Closing a Strategy Gap
Applying PMI’s strategic alignment domain to the messy non-profit world
Program management professionals' work is - or at least should be - the realization of a distinct strategic goal at your organization. A program should technically never exist without its strategic parent, but in reality, I’ve worked on multiple orphaned programs where this was far from the case.
The Project Management Institute (PMI) outlines a rich progression of steps for turning a strategic goal into a functional program captured in the “Strategic Alignment” performance domain. (1 p.67-79) But what happens if your business doesn’t have a holistic strategic plan? Or you’re taking over a long-running program that is far removed from the current leadership's objectives? If the connection between your organization’s strategy and your program is noticeably slack - regardless of how it occurred - you are highly vulnerable to a strange type of failure. One where you are delivering on the stated aims of your program, but cancelled by leadership because they no longer see value in your program’s outputs.
Well, pull out your “Risk Log” because this strategic gap is something that you’ll need to address. The sooner the better.
Part 1: What is “strategy” to a Program Management Professional?
Strategy, at its simplest, is “a plan of action or policy designed to achieve a major or overall aim.” The explanatory metaphor that stays with me is that strategy is deciding where you want to go, and tactics (or, in this case, programs) are all the work that gets you there.
Strategy, therefore, matters a lot to a program management professional (PgMP*). Not because you are the one necessarily making strategic decisions, but because you bring strategic goals to life. For those who relish invention, problem-solving, and creativity, fleshing out a strategic aim – particularly one that’s not been accomplished by anyone else before – can be tremendously engaging and rewarding work. It’s a key reason why program management is such an exciting field to work in.
The other significant reason that strategy matters to a PgMP is that dealing with strategy is a key marker in your career advancement. Often, it is a signal of your shift from project to program management. Project management professionals often need to be heads-down focused on creating the deliverable. While it is helpful to know your work's connection to a broader goal and communicate pertinent information upward, you’re not necessarily on point to adjust the project aims based on changing economic factors, etc. It’s the program or portfolio manager's role to coordinate with leadership to ensure that a program’s projects remain aligned with business objectives and update project management professionals on necessary changes. When you start being on point for strategic alignment, it’s a signal that you're advancing to a new frontier in your career.
*In “The Non-Profit Program,” I use the term program management professional with the acronym PgMP to refer to anyone working or interested in program management, regardless of their official job title at work or credentials. This usage differs from the typical professional usage, where PgMP indicates the successful completion of the Program Management Professional certification offered through the Project Management Institute (PMI).
Part 2: A look at PMI’s “Strategic Alignment” Performance Domain
To move from a strategic goal to a program, PMI offers a well-defined progression. (1 p.67-79) In summary, the five steps to the “Strategic Alignment” performance domain are:
Investment Decision: After a strategic plan is developed, your organization orders a “Program Business Case” created around one of its identified strategic goals. The business case provides a high-level description of the program, accompanied by a business justification and a cost-benefit analysis (including intangible benefits). Your leadership then makes an informed decision on whether to invest in the program.
Program Authorization: When given a green light to proceed, a governing body or program steering committee authorizes the creation of a “Program Charter.” In this phase, a program manager is hired – hopefully you – and the specifics of the program are further outlined, including scope, projects, governance framework, and success metrics. Approval of the “Program Charter” by the governing body officially launches the program.
Establishment of Controls: Working from the “Program Charter,” this phase involves the creation of the “Program Management Plan” and the “Program Roadmap.” These documents include the precise delineation of a program timeline with major milestones specified. It also involves estimating when the cherished program benefits will start to be realized.
Environmental Factor Identification and Monitoring: With the program fully specified, the program manager and team need to identify all the potential external factors that could affect the program. This work begins with an initial environmental analysis and is continually updated as the program progresses. Note that leadership changing their strategic goals is one of those enterprise environmental factors (EEFs) that nearly every program has to watch out for.
Risk Management: With all those factors identified, you then need to undergo the semi-imaginative, yet extremely pessimistic act of figuring out “what’s the worst that could happen?” Once risks are identified, you then determine how much each issue could potentially impact your program, and what you would do about it if such a fate arrives at your door one morning. You're also building in risk thresholds to the assessment, so you’ll need to know your leadership pretty darn well. This is another process that demands continuous monitoring and updates through the program’s lifespan.
All these steps rely on a top-down leadership model where a concrete strategic aim is decided at the executive level. It then trickles down through the “strategic alignment” process to become a fully built-out program with known goals, projects, timelines, and risks. Furthermore, this process also relies on the PgMP having significant time, resources, and ultimately access to leadership’s plans (and, honestly, their fears as part of the risk management process). All this assessment, development, and planning must occur well in advance of any fieldwork or projects.
