Governance Structure Tasks

Allocate an “owner” for the idea.

Check alignment of the idea with the priorities and pledges.

Check whether the idea is within the scope of the portfolio - if not, inform the proposer.

Allocate an owner, that person is responsible for developing the idea to decision Gate 1 stage.

Review the scale of the idea – in terms of urgency, cost, impact, etc – and consider at what level within the organisation will a decision be taken on whether to proceed and in particular whether political approval will be necessary.

Consider the need to involve external organisations in the governance of any project formed to implement the idea.

Allocate an “owner” for the idea.

Check alignment of the idea with the priorities and pledges.

Check whether the idea is within the scope of the portfolio - , if not, then it should be stopped or reshaped.

That owner is responsible for developing the idea to decision Gate 1 stage.

Review the scale of the idea – in terms of urgency, cost, impact, etc – and consider at what level within the organisation will a decision be taken on whether to proceed and in particular whether political approval will be necessary.

Assess links to the Business Plan.

Review the Business Plan to identify potential links to outcomes and priorities.

It is very helpful if you can relate your idea to these, as it will help you find a sponsor.

It is always good to get a second opinion from peers to test the idea is viable.

As part of the project proposal the strategic impact assessment will be reviewed, it would be a good idea to do an initial review now.

Appoint the sponsor

It is critical that the right sponsor is appointed.

The appointment should include ensuring that they have a formal remit to cover their role so that they understand their obligations.

As part of the appointment process there should be an induction into the role and knowledge sharing on what good and bad sponsor looks like.

The key decision makers should be assembled into the board that will oversee delivery of the change.

One of the key decisions for this group will be whether to use a programme or project approach to controlling delivery. The initial meeting should include Strategic Alignment on the agenda to ensure that there is a justification for the change.

The governance arrangements should be based on the risk impact assessment and the level of change.

Undertake an Impact assessment on statutory compliance and corporate policies.

Provide senior manager briefings on the structure, membership and authority of the the board.

Ensure there are clear sets of roles and responsibilities defined with individual objectives being set

The brief is a significant document as it sets out the scope in more detail, thus illustrating any changes to the governance arrangements and specifically the programme board.

There may be a programme board or the link may be directly into the Portfolio Board. This should be defined.

Each member of the board should have a personal term of reference and clarity about their decision authority.

Ensure that the change roles are adequately covered for each of the parts of the business that are going to change, ensure that the senior managers understand the significance of this role and the authority that it needs to carry.

There may be a need for other decision or specialist topic support groups to be involved.  This should be illustrated in the organisation design documentation (blueprint).

There should be an impact assessment to understand any risk or opportunities that may arise.  Look at corporate policies and standards to assess the potential impact on these and statutory compliance obligations.

Ensure there is a programme or project board in place with decision making authority.

The following should have happened:

Roles and responsibilities for board members have been defined.

There is clear linkage between the initiative and your organisations objectives and portfolio.

The key corporate experts have been co-opted on to the board in an advisory capacity.

Lessons learned from other programmes or projects have been reviewed.

There is an Assurance Plan in place.

Ensure balance of initiatives reflect the investment in strategic objectives and vision for the portfolio.

Stop initiatives that are unviable or have lost their strategic value.

Ensure lessons learned are being captured, recorded and actioned.

All initiatives should be subject to regular review of continued business justification and strategic alignment. What was top priority six months ago may no longer be the most important thing to be doing.

Ensure that current initiatives are included in portfolio level reviews, and stopped, accelerated or reshaped if necessary.

Lessons learned reviews, post-implementation reviews, workshops and improvement groups can help identify lessons. Share lessons widely to help others, but ensure formal changes to guidance or process are controlled.

The portfolio strategy should set out the vision in terms of benefits required, check these are being achieved.

Regular reviews of progress and business cases should be carried to check whether benefits performance is aligned to and sufficient to achieve strategic objectives.

Ensure the organisation lessons learned are being recorded and actioned.

