Policy to Successful Delivery - UK Government Web …webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100503135839/http:/... · Policy to Successful Delivery ... (IPPD) initiative, in ... There

Programmes & Projects Policy to Successful Delivery

Policy to Successful Delivery

www.ogc.gov.uk

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/


2 Policy to Successful Delivery


Introduction

This guide covers the steps from taking Policy through to Successful Delivery. It was originally developed by the Office of Public Services Reform (OPSR) as part of the Improving Project and Programme Delivery (IPPD) initiative, in joint partnership with OGC. This guide is aimed at policy developers and those responsible for delivering policy outcomes. It introduces the principles and concepts of programme and project management and provides a helpful summary of the key stages and management activities required for delivering successful outcomes.

Successful Delivery

The Successful Delivery of strategy and policies can best be achieved through the pragmatic application of Programme and Project Management skills and tools. Our rationale is that whoever you are, and whatever your role is in delivery, these skills and tools are capable of adding value to your work, that is, provided you don’t apply them by rote, and do tailor them to context and circumstance. Even in high pressure situations you will manage change better, rather than change managing you. Finally, this guide does not offer a single cut and dried solution. It challenges you with options for approaches and ideas. You are the judge of what you can learn and apply to your own circumstances. The whole process The whole process comprises the following stages:-

Getting Started: clarifying the desired outcomes and selecting a preferred option for achieving them.

Delivery Planning: to prepare a robust plan of how this change will be brought about: who is responsible for what, and when will it happen?

Delivering: doing the activities in the plan, keeping progress on track and managing risks.

Completing: closing the programme or project once outcomes are achieved and benefits are realised.

You may browse the entire process or go directly to the stage that is most relevant to you by clicking on the green text above. Within each stage are a number of themes which are considered in more detail. For example, Risk is discussed at a number of stages from identification, during the Getting Started stage, to analysis during Delivery Planning and management during the Delivering phase.


Policy to Successful Delivery 3

Getting Started

Introduction

The strategic priorities of a department set the context for all its projects and programmes.

Within this broad strategy, the first step in project or programme planning is to clarify what policy outcome you want to achieve. So Getting Started involves developing a clear vision of what is required and a preferred option for how that outcome will be delivered. To help this work, it is advisable to think through:

What is the result you want to achieve, and What causal factors influence that result.

What is the Preferred option?

Determining a preferred option will normally involve:

Understanding the intermediate and final impacts that contribute towards achieving the intended Policy Outcomes;

Prioritising the initiative against other commitments to determine how to assign scarce resources;

Considering the Stakeholders and the Risks involved for each of your main options or alternatives;

Evaluating the options, against appropriate criteria e.g. costs, risks, benefits, VFM and feasibility.

This analysis will usually require several “passes” before a preferred option emerges. In some situations, the earlier consideration of Policy Outcomes and Prioritising may need to be re-visited.


Activity Relationship

One sequence of addressing these questions is shown in the diagram on the left. This shows that:

The Policy Outcomes should be considered first, And then the initiative should be prioritised against

other commitments, Once this has been completed then the

stakeholders can be identified and the risks considered for each option.

This will enable a preferred option to be selected.

As shown in the diagram the identification of options, determining the stakeholders and assessing risks is in effect a recursive process that is carried out until one of the options is refined enough to enable the Policy Objective to be met. The feedback from this cycle to policy outcomes indicates that it is often necessary to revisit one of the activity steps when the outcome of one of the later steps questions one of the original assumptions or conclusions.

Starting Gate

An independent OGC Starting Gate review is applicable at any point in the early policy-to-project lifecycle to help departments assess deliverability. For more information, contact your departmental PPM Centre Of Excellence or [email protected]

Checklist

Getting Started :

The Senior Responsible Owner / Project Sponsor

Investment Decision Maker

HM Green Book on Options Appraisal

Stakeholder Map

Vision Statement


http://www.ogc.gov.uk/programmes___projects_starting_gate.asp

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/User_roles_in_the_toolkit_senior_responsible_owner.asp

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/User_roles_in_the_toolkit_project_sponsor.asp

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/User_roles_in_the_toolkit_investment_decision_maker.asp

http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/data_greenbook_index.htm

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/documentation_and_templates_stakeholder_issues_stakeholder_map.asp

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/documentation_and_templates_vision_statement.asp


Policy Outcomes

First-draft policy outcomes are likely to be defined in broad terms, at a high level this will include clarifying outcomes and defining policy objectives. It is vital that during the Getting Started phase, these outcomes are delineated in sufficient detail to serve as a solid foundation for the subsequent Delivery Planning and Delivering phases. It is also important to check that all members of the Sponsoring Group are agreed on the specific outcomes which the programme is intended to achieve. Disagreement or ambiguity around the desired outcomes at this stage is likely to lead to real difficulties in later stages.

Clarifying outcomes

Clarifying outcomes can be achieved through an iterative process of challenge and outcomes modelling. It might be helpful to get an independent review of this process to check the assumptions and reasoning in the modelling.

Example

The diagram shows an outcome relationship model for outcomes in the area of education, the outcomes are shown in ellipses and the arrows indicate links to other outcomes. The example shows that improved teacher motivation will lead to improved teacher retention. It may be difficult to quantify and value (i.e. measure) improved motivation. However, the example shows motivation is linked to retention, so by identifying benefits in retention levels (i.e. measuring the improvements), the programme can infer the achievement of improved motivation. The example also highlights that creating more teachers will not be achieved simply because there is improved teacher retention. There will need to be other initiatives in place that actively increase the number of teachers, such as



improvements in teacher recruitment schemes. Having established the overall model of outcomes, the relevant benefits can be identified which will provide the direction and focus for the programme.

POLICY OBJECTIVES

When the policy outcomes have been decided then the required Policy Objectives should be defined. These objectives should be SMARTER.

Specific Measurable Achievable Realistic

Timely Evaluated Reviewed

Defining the Policy objectives in this way not only enables the Policy to be successfully delivered but also enable the success to be measured during the Completing Phase.

Example

An example of a SMARTER policy objective is provided below:

Our one over-riding objective is:

A. To achieve our target of improving the basic skills of 750,000 adults by year x. This will be delivered through four key objectives which are:

B. To increase the demand for basic skills learning and help change the country’s culture of learning.

C. To ensure that activity takes place across Government and its agencies to gain access to potential basic skills learners and refer them to appropriate provision.

D. To improve the basic skills supply chain so that the planning and funding of literacy and numeracy provision is effective and well-coordinated.

E. To raise standards and quality in teaching and learning, thereby increasing achievement in literacy and numeracy skills among adults.

