The Project Portfolio Funnel

24. Juli 2017
Kategorien
Newsletter abonnieren

Project Portfolio Funnel

When you look at the project portfolio funnel of the Simple Portfolio Management Framework (SPMF) it looks like the diagram below. Like I explained in previous articles, this is not greatly different from how PMI defines the project portfolio funnel. What is greatly different, is how you manage your funnel. SPMF is a framework within which people can address complex portfolio management problems while productively and creatively delivering projects of the highest possible value. The SPMF works well with any project delivery method. From Scrum to Waterfall, and anything in between.

So let’s walk through this funnel step by step to understand the dynamics of a project portfolio funnel. For this example we will start with an empty funnel at time point X. We will follow the suggestion of the SPMF Guide and have monthly portfolio cycles. At time point X we have a bunch of project ideas on our Project Backlog. These ideas are collected by the demand management process.

These eight ideas will be categorized and afterward evaluated. During categorization or in the evaluation phase ideas can be removed from the Project Backlog for reasons as described in the linked articles. In short: when it is clear there is no value in the idea at this point of time it will be marked as such and removed from the project backlog. 

At a portfolio planning meeting, the remaining ideas have the chance of being selected for validation. When they are selected for validation the ideas are placed on the Portfolio Backlog and additional information will be gathered. This can be a business case validation or a technical proof of concept.

On successful validation, the execution phase of the project will start. Duration of the validation phase can be different for each project, depending on the needs and accepted risk. In the funnel below you see that two projects are still in the validation phase, and for one project the delivery phase has started.

Of course one result of the validation phase can be that the project will not be executed. This is shown in the funnel below. One project continuous to the delivery phase and is joining the one that was already started, and one project is stopped.

When all goes well the project (or parts of it) will be delivered and you can start monitoring its benefits. When it does not go well or the priorities of the portfolio have changed the portfolio committee can decide to stop a project as well in a portfolio review meeting. Both are shown in the funnel below.

After a while of monitoring the benefits (or lack of them), you then do a project retrospective. This is essential for learning and improving within the organization. But like I said, this retrospective only make sense after a phase of benefits monitoring and not directly after the closing of the project.

The above example of the project portfolio funnel is of course extremely simplified because in reality new ideas will come in on an ongoing base, and every portfolio cycle new ideas need to be evaluated and could be selected.

The duration of the phases after evaluation can span between one and many portfolio cycles.

Projects will be delivered, and new ideas keep on coming in.

Benefit monitoring starts, and still, new ideas keep on coming. Which is a very good thing. When you run out of ideas your portfolio quality will suffer greatly.

So after a while of running SPMF your funnel will look like below. And that is why transparency and backlog management are essential for managing your portfolio. Displaying this funnel in the form of a Kanban Board is a great start.

Tags

Das könnte Sie auch interessieren

The Professional Services Transformation Paradox #4 – Accountability vs. Alignment

1. April 2026

In large transformation programs, accountability is rarely missing. It is distributed. It sits with executive sponsors, steering committees, transformation offices, service line leaders, and partner groups, each with a defined role and a legitimate claim to involvement. On paper, this creates alignment. In practice, it often removes ownership, because when accountability is spread across too

Weiterlesen

The Professional Services Transformation Paradox #3 – Long-Term Investment vs. Short-Term Management

27. März 2026

One of the most underestimated constraints in professional services transformation is not technology, capability, or even funding. It is time. Real transformation takes longer than most firms are structurally able to tolerate. Core systems such as ERP platforms, data architectures, AI capabilities, or global workflow solutions are not incremental improvements. They are foundational changes. They

Weiterlesen

The Professional Services Transformation Paradox #2 – Internal vs. Client Execution

26. März 2026

One of the most persistent, and least openly discussed, tensions in professional services firms lies in how they execute their own transformations. It is a tension that does not reveal itself in strategy decks or partner presentations, but in the day-to-day reality of large internal programs that quietly struggle to deliver. At first glance, the

Weiterlesen

The Professional Services Transformation Paradox #1 – Technology Alliances vs. Internal Fit

20. März 2026

This article is part of a series exploring the tensions at the core of the Professional Services Transformation Paradox. The paradox itself is straightforward, yet deeply consequential. Firms that excel at transforming their clients often struggle to transform themselves. Not because they lack capability, but because their own structures, incentives, and operating models create resistance

Weiterlesen

The Five Elements of a Strong Governance Structure for Critical Projects

16. Januar 2025

Every executive has nightmares about that project—the one that spirals into an unmitigated disaster.  In general there are four ways a project can end up in a boardroom-shaking failure that can destroy value, reputations, and trust in one fell swoop. 1. The Titanic Failure: The project chugs along, oblivious to the iceberg ahead, burning millions

Weiterlesen

Why Every Critical Project Needs Board Supervision

15. Januar 2025

Projects are like icebergs—what you see above the surface is just the tip. Below lies the complexity, risk, and opportunity that can sink your ship if ignored. Too often, boards treat projects like black boxes, leaving management to deliver results without sufficient oversight. This hands-off approach might work for routine initiatives, but when it comes

Weiterlesen

Why Every Critical Project Needs Independent Reviews

14. Januar 2025

«Trust, but verify.» That timeless adage applies as much to critical projects as it does to diplomacy. Without an independent review, even the best-run projects can veer off course, leaving organizations blindsided by delays, cost overruns, or outright failures. Here’s the uncomfortable truth: internal stakeholders are often too close to the project to see the

Weiterlesen

Why Every Critical Project Needs an Executive Sponsor

13. Januar 2025

Launching a critical project without an executive sponsor is like sending a ship to sea without a captain—good luck steering through the storm. Projects don’t fail because of bad intentions. They fail because of a lack of alignment, authority, and support.  That’s where the executive sponsor steps in—not just as a figurehead but as the

Weiterlesen

Why Every Critical Project Needs a Dedicated Project Manager

12. Januar 2025

Far too often, organizations assign critical projects to people who already have full-time roles or, worse, delegate management to a loosely organized team with no single point of accountability. The results? Missed deadlines, blown budgets, and a whole lot of finger-pointing. Here’s the hard truth: if the project is important, it deserves a dedicated project

Weiterlesen

When $100 Million Technology Projects Fail, It’s the Board’s Fault—Every Single Time

2. Januar 2025

In Switzerland, rumors suggest that both Bank Julius Bär and Raiffeisen Schweiz are grappling with failed technology projects, each costing over $100 million so far. Bank Julius Bär is reportedly trying to replace its existing core banking system for the Swiss booking center with Temenos, while Raiffeisen Schweiz is attempting to build a modern e-banking

Weiterlesen
Next