If you’re trying to improve your Project Management Office (PMO), one of the first questions that comes up is usually pretty practical: Where do we start?
It can be tempting to jump straight into new processes, governance structures, tools, dashboards, or reporting requirements. But before doing that, it helps to pause and get an honest view of where the organization is today. That’s where a maturity model can be useful. It gives you a structured way to establish a baseline, identify gaps, and decide which improvements should come first.
There are a lot of maturity models out there, but when the conversation is about PMO maturity, I find two especially useful to compare: a PMI-style PMO maturity approach and a P3M3-style maturity approach.
They can look similar on the surface, but they’re really designed to answer different questions.
And if you choose the wrong starting point, you can end up improving the wrong thing.
The PMI-style approach: How strong is the PMO itself?
A PMI-style PMO maturity approach is mainly focused on the capabilities of the PMO itself.
In practice, that typically means looking at areas such as:
- Governance
- Integration and alignment
- People
- Processes
- Technology and data
The point is to understand what the PMO already does well, where it has gaps, and which improvements would create the most value right now.
For example, you might look at whether the PMO has clear governance, consistent project processes, the right roles and skills, reliable reporting, and technology that helps people make better decisions instead of just producing more status updates.
This approach is especially helpful when the organization is trying to set up, transform, or mature the PMO itself.
The question behind this approach is:
How capable is our PMO, and what does it need to improve?
The P3M3-style approach: How mature is the wider delivery environment?
A P3M3-style maturity approach takes a wider view. Instead of stopping at the PMO, it looks at how the organization manages to change across the broader delivery environment.
That usually means assessing maturity across three management areas:
- Portfolio management
- Program management
- Project management
Within those areas, the assessment may look at governance, management control, benefits management, stakeholder engagement, risk management, financial management, and organizational governance.
So the question shifts from the PMO alone to the organization as a whole:
How capable is our organization at managing projects, programs, and portfolios?
That may sound like a small distinction, but it can change the entire assessment conversation.
A PMO can have strong internal processes and solid reporting while the broader organization still struggles with strategic prioritization, benefits realization, resource allocation, or portfolio governance.
A P3M3-style assessment can help bring those broader organizational issues to the surface.
The real difference is scope
The simplest way to think about the difference is this:
A PMI-style approach looks inward at the PMO.
A P3M3-style approach looks outward across the organization’s project, program, and portfolio environment.
Neither one is automatically better.
They simply help answer different questions.
For example, think about an organization that has just created a PMO. Its immediate challenges may be building consistent processes, defining roles, setting up governance, improving reporting, and strengthening project management capability.
In that case, a PMO-focused maturity model may be exactly the right place to start.
Now think about a different organization. This one already has a mature PMO and standardized project management practices in place. The bigger challenge may be that executives are struggling to prioritize investments, resources are being assigned inconsistently, programs are not delivering the expected benefits, and projects are not clearly tied to strategy.
In that situation, a broader P3M3-style assessment may give you a more useful picture of what is really going on.
So how should you choose?
Start with the problem you’re trying to solve.
If the primary question is:
How do we improve the PMO?
Then a PMO-focused maturity model is the better starting point.
If the question is bigger than the PMO and sounds more like:
How do we improve the way the organization manages investments, programs, and projects?
Then a P3M3-style approach may be the better fit.
The good news is that this does not have to be a permanent either-or decision.
An organization might start with a PMO-focused assessment to build a solid foundation, then later expand the assessment to include portfolio, program, and project management.
For many organizations, which may be the most practical path.
The question I would ask first
Before choosing a maturity model, I would begin with one simple question:
What organizational problem are we trying to solve?
If the problem is inconsistent project management, unclear PMO roles, weak reporting, or ineffective governance, it makes sense to focus on the PMO.
If the problem is poor strategic alignment, ineffective investment prioritization, weak benefits realization, or difficulty managing enterprise change, the organization may need to look beyond the PMO.
In other words, the maturity model should follow the problem—not the other way around.
Once the organization has chosen the right assessment approach, the next conversation becomes much more practical:
Where are we today?
That is where the maturity journey really begins.
Lilystream
Leave a Reply