Plus one supporting objective which is:

F. To implement the strategy effectively through the work of the unit itself.



Prioritising

All departments have to contend with limited resources. Prioritising activities, bearing in mind the department’s capacity and capabilities - is critical to successful delivery. At the departmental level, and for constituent management units, the regular business planning cycle should ensure rigorous Prioritisation of all activities underway or committed to. Outside the regular planning cycle, if unexpected new projects or programmes are required, their priority against existing or already planned work should be judged. This will help to avoid "pet projects" which are not contributing to the overall business strategy. And whatever the scale or scope of your project or programme, scanning the totality of related activities (whether in your department or another) will help to identify opportunities for initiatives to contribute towards each other to their mutual benefit and alert you to possible conflicts.

One approach to Prioritising

One approach to Prioritising is to use an achievability/ worth doing matrix as shown in the diagram. For each initiative, programme or project, consider realistically how achievable it is, and how much value it will bring.

Consider the need to balance business as usual with the work required to implement the new initiative, programme or project. Is it worth it? If it is difficult to achieve, can the difficulties be overcome with more time, or more resources, for example. If it does not appear to be worthwhile, would changing the scope make a difference? Then revisit the total portfolio of activities and current priorities to check whether everything can be done. If not, decide what needs to change, for example delaying current initiatives or acquiring additional capability.



Stakeholders

What is a 'Stakeholder'

A 'Stakeholder' is anyone who directly or indirectly receives the benefit, or sustains the costs, resulting from the implementation of a policy. Identifying and effectively managing stakeholder relationships is critical to successful delivery.

Analysis of stakeholder interests

In the Getting Started phase, first a comprehensive map of stakeholders is needed to help clarify the desired policy outcomes. For example, the desired outcomes might need to be expressed in terms of the impact on key stakeholder groups. From this initial map, a more sophisticated analysis of stakeholder interests and influence is needed to help assess delivery options.

For Example

For example, the opposition of a powerful stakeholder might make one option more risky, and/or more costly.

The identification and analysis

The identification and analysis of stakeholder interests may also inform the selection of Project / Programme Board representatives and consultation/communication arrangements. At subsequent stages in project/programme delivery, assessing the extent to which stakeholder outcomes are being achieved will enable effective benefits management. Finally, information about the delivery of benefits to key stakeholders should be embedded into programme review processes.

Risks

After Identifying options and determining the Policy Outcomes it is necessary to consider the risks associated with each Option. Risks are a combination of threats and opportunities, which impact the magnitude of the objectives. Threats have negative impacts, opportunities have favourable impacts. There are two



types of risk: those that could emerge from the Policy Objectives (Strategic Level Risks) and those that are only related to the option being considered. The importance at this stage is to identify each risk and to make an initial assessment of its acceptability. The objective at this stage being to enable the best option to be selected. However, risk will need to be assessed in more detail and contingency plans developed, initially during Delivery Planning and continue to be reviewed while Delivering.

Risk Identification

When identifying risks you may want to consider the following: -

Look at what is at risk and why, Consider the opportunities opened up by the current policy initiative as that may also clarify where risk

lies, Aim to identify the 20% of risks that would have 80% of the potential impact, Consider any risks that may arise as a result of successfully delivering the Policy.

As shown in the diagram above, risks can occur from several sources. All sources need to be considered at this stage. The Checklist below only gives some indication of the types of question you may wish to ask when identifying risks:-.



Risks Checklist

Strategic level risks

What are the risks emerging from the environment in which the business operates and the environment in which programmes are run?

Other Policies

Existing programmes may both be a source of risk to a new programme and offer the benefit of experience for identifying risks:

What analysis of risk has already been carried out?

Has the analysis of risk from legacy programmes been realistically reviewed?

What has gone wrong in the past and what lessons can be learned from those experiences?

Are new inter-programme dependencies created?

Other initiatives within the organisation

If a new initiative arises during the course of a programme, it is important to work through the impact of the new initiative on the programme:

Is it possible to revise the programme to accommodate the new initiative?

If not, what are the impacts of delaying the new initiative's introduction or introducing it as a separate programme?

Have all known inter-programme dependencies been identified and considered?

Political pressures

Are political pressures on the programme well understood and documented?

Have they been regularly revisited through the life of the programme?

What risks threaten successful management of the programme?

Operational risks

Transfer of deliverables to operations:

Are there constraints that limit proper piloting and testing?

Are expectations realistic?

What risks arise from handing over project deliverables to the business and bringing in change with new systems or new ways of working?

Acceptability within business operations?

Have the relevant business managers been identified, whose areas will be affected by the outcome of the programme?

How are they involved in identifying and realising the benefits to the business through improved performance of their operations?

Acceptability to stakeholders

The same considerations apply to the programme's stakeholders:

Are stakeholders' requirements understood and reflected in the programme's aims and objectives?

Are the stakeholders suitably involved within the programme?



Options

To determine the best delivery option to achieve the desired policy outcome (and so contribute to an organisation’s strategic goals), assess all candidates systematically against objective criteria. The list of possible options should include the 'do-nothing option', as the baseline for comparative evaluation. The selection process should be transparent, to demonstrate integrity, and be documented in sufficient detail to enable audit. In certain circumstances (e.g. the awarding of a valuable contract) an independent, objective review of the options appraisal process may be necessary.

Questions to ask

Questions asked during option appraisal might include:

Is this consistent with our overall strategy and planned policy outcomes? Are all its elements consistent with the strategy / policy outcomes? Feasibility

- Will this option overtax available resources? - Is it technically possible? - Can people with the necessary competence be put in place in time? - Can the potential benefits really be delivered?

Cost and benefits - what sort of value equation does this offer? Affordability - even so, is it too expensive? Potential interactions - will benefits exceed the sum of the parts if joined with other programme's outputs? What risks and constraints have to be managed?

After the selection has been made, the preferred option should be kept under close review to ensure that nothing has changed to invalidate it, or diminish its benefits. Further advice on evaluating options can be found in the Treasury Green Book.

Evaluating your options

While evaluating options is not simply a matter of marking each option against some fixed criteria, the Tables provided below give an indication of the types of questions that can be asked when evaluating Options.

Strategic Fit Good Fit Adequate Fit Poor Fit

How well does the option fit the Strategic Priorities? If it is a poor Fit can we change the Priorities?

Achievability Easily

Achieved Achievable

Difficult to Achieve

To what extent does the option contribute to achieving the Policy Outcomes? If they are Difficult to Achieve can the option be modified or can we change the Priorities?



Risks Yes Unsure No

Are the risks associated with this option acceptable? If not can the option be modified to reduce the risk?

Affordability Very Affordable Affordable Not Affordable

Is this option within the budget available? If not can we reduce the change the Option or find other sources of Funds?



