Initiating in PM²: From an Idea to a Project Ready for Planning
Ninth article in the “Learning PM² Through a Project” series
Initiating does not prove that an idea is interesting. It establishes whether a real problem exists, whether a project is the appropriate response, and whether investing in planning is justified.
Its outcome is not a detailed plan. It is a proposal solid enough to pass the RfP – Ready for Planning Gate.
Why this project, what value should it create, and do we have enough clarity to plan it?
The Four Questions
| Question | Expected answer |
|---|---|
| Why? | Problem, opportunity, objectives, outcomes and benefits |
| What? | High-level scope and deliverables |
| How much and when? | Preliminary budget and roadmap |
| Who? | Sponsor, initial governance, resources and authority |
Three Artefacts, Three Purposes
| Artefact | Question | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| Project Initiation Request | What is the idea? | Captures the need and starts the discussion |
| Business Case | Why invest? | Justifies investment and expected benefits |
| Project Charter | Which project should we plan? | Defines the project at high level |
The PIR opens the door, the Business Case justifies the investment, and the Project Charter gives the project its shape.
Project Initiation Request
The Project Initiation Request (PIR) briefly describes the business context, the need and desired outcomes. It does not yet prove that the project should be funded; it makes the need visible and assessable.
It may contain the problem, affected users, initial objective, possible options, urgency, evident constraints and risks, and a possible sponsor.
For Smart Bookings, the PIR identifies that gyms manage bookings and waiting lists through messages, calls and manual spreadsheets, creating administrative effort, errors and empty places. It proposes assessing an integrated booking, waiting-list and notification capability.
The PIR does not yet choose technology, a final budget or a release plan.
Business Case
The Business Case presents objectives and provides the justification for funding the investment.
Its central question is:
Is this project worth investing in compared with the available alternatives?
An effective Business Case connects:
- current situation and problem;
- business objectives and strategy;
- options, including doing nothing where relevant;
- recommended solution;
- preliminary estimates of cost, time, resources and dependencies;
- expected benefits and how they will be observed;
- risks, assumptions, constraints and operational impacts.
It is not a promise of perfect ROI: information is often estimated during Initiating. Its value lies in making assumptions explicit so that an informed decision can be made.
In the classic PM² Business Case example, the Business Manager is Responsible, the Project Owner is Accountable, the Solution Provider and Project Manager Support, the PSC and User Representatives are Consulted, and the AGB is Informed.
Project Charter
The Project Charter defines the project at high level: scope, time, cost, quality, deliverables, work packages, roadmap, budget and governance.
If the Business Case answers “why invest?”, the Charter answers “what are we setting up as a project?”.
It may define objectives, scope and exclusions, deliverables, Critical Success Criteria, milestones, preliminary budget, roles, stakeholders, risks, assumptions, dependencies, and initial quality, transition and Business Implementation approaches.
For Smart Bookings, the Charter may include class configuration, booking, cancellation, waiting lists and notifications while excluding online payments from the first release. It records PO–BM–SP–PM governance and a roadmap for analysis, development, pilot and release.
The Charter does not replace the Project Work Plan: it is high-level, while the Work Plan details activities, assignments, schedule and baselines during Planning.
The Logical Sequence
| Step | Result |
|---|---|
| PIR | Makes the need or opportunity visible |
| Business Case | Demonstrates why investment is reasonable |
| Project Charter | Defines the project to be planned |
The documents are not repetitions. Each reduces a different uncertainty.
Governance During Initiating
| Role | Contribution |
|---|---|
| Project Owner | Sponsors, directs and approves key artefacts and investment within authority |
| Business Manager | Defines need, objectives, outcomes and Business Case |
| Solution Provider | Provides feasibility, capacity and technical constraints |
| Project Manager | Supports estimates, roadmap, risks and project set-up |
| User Representatives | Contribute needs and operational constraints |
| PSC | Guides significant decisions |
| AGB | Decides beyond project authority |
Initiating is not a phase reserved for the PM. The PM structures the project, but justification arises from the business need.
RfP: A Decision, Not a Formality
The Ready for Planning Gate checks whether the organisation can responsibly invest in Planning. The problem, objectives, credible justification, high-level scope and constraints, sponsorship, governance, initial resources and assumptions should all be clear.
The decision may be to proceed, request clarification, postpone, stop the initiative or select an alternative option.
RfP authorises Planning, not full delivery. Executing is authorised by RfE when plans and baselines are mature.
Practical Case
A client asks to add online payments to booking. It is an interesting request, but not enough to start a project. The team must establish which problem it solves, for which gyms, whether it belongs in the scope, which security, refund and support constraints it introduces, and which value it creates against complexity and risk.
If sufficient justification does not emerge, the best decision may be not to plan the project. Good Initiating also prevents projects that should not begin.
Do Not Confuse
| Pair | Difference |
|---|---|
| PIR and Business Case | The PIR introduces the need; the Business Case justifies investment. |
| Business Case and Charter | The Business Case explains why to invest; the Charter defines which project to plan. |
| Charter and Work Plan | The Charter is high-level; the Work Plan details work, timing, resources and baselines. |
| RfP and RfE | RfP authorises Planning; RfE authorises Executing. |
Test What You Remember
- What is the purpose of Initiating?
- What is the difference between PIR, Business Case and Project Charter?
- Who is normally Responsible for the Business Case?
- What does RfP authorise?
Answers
- Turning an idea into a justified, high-level project proposal.
- The PIR captures the need; the Business Case justifies investment; the Charter defines the project to plan.
- The Business Manager.
- The start of detailed Planning, not full execution.
Flashcards
Q: Which artefact captures the initial idea?
A: Project Initiation Request.
Q: Which artefact justifies funding?
A: Business Case.
Q: Which artefact defines the project at high level?
A: Project Charter.
Q: Which Gate concludes Initiating?
A: RfP – Ready for Planning.
Exam-Style Question
Which artefact justifies the investment and expected benefits?
A. Project Initiation Request.
B. Business Case.
C. Project Charter.
D. Project Work Plan.
Correct answer: B. The PIR, Charter and Work Plan have different purposes.
In the Next Article
In the next article, we will enter Planning: the Project Handbook, Project Work Plan, baselines, logs and preparation for RfE.
Essential Sources
- European Commission, PM² Project Management Methodology Guide v3.1.
- European Commission, PM² Project Management Methodology – Highlights, 2025 Edition.