A key check at this point is the long term achievability of the strategic direction is still achievable

Benefits performance should be assessed and reviewed regularly to ensure that the portfolio (and individual initiatives) are delivering the benefits and return on investment required to achieve the strategic objectives.

Any shortfall in forecast benefits should be fed back into the scan process to identify further opportunities that will realise higher benefits.

Check that the statutory compliance criteria are being maintained.

Ensure there are audit trails to provide evidence of sustained compliance.

Ensure the organisation lessons learned are being recorded and actioned.

There is a range of compliance areas, the work of the portfolio should be based on achieving them or maintaining them as a fundamental basis for the changes.

It is important that the appropriate stakeholders are involved in setting and monitoring these.

Independent assurance of achievement and compliance is an important validation concept.

Ensure that EA alignment to business operating models is in place.

Seek independent assurance that the target operating models are achievable.

Ensure that portfolio governance model is delivering the change objectives.

Ensure the organisation lessons learned are being recorded and actioned.

Pay attention to the Part of the business that is being changed. Ensure Service Managers are fully involved – as Executives or Senior Users at project level, as Business Change Managers at programme level. They will have to manage transition, deliver the change in their teams and ultimately realise the benefits.

Alongside independent assurance, frontline staff and stakeholders can provide useful input.

Seek feedback from those involved in change delivery.

Conduct formal lessons learned exercises – surveys, workshops for example – as well as picking up and acting on informal identification of lessons and ideas for improvement. Feedback decisions to encourage contributors.

Check the requirement of strategy and standards teams as part of the closure.

Undertake impact assessment on other programmes of proposed closure.

Undertake business impact assessment of loss of programme staff.

There are two areas of impact to consider.

The impact on other programmes of this one closing, there may be projects that need to be reallocated or there may be outcomes that have not been achieved and will need to be managed through other programmes or projects.

There may be roles that the programme has been fulfilling on behalf of business operations, which will leave a gap when the programme closes, for example, managing a supplier or programme funded transition resources still in the business.

At this point, decisions will need to be taken setting a timetable for decommissioning the programme team. In particular, how will the gains be sustained through the BCM and Change Team?

De-commissioning the structure needs to be undertaken carefully to ensure key knowledge is not lost or leaves staff de motivated.

Confirm programme objectives are achieved.

Confirm business operations are now self-sustaining.

The programme team and infrastructure should be disbanded in an orderly fashion. A key element of this activity is ensuring that the inherent knowledge embedded within the team is captured and that the release of staff is in line with the programme.

Where individuals remain within the organisation their personal records need to be updated and transferred back to their department. Formal review of the Organisation Design document and lessons learned documented for future programme structures.

The team should now have been disbanded and an action plan for the lessons learned about structures, roles and responsibilities to be applied.

Complete the closure report and programme performance evaluation

Complete hand over of ongoing contracts to the portfolio or operations

The team should now have been disbanded and an action plan for the lessons learned about structures, roles and responsibilities to be applied.

Test that the alignment between the achievements of the initiative outcomes are remaining aligned to the strategic vision.

Enterprise architecture records should be updated.

Record any lessons relating to benefits delivery governance.

Commission independent assurance of the benefits management process to ensure appropriate diligence and compliance is in place.

Avoid ambiguity – once responsibility has transferred from portfolio to Business As Usual (BAU), ensure that the responsible managers accept that responsibility and document the handover.

Roles and responsibilities and accountability through the portfolio hierarchy is a “must” for effective benefits delivery. Any ambiguity about accountability within operational areas about where and how the benefit will be delivered will lead to failure; the quality of benefits governance should be continually monitored.

A key check at this point is the long term achievability of the strategic direction is still achievable.

If there are any lessons to the benefits delivery governance they should be documented and considered for portfolio wide adjustments.

Independent assurance of the portfolio risk process should happen on a regular basis to ensure that there is rigor and good governance in place.

The programme itself needs to have ownership of the vision but the Portfolio Board has to approve it.

They need to make sure it doesn't conflict or overlap with other things that are going on within the portfolio and the wider organisation.

