Major Project Governance Assessment Scorecard

 

Category

Element

Assessment Description

Score

(1-10)

Reasons for Scoring / Suggestions for Improvement

Create Vision

Vision for Change

 

 

- Are there clear and easily understandable statements, backed up by appropriate evidence, of:

  • Current problems and the need for change?
  • Business drivers for the project?
  • Benefits expected to be delivered by the project?
  • How things will be from a business, user and technology perspective when the project is complete?
  • Project scope, objectives,  success criteria and a roadmap for delivery?

- Is the vision being maintained and developed as the project progresses?

- Is the vision regularly communicated and reinforced for project stakeholders?

5

There are clear drivers for change that are understood by the Project Sponsor and Project Board members.

The vision has not been written down in a form that can be readily communicated to the wider community. This is likely to become an issue as the project progresses.

The project scope is understood but success criteria are relatively vague.

Create Vision

Business Case and Alignment

- Is there a credible business case for the project including:

  • Options appraisal confirming the recommended option as best value?
  • Non-recurrent project costs and recurrent whole life costs which include effort from all areas?
  • Realistic assessment of benefits and an agreed plan for reviewing that the anticipated benefits have been delivered?
  • Alignment with the institutional strategic plans?
  • Market analysis and procurement strategy?
  • Identification and analysis of the most significant risks?
  • High level delivery plan and schedule?
  • Requirements for business as usual service delivery?

- Are benefits measurable and aligned with overall business objectives?

- Has project funding and authority to proceed been secured?

- Has the procurement stategy being followed been agreed with institutional procurement specialists?

- Is the business case regularly reviewed and updated as the project progresses?

6

The software being implemented was chosen following a procurement foir which a detailed business case was prepared.

There is a delivery plan and initial risk analysis has been carried out.

Analysis of project benefit realisation  and organisational impact of post project service delivery has been relatively lightweight.

Engage People

Sponsorship and Stakeholder Buy In 

- Has an appropriate individual been identified as the Project Executive?

- Does the Project Executive have the time, skills and commitment to provide effective leadership for the project? - Have appropriate individuals been identified to act as Senior Users and are they effectively representing the interests of the user community?

- Has an effective User Group been established? - Have appropriate individuals been identified to act as Senior Suppliers and are they effectively representing the interests of the groups who are delivering the project?

- Has an effective Supplier Group been established?

- Has the project identified all other critical groups of stakeholders who will be affected by the project and obtained their buy-in?

- Are lessons learned from previous projects being used positively to improve project governance and outcomes?

- Have reporting requirements been confirmed for the groups and committees who will have an interest in the project as it progresses?

- Is there open and transparent sharing of project information with stakeholders?

- Are there champions for the project across the stakeholder community?

- Are there ongoing activities to maintain the engagement of key stakeholders with appropriate success measures?

6

Senior support is evidenced through strong engagement of VP Director of Corporate Services as SRO.

Stakeholder analysis and coommunicationo plan has been completed.

Currently Senior User does not attend Project Board.

Stakeholder engagement is good but board disconnect from User Group potentially leaves the project vulnerable to dis-engagement as the project progresses.

Stakeholder engagement is not being formally measured.

Engage People

Team Building

- Is the project team fully representative of the stakeholders whose operational input will be essential for success?

- Are the members of the project team and other supporting teams appropriately skilled to deliver the project?

- Is appropriate staff development and recruitment being undertaken to strengthen the project team?

- Is the project team adequately resourced and supported?

- Have team memebrs been given enough time from their day jobs to successfully deliver the project?

- Is the project leveraging the skills and experience available from external suppliers and are supplier staff appropriately engaged with the project?

- Does the project team demonstrate cohesion and a shared belief in the project vision and the achievability of the project goals and objectives?

- Do individual project team members demonstrate a high degree of personal motivation to successfully deliver the project?

- Are there effective links between the project team and User Group to validate/support the work of the project team and ensure that the user perspective informs project decision making?

- Are the project team working well together and with other stakeholders?

7

Project team is representative of key internal service providers and is strongly linked to supplier.

User representation on project team is weak - mirroring the lack of user involvement with project board.

