Insights

Questions Every Board Should Ask About a Major Programme

A board is accountable for the major programmes its organisation runs, but board members are rarely delivery experts, and the reporting they receive is designed by the people being reported on. The result is that boards often approve and oversee programmes without asking the questions that would reveal trouble. Here are the questions that matter, and what a good answer sounds like, so that non specialists can hold a programme to account.

By Christopher Fagan

On the plan

“What has to be true for this date to hold?”

A good answer names specific assumptions. A poor one restates the date with confidence. Every plan rests on assumptions; a team that cannot articulate theirs has not stress tested them.

“What have we taken out of scope, and when?”

If scope has grown but the date has not, something has been quietly deferred. A healthy programme can point to what it descoped to stay on track. Silence here is a warning.

On the risks

“What is the one thing most likely to derail this?”

A credible team answers immediately and specifically, usually data, testing or a dependency they do not control. A team that says everything is under control is either not looking hard enough or not telling you.

“What are we managing by hope?”

An honest programme has risks it is watching without a full mitigation. Naming them is a sign of maturity. A risk register full of low ratings on a large programme is a sign of the opposite.

On the data

“Have we tested the data at full volume, and did the business accept it?”

Data is the most common cause of failure and the most reliably over reported. The right answer references full volume trial runs and the business formally rejecting and then accepting migrated records. “It is on track” without that is not an answer.

On the reporting itself

“When did this last report amber, and what happened?”

A large programme that has never reported anything but green is not healthy, it is one where people do not feel safe raising problems. The answer to this question tells you whether the status you are being shown is real.

“Who does the assurance report to?”

If the programme assures itself, the assurance is worth little. Genuine assurance reports to the sponsor or the board, independently of the delivery team. See independent programme assurance.

On the business

“Is the business arguing with us?”

Counterintuitively, friction is good. Serious engagement from the people who will use the system produces disputes about process and design. Silence usually means the business has not really looked yet, and will do so late, during user acceptance testing, when every objection becomes a change request.

The point of these questions

None of them require technical expertise. They require a board willing to ask plainly and to notice when an answer is confident rather than substantive. The difference between a board that catches trouble early and one that is surprised by it is rarely knowledge. It is whether it asks these questions and listens carefully to the answers.

We provide boards with an independent view of the programmes they are accountable for. See delivery excellence or get in touch.