Programmes may believe they are going to change the world but it always has to be in context.

The programme blueprint should be assured by any specialist compliance bodies.

Identify governance constraints on future states and include in the options analysis.

Undertake impact assessment on the corporate strategy and plans.

Now is the time for allocating a Design Authority to oversee this work, provide advice and support on the use of specific tools and to help evaluate the options.

The Programme Manager will be responsible for the document but the majority of the content will come from the BCMs.

The corporate inputs should be contributing to the development of the options and major step changes required in the corporate plan should be linked to intermediate blueprint states.

There must be appropriate approval of the blueprint by the programme board and any other influential bodies.

When the blueprint is completed the scale and impact of the change will be known, this may require changes to the programme board and the BCMs.

Consult the project sponsors about the changes to project requirements

This is an opportunity to increase resource and knowledge available to the programme. Project resources released from closed projects can be integrated into the programme team to help with other tasks.

Approved Tranche Plan.

Consult the project sponsors about the changes to the project requirements and build in changes to governance through different tranches, if required. 

Confirm alignment with other major events during the programme lifecycle.

The Tranches must fit to the programme plan and dependencies with other programmes.

There must be appropriate approval of the Tranche plan by the programme board and any other influential bodies.

The tranches may also highlight significant changes to the nature of the programme, so changes to the programme board can be forecasted and planned.

Project resources released from closed projects can be integrated into the programme team to help with other tasks.  The Programme Manager should take a lead on this work and focus on identifying the outputs that will be required to achieve the step change.

Ensure governance groups engage in the selection of the preferred approach.

Consider market consultation to assess options.

Impact assessment of the delivery strategy options.

Review of market options.

Confirm that the delivery strategy aligns with the relevant corporate strategies.

The different outcomes will require different projects and deliver different benefits, this is the point where the various options are considered and the preferred approach selected.

At this point, the programme will consider the options with their merits and select the optimal route.

There must be appropriate approval of the Delivery strategy by the programme board and any other influential bodies.

This work should be led by the Programme Manager with external subject matter knowledge and expertise to assist with the selection should be considered.

Check strategic alignment of the programme outcomes.

Confirm that the gate reviews of projects are effective.

Confirm that the support of high impact stakeholders is in place.

Initiate independence assurance of the viability of the programme direction.

This work to gain the approval will be led by the SRO, but with the support of the programme team.

Having an independent review of the programme and how it has achieved progress and decisions would be a wise move to ensure thoroughness.

The governance theme is checking that the political support is in place for the level of change, it should also be ensuring that there is thorough impact assessments on other initiatives for alignment.

The current membership and terms of reference for the programme board should be reviewed and updated to reflect the changing roles as the programme moves forward.

Ensure that project objectives are aligned with the programme.

Identify sponsors for the projects.

Approval project board structures.

Impact assessment on the programme board structure.

Update the dependency network.

This work should be led by the Programme Manager.  Some early partnerships may be coming into place with suppliers, who may be able to provide expert input.

The governance of existing projects may need to change now and new projects will need at least a sponsor allocated, there may not be sufficient information to identify project boards at this stage.

There is also a danger that that sponsors may be overloaded, so try not to allocate more than one project per sponsor if possible.

The structure of the programme board may need to change as a result of the project dossier design and changes to sponsorship.

Ensure adherence to corporate standards that may be affected by the programme.

Adapt the programme board governance model to reflect the new governance arrangements.

Review the current project governance and identify opportunities for improvement.

The authority of the Sponsoring Group, Programme Board and Project Boards should be clearly defined and put within the broader organisational context of these strategies.

Responsibilities and accountabilities of key individuals should be defined, and how their success will be measured.

The governance of each theme will be affected, these will need to be tested and approved.

Corporate standards and policies should be scanned to ensure compliance.

The theme management strategies will be largely statements of compliance to this framework with explanations of exceptions, this should be tested as part of quality review.

It is important to monitor dependencies and developments on other programmes for opportunities to improve or problems that can be avoided.

