Project Management and Strategy: Kill the Orphan Projects
An orphan project is one that nobody can connect to a goal the organization actually cares about. It can still be well run, on time and on budget, and still be a waste. This guide is about the link between project management and organizational strategy: how a goal becomes a set of projects, the tools that keep the chain visible (OKRs and the balanced scorecard), a made-up example that traces one goal down to four projects, and what a project manager can do when the link is weak or the strategy changes. For how a central office manages many projects at once, see our guide to enterprise project management.
The short answer
Strategy decides what the organization is trying to achieve and where it will focus. Projects are one of the main ways it gets there. Project management makes sure each project is done well. Strategy work makes sure it is the right project.
The test is simple. For any project, you should be able to finish the sentence: “We are doing this so that [strategic goal] moves from [now] to [target], and we will know because [measure].” If nobody can, the project is an orphan, and it is competing for people and money that real priorities need.
What strategy is, and what it is not
Strategy is a set of choices about where to compete or serve, how to win there, and what to leave alone. The “leave alone” part matters most for project work, because every project says yes to something and no to something else.
Strategy is not a long list of projects, a budget or a slogan on the wall. It is also not the same as the annual plan, though plans put strategy into dates and money.
For a project manager the working definition is practical: strategy is the reason the sponsor can give for funding this and not something else.
From strategy to project: the cascade
Most organizations break strategy down in layers. Names differ, but the pattern is similar.
| Level | The question it answers | Typical owner | Example |
|---|---|---|---|
| Strategy | Where are we going, and what do we not do? | Board and executives | Win on service in three regions |
| Objectives | What must be true in the next year or two? | Executives and department heads | Raise repeat purchases |
| Programs and initiatives | What bundles of change will move the objective? | Program sponsors | Customer retention program |
| Projects | What specific outputs will we build? | Project managers | Loyalty app, faster-delivery redesign |
| Benefits | What changes for the business once the output is used? | Business owners | More customers buying a second time |
Two things go wrong in this chain. Sometimes the top is vague (“be the best”), so nothing below can be tested against it. Sometimes the bottom runs on its own: projects start because someone has a budget or a good idea, and the strategy is quoted later to justify them.
Notice also that benefits sit after the project, owned by the business. A project can deliver its outputs perfectly and the benefit can still fail to appear if nobody changes how work is done. That is why strategy-driven teams name a business owner for each benefit, not only a project manager for each project.
Tools that keep the link visible
Three common tools help. None is required, and they overlap.
| Tool | What it does | How it helps projects | Watch out for |
|---|---|---|---|
| Objectives and key results (OKRs) | Pairs an ambitious objective with a few measurable key results | Gives each project a number it is supposed to move | Using OKRs as a list of tasks, or as a performance rating |
| Balanced scorecard | Tracks strategy across four views: financial, customer, internal processes, and learning and growth | Shows when a project helps one view but harms another | A scorecard with dozens of measures that nobody reads |
| Strategy map | Draws cause and effect between objectives | Shows which project supports which link in the chain | Pretty diagrams with no owners |
On OKRs, Google’s re:Work guide suggests picking three to five objectives with around three key results each, and grading them from 0.0 to 1.0. It describes 0.6 to 0.7 as the sweet spot for ambitious goals, and says OKRs are not synonymous with performance evaluation. Both points matter for project work. If a key result is a stretch, a project that gets you 70% of the way may still be a success. And if people fear being rated on it, they will set safe targets.
The balanced scorecard was introduced by Robert Kaplan and David Norton in the early 1990s. Its main idea is that financial results alone arrive too late to manage by. Customer, process and learning measures act as earlier signals. For projects, that means asking not only “will it pay back?” but “what will it do to customers and to our ability to deliver?”
A made-up line-of-sight example
All figures here are invented to show the method. A regional retailer has a strategy to win on service. One objective is to raise repeat purchases: today 40% of active customers buy again within 90 days, and the target is 46%.
With 50,000 active customers, six percentage points is 0.06 × 50,000 = 3,000 more repeat customers. Suppose each repeat customer adds about $90 in gross margin a year. Then the objective is worth roughly 3,000 × $90 = $270,000 a year. That is the size of the prize the projects share.
Four projects are proposed. The trace below asks each one how it moves the objective.
| Project | How it supports the objective | Benefit measure | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| Loyalty app | Gives customers a reason to return and gives the team data to follow up | Repeat purchase rate among app users | Clear link |
| Faster-delivery redesign | Late deliveries are the top reason for one-time buyers in the (made-up) survey | Share of orders delivered on time | Clear link |
| Customer data cleanup | Without it the loyalty app cannot match customers across channels | Share of customer records matched | Enabler: link runs through the app |
| New point-of-sale system | No one can say how it changes repeat purchases | None named | Orphan until a link is shown |
The orphan is not necessarily a bad idea. The old system might be about to fail, which would be a risk to the whole business, and that is a different strategic reason. But it should be argued on those grounds, with its own measure, instead of riding along under “retention.”
