A centralized Project Management Office (PMO) is a great idea—when approached with care. Like all powerful concepts, it must be implemented wisely. One fundamental principle should always be kept in mind: never sacrifice the autonomy and independence of project managers and their teams for the sake of the PMO.
Even today, the PMO remains a hot topic in project management discussions. While the terminology may evolve, the core issues remain as relevant as ever.
A PMO can be a powerful tool for increasing efficiency when managing multiple projects, but establishing one requires solid justification. Otherwise, the core benefits of project-based management may be lost.
Why Establish a Project Management Office?
A PMO makes the most sense when several projects are being implemented in the same location or in close proximity. In such cases, centralizing shared functions can save substantial costs compared to duplicating them across individual projects.
A Copy Machine Analogy
Imagine you’re running ten projects in one office. At first glance, giving each team its own copy machine sounds ideal—it supports the autonomy of each team and aligns with the philosophy of projects as “mini-businesses.”
But if we think pragmatically, a single high-speed, multifunctional copy machine could serve all ten teams better. It might offer duplex printing, sorting, stapling, scanning, network connectivity, and other advantages. This setup is more cost-effective and powerful than ten individual machines.
Of course, the trade-off is reduced independence and greater reliance on shared services.
The Risk of Shared Responsibility
The shared copy machine example illustrates the need for careful coordination. Who is responsible for maintenance? Supplies? Scheduling? If no one is clearly accountable, we fall into the classic trap of “everybody’s job is nobody’s job.”
To maintain order, one team could manage the shared resource—but should they also control access to it? What happens when multiple teams need to print large reports at the end of a reporting period?
Clearly, we need neutral governance over shared functions to ensure fairness, efficiency, and accountability.
The Role of the PMO
This brings us to the concept of the independent project management office—a neutral group not tied to any single project, responsible for delivering shared services such as:
- Document processing
- Scheduling coordination
- Resource planning
- Reporting and tools support
The PMO provides cross-project services where consolidation reduces costs and prevents conflicts. However, if not properly scoped, the PMO can gradually take over key responsibilities that should belong to project managers—undermining the very idea of decentralized, flexible project management.
Where to Draw the Line
What about centralizing other project functions—like resource management, budgeting, or estimating? While there may be efficiencies in consolidation, there’s also a real risk:
If too many responsibilities shift to the PMO, we drift back toward top-down, hierarchical structures—the very structures project management was designed to improve upon.
Instead of creating flexibility and empowerment, the PMO risks becoming a bureaucratic bottleneck.
A Balanced Approach
A centralized PMO can be an excellent idea—but only when used strategically and selectively.
- Don’t be seduced by trendy management ideas or the illusion of control.
- Don’t sacrifice the independence and agility of project teams.
- Don’t forget why project management emerged in the first place: to bring responsiveness, focus, and accountability to work that doesn’t fit into traditional structures.
If you choose to establish a PMO, do it with intention—and always remember the goal is to support project success, not to control it.
