoken eloquence or level of education.

• the biggest roadblock we faced was not finding experts on the target subjects
• but finding experts that could also express the information with competent and efficient written communications
• I came to realize that this was a capability that the majority of business people struggle with
• Effective and efficient writing takes a lot of practice and some disciplined technique

In particular, business and technical writing on complex subjects places a different set of demands on the author compared to other forms:

• writing must be precise; unambiguous and free of literary flourish
• it must present the flow of information in a structured manner
• it must be concise

When it comes to technical writing, I struggle as much as the next person.
The aspects I find most difficult are

• keeping on point
• obsessing over punctuation, usage and form too early in the process
• balancing the amount of content of each topic area and
• properly sequencing information

The technique I created to alleviate these issues is detailed outlining using full declarative statements

• I call it "Stoutlining"
• You are reading an example of this practice right now

Rather than a typical outline of bullet points, you structure a single thought in a clipped but functional sentence form

I find that this approach offers several benefits over simply 'writing away' and constantly wordsmithing the results

• it is fast to develop
• it forces economy of words and thoughts
• it is easy to review (either as an author or by others)
• out-of-sequence statements can be quickly identified and reordered without wreaking havoc on paragraph form and structure
• it reduces the amount of time and effort spend re-writing formal sentences
• punctuation, tense and other stylistic elements are not addressed until the flow of concepts is fully baked

Similarly, when compared to the traditional skeletonized outline,

• which can prove troublesome to recall intentions later
• or be difficult for others to follow
• this technique allows a complete train of thought to be developed
• without getting distracted by constant editing to address readability issues

Once statements are completed, appropriate headings can be added, and individual thoughts can be quickly developed into more cohesive paragraph form. Given that stoutlining is simply an interim writing technique, there are no real rules so it is easy to adopt with a bit of practice. I find it has cut my time per page of finished output in half when compared to simply writing in stream of consciousness.

When the time comes to compose your next literary masterpiece, give this technique a try and see if you find it as useful to your own writing efforts as I have found it to be with my own.

I'll be conducting a live interview with Rene to explore the combined portfolio and project management initiative that she has been so deftly guiding. I think this format is much more informative and digestible for participants compared to a straight-up presentation. Expect to hear a truly impressive success story about what can be accomplished with enough support, drive and leadership, interspersed with witty banter and supporting visuals -- now really, what more can you ask for? Oh alright, we'll provide some Q&A time as well; perhaps we can even work in a few thoughtful queries as part of the interview itself.

Rene put a lot on her plate with this endeavor; in conjunction with consolidating several disparate and overwhelmed IT groups into a single centralized entity, there was much to be done to establish a formal project management methodology for the campus, develop a portfolio management program for decision support, implement a PPM platform so everything was in one tool (see if you can guess which one), define the portfolio of services to help manage operations, and create a Portfolio and Project Management Office (PPMO) to help implement and manage it all.

Oh, did I mention this was all done simultaneously?

Just pulling off one or two of those efforts would be considered a resounding success by most. Clearly, there is much to be learned from this experience, so I look forward to having you join us for this exciting discussion -- 10:00 AM central time; don't be late!