Notice what the trace does. It lets a sponsor compare projects on one page. It also shows dependencies: the data cleanup is only worth doing if the app goes ahead. If the app is cancelled, the cleanup should be reviewed too.
Benefits come first
The strongest habit that connects projects to strategy is to write the expected benefits down before the project starts, with an owner and a measure.
PMI’s 2016 Pulse of the Profession note on benefits reports that 74% of projects met goals and business intent when benefits were identified before the project started, and that 83% of organizations lacked maturity in benefits realization. Treat these figures with care. The page gives no sample size or method, the data is a decade old, and projects that define benefits early may differ in other ways too. It shows an association, not proof of cause. The practice itself is sensible regardless: it is cheap and it forces the conversation about purpose.
A one-paragraph benefit statement is enough: what will change, for whom, by how much, by when, who owns it and how it will be measured. Put it in the charter. Our guide to the initiating process group covers where it fits.
What a project manager can do
You may not set strategy. You can still protect the link.
- Ask for the sentence. At kickoff, ask the sponsor to complete the “so that” sentence from section 1. Write down the answer.
- Put the benefit in the charter. Name the measure and the business owner, not just the deliverables.
- Report against benefits. Alongside time, cost and scope, show whether the leading signs of the benefit are appearing. See our guide to project management metrics for examples.
- Flag drift. If scope changes weaken the link to the goal, say so at the change-control meeting, not in the closing report.
- Offer a stop option. Tell sponsors early what would make the project not worth continuing, such as a cost level or a changed assumption.
- Hand over the benefit. Before closing, confirm who is responsible for measuring it after you leave.
Some of this is uncomfortable, because it questions the sponsor’s idea. A neutral way to put it is as risk management: “I want to be sure we can show the board what this achieved.”
When the strategy changes mid-project
Strategies shift: a new executive, a market change, a merger. Projects in flight do not always shift with them.
When a change lands, run a short re-check rather than carrying on by default:
- Restate the original link between the project and the strategy.
- Ask whether that link still holds, is weaker, or is now gone.
- List what has been spent and what remains. Money already spent should not decide the answer; only future costs and future benefits matter.
- Present the options: continue, change the scope, pause or stop.
- Get a decision from the sponsor in writing.
Stopping a project is not a failure of project management when the reason is a good one. Finishing something nobody needs is the real failure. Close the stopped project properly, record the lessons and release the people. Our guide to the closing process group covers how.
Warning signs of a broken link
- The business case was written after the project was approved.
- Different executives give different reasons for the same project.
- The benefit has no named owner, or the owner is the project manager.
- Everything is “top priority”, so teams are stretched across too many projects.
- Status reports cover tasks and dates but never mention the goal.
- Nobody has ever cancelled a project.
- Benefits are claimed at closing with no measurement behind them.
Common mistakes
- Treating alignment as a one-time approval. The link needs checking at each stage gate or review.
- Confusing outputs with outcomes. “App launched” is an output. “More repeat buyers” is an outcome.
- Counting the same benefit twice. Two projects can both claim the same gain. Check totals before approving.
- Overloading the pipeline. More projects than capacity slows all of them. Strategy includes the choice to wait.
- Hiding the weak link. A project manager who knows the project has lost its reason and says nothing is not being loyal.
- Copying frameworks without the habits. A scorecard that is never discussed is decoration.
Learn more
If you want structured study of project selection, business cases and benefits, online providers such as Coursera and Udemy list project and strategy-related courses. We may earn a commission if you sign up, at no cost to you. We are not affiliated with any university. Check the syllabus for business case and benefits content, which not every project course includes. You can also read our guide to the benefits of project management.
Frequently asked questions
How does project management relate to organizational strategy?
Strategy sets the goals. Projects are one way of delivering the changes needed to reach them. Project management makes sure those changes are delivered well, and strategic alignment makes sure they are worth delivering.
What is strategic alignment in project management?
It means each project can be traced to a stated organizational goal, with a measure that shows whether the project helped.
What is the difference between a program, a portfolio and a project?
A project produces a defined output. A program groups related projects to gain benefits that managing them separately would not. A portfolio is the full set of projects and programs an organization chooses to fund. Our enterprise project management guide covers the differences.
What are OKRs?
Objectives and key results: a method that pairs an ambitious goal with a few measurable results. Many teams use them to set priorities each quarter or year.
What is a benefits realization plan?
A plan that says what benefits a project is expected to bring, who owns each one, how and when it will be measured, and what must change in the business for it to happen.
Should a project be cancelled if the strategy changes?
Not automatically. Re-test the link, look at future costs and benefits only, and let the sponsor decide among continuing, changing, pausing or stopping.
Can a project manager influence strategy?
Indirectly, yes. By showing which projects deliver their benefits and which do not, project managers give leaders the evidence they need to sharpen priorities.
Browse certificate, course and degree programs side by side.