They execute on strategic processes. Let’s talk about process ownership. One benefit of instituting a CPM office is that it can be aggressive in removing the silos that inhibit information-sharing companywide. Uncoordinated and distributed CPM process ownership invariably leads to inconsistencies in CPM process application, different versions of the truth, and projects that are islands unto themselves and so fail to consider the performance management needs of the company overall. CPM offices entirely own, provide substantial governance over and standards for, or else heavily facilitate performance management processes such as strategic planning and knowledge management.

At LB Foster (NYSE FSTR), for example, several processes were centralized for governance directly within this office. Strategic planning was defined and rolled out nationally throughout its product groups. The CPO led gathering of all strategic planning input documents, facilitated analytics and formulation meetings, and compiled the corporate and business unit plans. On the heels of this strategic planning process, we assisted with the design and development of a strategy map and Balanced Scorecard. The CPO clearly owned this process and led the cascade of Balanced Scorecards again throughout company. By having a central office, consistent standards were developed and deployed, change control was initiated, and common reports and IT infrastructure were developed. Later, the CPO partnered with manufacturing to adopt both Lean and Six Sigma to improve the business.

At another public company, the portfolio of processes included strategic planning, performance management, enterprise risk management and compliance, initiative management, global alignment of strategies with support unit services, strategic management meeting reviews, sharing best practices, and comprehensive communication and education process focused on the strategy. ###