Skip to content
Our website will be unavailable from 17:00 GMT Wednesday 20 November until 9:00 GMT Monday 25 November while we carry out important upgrades.

If you plan to update your membership, book an event or access APM Learning, APM Community or use other resources, please do this outside of these dates.

The 15 November Chartered Project Professional submission date is unaffected.

Thank you for your patience.

Could visibility and better oversight make sponsors more effective?

Added to your CPD log

View or edit this activity in your CPD log.

Go to My CPD Only APM members have access to CPD features Become a member Already added to CPD log

View or edit this activity in your CPD log.

Go to My CPD
Login to bookmark this
Added to your Saved Content Go to my Saved Content

I have heard from a number of quarters that a strong, effective sponsor can make a significant difference to a project – the barriers can seem to melt away rather than continually build. Effective leadership in projects can help people open their minds to the opportunities and be willing to embrace new ways of working. 

One of the core needs and difficulties of being an effective sponsor is being visible. Sponsors sometimes have limited time to listen, take on board feedback from a wide audience, and personally advocate the need for change. This becomes increasingly difficult for multi-location projects, which are so common today. 

I recently had an interesting conversation with Faith Forster, Founder & CEO of Pinipa, a platform for oversight and communications on more complex projects with multiple workstreams and stakeholders. 

Faith said one way of improving sponsor oversight is to provide a simple, high level view of progress, creating visibility of key items across workstreams such as key dates, decisions, discussions and documents. You could use this information to share targeted updates with stakeholders proactively, so that those interested in the project are always kept up to date, saving valuable time and effort for the project team.

The aim is to achieve a delicate balance between a sponsor actively supporting the project team and stakeholders, whilst not micro-managing. This will increase visibility and accountability, helping the sponsor make more informed decisions, proactively share and reinforce the basis of those decisions, and rapidly course correct if needed.

So I was intrigued by the idea of a start up like Pinipa seeing a market in a platform for project management that has stakeholder engagement at the core of its proposition. Project updates can be captured through integrations with PPM software packages. 

Where this presents a very interesting opportunity is for the role of the sponsor to monitor progress, but also give feedback through discussions to understand how stakeholders are responding. 

I welcome any suggestions in the comments for ways in which sponsor oversight can be improved.

Julian Smith
Written byJulian Smith

Julian Smith was head of external affairs at APM.

1 comments

Join the conversation!

Log in to post a comment, or create an account if you don't have one already.

  1. Patrick Weaver
    Patrick Weaver 22 April 2016, 08:15 AM

    One very simple option is to refuse to fund a project or program unless:1.  There is a comitted sponsor prepared to champion the project and have its success linked to his/her KPIs2.  Require all sponsors to have completed a half day intensive training before thay can fulfil the role in point 1This may cause a few problems in the early stages (but what's the point of the project if the organisation's executives don't want it) and will save the organisation $millions in failed projects. The role of a sponsor is challenging, see: http://www.mosaicprojects.com.au/WhitePapers/WP1031_Project_Sponsorship.pdf