Delivery Planning

Delivery Planning takes the: -

Policy Outcomes, Risks, List of Stakeholders, The Preferred Option selected during Getting Started, and develops them further to produce a Delivery

Plan.

The Policy Outcomes, Stakeholders and Risks associated with the Selected Option are key inputs to this activity. The diagram below serves as a checklist of the issues which departments need to think about in drawing up a delivery plan.

Key Areas

The key areas for delivery planning are: -

Policy Deliverables, including how each will be achieved, with what Resources and against what Timetable of activities.

Communications, tailored to the Stakeholder audience. Risks, assessed by probability and impact, and supported by proposals for risk management. Resource planning, reflecting known or estimated requirements of the time, staff skills and numbers,

necessary infrastructure and budgets. Accountabilities, summarising who is responsible for doing what, by when, and to what standard, under

the project and programme structures described. How will progress be reported and monitored?



Guidance

Useful guidance is provided on the format for Delivery Planning in the Successful Delivery Pocket Book.

Starting Gate

An OGC Starting Gate review is designed to add value when work is still formative; policy options are still being identified; the political climate is ambiguous, or work is not yet sufficiently well defined or quantified for formal project and programme management assurance. For example:

before a public announcement has been made (to provide assurance that the initiative is not over-sold);

where an announcement has already been made ( to assess the risks and challenges facing the initiative, and how best to manage them;

when the initiative is about to become formalised as a project (to ensure that the project is being set up in the right way).”

The HMT Operational Efficiency Programme (OEP) report recommended that Departments should engage OGC Starting Gate reviews for IT-enabled initiatives before they are started as high-risk projects. Experience shows that launching a major high risk, multi-year project or programme without having any independent assurance, compounds the risk of failure later on - with all the attendant damage to policy outcomes, cost and reputation. An independent OGC Starting Gate review (which will precede OGC Gateway reviews) draws on “lessons learned”, good and bad, to help departmental leads to build practical delivery issues into their policy design. Starting Gate helps departments to ensure their major new policy initiatives will be implemented with the greatest possible chance of success.

On completion of Delivery Planning a Gate 0 review should be conducted. Gateway 0 focuses on the programme or project business justification. It also provides assurance to the programme or project board that the business requirement has been adequately researched and fits within the department's overall business strategy. Used at programme level, the review will, in addition, examine how the planned portfolio of projects aims to deliver the overall programme objectives, and that the programme management structure, monitoring and resourcing is appropriate.

This review tests the robustness of selected options. It checks the coherence, consistency and completeness of delivery preparations and planning, especially where accountabilities might have been dispersed amongst a number of individuals. This is in effect a Gateway where a Go / No Go decision is taken and is an essential review point, especially where delivery planning tasks have been delegated to a number of individuals.

Checklist

Delivery Planning :

Programme Manager

Project Manager

Contract Management

Risk Log (Risk Register)

Business Case

Business Strategy


http://www.ogc.gov.uk/documents/cp0043.pdf

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/programmes___projects_starting_gate.asp

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/introduction_to_procurement_gateway_0.asp

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/User_roles_in_the_toolkit_programme_manager.asp

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/User_roles_in_the_toolkit_project_manager.asp

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/documents/Contract_Management_in_Complex_Projects.pdf

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/documentation_and_templates_risk_log_risk_register.asp

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/documentation_and_templates_business_case.asp

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/documentation_and_templates_business_strategy.asp


Communications Plan

Project Brief


http://www.ogc.gov.uk/documentation_and_templates_communications_strategy_.asp

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/documentation_and_templates_project_brief.asp


Policy Deliverables

Policy Delivery is concerned with Outcomes that deliver benefits. However, to deliver these Policy Outcomes it will be necessary to produce a number of outputs or Policy Deliverables. While there will not be a deliverable for each Outcome, the policy being implemented will often require change, e.g. to a system or procedure. Examples of Policy Deliverables could include: the provision of new systems, documentation defining changed procedures, and promotional literature.

Example

Using the outcome relationship model diagram from the Getting Started phase, it can be seen that there are a number of possible Outcomes. For many of the outcomes shown in the diagram there will be one or more deliverable or output. For example "Promotion of careers in teaching" may well require an advertising campaign, and the production of literature.

"Increased professional development of teachers" may well require training courses to be developed. Other Deliverables may be linked to the delivery process itself. If the main Policy Outcome is "More effective learning by pupils" then we will need some way of measuring the degree of success that has been achieved. This measurement process is a deliverable.

Defining Policy Deliverables

When defining policy deliverables, in addition to defining what the output is and what work needs to be done, it is essential to get agreement from those who will be accountable for each deliverable in terms of what actions they will undertake and the timetable for delivery.



Communications

Planning how information about the policy initiative will be disseminated to stakeholders, people directly involved in the policy development, the rest of the organisation, and any other external organisations; is a key factor in ensuring successful delivery. One way of achieving this is to develop a Communication Strategy that defines how people will be able to feed back their views, issues and ideas.

A key objective

A key objective is to communicate early successes both to those directly concerned with the business operation, and to other key audiences, especially where rapid progress is required. The aim is to secure commitment and build momentum. Thereafter, effective communications will also facilitate knowledge-transfer across programme staff and into the business operations.

When considering your communication strategy you will need to consider the type of communication that will be required for each of the stakeholder groups.

As shown in the diagram

Two of the factors that typically influence this are: the potential impact that the policy will have on the stakeholder group; and the importance, or influence, that the stakeholder group may have. The diagram shows how the type of communication required could change for different levels of impact and influence.

A Communications Strategy

A Communications Strategy defines how communications will be established and managed during the running of the policy delivery.

Developing the Strategy will involve:

Confirming the identity of the relevant stakeholders and their needs;

Identifying the information to be communicated, both outward from the programme and inward to the programme from the stakeholders;

Selecting the appropriate way(s) of communicating to each (for example briefings newsletters, presentations), and the required frequencies;

Defining the associated costs and including these in the overall budget.



Communication is central

Communication is central to any change process - the greater the amount of change, the greater the need for clear communication about the reasons, the benefits, the plans and proposed effects of that change. It is important, therefore, that the Communications Strategy should be defined and implemented as early as possible and then adequately maintained throughout the programme.

The Communications Strategy should answer the following questions:

What are the objectives of communications? What are the key messages? Who are you trying to reach? What information will be communicated? When will information be disseminated, and what are the relevant timings? How much information will be provided, and to what level of detail? What mechanisms will be used to disseminate information? How will feedback be encouraged, what will be done as a result of feedback?



Risks

During delivery planning we analyse each risk identified when Getting Started and develop a risk mitigation plan.