It’s admittedly asking for a pretty ideal environment. One that many non-profits are not in the position to offer. If you are working in less-than-perfect conditions, is PMI’s strategic alignment process still valuable?
Part 3: Strategic alignment at non-profits
In my experience, leadership doesn’t usually hand you a clean piece of strategy and then give you time for intensive planning. That being said, some of the most interesting programs that I’ve worked on were bottom-up. A mid-level manager/leader had an idea, executive leadership said “sure, why not?”, I thought it was cool, and we were off to the races with execution. It is some of the most exciting work I’ve ever done, but when hard times hit, the programs were no longer valued by leadership, and professional heartbreak ensued.
This was a harsh lesson learned, but verbal support and encouragement from leadership for an idea is not enough to carry a program through to success. Your program needs to be tied to a hard strategic goal that your leadership is both invested in and accountable to with their own bosses. The rigorous process advised by PMI helps to cement that relationship and provides the steps to support continuous monitoring, connection, and evaluation. In other words, you're building the appropriate structures to make sure your leadership has little wiggle room to ambivalently pivot or start ghosting you when the organization hits a bump in the road.
In an imperfect environment where there’s a notable gap between organizational strategy and your program, it’s going to be well worth it to reverse-engineer your program’s strategic alignment from the bottom up. Here are some actions that you might have to take:
Hunt down the right strategic goal: Often, the communicated organizational goals at large non-profits are many levels above your work. Instead of relying on a broad strategic goal that your program can only make a small contribution to, reach out to your leadership one to three levels above you (I like to call them my boss-boss or boss-boss-bosses). Ask about their strategic goals for their role, or maybe if they have an annual performance goal directly linked to your work. Often, the stuff that really matters gets placed in the personal job performance documents more than department-wide announcements. Remember to ask around with tact and grace, as some of this material may be confidential or just held close to the vest. Also, you’ll be doing yourself an extra favor. When you show interest in your leadership, you are simultaneously building up those relationships (i.e. stakeholder engagement) and your own professional network.
Be ready to advocate your program into the business strategy: When I started as program manager of the Integrated Care Program at Boston Children’s Hospital, my understanding was that the program was formed more as a consolation prize coming out of a tough restructuring. While I never heard a single person ever say that patients and their caregivers don’t need better care integration, it was far from an outlined strategic goal of the entire enterprise. Our team’s work in those initial years was forming relationships to promote the objective while testing ideas for what a program to improve integrated care would actually involve. If you have an amazing and bold idea surrounding a cause you care about, you may need to advocate your program right into the business strategy. PMI’s same approach for strategic alignment still applies, but with significantly more upfront work involved.
Make the case for a “mid-point review” to build out strategic alignment: I have no evidence, but I suspect there are many non-profit programs out there where the content of PMI’s recommended documentation either does not exist or is inaccessibly spread out across many presentations, emails, conversations, etc. Suppose you are taking on such a program that’s already in motion with active projects. In that case, you can still advocate for the time and resources to build out the formal strategic alignment documentation. Be tactful in your framing and refrain from pointing to the failure of previous management; instead, communicate that a mid-point review or audit is necessary to incorporate new knowledge and updated leadership goals. Remember, there’s no expiration date on when you can make a “Business Case” for your work.
Be prepared that you may not like what you find: In looking the strategic aims of your leadership right in the eye, you may be opening Pandora’s Box. It could turn out that the strategic goals of your leadership don’t line up with your program; or the cost-benefit analysis shows that your program is a losing investment; or when you write up your program roadmap in full, stakeholders start saying, “It’s way too slow.” Building out the strategic alignment documentation for your program is like taking an MRI. When you look inside, you may find all kinds of scary dark spots that need further investigation. It’s tough, difficult, maybe even painful work, but it’s also worthy. You're doing the job needed to give your program its best chance at success. Only through that success can you deliver the intended benefits to your community, whether it’s addressing the housing crisis or supporting child literacy. At non-profits, that’s often remarkable stuff.
“Wheels of a Dream”
Strategy is the ultimate verbalization of a business community’s hopes. No song better communicates hope than “Wheels of a Dream” from the musical Ragtime. For this article’s song pairing, here’s a beautiful duet sung by Broadway royalty, Audra McDonald and Brian Stokes Mitchell.
References
Project Management Institute PMI. The Standard for Program Management - Fifth Edition. Project Management Institute; 2024.