Build assurance reviews formally into the plan and align with Corporate Plans.

Review plans for alignment with the achievement of the programme blueprint.

Update the dependency network.

Update the Tranche gates in the plan.

There should be a plan to schedule the recruitment and procurement of personnel to fill the programme structure. This may prove to be a significant constraint that affects the timetable.

At this milestone all the plans should be approved, they will be coming from each of the themes, so the key activity from the governance perspective is to review their viability and interdependencies to ensure that they all fit together and then the programme board should approve them.

A key element of this plan will be the Tranches and ensuring that there are adequate stop/go decisions to enable control to be maintained during delivery.

It is important to monitor dependencies and developments on other programmes for opportunities to improve or problems that can be avoided.

Check funding release plans.

Review the project budgets for viability.

Review the benefit profiles for viability.

The source of most of the costs will be the Programme overhead and the projects, the savings and improvements will come from the benefit profiles.

The business case is the single document against which the success of the programme will be measured, so this is a key activity to get right.

There must be clear decision making authority for management of the business case in place.

This must extend into the project governance so it is clear what the levels of tolerance will be.

The corporate business case approval process must be followed to ensure adequate controls are in place.

There will be a need to brief and engage with external governance groups who will be involved with the decision to ensure that their support is still in place.

Check strategic alignment of the programme outcomes.

Confirm that the gate reviews of projects are effective.

Confirm that the support of high impact stakeholders is in place.

Initiate independence assurance of the viability of the programme direction.

This work to gain the approval will be led by the SRO, but with the support of the programme team.

Having an independent review of the programme and how it has achieved progress and decisions would be a wise move to ensure thoroughness.

The governance theme is checking that the political support is in place for the level of change, it should also be ensuring that there are thorough impact assessments on other initiatives for alignment.

The current membership and terms of reference for the programme board should be reviewed and updated to reflect the changing roles as the programme moves forward.

Ensure that project governance and structures are clearly aligned with the programme governance.

Establish programme reporting process.

Put in place project assurance plans.

Establish the project gate procedures in line with the framework.

Schedule programme governance boards for the Tranche.

Each of the theme management strategies will now be put into place, so the programme governance theme activity is ensuring that they are established and working well, hence the independent check that it has happened can be a useful assurance review.

The programme board may now be changing structure to accommodate the different delivery model for the first tranche, or it may change as it moves into different tranches, in both cases, the terms of reference of the board and the individuals on it should be updated to reflect the change.

Project governance arrangements should be carefully monitored to ensure that they are aligned with the programme, with key project sponsors being included in the programme board when appropriate.

Project Managers should now be appointed and put into place to support the launch of the imminent projects. Training and development needs for Project Managers, boards and team members should be identified and scheduled, along with induction activities to bring them up to speed on the overarching programme.

It is important to monitor dependencies and developments on other programmes for opportunities to improve or problems that can be avoided.

Ensure that project governance complies with corporate and programme standards.

Review the internal governance arrangements and action lessons learned.

Ensure that the programme board is maintaining alignment with strategic goals.

Assure that the business change plans are in place and effective.

Identify opportunities for framework improvement.

Schedule and manage gate reviews for projects.

Track gate review trends.

Organise assurance reviews of the programme.

Ensure that project and programme lessons learned are being actioned. 

Update corporate standards to reflect the new operating status.

Project teams should be in place and the control arrangements for projects should be integrated with the programme structures.

Roles and responsibilities for managing the programme should be clearly in place. There will inevitably be people coming and going, this will need to be managed and improvement and adjustments to the Organisational Design made as appropriate.

If any transitional risks were being monitored, then these should now be mitigated.

Preparation for any contract migrations and consolidation should be considered along with warranty arrangements.

Review the programme governance structure effectiveness.

Review the internal governance arrangements and action lessons learned.

Confirm strategic alignment of the programme outcomes.

Identify additional change activities required to stabilise the services.

If Programme Assurance has been appointed, they should be involved with the review.

