Bring work from Azure DevOps, Jira, Microsoft Project, Planner, Project for the Web, Smartsheet and Monday.com into one portfolio view. Teams keep their delivery workflows while leadership sees regulatory, technology, operational and customer initiatives together.
Capture requests and score them against published strategic and risk criteria, with budget, forecast, benefits and impact next to each initiative. Mandatory work stays identifiable as mandatory, and the cost and capacity consequences of protecting it stay visible rather than absorbed silently.
Build competing funding scenarios against one ceiling, then check the survivors against real availability in hours or % FTE. Over-allocation appears before the portfolio is approved, not after four programs discover they all depend on the same security team.
The question is rarely whether regulatory, resilience, modernization and customer initiatives matter. It is which combination fits the budget and the delivery capacity without creating unmanaged risk somewhere else. Build comparable scenarios, keep the mandatory commitments visible inside them, and choose with the full trade-off on screen.
Streamline Project Portfolio Management and Visibility at Scale
Integrations
Capture new project request, streamline evaluation and prioritization
Product
Structured Approach for prioritizing and aligning portfolios with strategic priorities and resource constraints
Product
Last updated 20 August 2026
Banking portfolio management, answered.
Run-the-bank is the cost of keeping the bank operating: existing systems, operations, support, licenses. Change-the-bank is investment in doing something different, whether that's new products, regulatory change, modernization or efficiency work. The distinction matters because both come from the same pot and the boundary gets fought over. A lot of what sits in run is really deferred change, and reclassifying it honestly is often the first useful thing a portfolio review does.
The agreed set of change initiatives a division or the whole bank has committed to deliver in a period, with funding, sequencing and ownership attached. It's different from a project list because it's a commitment: the book of work is what leadership said it would do and will be held to. The usual problem is that it mixes mandatory regulatory commitments with discretionary investment and treats both the same way.
Score both on the same model instead of exempting one of them. Mandatory work should rank high because its risk factor is genuinely severe, not because it skips assessment. Once regulatory change carries a score, the cost it imposes in displaced strategic investment becomes visible, and leadership can see exactly how much of this year's capacity the compliance agenda is consuming.
Yes. Projects run a configurable process of phases and stages with gates between them, and you choose which gates require approval. Named approvers review in the Approval Center and approve or reject with comments, and every approver has to sign off before a project advances. The decision history is retained, and a scoring model already being used on live work has to be cloned before anyone can change it.
They can. Alongside standard approvals handled inside PPM Express, there's an API-based option built for organizations already running an external approval or workflow platform. PPM Express sends the approval request out to your system, and your system calls back to approve or reject the stage transition. For banks with an established change-governance toolchain, that avoids standing up a second approval queue.
Run the scenario both ways. Pareto optimization shows the options where you can't improve strategic value, benefits, risk or cost without conceding something elsewhere, so the executive committee sees the actual frontier rather than one recommended plan. The aim isn't to underfund mandatory work. It's to stop the crowding-out from happening silently and then being discovered in December.
The model that was applied, the factor weights in force at the time, the scenarios compared, the one selected, and the numbers as they stood at that moment. Figures are baselined at the point of decision and the decision history is kept. Because a model scoring live change has to be cloned before it can be altered, the basis of a past decision can't be edited after the fact.
When numbers change upstream after you've built an analysis, PPM Express shows you exactly what moved and asks whether to take it, rather than absorbing the change quietly. A re-plan then starts from a known delta instead of another data-gathering round. On a multi-year program where technical standards and regulator clarifications arrive in installments, that difference compounds.
Each person's capacity comes from their work week and calendar exceptions, and allocation shows against it in hours, percent or FTE, with overallocation flagged. Books of work usually break on a specific group of people rather than on budget: the change specialists, data engineers or SMEs written into a dozen initiatives at once. That shows up as soon as the plans sit in one view.
Yes. Project Online and Project for the Web connect directly, and for the Microsoft Project Desktop client there's PPM Express Project Publisher, an add-in your planners use to publish schedules up from inside Project. Desktop 2016, 2019 and 2021 are supported. Plans come across up to 2,000 tasks and ten levels of hierarchy.
Every initiative carries budget, forecast, benefits and impact, baselined at approval, so the current position can be set against what was funded. Because the portfolio reads live from the delivery tools, the committee sees the position as it stands rather than a reconciliation put together the week before. That week-before reconciliation is normally where the credibility-damaging discrepancies come from.
You get data residency in the US or the EU, full GDPR compliance, and custom DPAs to meet strict regulatory requirements. Microsoft 365 and Okta SSO handle identity. Strict data isolation between customers, and detailed audit logs covering the portfolio of record. Prioritization models in active use are protected from silent edits, which tends to be the specific control an audit function asks about.
No. Horizon scanning, regulatory interpretation and obligation mapping are a separate discipline with their own tooling. PPM Express handles what comes next: turning agreed obligations into funded, sequenced, staffed initiatives, and evidencing how those calls were made. The two work together, and conflating them is a common reason people end up disappointed with one or the other.
.svg){kind=small}