High Level Risk Management

The diagram shows a high level risk management approach which will help you to manage risks across all aspects of the Policy Initiative.

This approach

This approach starts by identifying all the risks. This step will have been completed during Getting Started. The steps in the diagram are then followed for each risk in turn. The questions down the left hand side in effect help build an understanding of the risk in terms of:-

When, where and how they are likely it is to occur; Who owns the risk; What is the probability of the risk occurring and the expected impact; What are the interdependencies; What countermeasures are needed (actions to respond to the threat or opportunity).

The boxes in the central column are concerned with how we monitor and measure risk to enable the total impact of all risks to be minimised, while the right hand box "Further Risks" indicates that it is important to constantly monitor and reassess risk.

Levels of Risk

The diagram shows the levels that at which risks can occur and the types of decision that are required to mitigate the risk.

Additional information

Additional information about Risk assessment and management can be found in OGC's Introduction to Risk guidance.


http://www.ogc.gov.uk/documents/06072009_Introduction_to_Risk.pdf

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/documents/06072009_Introduction_to_Risk.pdf


Resource Planning

When planning the delivery of a new policy initiative you will need to consider the resources required, be they from: your organisation, your partners, your advisors, your suppliers or their suppliers.

What types of resources are needed?

The diagram summarises the types of resource you will need, the factors to be considered when planning and the information that will be needed for the resource in question.

Main resources

The main resources that need to be planned are the: -

Funding that is required to deliver the policy initiative; People that are required to develop the policy, manage the development and operate and systems that

result from the policy delivery; Facilities required, both during the delivery and operation phases; Tools that will be required to deliver the policy; Technology that will be required to enable the effective operation of the policy.

For example: When planning funding, in addition to the budget it will often be necessary to undertake cost benefit analysis and assess if the initiative will give value for money. It will then be necessary to identify all sources of funding, the timing of the funds (how much funds are required and when will they be required), and how these funds are to be applied.



Accountabilities

While it is not practical to create a full delivery organisation until delivering it is important to recognise the main accountabilities of the Executive and to involve some of the senior staff who will be responsible for aspects of delivery. This will enable the correct project structures to be put in place and the methods of monitoring progress and capturing customer feedback to be planned. What is key at this stage is to consider what governance roles are required, what each role holder will be accountable for, whether the initiative requires a programme or project, and the programme and project structure.

Governance roles

The list below can be used as a starting point to identify what governance roles may be required and what they are accountable for:-

Sponsoring Group: responsible for making the investment decision. For cross-cutting initiatives, clarify who holds the budget, who pays for what and when.

SRO: if it is a cross-cutting initiative, there should be a single SRO with overall responsibility for a successful outcome, supported by representatives from each of the collaborating organisations. Where private sector partners/suppliers are involved, there should be a senior manager with an equivalent role.

Programme / Project Manager: this role includes responsibility for communication with key stakeholders; effective operation of the programme / project; identifying/resolving cross-cutting issues.

Project delivery organisation: to fit specific project needs. Business Change manager(s): responsible for transition and embedding of change. For cross-cutting

initiatives, there should be one for each organisation involved. Business / service delivery team(s): external to the programme organisation. Where multiple agencies

are involved, you must define clear lines of reporting for each agency.

Programmes vs. Projects

Do I have a Programme or a Project?

A Programme can be described as a portfolio of projects and changes, planned and managed in a coordinated way, that change organisations to achieve a set of defined business objectives or benefits that are of strategic importance.

So what is a Project?

A project is a unique set of coordinated activities, with definite starting and finishing points, undertaken by an individual or team to meet specific objectives within defined time, cost and performance parameters.



Typical Differences between Project and Programme Management

Project Management Programme Management

Is a broadly spread activity and is concerned with more broadly defined change objectives that combine to deliver benefits.

Is an intense and focused activity that is 'driven' by the outputs that are to be delivered.

Is suited to managing large numbers of projects and activities with complex and changing inter-relationships, in an uncertain environment (that is, a larger and more dynamic environment).

Includes change control mechanisms but is best suited to objectives that are closely bounded and relatively certain.

Is about managing the delivery of a product, service or specific outcome.

Produces, through synergy, a wider set of benefits than the total of individual project benefits.

Is suited to managing the impact of, and the benefits from, the deliverables from a number of component projects and ensuring that there is a smooth and risk-reduced transition into a new business operation.

Aims to deliver benefits at the end of the project.

Delivers benefits both during and after conclusion of the work, having put in place the measurement mechanisms required to demonstrate delivery of the target benefits over time.

Continues until the policy outcomes have been achieved, which generally coincides with completion of all the constituent projects. (A programme may of course be stopped earlier if it is no longer viable or relevant).

Programme and Project Structures

There is no single programme or project structure to fit every situation. Discretion is needed to find what’s fit for purpose in each case. Whatever structure is chosen, it is critical to successful delivery that programmes and projects are managed to enable clear direction setting, decision-taking and oversight of progress, including triggering prompt remedial action if progress is behind the plan - but without incurring excessive paperwork or management overheads. It might be necessary to revisit and amend the structure as the project or programme progresses, to respond to changed demands or circumstances. The design of a programme structure should take account of considerations such as:

What level in the organisation do decisions need to be taken? Which different (internal or external) organisational groups need to be represented, e.g. finance or HR.? Who is representing users to ensure products or deliverables are fit for purpose? Do roles need to be split across more than one individual to be able to cope with large scale programmes? Do cross-organisation structures need to be designed?

Monitoring

Monitoring progress is a fundamental part of successful delivery. The basis for all monitoring activities should be the plans underpinning the programme or project. Monitoring progress requires relevant and up-to-date information on progress, presented in a usable manner, to be available at regular points during the programme. It is often useful within an organisation to adopt some simple, standardised reporting formats, to



help ensure that senior managers understand and will act on the information that is reported up to them. What data are needed to inform progress monitoring and how these will be collected, should be identified as early as possible to enable efficient mechanisms or systems to be established.

This is important, for example, to prevent arduous or duplicated data gathering burdens being placed on those further along the delivery chain. It is also crucial to identify early on in your programme what the time lag will be between your activities and the measurable impact. Do you have time to adjust your plans if you are not achieving what you expected? Often the views and experience of customers are crucial to achieving desired outcomes.



Delivery

Effective Delivery

Effective delivery requires that interdependencies are managed effectively. Interdependencies can occur anywhere: between programmes, projects or individual deliverables. They are often complex and dynamic, so need to be assessed and managed as an ongoing process.