IS technical representation is generally channeled via the Project Manager rather than full membership of team.

Skill set of team is appropriate and team is adquately resourced and supported.

Engage People

Communication

- Does the project communications plan include all stakeholder groups impacted by the project?

- Have adequate resources been devoted to ensuring effective communication?

- Is the communications plan a key element of the project delivery and it it regularly reviewed and updated?

- Dos the communications plan include appropriate success measures?

- Have cultural and behavioural impacts been assessed and appropriate communications actions identified?

- Are project communications clear, consistent, timely and likely to build trust and deliver results?

- Do communications include effective feedback loops?

- Are there practical ways for project stakeholders to raise concerns if the project appears to be going off track?

- Is effective communication being used to drive project decision making and not simply as a public relations exercise?

- Are there practical ways for project stakeholders to raise concerns if the project appears to be going off track?

- Is there a communications log of all formal coimmunications sent by or on behalf of the project?

- Are communications achieving positive outcomes for the project?

6

Communication plan exists but is relatively immature.

Communication typically around key project events rather regular communication.

Communications around project timing and initiation seemed relatively weak.

Feedback loops have been established via User Group but so far these have not been tested.

Grip Task

Governance Structures

- Has the project established effective governance structures?

- Is there a competent and representative Project Board and User Group?

- Do the individuals involved in project governance understand their responsibilities and are they appropriately skilled and supported to discharge these?

- Have appropriate individuals been identified to act as Senior Users and are they effectively representing the interests of the user community?

- Has an effective User Group been established? - Have appropriate individuals been identified to act as Senior Suppliers and are they effectively representing the interests of the groups who are delivering the project?

- Has an effective Supplier Group been established?

- Does the Project Board meet regularly to review project progress - at least every six to eight weeks?

- Are the regular reports prepared for the Project Board and User Group clear, consistent, timely and relevant?

- Are there often surprises at Project Board or User Group meetings?

- Are there effective links between the Project Board and User Group with sharing of papers and consistent reporting of updates, risks, issues and concerns?

- Is participation at Project Boards and User Groups being monitored and action taken when required to maintain effective governance?

7

Project management and governance is in line with best practice.

Senior Supplier has been appointed.

Absence of Senior User a concern.

Post project business as usual responsibilities implicit rather than clearly articulated.

Grip Task

Risk Management  and Assurance

­- Do reporting processes and performance measures enable the Project Board to monitor progress and deal effectively with risks and issues? 

- Are appropriate actions taken when issues or risks arise?

- Are there effective financial control and reporting processes with appropriate estimation and control of project contingencies?

- Have adequate resources been devoted to project assurance and are these assurance processes effective?

- Does the project use external reviews to provide additional assurance on risk management and project progress?

- Are Project Board members, risk owners and other key stakeholders engaged with risk management and do they accept the time and resource implications of required mitigation and contingency actions?

- Is effective risk management fully embedded in the project management process and used to inform project decision making?

- Are the key project risks identified and are risk impacts clearly defined in business terms that are understandable to stakeholders?

- Is the risk log being proactively maintained and regularly reviewed by the Project Manager, Project Executive and risk owners?

- Are there clearly defined criteria for the escalation of risks and issues to the Project Board?

- Are the most significant risks, and recommended actions, regularly reviewed at Project Board meetings? 

5

Risk management in place and reviewed at project board.

Risk process relatively immature and not driving process. 

Financial controls in place for IT and external costs.

No obvious "Plan B" has been established.

 

 

Grip Task

Project Managementand and Planning

- Is there a Project Manager with day to day responsibility for running the project?

- Does the Project Manager have the skills, experience, capacity and motivation required to successfully deliver the project?

- Is the Project Board providing effective support for the Project Manager?

- Has the project vision and business case been translated into an unambiguous project brief with clear and agreed success criteria?

- Have appropriate budgets, timescales, tolerances and contingency been agreed?

- Has the Project Manager established and maintained an appropriately detailed and credible project plan identifying tasks, responsibilities, resources, deliverables, deadlines and milestones?

- Does the project plan include change management tasks (people and processes) as well as technical activities?

- Has the Project Manager established and maintained effective risk, issue and change management processes?

