3 delivery models — Resource Augmentation (RA), Managed Service (MS), and Project-based (Full QCD Ownership)

 

Introduction

This document presents a comprehensive KPI Framework for Software Project Governance, covering three key delivery models commonly applied in IT service and software engineering environments:

1. Resource Augmentation (RA) – focusing on individual resource performance and efficiency.

2. Managed Service (MS) – focusing on service-level stability, SLA compliance, and operational excellence.

3. Project-based Delivery (Full QCD Ownership) – focusing on end-to-end accountability for Quality, Cost, and Delivery outcomes.

The framework is designed to align with PMO governance standards and ensure that each delivery model has clearly defined, measurable, and actionable indicators that reflect the project’s objectives and the Project Manager’s level of authority.

 

Purpose

The purpose of this framework is to:

• Standardize KPI measurement across different project types.

• Clarify what can and should be measured under each model.

• Enable data-driven performance evaluation of teams and Project Managers.

• Support continuous improvement through transparent QCD (Quality, Cost, Delivery) tracking.

 

Structure

The framework consists of three sections (one per delivery model), each containing:

• Q (Quality): Measures related to deliverable quality, compliance, and client satisfaction.

• C (Cost): Measures related to efficiency, utilization, and financial control.

• D (Delivery): Measures related to timeliness, reliability, and service continuity.

Each KPI includes its definition, formula, data source, frequency, target value, and ownership, ensuring transparency and ease of application across teams and departments.

 

🧭 I. Overview: Comparison of the 3 Delivery Models

Criteria	Resource Augmentation (RA)	Managed Service (MS)	Project-based (Full QCD Ownership)
Contract Type	FTE-based (staffing / body leasing)	SLA-based (service outcome)	Scope-based (product / solution delivery)
Ownership	Client owns full QCD	Vendor owns Q and D (partial C)	Vendor owns full QCD (Quality, Cost, Delivery)
PM Authority	Manages people and performance	Manages process, SLA, delivery	Full authority over scope, cost, resource, timeline
Risk / Reward	Low risk / limited reward	Moderate risk / SLA bonus	High risk / milestone-based reward
Measurement Focus	Individual performance	Service performance	End-to-end delivery outcomes

 

🧩 II. Recommended KPIs by Model

1️⃣ Resource Augmentation (RA)

🎯 Goal: Measure the performance and quality of individual resources provided to the client, not the final product outcome.

Dimension	KPI	Formula / How to Measure	Data Source	Frequency	Typical Target	Owner
Q – Quality	Code Review Pass Rate	(PRs approved on first submission / Total PRs) × 100 %	Git / Azure DevOps / Bitbucket	Monthly	≥ 90 %	Team Lead
	Defect Density (RA scope)	Defects caused by RA resources / KLOC or per sprint	Jira / QC tools	Monthly	≤ 0.3 defects/KLOC	PM
	Rework Effort %	(Rework hours / Total effort) × 100 %	Timesheet / Jira	Monthly	≤ 10 %	PM
	Client Feedback Score	Quarterly rating from client PM / tech lead	Survey / Retrospective	Quarterly	≥ 4.0 / 5	PM
C – Cost	Billable Utilization Rate	(Billable hours / Available hours) × 100 %	Timesheet / SAP	Monthly	≥ 95 %	PM
	Productivity	Story points / FTE / Sprint	Jira / Azure DevOps	Bi-weekly	≥ 8 SP / Sprint	PM / SM
	Attrition Impact	Days of delivery loss due to turnover	HR / PM Report	Quarterly	≤ 5 days	PM
D – Delivery	On-Time Task Completion	(Tasks completed on time / Total tasks) × 100 %	Jira	Sprint	≥ 95 %	PM
	Commitment Reliability	(Sprints achieving ≥90% of plan / Total sprints) × 100 %	Jira	Quarterly	≥ 80 %	PM
	Availability Rate	(Actual working hours / Planned hours) × 100 %	Timesheet / HR	Monthly	≥ 97 %	PM

💡 Optional composite metric:

RA QCD Score = (Q × 0.4) + (C × 0.3) + (D × 0.3)

 

 

 

2️⃣ Managed Service (MS)

🎯 Goal: Ensure the service performance, stability, and SLA compliance.
The PM has control over process, resourcing, and delivery KPIs — but not full cost or scope (as per the service contract).

Dimension	KPI	Formula / Description	PM Authority
Q – Quality	SLA Compliance Rate	(SLAs achieved / SLAs committed) × 100 %	✅ Full (QA, process, governance)
	First-Time-Right (%)	(Tasks completed correctly on first attempt / Total tasks) × 100 %	✅
C – Cost	Effort Efficiency	(Planned hours / Actual hours) × 100 %	⚙️ Partial (within contract scope)
	Resource Stability	(Stable FTEs / Total FTEs) × 100 %	⚙️
D – Delivery	Service Availability	(Uptime hours / Total hours) × 100 %	✅
	Response Time Compliance	(Requests responded within SLA / Total requests) × 100 %	✅
	Change Request Turnaround	Average time to close CRs	⚙️

📘 Typical targets:

• Availability ≥ 98%

• SLA Compliance ≥ 95%

• First-Time-Right ≥ 90%

3️⃣ Project-based (Full QCD Ownership)

🎯 Goal: Ensure the product or solution is delivered with full Quality, Cost, and Delivery accountability.
The PM acts as Project Responsible / Project Owner / E2E PM, with full decision-making authority.