The review should assess the capabilities and skills of the existing Programme Team and propose the necessary changes to the programme structure to ensure the delivery of the next Tranche is optimised, in particular between the use of internal and external resources. Individuals should have performance targets and objectives set.

The nature of the team will change as it moves to the next Tranche. There should be knowledge transfer arrangements in place and it will be necessary to activate the arrangement for recruiting/procuring the team.

There may be additional change activities or opportunities that arise that can be exploited, these may be seen as opportunity risks, but the environment should be scanned to cover this.

The Governance framework may well have evolved already as part of the programme delivery. This may have affected the way the Strategies have been delivered. This may have left gaps that need to be accounted for.

If the arrangements have remained stable then this is an opportunity to reflect on the lessons of the Tranche and improve the Governance arrangements for the next Tranche, particularly if the nature of the programme is changing, for example, from construction to technology.

Decommissioning and disposal of assets should be in line with corporate policies on recycling, risk, health and safety etc. 

There may be financial value in the residual products that will enable them to be sold.  Contract termination notices may have been required so checking obligations are properly managed is needed.

Check strategic alignment of the programme outcomes.

Confirm that the gate reviews of projects are effective.

Confirm that the support of high impact stakeholders is in place.

Confirm the stability of business operations.

Document lessons learned from the Tranche.

Initiate independence assurance of the viability of the programme direction.

This work to gain the approval will be led by the SRO, but with the support of the programme team.

Having an independent review of the programme and how it has achieved progress and decisions would be a wise move to ensure thoroughness.

The governance theme is checking that the political support is in place for the level of change, it should also be ensuring that there is thorough impact assessments on other initiatives for alignment.

The current membership and terms of reference for the programme board should be reviewed and updated to reflect the changing roles as the programme moves forward.

Illustrate how the change will contribute to the strategic objectives or fit with other initiatives.

Allocate ownership of the responsibility for delivering the change.

Approval will require evidence that the project is an integral part of one of the programmes and/or that there is a link from the benefits to achieving the strategic principles.

Where the project will deliver changes to internal operating practices or processes then responsibility for delivering those changes must be clear.

Specify the impact each option would have on any corporate standards or systems.

Ensure that the appraisal of each option takes into account wider considerations on the organisation in terms of standards and policies.

The commissioning or procurement implications should be a major factor in considering which the preferred option is and the potential disruption to existing supply chains.

Define how the option will meet the strategic objectives.

Compliance to any corporate standards or guidance must be understood to avoid making decisions and recommendations that ultimately prove undeliverable.

There should be a clear understanding of the impact of the change on the operational areas and appropriate stakeholder engagement activities should be undertaken.

An impact assessment of the project on external bodies should be undertaken.

Assure compliance with corporate policies and strategies.

Refine the project governance for the next stage.

A variety of people from across Aspire Europe are part of the process so questions may well come from unexpected places.

Consultation with the appropriate elected and governance groups that will have responsibilities for the outcome of the project should have the opportunity to contribute at this point.

Ensure recommended actions relating to the business solution in the wider business have been accounted for.

Confirm sign off of the approach with the business areas that will change.

Ensure that the roles and responsibilities for the next stage are allocated if they differ from this framework.

Profile any impact on corporate standards or systems.

It is important that finance and supporting Senior Managers are part of the authorisation of this Business operation and the implications that this will bring to the organisation.

The design should be compliant with corporate standards and have formal approval.

Standards or policy groups should be consulted on the final solution and approval or recognition of the decision sought from elected and representative bodies.

The impact of the internal change on internal systems and other change initiatives should be undertaken and gap analysis communicated.

The technical design will be an important contribution to the commissioning and procurement process so some early engagement to take advice on how to handle this aspect is required.

Confirm that the preferred option is aligned with corporate standards.

Confirm business case sign off process.

The contribution for the strategic vision should be fundamental to the successful achievement of this step.

The delivery approach may impact on other projects and programmes, so opportunities may exist for collaboration.

Check that procurement guidelines are followed and that the project is compliant with the Aspire Europe Business Plan and relationships.  The contribution for the strategic vision should be fundamental to the successful achievement of this step.