Scope of work Whilst defining the scope of the work, you will need to judge:

Whether this is a programme, made up of a number of interrelated projects, or a discrete project. How many separate work strands or streams are needed and how should these be aligned to deliver

objectives. What mix of skills, numbers of people, money and time, each strand, and the programme/project overall

will demand. Who should steer, independently quality review, or produce the deliverables. Whether the risks, dependencies and constraints have been recognised and understood at all levels. Whether your plans are well enough developed to allow you to anticipate risk, and manage it by

countermeasures and contingency plans. How to sustain your focus on producing and implementing suitable deliverables to achieve the intended

outcomes. How you will know that you are succeeding or adjust your plans if you are not, including cancelling the

project or programme with minimum time and resources wasted if you are no longer sufficiently confident of delivering.



Checklist:

Delivering :

Strategies for risks, benefits, stakeholders, quality, resources

Programme Plan (includes dependencies, schedule, transition)

Programme Organisation (structure with roles and responsibilities)

Benefits Realisation Plan

Risks and Issues Logs

Project Initiation Documentation (which include Project Business Case, Project Plan, Organisation, Risks);

Reviews (e.g. Gateway Reviews)

Progress Reports (e.g. Highlight Reports)

Project Delivery :

Testing strategy

User Acceptance


http://www.ogc.gov.uk/documentation_and_templates_programme_plan.asp

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/introduction_to_programmes_governing_a_programme_2343.asp

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/documentation_and_templates_benefits_realisation_plan_.asp

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/documentation_and_templates_risk_log_risk_register.asp

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/documentation_and_templates_project_initiation_document_pid.asp

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/documentation_and_templates_project_initiation_document_pid.asp

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/what_is_ogc_gateway_review.asp

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/documentation_and_templates_testing_strategy___test_plan.asp

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/delivery_lifecycle_end-user_support.asp


Planning

The planning process

Programme planning is a continuous process. We have already seen that the delivery plan is the input to the delivery process. Planning a programme requires the integration of various strategies so that the Programme Plan reflects not only the schedule of projects within the Project Dossier, but also the way the programme is to manage quality, risk, communications, and benefits. The Programme Plan is formulated, reviewed and refined throughout the programme lifecycle.

The processes of Programme Management are:

The programme management team will be responsible for continual monitoring of progress, however, key review points or milestones should be identified and planned where a formal assessment of progress and benefits delivery can be made. These reviews may involve internal assurance, peer-level assessors, audit, or external assessors, depending on the type of programme and its governance requirements. Often sufficient time and resources is not allowed for reviews. Whether the programme or project is subject to formal OGC Gateway Reviews or not, all projects and programmes require formal review and independent assessment at key points in the delivery cycle.



Organisation

The application of a Programme Management regime should not automatically impose the need for additional management resources. Programme Management roles and responsibilities should be seen as 'logical roles' that, for a small programme, may simply be expansions of existing responsibilities. For a major programme, however, the work and responsibilities of these roles will be very considerable and the costs of a fully constituted Programme Management structure with full-time participation as well as additional support would be justified. In all cases, however, it is essential that the key responsibilities are clearly defined and understood by all personnel involved. The roles needed to manage a programme should not be passive roles to monitor and review events; rather, they should be proactive and action-oriented roles, with responsibility and accountability to match.

Primary roles

There are three primary roles for managing a programme:

Overall leadership and ultimate accountability for the programme, the Senior Responsible Owner (SRO). Someone with responsibility for day-to-day management of the programme, its risks, issues, conflicts,

priorities, communications, and ensuring delivery of the new capabilities, the Programme Manager which requires dedicated support.

A senior member of the organisation with responsibility for realising the benefits through the integration of the new capabilities into the business operations, Business Change Manager.

Achieving outcomes requires active management of the change process. Appointments to programme roles should be based on selection of individuals who demonstrate the required competencies with the necessary skills and experience to deliver these outcomes. Rewards and recognition systems need to be linked to delivery of the programmes benefits encouraging staff to stay in post until the desired outcomes are achieved. High turnover of staff during a project can add to the risks.

Programme roles

The figure below shows the core programme roles and how they inter-relate.



Programme Sponsorship

Programme sponsorship means providing the investment decision and top level endorsement of the rationale and objectives for the programme. Sponsorship also means the continuing senior management commitment to promoting and supporting the changes introduced by the programme, and championing the implementation of the new capabilities delivered by the programme to ensure that the required benefits and outcomes are delivered. The programme’s sponsors are key stakeholders and form the Sponsoring Group for the programme.

Programme Direction

Working with the Sponsoring Group, the role of Programme Director / SRO has overall accountability and personal responsibility for the successful delivery of the programme. The role is fulfilled by an individual who is at the appropriate senior level, with responsibility for delivery, and who can provide leadership and authority to the programme team. The individual who fulfils this role should be a member of the Sponsoring Group and must be empowered to direct the programme with appropriate decision-making authority.

Managing the programme

Managing a programme is not simply a line management function overseeing the delivery from a number of projects. Programmes do not typically have a clear path towards a well-defined goal which can be managed using traditional approaches. The role of Programme Manager is responsible for leading and managing the setting up of the programme and establishing the project portfolio required to deliver the new capabilities. The role is also responsible for coordinating, aligning, monitoring and progressing the work of the programme within an often uncertain and ambiguous environment. Successful delivery will depend on effective management (by the Programme Manager) of the risks, issues, conflicts, priorities, communications and personnel involved with the programme. The skills and experience required for the Programme Manager role include the ability to work positively within the uncertain environment of Programmes and with an often diverse range of individuals and groups.

Delivering change

Delivering change will not happen on its own. The required outputs from the projects need to be defined and targeted based on their contribution to delivery of the required benefits and outcomes. The role of Business Change Manager is responsible for benefits definition and management throughout the programme. Delivering benefits requires the programme to be closely integrated with the mainstream business activities since it is only through embedding changes as "business as usual" that the benefits will be realised. The Business Change Manager role is key to providing the bridge between the programme and the business operations. In many business change programmes, there will need to be a number of individuals appointed to this role reflecting the number of business areas requiring the implementation and transition to new ways of working and new business operations.

Supporting the programme

Programmes are major undertakings often affecting large numbers of people and organisations, and generating substantial volumes of information. The "engine room" of a programme is the Programme Office providing a "centre of excellence" and information hub. All information, communication, monitoring and control activities for the programme are coordinated through the Programme Office.



Summary

In summary organisation:

Requires context-specific solutions. The aim of the PM organisation should be to maximise delegation whilst maintaining coherence, focus &

control. The organisational structure should facilitate an understanding of how the policies and outputs fit together

to produce the outcomes. There is an ongoing need to monitor where the structure may need adjusting to address weaknesses and

capitalise on strengths.

The structure will probably need to change to take into account progress and new information.



