Business Value-Oriented Project Management (BVOPM) is a new project management standard that aims to help eliminate waste during product development and increase business value added to all related processes within a project.

The organization that introduced this type of project management is Business Value-Oriented Principles (abbreviated BVOP), which created The BVOP Ultimate Guide, which actually presents all the details of Business Value-Oriented Project Management (BVOPM). The website of the organization where the official BVOP Ultimate Guide is published in

Features of the Business value-oriented project management (BVOP Project Management)

BVOPM originates from BVOP, which is the abbreviation of Business Value-Oriented Principles. This doctrine and trend in project management is part of a larger collection of knowledge containing all of the Business Value-Oriented Principles.

The entire collection of principles contains basic rules, activities, and recommendations for all departments within an organization. The additional central concept is that all people in the organization, regardless of the team and the department in which they are assigned, can contribute to the business value of the products that the organization develops, and the whole company.

BVOP proposes the idea of ​​the entire Project Management Office (PMO), as well as the Program Management Office, being part of a single office, and even the theory of ​​eliminating program or project management positions with all members of these teams linked in a single department.

Product management as part of project management

Another peculiarity of Business Value-Oriented Principles is the inclusion of some of the traditional skills and activities of product managers as part of the skills and activities of project managers. In doing so, BVOP aims to create cross-functional teams where work is done more quickly and easily.

New practices in the activities of business value-oriented project managers.

BVOP adds the following new activities to project managers:

  • Documentation management
  • Product Management
  • Waste Management
  • Making decisions
  • Measuring business value points
  • Attitude management
  • Defect analysis
  • Observation and optimization
  • Manage the Transparent Board of Project Issues

Practices preserved by classic project management:

  • Scope management
  • Risk Management
  • Closing projects

Business Value-Oriented Certification

BVOP offers its own project management certification for business value orientation as the preparation and training process is free of charge and the final exam takes the form of an online test on the organization’s website. The BVOP® Project Management certification is cited in the US online media (Top 13 project management certifications for 2020 by Sharon Florentine, DEC 20, 2019).

Testing BVOP concepts

Our team is always open to new and innovative approaches, but at the same time, we strive to validate and test ideas and working concepts continuously.

Here’s how we easily tested Business Value-Oriented Project Management (BVOPM).

In our real work, beyond the passion for journalism, we work on new projects every day. We chose two new projects that we needed to get started on and did the following.

We formed two teams – Team 1 and Team 2. Both teams were the same in size and skill. The two teams and the scope of the project are part of the University of California’s business activities.

Team 1 started work on the traditional Waterfall approach, which includes all initialization, planning, monitoring, and closing practices. These were also the requirements of the stakeholders anyway.

Team 2 started working on the BVOPM model and decided to develop the same project completely isolated from the officially announced plan. For Team 2, we assigned an Agile product manager with a lot of product knowledge and introduced all business value-oriented principles.

The work started in parallel.

Team 1

At the end of the first week, Team 1 created many classic documents such as the Project Charter and a collection and definition of all project stakeholders (and defined their involvement, interest, and influence).

At the end of the second week, Team 1 submitted a business plan and recommendations for the implementation of the work.

At the end of the third week, Team 1 successfully defined the scope of the project and received regulated budget values, costs, and tolerances from stakeholders.

At the end of the fourth week, Team 1 created a RACI matrix and the Human Resources Management Plan.

At the end of week five, Team 1 created a risk management plan.

At the beginning of the sixth week, Team 1 started real work. The project manager closely monitored project parameters and variables and communicated with stakeholders. Changes in coverage were addressed, and change requests were executed (including careful risk assessment).

At the end of the twelfth week, Team 1 completed the prototype.

At the end of week 16, Team 1 completed the tests.

At the end of the seventeenth week, Team 1 began the project closure phase.

At the end of the eighteenth week, Team 1’s project was officially announced to be successfully completed.

Team 2

At the end of the first week, the team had ready sketches, a prepared environment for working with all the necessary tools.

At the end of the second week, the Team 2 project manager defined the waste and presented it to the team. Half an hour later, the team understood the project manager’s views, and everyone agreed to eliminate waste that involved only one inconvenient design tool and one testing tool. The two instruments were replaced immediately with the consent of all team members.

At the end of week five, Team 2 finished work on the prototype.

At the end of week six, Team 2 completed the remaining test work, as many tests were created during actual development.

Basic calculation

Team 1 completed the project in 18 weeks.
Team 2 completed its project in 6 weeks.

The 12-week difference (three months) was the obvious difference in the use of traditional project management practices.

Team 1 was dismissed, and participants no longer communicated with each other.
Team 2 members still communicate daily and share skills and ideas.


We believe that a bright contrast in productivity is evident in the two project management approaches (three months, a big win for BVOP). We won’t be posting the cost difference, just mentioning that you can make basic cost estimates for both teams.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *