Program vs Project Management

This assignment delves into the distinctions between program and project management. It emphasizes that projects have defined start and end points with specific deliverables, whereas programs encompass multiple interconnected projects aimed at broader strategic goals. The document further discusses how program management, being more comprehensive and long-term in nature, is typically governed by senior management and directly influences an organization's financial performance. It also touches upon the role of program managers in ensuring alignment with organizational strategy and resolving conflicts across projects within a program.

Running Head: PROJECT MANAGEMENT 1
Personal Learning Portfolio
Student’s Name
University’s Name

Running Head: PROJECT MANAGEMENT 2
Table of Contents
Portfolio Entry 1 – Project vs. Program.....................................................................................3
Portfolio Entry 2 – Program Initiation.......................................................................................4
Portfolio Entry 3 – Program Stakeholder Engagement..............................................................7
Portfolio Entry 4 – Program Governance...................................................................................8
Portfolio Entry 5 – Program Theory........................................................................................10
References................................................................................................................................12

Running Head: PROJECT MANAGEMENT 3
Portfolio Entry 1 – Project vs. Program
Mike Fritz, the director of program/project management at Megatronic has adopted a
different approach in defining the concepts of programs and projects for the organization. The
approach is totally different from the conventional approach that is used for defining the two
concepts.
The approach adopted by Mike is good to a great extent. He has simply categorized
the programs and projects on the basis of their contribution to the company’s business.
According to Mike, any activity that is targeted towards the production of the new product in
the market is to be treated as a program, whereas any activity other than the program, that is,
which does not lead to the production of new products is to be categorized under project
head.
This is a simple and effective definition of the concepts provided by Mike. It becomes
easier for the company's employees to quickly determine whether an activity is a program or
project. The concept of bounding box to explain the elements of the program is yet again an
effective tool to make the program and project managers understand the significance of
association of stakeholders and sponsors in a program (Milosevic, Patanakul &
Srivannaboon, 2010).
However, for any person who has worked somewhere else and where the
conventional definition of project and program was used, it might be difficult for him to grasp
the new definitions. It might be confusing for him due to his earlier understanding and way of
doing work in the project and program management department.
The current approach adopted by the company in explaining and differentiating
between projects and programs is quite effective. It has clearly laid out the differences in
terms of importance, their definition, the elements that are to be considered, alignment with
the strategy, the significance of milestones, and other factors (Milosevic, Patanakul &

Running Head: PROJECT MANAGEMENT 4
Srivannaboon, 2010). The director of program/project management has even explained
different aspects of projects and programs by giving examples to new project manager.
It has even differentiated the terms on the basis of the autonomy that is being
provided to the project managers and program managers. The project managers are simply to
get the required outcomes for a project within the time, cost and performance constraints.
This is due to the fact that it is a part of the cost center and would not directly contribute to
generating revenues for the company.
However, the expectations from a program manager are higher, the program is
expected to be completed considering the elements specified in the bounding box, the
company can afford to sacrifice the scope and cost of the project, but not these elements. The
nature of the success accomplished on the completion of programs and projects have also
been effectively explained in the differentiation.
The success of programs is considered to be important as it is actually a business
success which is likely to bring more revenues for the company. This also gives it a priority
in getting the resources and budgets allocation (Milosevic, Patanakul & Srivannaboon, 2010).
Moreover, many of the basis of differences is similar to the conventional point of differences,
making this approach more agreeable. The approach adopted by the company for
differentiation is wholesome and does not require any changes at least in the case of
Megatronics.
Portfolio Entry 2 – Program Initiation
James should select Early Birds, Ltd offer for installing the fire extinguishing
systems. There are four concerns that James has to consider while placing the order, namely-
total cost of an extinguisher, including installation cost, purchase cost, and maintenance cost,
the safety features, ease of use, and ease of maintenance. The costing for the offer made by
each company has been computed below:

Running Head: PROJECT MANAGEMENT 5
Particulars Fire
Extinguisher
Early Birds,
Ltd.
Xtra Care,
Ltd
Zebra
Limited
Pieces to be
ordered (Total
area/Spraying area)
200 80 100 40
A. Total
Purchase
cost
17,000 13,600 11,500 97,200
B. Total
Installation
cost
0 0 400 0
C. Total
Maintenance
Cost
(Number of
Pieces*per
unit cost)
600 550 300 0
Total (A+B+C) 17,600 14,150 12,200 97,200
From the computation made above, it is apparent that the offer made by Xtra Care,
Ltd is the optimal solution for the company, Mega security, followed by Early Birds, Ltd,
Fire Extinguisher, and Zebra Limited. However, the project manager is required to consider
the other factors also which includes the safety features, convenience to use, and
maintenance.
The safety features of the solutions offered are not provided for which it is assumed
that all the fire extinguishing systems are safe while using the new premises. It is observed