Review and Control

Programmes are no different to other activities in that progress should be assessed at regular points and performance measured against required standards and pre-set criteria. Programmes should be able to demonstrate that the management processes employed and the governance arrangements applied are effective and appropriate for the programme, that the particular needs of stakeholders are being, or are likely to be, met, and that the investment is delivering the required results. Key processes to be considered is how the required information is captured, benefits are reviewed and how the gateway process is applied.

Gateway Reviews should be planned and scheduled at key points throughout the programme. At a minimum reviews should be done at the end of each major block or “tranche“.

Progress and performance

Reviews can address a range of progress and performance assessment, including:

External audit scrutiny

Internal audit requirements

Peer review

Independent expert scrutiny

Management assurance

Benefit review

Quality assurance

The Programme Office is responsible for establishing and implementing the appropriate audit, assurance and review processes for the programme. As the programme progresses, project managers for the projects within the Programme Portfolio should submit regular reports summarising their actual and projected delivery of products or outcomes. These reports should include specific details on delivery dates and costs. By monitoring the Programme Plan closely, the Programme Manager will be alerted to any inter-project dependencies that are becoming critical in terms of delivery dates, resource utilisation, or costs and benefits. The Programme Plan should be publicised regularly to ensure all affected and interested parties are kept fully informed and able to provide feedback as appropriate. In Project Management, control is all about decision making and is the central role.

What the purpose of control?

The purpose of control is to ensure that the project:

Is producing the required products, which meet the defined Acceptance Criteria Is being carried out to schedule and in accordance with its resource and cost plans and that it remains

viable against its Business Case.

Monitoring activities facilitate the checking and reporting on progress against the plan. Control activities promote revisions to be made to the plan in response to issues discovered during monitoring.




Controls ensure that, for each higher level of the Project Management Team, the next level up of management can:

Monitor progress. Detect problems.

Compare achievement with plan. Initiate corrective action.

Review plans and options against future scenarios. Authorise further work.

Capturing Information

Controls must also cover capturing information on changes from outside the project and taking the necessary actions. New procurement projects within Civil Central Government are subject to Gateway Reviews. Procurements are defined as any finite activity designed to deliver a Government requirement and involving Government expenditure.

The OGC Gateway™ Process

The OGC Gateway Process examines programmes and projects at key decision points in their lifecycle. It looks ahead to provide assurance that they can progress successfully to the next stage; the process is best practice in central civil government, the health sector, local government and Defence.

The process considers the project at critical points in its development. These critical points are defined as Gateways. There are six Gateways during the lifecycle of a project. The process emphasises early review for maximum added value.

Benefits Review

The process of realising benefits should be kept under systematic review at agreed intervals. At the end of each 'tranche', a report should be delivered on benefits realised, and a post programme review concluded after programme closure. It may be useful to consider the assessment of benefits from both an “internal” and “external” perspective. The internal perspective will involve measuring reduction in costs, for example. The external perspective, for





example via a programme audit function, will involve assessing whether the potential for achievement of benefits remains on track and ensuring all the possible benefit dependencies are considered. Input from stakeholders, including the business managers responsible for the changed operations, will be necessary to provide evidence of benefits achieved. It is helpful to have independent reviewers evaluate what benefits have been achieved, according to pre-determined criteria and measurements. This will ensure objective judgements are made about the business impact of implemented policies.

Review Process

The review process is to:

Monitor benefit profiles and the benefit realisation plan to provide assurance that the programme's strategic objectives, scope and planned policy benefits are not compromised.

Re-prioritise or realign elements of the programme to further optimise benefits. Report progress to stakeholders. Track improved performance in the business operations impacted by the implemented policies against

pre-determined measures. Build capability by documenting and sharing knowledge on how better to manage the delivery of benefits

in future programmes.



Risks and Issues

The programme environment is complex and dynamic. At any point in a programme's life there will be events or situations that may adversely affect the direction of the programme, the delivery of its outputs or achievement of its benefits.

Programme's Risks

These are the programme's risks.

So what is the difference between a risk and an issue?

Risks are things that may happen at some point in the future and require positive management to reduce their likelihood of happening or their impact on the programme, or both. Issues are things happening now that are affecting the programme in some way and need to be actively dealt with and resolved. Risks, should they occur, turn into issues.

Risk ownership

Risk management is primarily the responsibility of the Programme Manager, however, each identified risk should be allocated to an individual who is best placed (with relevant seniority and responsibility) to monitor the risk and manage any appropriate mitigation or contingency actions. In many instances, this ownership will fall to the Programme Manager, however, the Programme Director and other members of the Sponsoring Group are equally likely to be identified as the most appropriate risk owner. On major or complex programmes, the responsibility for risk management may be assigned to a dedicated Risk Manager role. The individual appointed to this role will work with the Programme Manager and will have specialist expertise in managing risks.

Responses to risk

Each risk will have a range of possible responses that will affect either the probability of the risk occurring or its impact should the risk occur.



For Threats, the options are:

Reduction Proactive actions taken to reduce:

The probability of the event occurring, by performing some form of control (see below for the four types of control available), or

The impact of the event should it occur.

Typically involves changing one aspect of the organisational activity, i.e. changing the scope, procurement route, supplier or sequence of activities.

Removal

Transfer A third party takes on responsibility for an aspect of the threat (see below for the four traditional categories of transfer).

Retention A conscious and deliberate decision is taken to retain the threat, having discerned that it is more economical to do so than to attempt a risk response action, for example. The threat should continue to be monitored to ensure that it remains tolerable.

Share Modern procurement methods commonly entail a form of risk sharing through the application of a pain/gain formula: both parties share the gain (within pre-agreed limits) if the cost is less than the cost plan; or share the pain (again within pre-agreed limits) if the cost plan is exceeded. Several industries include risk sharing principles within their contracts with third parties.

For Opportunities the options are:

Realisation Identifying and seizing an opportunity

The realisation of an opportunity ensures that potential improvements to an organisational activity are delivered. For example, if there is an opportunity to complete a project early and reduce the headcount, the realisation of the opportunity would be to achieve the reduced costs possible through a lower-than-planned headcount.

Enhancement Seizing and improving on an identified opportunity

Enhancement of an opportunity refers to both the realisation of an opportunity and achieving additional gains over and above the opportunity. An example may be negotiating a lower rental figure for existing occupied premises and restructuring the organisation to reduce the floor space required. Or it may include achieving financial gain from finishing a project early and gaining additional revenue from deploying the released resources on another project.



Exploitation Identifying and seizing multiple benefits

Exploitation refers to changing an activity’s scope, supplier or specification to achieve a beneficial outcome without changing the objectives or specification. An example is where a contractor on a fixed-price contract manages to obtain a lower price from an alternative supplier on multiple subcontracts, while maintaining the desired specification.

