“PMO” can mean a lot of different things these days—maybe too many things? P can stand for project, program, or portfolio. And even then, the nature of the PMO will vary from one organization to another. In a post for the Association for Project Management, Emma-Ruth Arnaz-Pemberton wonders if it is time to “divorce” some key functions of the PMO in order to provide tighter focus on pertinent areas.
It ultimately comes down to if the PMO really needs to be the central integrator of all things that right now fall under the PMO blanket, from benefits realization to knowledge management. Is standardization and oversight provided by one body a true necessity? Or is it time to let some sub-disciplines cultivated by PMOs to go bloom on their own? Arnaz-Pemberton sides with the former camp over the latter, as she believes a strong PMO is the only way to stop new silos from sprouting up. And she may very well be right. But what do you think?
You can view the original post here: https://www.apm.org.uk/blog/pmchat-divorcing-the-pmo/