So while a dashboard of three product lines (for example) cannot reconcile different definitions of ‘in development’, a weekly rollup of work in development can quickly become a means of negotiating numbers rather than reviewing progress.
Fix the data model before the dashboard
Your minimum fields are not going to map perfectly across teams as they will likely require access to different detail to function. Thus standardize the minimum and the rest can vary.
To establish the minimum shared layer of information to replicate across all applications and platforms, establish the following 5 fields to track within each work item/feature, Stage Gate Status, Committed Launch Date, Planned Launch Volume, Capital/Tooling Commitments, and Accountable Owner.
Define stages by evidence, not by confidence
Close the Stage Definitions to Physical Artifacts at each Stage Gate. That is, the Concept Stage should end with a set of validated Requirements and an estimated Cost with specified accuracy. The Industrialization Stage should end with a confirmed Bill of Materials (BOM) with Suppliers.
Make prioritization comparable across unlike products
In evaluating whether to produce a consumables line versus a capital equipment line (such as a programmable autoclave), score these on different arithmetic to account for their nature. A high volume, low margin refresh will score poorly on NPV (net present value) against a multi-year platform program, but score well within the categories of volume and refresh cycle. So score within categories and then allocate your budget within those categories to get the most value out of your portfolio.
I often find that simple scoring models of 5 parameters * 5 levels (25 scores) are all that are needed to differentiate between the 30 or so projects that end up making up your portfolio. Some typical scoring criteria include, Strategic Fit, Commercial Confidence, Technical Risk, Resource Intensity and Regulatory Exposure.
Score the denominator honestly
While scoring Resource Intensity scores for work done by engineers by line can provide a good indication of resource utilization, typically scores fail to capture fully the value of time spent by experts. Also scores typically fail to capture fully the value of time spent by testers and validation specialists. The minimum field to score is hours of engineers’ time by line. For example, an environmental chamber that can only be used by one line for 11 weeks is very expensive regardless of how few engineers are required.
Connect the portfolio view to manufacturing reality
While supply related slippage of launch dates far outnumbers design related slippage, supply constraints are hardly ever mentioned in portfolio reviews until there is an emergency. Three signals to include in your project status view are long-lead item commitment dates, tooling lead times and line changeover requirements.
_launches_ of _different_products_ on _different_operating-profiles_, can be produced by _separate_departments_, on _separate_budgets_ and on _separate_schedules_; however, visibility of the fact that three Product Lines are to _launch_in_the_same_quarter_ on the same production asset and therefore will be competing for the same _molding_capacity_ a quarter in advance is very valuable.
Run a constraint calendar alongside the roadmap
A simple shared calendar outlining the asset availability, test stations and supplier capacity for a Portfolio of Products will bring far greater value to cross-functional planning than a tooling upgrade. The regular Program Manager meetings to discuss potential conflicts prior to them becoming embedded in Customer Commitments are far more valuable.
Choose the right level of tooling for your maturity
Most organizations purchase the functional capabilities of a new product planning platform without first identifying whether the needed data discipline to sustain and continue to feed it on an ongoing basis exists. A comparison of several popular portfolio management approaches for managing product development work is provided in the following table, with an evaluation of workability for each given a set of conditions.
| Approach | Works when | Main cost | Typical failure mode |
| Spreadsheet rollup | Fewer than about 25 active projects, one planner | Manual consolidation time | Version drift and stale inputs |
| Project tool reporting | All lines already on one system | Configuration and admin effort | Task detail crowds out portfolio signal |
| Dedicated portfolio platform | Multiple lines, shared capacity, formal gates | License plus data governance | Adoption stalls without owned definitions |
| Warehouse plus BI layer | Mature source systems, analyst capacity | Engineering and maintenance | Reports nobody trusts or reads |
When you shortlist product portfolio visibility tools, favour the ones that model capacity and dependencies in an adequate fashion, not only rendering beautiful representations of the workings of work going to be produced to deliver value as quickly and efficiently as possible to customers in an ever changing environment.
Build the review cadence that forces decisions
Just being aware of Portfolio Visibility deficits is of little value without having a decision forum to support required decisions. Set up a regular meeting (e.g. Monthly) for a Portfolio Review with a fixed agenda. Allow only exceptions to the ‘normal’ way of running the Portfolio in this meeting and require a description of the trade-off(s) required for each exception.
- Changes to committed launch windows, with the driver named
- Capacity conflicts in the next two quarters
- Projects proposed for stop, hold, or acceleration
- Decisions taken, with owner and date recorded
Track the decisions made during a portfolio review meeting and follow up on them at subsequent reviews. In monitoring and refining a portfolio of work the biggest challenge is tracking and directing work in development to deliver customer value and change as fast as possible while requirements change all the time. This requires closed loops of work to ensure that the work described in a portfolio has been updated to reflect the current reality.
