From project governance to an operating model that connects strategy, funding and execution

1. Strategic context

An IT function organised around projects was moving to a product model, to connect its investments to business priorities.

2. What was blocking execution

Governance, funding and tracking were all built around the project. The roles of a product model did not exist, and nothing connected the value delivered to the priorities. Reorganising the teams without changing that framework would have produced trains funded like projects.

3. Work on the model and governance

An organisational review, scoping of the product model, and mapping of the value streams. Definition of the new roles and their decision rights: Epic Owner, Business Owner, Lead Architect. Set-up of portfolio governance and funding: an Epic maturation Kanban, Portfolio Sync, Strategic Portfolio Review, quarterly review, participatory budgeting and capacity funding.

4. Putting it to work

Launch of 3 ARTs, facilitation of PI Planning and synchronisation between trains, and support for the team leading the change.

5. Tools and data

The model was designed knowing how it would be represented: portfolio and funding in Clarity, execution in Jira. We then implemented both tools so that they carry the same chain, from leadership governance down to the teams.

6. Decisions and results made possible

Leadership now makes trade-offs between value streams funded by capacity, rather than between projects one at a time. An Epic decided in a governance forum can be followed in the tools all the way to the work of teams.

7. What we learned

A transformation that redesigns execution without touching funding or portfolio governance stops halfway. The model holds because finance, governance and the tools changed at the same time as the teams.

See also: Operating Model & Execution · Clarity PPM