The level of change and the continuing ability to maintain services during transition should be a key factor in selecting the approach.

Preparation for the approval of the business case through and timetable should now be made, if not already.

Assure compliance with corporate policies and strategies.

Refine the project governance for the next stage.

Key governance groups will be required to approve the Business Case to ensure that all bases are covered - it is advisable to speak to each before submitting the Business Case for approval.

Consultation with the appropriate elected and governance groups that will have responsibilities for the outcome of the project should have the opportunity to contribute at this point.

Ensure recommended actions relating to the business solution in the wider business have been accounted for.

Confirm sign off of the approach with the business areas that will change.

Ensure compliance to corporate policies when external resources are used.

Work packages should only be placed with approved suppliers.

Compliance to corporate policies and standards should be embedded in the contract. Placing contracts is a major commitment of Aspire Europe governance therefore procurement assurance will be important. Sign off authorities will also need to be put into place.

Key individuals in the business areas that will receive the assets or service models should be part of the quality assurance as they will sign off on behalf of the business areas and operations.

The effect of the new Business Operating Model on corporate activities can be planned for.

The Programme/Portfolio Office should cross reference the anticipated changes, update the plans and align the capabilities to the achievement of the Aspire Europe Business Plan along with other policies and standards.

Impact on existing supply chains, contracts and statutory compliance should be carefully monitored.

Responsibilities for statutory compliance should be clearly defined in transition plans.

Ensure sign off compliance to corporate standards.

Contract management responsibilities should be in place with authority to deal with assurance of the build and testing.

Audit trails of contractual issues should be maintained.

Governance bodies should be consulted should strategic or compliance issues arise during development.

Business areas representatives should be included in the monitoring of the delivery as they will sign off the acceptance.

Ensure that corporate standards have been met and formally signed off.

Formal contract ownership should now be allocated if the project is at the point of accepting the service and making significant payments.

The sign off of the acceptance tests should be by the business groups that will own the new assets or service models post the projects.

Ensure that the project board has the right level of authority.

Refine the project governance for the next stage.

An impact assessment of the project on external bodies should be undertaken.

If there are any specialist contributions required from the corporate groups or outside Aspire Europe to test compliance, they should be included in the team.

Consultation with the appropriate elected and governance groups that will have responsibilities for the outcome of the project should have the opportunity to contribute at this point.

Ensure recommended actions relating to the business solution in the wider business have been accounted for.

Confirm sign off of the transition approach with the business areas that will change.

Consider independent assurance to validate or compare performance data.

Confirm business areas readiness to change.

Portfolio Office should be involved with the base lining and ensuring that the changes are being reflected in the business architecture.

The business areas ready for change should be checked for stability to ensure performance metric deviations can be attributed to the project or not.

Corporate compliance should be monitored to ensure standards and policy compliance is sustained.

Business area sign off implementation is provided.

Individual areas should now be achieving steady state after their transition periods.

Any services that are being transitioned, which are part of legislative compliance, need to be monitored by the corporate risk teams/Programme or Portfolio Office where appropriate.

Each individual area that is subject to change should sign off their acceptance of assets or operation procedures into their responsibility.

Update corporate standards to reflect the new operating status.

Complete sign off of hand over to operations.

If any transitional risks were being monitored, then these should now be mitigated.

Preparation for any contract migrations and consolidation should be considered along with warranty arrangements.

All business areas should now have achieved steady state.

Full operational hand over of the change should now have been completed.

Governance bodies should be part of the process if their roles have changed, if not, they should be briefed on the status of the outcomes.

Assure compliance with corporate policies and strategies.

Follow on actions for the corporate team should be documented and allocated.

Outstanding contract or delivery issues should be allocated to operational groups.

Governance lessons learned should now be recorded.

Fill in end of project report.

Final handover - ensure supplier responsibilities are removed from the project.

All contracts should now be migrated to any corporate functions and quality systems should be updated along with the Aspire Europe Business Plan to reflect the completion of the project.