Key Finding: The adoption of Portfolio Management (PfM) has not increased amongst organisations, but its use leads to increases in the key performance indicators of quality, scope, budget, time and business benefits. The 2004 survey report addressed portfolio performance as a secondary effect of enhanced PM capabilities. One of the primary conclusions drawn from the survey was that maturity levels did matter and that they improved not just project performance, but that of the portfolio of all projects. The 2007 survey results pointedly defined the emerging practice and stressed that its purpose was to promote the achievement of strategic business objectives. The report highlighted the increase in organisational adoption of PfM (53%, a 7% increase from 2004), and drew attention to the degree to which respondents leveraged various PfM capabilities, with Project Selection being the most common. In 2012, the survey results do not show an increase in adoption (remained at 53%), but they do provide a much more robust look at the effects of PfM and the tools that are available to support it. Since the adoption rate has not increased, we wanted to show where PfM is being used by depicting which industries and sectors are using PfM in Figure 15 below. Figure 15: Adoption of Portfolio Management by Industry The data analysed make a compelling case for the benefits that can be achieved with an effective deployment of PfM processes and dedicated software. 20 Insights and trends: Current Portfolio, Programme and Project Management Practices