The Portfolio Office Asked to Take Control of Resources
Meridian Financial Group has 12,000 employees and a change portfolio of 70 projects worth £200 million a year. The Portfolio Office has eight staff and mainly produces monthly status reports from Excel templates that project managers complete inconsistently. Resource management is delegated to department heads, each using their own spreadsheet. The firm has only 14 experienced data architects, and they are currently allocated across nine projects. Two projects have slipped because the same three architects were over-allocated. The Portfolio Board has now asked the Portfolio Office to 'take control of resource allocation'. The Head of Portfolio Office is unsure whether to centralise all allocations or to facilitate a resource planning process. A senior department head has said that central allocation would 'destroy delivery accountability'. The board also wants faster portfolio reporting and better dependency management.
1. What is the appropriate role for the Portfolio Office in resource management? Justify your answer using MoP's view of portfolio office responsibilities.
Read the worked answer
MoP does not require the Portfolio Office to own all resource allocation. Portfolio office responsibilities can range from informing, through advising, to controlling, depending on mandate and maturity. Here, the board has asked for control, but full central allocation would be risky: department heads retain line management, delivery accountability and professional standards, and a central team of eight cannot allocate 12,000 people. I would recommend a facilitating model with clear decision rights: the Portfolio Office maintains a portfolio resource schedule and capacity model by scarce skill, provides demand-and-supply analysis, highlights conflicts and options, and supports the board in prioritising. Department heads remain accountable for allocation within agreed priorities. This addresses the senior head's concern without leaving the board blind. If the board wants stronger control, it should define thresholds, for example any allocation of data architects above an agreed percentage requires portfolio office or board approval. The key is transparency and prioritisation, not command-and-control.
2. How would you resolve the data architect over-allocation?
Read the worked answer
Treat the 14 data architects as a portfolio constraint, not nine local problems. Build a time-phased demand and supply model: how many architect-days each project needs by quarter, against 14 people less annual leave, support and non-project work. Then apply the portfolio's priorities: if all nine projects cannot be served, the board must decide which are deferred, resequenced or delivered with alternative resourcing. Options include staggering project phases, using external partners for lower-risk work, pairing less-experienced architects with seniors, and reducing scope. What-if analysis should show the impact of each option on delivery dates and risk. The Portfolio Office should not quietly reallocate people; it should present the conflict and the trade-offs. The two slipped projects need a recovery plan that reflects the real constraint. The longer-term fix is a skills strategy: 14 architects for a £200 million portfolio is a capacity risk that the board should own, not just a scheduling nuisance.
3. Which portfolio office services should be prioritised given eight staff, and what should be dropped?
Read the worked answer
With eight staff, prioritise services that change decisions. First, portfolio definition support: a single register, consistent categorisation and prioritisation data. Second, dependency management and resource capacity, because these are causing slippage. Third, benefits tracking for the top projects, linked to the board's value questions. Fourth, simplify reporting: standardise the template, automate where possible, and reduce the monthly narrative. The Portfolio Office should not try to be a full centre of excellence yet. It should agree a service catalogue with the board, including what it will not do. MoP's portfolio office principle is about having the right capability, not the biggest team. A small office that provides reliable data and honest analysis will earn more authority than one that produces reports nobody uses. The board should also review whether the office reports to a level with enough authority to challenge department heads.