Running Head: PROJECT MANAGEMENT 6
that the system by Xtra Care, Ltd is very difficult to use which rules out the option even if its
costing is the lowest. Fire Extinguishers provides an easy option of using its system but with
a higher total cost in comparison to Early Birds, Ltd (Milosevic, Patanakul & Srivannaboon,
2010).
In the context of maintenance cost, even though the cost would be a slightly higher in
the upcoming years (605) for Early Birds, Ltd, the offer made by the company should be
selected as the total cost is low, the system has a moderate degree of ease to use, and is safe
for the installation.
James can further negotiate the costs as Mega Security already has business relations
with Early Birds, Ltd. Moreover, it would be delivered and installed with 30 days as a
delivery lead time. Therefore, considering all the factors, it is suggested that James should opt
for the offer made by Early Birds, Ltd.
From a program perspective, this issue of selecting the best offer of fire extinguishing
systems for Mega Security is likely to have a long-term impact on the entire organization
(Springer, 2016). The primary base for taking this decision is to cater to the needs of all the
departments in the company and ensure that the investment made by the company in the
systems is profitable. It is advised that while taking any decision where different options are
available, the managers are required to consider the major factors that can be the deal
breakers.
The managers need to prioritize the factors, on the basis of which the decisions are to
be taken. The managers should make a log where all the considerations, alternative solutions,
their costing and other essential factors should be recorded (Verzuh, 2015). This would help
the management in making a comparison as to which alternative is serving the maximum
considerations and would be most profitable for the company.

Running Head: PROJECT MANAGEMENT 7
Portfolio Entry 3 – Program Stakeholder Engagement
The case deals with the decision regarding the adoption of new TKS program for
General Public Hospital (GPH). The company has to adopt new TKS program as the existing
vendor for TKS sold his business to someone else. A new proposal has been presented by
Julia Skown and her team which provides an estimated cost of the program as one million
dollars and an estimated schedule of eighteen months (Milosevic, Patanakul & Srivannaboon,
2010).
However, with further research, her team came with an additional feature of new
transaction inquiry feature. Incorporating the new feature is likely to further increase the cost
of the project by $100,000 and delay in the installation of the TKS program by two months.
The core values of the company revolve around providing quality products and services to its
customers and focusing on the customers.
It is advised that the executive team of the company should take the decision of
implementing the new TKS program incorporating the new feature. Even though, the new
feature would add to the cost and schedule of the program, but it would ensure more accuracy
and better quality to the different customers (Milosevic, Patanakul & Srivannaboon, 2010).
Adoption of this advanced and improved TKS program would also bring other
benefits for the company. This program is one of the advanced programs that the company
would employ if decided. The new program with the transaction inquiry feature would have
an advantage over the previously implemented TSK programs in terms of scheduling
capability, reporting capability, robustness and various other additional features.
From the viewpoint of the cost involved, as the program is a new generation product,
it is likely to increase the efficiencies, which in turn, would decrease the part-time employees.
It would be a user-friendly interface, which the customers can easily access (Milosevic,
Patanakul & Srivannaboon, 2010).

Running Head: PROJECT MANAGEMENT 8
Although it would be difficult for the management of the company to announce the
decision of implementing the new program and convincing the customers for the delay in
schedule, it is likely that the benefits that the customer would get with the usage of TSK
program would outweigh the issues and resistance on the part of customers. It is, therefore,
recommended that the executive team should take the decision for adopting the new feature
in the TSK program and implement it in the organization.
Portfolio Entry 4 – Program Governance
The concept of program strike zone relates to the implementation of a tool that is used
by the managers in determining the progress of a program towards the accomplishment of
expected results. This is done by identifying the key factors that are essential for the success
of a program (Milosevic, Patanakul & Srivannaboon, 2010).
In terms of benefits, the program strike zone serves as an effective management and
communication tool that enables the project managers to keep the project aligned with the
project’s goals and objectives throughout its lifecycle. It ensures that there is a proper and
relevant flow of information between the executive management and the project team so that
there is no surprise behavior and the contingencies are minimized (Milosevic, Martinelli &
Waddell, 2009).
With the proper flow of information, the results indicate that the barriers and critical
issues which may cause a delay in resolution and decision-making are eliminated. A program
manager can identify at any point whether a program is aligned to the overall goals and
objectives or not, if any misalignment is found, the manager can stop a program.
Adopting the program strike zone brings a lot of advantages for the program
managers and the organization for which it is implemented. The program strike zone makes
use of the graphs and basic factors for indicating the progress of a program. It holds a high
visual appeal and is simple in use, thereby making it user-friendly.