- Is there effective management of financial and people resources?

- Do reporting formats, contents and frequency of updates reflect the needs of the Project Board, User Group and other key stakeholders? 

- Are there often surprises at Project Board or User Group meetings?

- Are there agreed criteria for closure of the project and re-deployment of the project team?

7

Clear evidence that best practice approaches have been adopted.

Not clear that Project Manager can effectively manage business partner resources.

Project Board meetes regularly and has expected range of reports.

Procurement Office engaged via Project Board.

Grip Task

Implementation

- Is there an appropriately detailed implementation plan that has been agreed by all parties?

- Does the implementation plan include:

  • Change management tasks as well as technical activities?
  • Training for users whose ways of working are being changed?
  • Completion of required user and technical documentation?
  • Appropriate user support activities?
  • Adequate resources for the resolution of issues that become apparent post go live?

­ - Are there clear technical and business acceptance criteria for the implementation?

- Will adequate acceptance testing be carried out and the outcomes signed off as part of final pre-implementation testing

- Have options to implement large scale changes using a phased approach been properly assessed?

- Are there appropriate contingency arrangements so that the implementation can be delayed or abandoned if the solution is not ready on time?

- Can the implementation be rolled back if the new solution is not working or there are serious unforeseen impacts post go live?

- Is there a process for documenting and communicating any features that will not be delivered by the implementation?

5

No baseline measures establised.

Clear implementation plan.

Weak contingency arrangements.

Training plan in place for stakeholders.

Support mechanisms for business as usual could be overwhelmed if significant issues occur post implementation.

Embed

Learning

- Are lessons learned from previous similar projects being used positively to improve project governance and outcomes?

- Are there effective processes for learning and adapting the project approach based on experience as the project progresses?

- Is there a plan to conduct a post project review to identify the learning from the project and how any outstanding issues emerging from the project will be handled?

4

Project Board responsible for multiple project deliveries and will oversee learning from earlier releases. There is no plan beyond final Project Board meeting.

Embed

Measurement

- Has the project established and published baseline measures of what took place before the project started?

- Does the project regularly report on appropriate measurements to identify improvements made against the baseline and to act as a starting point for further improvements?

- Have appropriate performance targets and measurements been defined for the solution delivered by the project?

1

No baseline measures established.

Embed Business As Usual

- Are the requirements for business as usual service delivery been included in the business case for the project?

- Has the business as usual service been fully defined including:

  • Normal service and support hours?
  • Service availability and how measured?
  • Service capacity and performamce targets?
  • How planned downtime will be communicated?
  • Organisational structures, resources and skill requirements?
  • Support mechanisms and escalation routes?
  • Funding requirements?
  • Change control process for future service enhancements?

- Has an appropriate and user focused service level agreement or service level definition been agreed for the business as usual service?

- Are impacts on the business as usual service actively considered as part of project decision making?

- Is there a clear plan for transition to the live service?

- Is it clear who users will contact in the event of any incidents or queries and how support effectiveness will be monitored?

- Are backup and recovery defined and in place?

- Are business continuity arrangements defined and in place to enable the business to cope effectively during a recovery period and/or in the event that the recovery hits problems in practice?

- Are the business as usual service requirements reflected in contractual arrangements with third parties involved in delivering the service?

0  

Embed

Benefits Realisation and Ongoing Improvement

- Is there a credible assessment of the benefits to be delivered by the project and a plan for reviewing that benefits realisation included in the business case?

- Are benefits measurable and aligned with overal business objectives?

- Are benefits being regularly reviewed and updated as the project progresses?

- Does the project plan include activities which enable benefits to be fully realised e.g. user training and guidance, definition of new roles and responsibilities, collection of performance data, decomissioning legacy systems?

- Have responsibilities and ownership for post-project benefits realisation been assigned to appropriate project stakeholders?

- Have reviews to track and report on benefits realisation been scheduled for a defined time period following project delivery?

- Are there clear processes and responsibilities defined for ongoing improvement of the solution delivered by the project?

1

No benefits realisation plan and responsibilities implicit rather than stated.

 

AttachmentSize
File SampleGovernanceRadar.xlsx15.49 KB