- This topic has 7 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Do you think the Functional Area Lead should be a project manager (from the PMO, if the company has a PMO) or should be a manager from the functional area? I lean toward project manager because that’s the primary skill set needed to plan all the work across workstreams within the functional area, mitigate risks, coordinate work across workstreams within the functional area, report up progress and escalate issues. However, if a PM is playing that role, how do you maintain proper accountability for functional area managers who should ultimately be accountable for whether or not their team(s) deliver the work necessary to integrate?
(note – I’m very biased toward project managers because I lead my company’s PMO. I would love to hear other perspectives to balance out my bias.)
Well, for the overall transaction management, I would agree that someone with high skills in project management needs to lead this transaction to manage the transaction within the allocated time. In contrast, for each functional area, I would recommend being led by someone content with the area’s speciality to report information and provide decisions immediately.
From my perspective, the CEO or the COO should be the M&A project lead. If there is a position of PMO exists in the organization, the PMO can be the primary assistant to the M&A project lead to coordinate with the functional lead. With this setting, the M&A project team has seen to be strongly empowered and should be able to manage easier down the road.
I’m in agreement with your suggestion for a PM who works with and through the function leads for all workstreams. We’ve experienced the challenge of function leads being already stretched with their normal operational responsibilities and projects, and struggle with the additional integration responsibilities. In some cases however, if you had an individual who has capacity and the skillset, they may be able to easily step into the PM role as well.
It is important to have a project charter approved by the Board and after consultation with the key stakeholders. Only then, can one be effective in integrating this whole entire process. Any deviation from the project charter must be met with a variation order and the changes logged and registered to ensure future learning.
I believe that the functional lead should be the one who is accountable for the area in which they are a SME- so a compensation manager for compensation. The Project manager helps them to lay out their plan, helps them to delivery and achieve their plans but we (in most cases, and I am a SR Integration PM) are the ones that make the decisions on a specific area.
From my own personal experience, someone who has PM skillsets should be the project manager instead of functional leads. Skillsets required for M&A (especially when it is large & complex deal) are different from normal day-to-day work. You will want to rely on someone who is familiar with the entire M&A process and stakeholder management.
Having said that, it is still important to engage functional leads as they need to be fully aware of what decisions have been made and how those will have impact on their workstreams.
The lead transaction should have the necessary commercial skills in order to ensure sound decisions. Also, he should be involving the right disciplines, internally from the corporate members &/or externally through competent consultants, in order to ensure that all aspect of the deal are thoroughly addressed & executed.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