Implementing responses

Having determined the most suitable responses to the identified risks, the relevant actions should be implemented to achieve that response. Risks and the selected responses to them should be communicated to stakeholders, particularly those who are directly affected either by the risk itself or by the actions taken to contain the risk.

Embedding risk management

The activities involved in risk management, for example, risk identification and evaluation, take time to do. Risk management is not an optional task for the programme. Risk management activities need to be an intrinsic part of the way the programme is planned and run.

It is also important to ensure the Risk Management Strategy is kept up-to-date by reviewing it and amending as necessary to reflect practical experience. The Risk Management Strategy and Risk Log should be accessible to everyone with an interest in the programme.



Leadership

Programme Management involves translating policy objectives into constituent elements to be delivered through a number of project teams. This complex process demands that people perform at their best; the people working in the programme must want to succeed. The leadership skills and behaviours of the Programme Director, Programme Manager and others at all levels of the programme are important.

Effective leadership

Effective leadership is characterised by:

Shared purpose but clear, distinct accountabilities

Unambiguous communication Openness and trust

Flexibility, creativity and innovation Constructive, honest and fair feedback and challenge Learning from, not repeating mistakes

Care and development of individuals Commitment to delivering for customers

Autonomy matched to accountability Insight into sources of individual motivation including genuine thanks Clear expectations about individual and team

performance

Teamwork (where it is the best approach to deliver the particular task)

Consistency

A system of competent performance appraisal, and equitable reward

The absence of fear; and aggression

Key Principles

The key principles for effective leadership as defined in MSP are: -

Empowered decision making, giving individuals the appropriate autonomy to fulfil their role effectively. Motivation, reward and appraisal systems are key to encouraging the right attitudes and energy to drive the programme;

Visible commitment and seniority to: - ensure the right resources are available to the programme - influence and engage with the stakeholders - balance the programme’s priorities with those of the ongoing business operations - focus on delivery and realisation of the business benefits

Relevant skills and experience to provide active management of: - the inherent cultural and people issues associated with change - the programme’s finances and the inevitable conflicting demands on resources - the co-ordination of the projects within the programme through to the transition to new operational services.

The following Tables give examples of both effective and Ineffective behaviour in each of the three components of effective Management: -



Leadership

Effective Behaviour Ineffective Behaviour

Visible and approachable to all Says one thing and does another

Acts with honesty and integrity Takes contrary views as a personal criticism

Sound application of knowledge and expertise Ignores wider interests

Resilient and determined Accepts the status quo

Challenges and is prepared to be challenged Aloof and arrogant

Takes difficult decisions Aggressive not assertive

Takes personal responsibility for making progress

Direction


Clarifying what needs to achieved Looks to others for direction

Involving people in deciding what needs to be done

Takes an overly cautious approach

Communicating the vision for the policy initiative Assumes people know what is required of them without being told

Setting Objectives Loses sight of the big picture

Creating practical and effective plans

Establish standards of behaviour

Agreeing clear responsibilities

Initiating change to make things happen



Motivation


Gets to know individuals Works with only the most competent people

Adapts leadership style to suit different people, cultures and situations

Writes rather than speaks

Knows when to step in and when not to Has fixed management style

Listens and takes account of diverse views Does not delegate challenging or interesting work

Is uncomfortable working with people from diverse backgrounds

Gives and expects constructive feedback

Coaches individuals so they give their best Blames others

Tackles poor performance Wields the red pen

Praises achievements and celebrates success Avoids giving bad news



Completing

Introduction

Earlier we described a project as a unique set of coordinated activities with definite starting and finishing points. A programme was described as a portfolio of projects that change an organisation to achieve a set of defined business objectives or benefits. Projects and programmes have a finite life. Projects focus on delivering products or outputs; programmes are about co-ordinating a range of related projects to achieve a desired outcome.

Projects and programmes have a finite life. Projects focus on delivering products or outputs; programmes are about co-ordinating a range of related projects to achieve a desired outcome.

What activities ensure an effective close down of the project? There are a number of activities that ensure an effective close down of the project / programme:

Benefits realisation - The focus of benefits management is on the actual realisation of benefits. Benefits management is the activity of identifying, optimising and tracking the expected benefits from business change to ensure that they are achieved.

Closure - The disbanding of a programme or project, the handover to the new system or state - the transition.

Review and Evaluation - Post Project Evaluation and Reviews, (PPE & PPR) Project Implementation Reviews (PIR) If we are to improve we must learn from both our successes and our failures. How well was the programme / project run? Have the benefits been delivered?

Lessons Learned - These should be captured throughout the project / programme - dissemination to others is the key.

Follow on actions - Listing things to be done, considering whether we need to start another change? SRO sign off.

Checklist

Completing :

Lessons Learned Report,

Reviews (e.g. Post Project Report or Post Implementation Review),

Project Evaluation Report

Handover


http://www.ogc.gov.uk/documentation_and_templates_lessons_learned_report_.asp

http://www.ogc.gov.uk/delivery_lifecycle_post_implementation_review_pir.asp


Benefits Realisation

Benefits Management

Benefits management involves monitoring for the emergence of expected policy benefits, which must have been specified previously into measurable elements. It then requires action by the Programme Management Team to optimise the business impact of individual and combined benefits. Benefits management covers:

The identification, timing and subsequent realisation of measurable business benefits.

Describing their measurable elements. Planning their realisation. Specifying, explaining and establishing a

shared understanding of policy benefits amongst those developing, tracking and delivering them.

Clarifying then monitoring the costs attached to developing and delivering business benefit.

Allocating accountabilities to named individuals for delivery of benefits.

Summary of responsibilities

The table below summarises the responsibilities for the activities involved in Delivering Benefits?

Role Responsibilities

Business Change Manager

Assessment of benefits achieved and establishment of ongoing measurement processes

Programme Director Leading the benefit review, release of personnel, sign-off for programme closure

Benefits management process



Closure

Closing a Programme

Programmes can last anything from a few months to several years. The longer a programme lasts, the harder it can be to ensure it is closed at the appropriate point. Programme plans must include the process of closure once pre-determined criteria have been met. Benefits will have been delivered and realised during the running of the programme, however, some benefits, and possibly the majority of them, may not be fully realised until some time after the last project has delivered. This process identifies the need for future assessment of benefit realisation as well as a formal review of those achieved so far. Sometimes, not all benefits have been delivered when the programme is closed. So 'Closure' should incorporate the review of what has been delivered, and schedules future evaluation arrangements. Additionally, the process 'signs-off' completed projects and work streams, enabling the handover of responsibilities to new owners. In the event of premature closure, before the benefits have been delivered, outstanding deliverables or projects may need to be formally reassigned to other managers.