Dimension	KPI	Formula / Measurement	PM Authority
Q – Quality	Defect Leakage Rate	(Post-release defects / Total defects) × 100 %	✅ Full
	Customer Satisfaction	Client rating post-delivery	✅
	Test Pass Rate	(Passed test cases / Total test cases) × 100 %	✅
C – Cost	Cost Performance Index (CPI)	Earned Value / Actual Cost	✅
	Cost Variance (%)	(Budget – Actual) / Budget × 100 %	✅
D – Delivery	Schedule Performance Index (SPI)	Earned Value / Planned Value	✅
	Milestone Achievement Rate	(Delivered milestones / Planned milestones) × 100 %	✅
	Scope Change Impact	% effort or cost increase due to CRs	✅

 

🧠 III. Summary of QCD Ownership and Measurement Focus

Model	Scope of QCD Ownership	PM Authority	Primary KPI Focus
RA	Q, C, D at resource level	Manage individual resource performance	Efficiency, Quality of contribution
MS	Q and D (full); C (partial)	Manage service delivery and SLA adherence	SLA, stability, process compliance
Project (Full)	Full QCD	Manage scope, cost, timeline, resources	CPI, SPI, Quality, Customer Satisfaction

 

 

🧩 IV. Summary Table: PM’s Measurement & Required Authority

Model	What PM Measures	What Authority PM Needs
RA	Resource efficiency & contribution quality	Authority to assign, evaluate, and monitor performance
MS	SLA and service output	Authority over process, delivery, and SLA enforcement
Project (Full)	End-to-end QCD outcomes	Authority to decide scope, resource, budget, timeline, and risk responses

 

 

🎯 Key Takeaways

• RA PM = QCD Controller of Resources
  → Focus on performance and efficiency metrics.

• MS PM = QD Owner of Services
  → Focus on SLA, quality, stability.

• Project PM = Full QCD Owner
  → Focus on scope, cost, timeline, risk, and overall delivery success.

Ambidextrous leadership (lãnh đạo hai tay thuận)

 Vô tình đọc được bài báo mới của cô Trang: Ambidextrous leadership and innovation ambidexterity in a business function: the role of managers’ psychological capital and proactive personality - https://www.emerald.com/jkm/article-abstract/29/5/1446/1263987/Ambidextrous-leadership-and-innovation?redirectedFrom=fulltext 

Thử tìm hiểu nó và áp dụng vào PMO như thế nào!

🧭 1. Định nghĩa Ambidextrous Leadership

Ambidextrous leadership (lãnh đạo hai tay thuận) là năng lực của người lãnh đạo trong việc cân bằng và linh hoạt giữa hai phong cách lãnh đạo đối lập — để vừa duy trì hiệu quả vận hành, vừa thúc đẩy đổi mới sáng tạo.

Cụ thể, đó là khả năng biết khi nào nên kiểm soát – khi nào nên trao quyền.

👉 “Ambidextrous” nghĩa đen là “hai tay đều thuận”, ngụ ý người lãnh đạo có thể sử dụng linh hoạt cả hai kiểu tư duy và hành động:

Loại tư duy	Mục tiêu	Phong cách lãnh đạo phù hợp
Exploit (khai thác)	Tối ưu hóa, ổn định, hiệu quả	Cấu trúc, kiểm soát, chuẩn hóa
Explore (khám phá)	Đổi mới, học hỏi, thử nghiệm	Trao quyền, khuyến khích sáng tạo, chấp nhận rủi ro

➡️ Ambidextrous leader là người biết “chuyển chế độ” giữa hai trạng thái này tùy vào hoàn cảnh.

---

⚙️ 2. Ví dụ cụ thể

• Khi dự án đang vận hành ổn định → bạn đóng vai Exploit Leader:

  • Tuân thủ quy trình, tối ưu KPI, đảm bảo chất lượng.

• Khi cần đổi mới (AI, automation, thử concept mới) → bạn trở thành Explore Leader:

  • Cho phép thử – sai, khuyến khích ý tưởng, giảm áp lực KPI, tăng sáng tạo.

🧩 Ambidextrous leadership = vừa quản lý hiện tại, vừa tạo tương lai.

---

💡 3. Ba thành phần cốt lõi (theo Rosing, Frese & Bausch, 2011)

1. Opening behaviors – khuyến khích đổi mới:

   • Trao quyền, chấp nhận sai lầm, khơi gợi ý tưởng mới.

2. Closing behaviors – kiểm soát hiệu suất:

   • Đặt mục tiêu rõ, theo dõi tiến độ, duy trì kỷ luật.

3. Flexibly switching – linh hoạt chuyển đổi:

   • Nhận biết khi nào nên open hoặc close, tùy theo giai đoạn hoặc mục tiêu.

---

🧠 4. Ứng dụng trong quản lý dự án và PMO

• Trong giai đoạn khám phá (ideation, POC) → khuyến khích nhóm nghĩ khác, thử nghiệm nhanh, “fail fast – learn faster.”

• Trong giai đoạn triển khai (delivery) → áp dụng quy trình, chuẩn hóa, kiểm soát rủi ro, timeline, cost.

• Trong PMO → giúp cân bằng giữa “governance & innovation” — vừa bảo đảm chuẩn mực, vừa không bóp chết sáng tạo.

Ví dụ thực tế tại Bosch hoặc doanh nghiệp công nghệ:

PMO leader khuyến khích team thử công cụ AI mới cho báo cáo PSR (exploration), nhưng sau khi có template chuẩn thì yêu cầu mọi dự án áp dụng thống nhất (exploitation).

---

🧩 5. So sánh nhanh

Phong cách	Tập trung vào	Rủi ro nếu quá đà
Exploit	Hiệu quả, kỷ luật, kết quả ngắn hạn	Giảm sáng tạo, trì trệ
Explore	Đổi mới, linh hoạt, kết quả dài hạn	Thiếu ổn định, dễ sai lầm
Ambidextrous	Cân bằng cả hai	Cần năng lực nhận diện & điều phối cao