The Delivery Environment: Why Transformation Succeeds or Fails on Behaviour
Strong governance and methodology can coexist with transformation programmes that still struggle under pressure due to behavioural conditions surrounding delivery.
Strong governance and methodology can coexist with transformation programmes that still struggle under pressure due to behavioural conditions surrounding delivery.
As transformation programmes get larger and more interconnected, people are often working with amiguity. Sponsorship behaviour is one of the strongest signals of delivery capability.
Communicating change well during transformation does not guarantee that people are ready for it. Leaders who can identify whether the struggle is uncertainty, capability gaps, or confidence with the change can target support where its needed
Leadership readiness is essential for setting up a culture to be ready for change and the adoption depends less on the program and more on the environment.
Uneven adoption after go-live is rarely a sign that a change program was poorly executed. More often, it reflects decisions made earlier about how adoption would be supported
Change programs can be executed well and still fall short of lasting impact. When adoption is uneven after go-live, the cause is rarely a process failure.
Applying standard governance models across all programs irrespective of scale and complexity tends to produce governance that is either too heavy to be useful or too light to be effective.
Governance in transformation environments is usually well-established, but how leadership engages determines if it becomes passive rather than reflect actual progress.
Transformation work is back on the agenda at greater scale and with less margin for error than before. Right sized governance requires delivery structures that suit the scale of the portfolio
Project leaders looking to hire a business analyst often debate whether to prioritise deep technical or industry experience over strong analytical fundamentals...