Running Head: PROJECT MANAGEMENT 9
It is flexible in terms of usage and is therefore considered as an effective control and
management tool by both the program managers and senior managers (Milosevic, Martinelli
& Waddell, 2009). It is useful in bridging the gaps and differences that may arise in the
program planning, strategic planning efforts and its execution within an organizational
setting. It helps the program and senior managers to focus only on the key factors that are
essential and would result in the success of the program.
One of the most important advantages of program strike zone is that it allows an
autonomy to the project team, especially the program managers to get the desired results. So
far the results are achieved, the senior managers do not interfere with the working and
management of the project; only the issues which are significant or are beyond the control of
the team are brought to the notice of the senior management.
It helps in setting the boundaries within which the team would work without the
involvement of senior management (Milosevic, Martinelli & Waddell, 2009). However, there
are certain disadvantages of this program also. For example- non-involvement of the senior
managers can make the project team lose their focus on the project. There are chances that if
the project manager is not capable and competent, it would be a wastage of the organizational
resources and efforts. Moreover, if the program strike zone includes too many critical factors
that define success, it is likely that it loses its simplicity.
From the perspective of program governance, the senior management may face
challenges while implementing the program strike zone. Firstly, it is necessary that the
boundaries and structure set by the program strike management meet with the processes and
practices of the business.
However, these processes are dynamic and require a constant change which makes it
difficult to make changes in the program strike zone. Secondly, one of the major components

Running Head: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
10
of program governance is people who take up different roles in a program (Hanford, 2005). If
such people are not skilled or competent, the zone system would not work.
Portfolio Entry 5 – Program Theory
In the practical scenario, even if it is difficult to clearly differentiate between
programs and projects, the program management is considered to be a larger and scaled up
form of project management. The programs are considered to cover those elements which are
beyond the scope of individual projects consisted in a program. The statement mentioned
above can be held true to a great extent.
Program management is a wider concept in comparison to the project management. It
includes management of a series of projects that are undertaken in an organization with a
certain set of objectives that vary in the scope and scale (Milosevic, Patanakul &
Srivannaboon, 2010). It is basically management and control of a portfolio of multiple
projects. It has a greater span in the project lifecycle, that is, it is an ongoing process that
takes place in an organization.
Usually, the project management has a shorter duration in comparison to the
programs; each project is likely to have a fixed deadline by which it is deemed to be
completed, which is not in the case of programs (Levin & Ward, 2016). The program
management requires strategic planning on the behalf of the senior managers and the project
managers for setting the objectives and the course for achieving such objectives.
Under the project management, the results of programs are linked to the
organization’s financial calendar. For example- the results of the programs are to be disclosed
in the quarterly performances of the company. The projects are for a shorter duration and
results of a single project are not likely to have an impact on the overall financial
performance of the company.

Running Head: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
11
However, if these projects are combined in form of programs, it becomes significant
for the organization’s financial performance. Program management is a scaled up version of
the project management and is governance intensive. As the results of programs are likely to
impact the long-term financial performance of the company, they are usually governed by the
senior management (Martinelli, Waddell & Rahschulte, 2014).
The senior managers are responsible for providing direction, objectives, overseeing
the performance, and controlling the programs, which may not have been possible if
individual projects were considered. The program managers ensure that the objectives framed
by the senior board are achievable and any disputes occurring during the course of different
programs are resolved.
It allows the projects to be more governance intensive by being a part of the program
management. As a program is a portfolio of different projects, its management, control, and
budgeting become complex processes. The project management is concerned with revenues
and costs which are crucial for the financial results of a company, making its management a
difficult task (Sanghera, 2008). Moreover, the program management is governed and driven
by the overall strategy of the company.
Any changes in the market conditions, external environment, or the revision of
business goals require changes to be incorporated in the program management process. Due
to its large scale and wider scope, any changes that are proposed to be made requires
executive leadership skills on the part of program managers as these changes would have to
be made in individual projects also. Thus, it is appropriate to say that the program
management is a scaled up form of the project management.

Running Head: PROJECT MANAGEMENT
12
References
Hanford, M. (2005). Defining program governance and structure. Retrieved October 6, 2017,
from https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/apr05/hanford/
Levin, G., & Ward, J. L. (2016). Program Management Complexity: A Competency Model.
Boca Raton: CRC Press.
Martinelli, R. J., Waddell, J. M., & Rahschulte, T. J. (2014). Program Management for
Improved Business Results. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Milosevic, D. Z., Martinelli, R. J., & Waddell, J. M. (2009). Program Management for
Improved Business Results. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Milosevic, D., Patanakul, P., & Srivannaboon, S. (2010). Case studies in project, program,
and organizational project management. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Sanghera, P. (2008). Fundamentals of Effective Program Management: A Process Approach
Based on the Global Standard. New York: J. Ross Publishing.
Springer, M. L. (2016). Project and Program Management: A Competency-Based Approach,
Third Edition. West Lafayette: Purdue University Press.
Verzuh, E. (2015). The Fast Forward MBA in Project Management. New Jersey: John Wiley
& Sons.