Principles to project closure

The main principles of project closure are that: Every project should come to an orderly close. Customer and Supplier should be in agreement that the project has delivered what was expected; this

expectation should have been defined at the outset of the project.



Everyone who has provided support for the project should be warned of its close, so that they can plan for the return of the resources provided for that support.

Project Records should be retained to assist with possible audits or the production of estimating metrics.



Review and Evaluation

Programme Benefit Review

At the end of the project or programme, there should be a formal assessment or evaluation of its success (or otherwise). In line with guidance from HM Treasury’s Green Book, evaluation involves consideration of the economy, efficiency and effectiveness to determine VFM, how well the objectives have been met and whether there were any unintentional outcomes.

Evaluation brings to the fore the lessons learnt for the future. Plans for evaluation should form part of the initiation and planning stages. To ensure that evaluation is consistently applied it is important to maintain a clear requirement, endorsed by senior management, that evaluation is the specific responsibility of a senior manager with appropriate funding for monitoring and progressing the evaluation process. Evaluations also need to take account of longer term impacts where outcomes may not have an immediate effect. Reviews should be planned and scheduled at various points both during and after completion of the programme. The purpose is to:

Identify planned and additional benefits against plans. Evaluate change to business performance against the pre-determined baseline. Establish progress to, and achievement of the desired policy objective. Assess the overall performance of the programme Continuously improve the wider organisation by exposing programme learning.

Reviews scheduled after completion are often referred to as Post Implementation Reviews (PIRs) or alternatively Post Project Reviews (PPRs) or Post Project Evaluations (PPE).

Post Programme Review

A further Review should be scheduled for an appropriate point after closure of the programme - the Post Programme Review. This Review should assess the success of the programme's entire benefits realisation process, including those benefits that may not have been ready for measurement and assessment when the programme closed. The Post Programme Review should be scheduled when the transformed organisation has reached a 'steady state' and the changes delivered by the programme have become established into the business operations. To reinforce the work of the programme, a continuous improvement philosophy should be established so that the organisation is able to encourage further benefit achievement and improvements in performance.

Gateway

The OGC Gateway Review programme includes a review at the end of the cycle - Gate 5. For further details see 'tools' section and Further Information Section.



Lessons Learned

Although it is important for organisations to learn throughout the life of a project or programme, it is particularly important that Follow On Action includes formal summary of Lessons Learned. These lessons should be disseminated as appropriate throughout and beyond the organisation to those who might benefit from them to enable continuous improvement. One of the outputs of programme closure highlighted in Follow on Actions is a Lessons learned report and programme assessment. Articulating and documenting lessons learned is not an exercise that is carried out at the very end of a project or programme but rather is undertaken throughout the project / programme. As part of the completion of a project / programme these lessons need to be drawn together and disseminated widely.

What the report should cover

The report should summarise findings from interim reviews as well as the final review. To make a difference to future practice, it must be a frank document, reflecting insights in the round from the internal team, policy, technical and user representatives, those involved in steering the programme and external stakeholders. It should summarise what was done well, how it was done, and the impact it had; and what could have been done better, how, and the impact. Identify the lessons learned in a format that will be relevant to and useable by those who you hope will benefit from them.

One of the many functions and services provided by the Programme Office is that of carrying out health checks and advising on solutions during the lifetime of the programme and individual projects, for example, facilitating workshops to ensure that the programme delivers its benefits and lessons learned are disseminated.

Evidence statements

The following table provides examples of evidence statements and alongside a headline lesson learnt:

Evidence statement Headline lesson learnt

A major project involving a number of public sector organisations did not establish a single, consolidated business case until late into development. Although benefits had been identified, they had not been validated against a joint agreement of the total change envisaged. When problems arose, therefore, their impact on the projected benefits could not be tracked against the original change planned and those benefits were quickly eroded.

Think about ALL the implications and impact of the proposed change

An insurance company in the US conducted a 30-person project that took three years to complete against an original estimate of one year. When it was finished, they found that the company had stopped selling the product more than a year before.

Keep checking back to policy/strategic objectives

A number of private sector companies who have experienced unsuccessful projects believe they failed because: - It was not clear where accountability lay at senior levels; - Owners were not active or did not understand their role; and - Ownership lay with more than one person or a committee.

Clear, strong leadership is critical for successful delivery

One department appointed someone with no experience of project work to manage a very challenging project with a team of over 200 people. As this

Appoint people with the right skills and



manager was unfamiliar with project issues, valuable time was lost when decisions were being made.

experience

A project to alter radically the whole working practices of a government body, employing extensive new technology, focused too heavily on the commercial aspects of the agreement with their supplier. While the contract seemed to offer excellent value for money, the project fell into difficulties because technical and management issues led to severe delays. The good commercial deal was not a substitute for satisfactory service.

Don't ignore quality



Follow-on Actions

Programme

One key requirement for the closure of a programme is evidence that people elsewhere in the organisation or delivery chain are capable of delivering their new capabilities competently, without support from the programme. Where external support is still required beyond the life of the programme, e.g. staff training, this should be established separately.

Confirm Programme execution is completed

Programme Board Members, must confirm that policy and technical projects and work strands are complete; that benefits scheduled for delivery prior to closure have been realised and that any transition to operational ownership has concluded successfully.

Update and finalise programme documentation

The Programme Manager should confirm that documentation is complete and accurate, in order for the Programme Board to sign it off.

Disband programme management and support functions

The programme’s infrastructure and management processes are disbanded and individuals released from their appointed roles.

Any contracts used by the programme should be finalised and closed, or responsibility for continued contract management handed over to business management.

Inform stakeholders

Programme closure is confirmed by the Programme Director and the Sponsoring Group. All stakeholders should be informed of programme closure and its outcome in terms of changed operations.


OGC 1 Horse Guards Road, London SW1A 2HQ

The Service Desk will also channel queries to the appropriate second-line support. We look forward to hearing from you.

About OGC The Office of Government Commerce is an independent office of HM Treasury. You can contact the Service

Desk 8am – 6pm Monday to Friday: The OGC logo is a registered

trademark of the Office of Government Commerce in the United Kingdom and other countries.

T: 0845 000 4999 E: [email protected]

Press enquiries T: 020 7271 1318 F: 020 7271 1345

OGC Service Desk OGC customers can contact the central OGC Service Desk about all aspects of OGC business.

© Crown copyright 2010

Documents

Policy to Successful Delivery - UK Government Web …webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100503135839/http:/... · Policy to Successful Delivery ... (IPPD) initiative, in ... There