Strong leadership doesn’t guarantee effective sponsorship. Without clarity, context and practice, even senior leaders can derail delivery. Treating sponsorship as an active governance discipline helps projects stay resilient and focused on value.
It’s easy to assume that a strong leader will naturally make a strong project sponsor. They’re usually experienced with deep domain knowledge, a vested interest in business outcomes and the authority to shape success.
However, project sponsorship isn’t just an extension of line leadership. It’s a governance role with its own demands – navigating ambiguity, influencing without directing and making decisions that balance business value with delivery risk. And in many organisations, sponsors are thrown into the role without guidance – expected to lead, influence and govern a project with little to no experience in project delivery.
There’s rarely a formal induction to becoming a project sponsor, let alone a shared understanding of what ‘good’ looks like. And with limited opportunity to practise judgement before the pressure is on, the stakes (and risks) are high. It’s no small irony that sponsors are asked to perform at a high standard in one of the most influential roles in delivery – often with nothing more than ‘on the job’ learning behind them.
While project managers are usually trained extensively to navigate complexity and deliver with precision, sponsors and Steering Committee members are simply expected to know how to lead projects and portfolios intuitively.
That assumption carries substantial risk for project delivery and portfolio success.
Good leaders don’t always deliver great outcomes
The crux of the issue is that strong leadership capabilities and domain expertise don’t necessarily translate into solid sponsor instincts. The skills don’t automatically transfer, because decision-making in projects can be very different to operational decisions.
Decision-making in projects is rarely straightforward. Unlike business-as-usual, where operations are established and well understood, projects involve a higher degree of uncertainty and assumption. A successful sponsor must be able to make informed decisions amidst ambiguity – often without perfect information – and be ready to support the project when it’s under pressure. That means asking the right questions early, understanding the constraints at play – and weighing the full impact of each decision as the project evolves.
Without that context, even the most capable leaders can undermine delivery – unintentionally, and often repeatedly. It might be an unclear or misinterpreted steer, a decision that contradicts previous direction, or one made without a clear view of constraints and risks.
When we work with clients to recover failed or stalled projects, we often find a common pattern: inconsistent decision-making. Issues are revisited, calls are reversed. Progress is made, then undone. Sponsors may not fully grasp the downstream impacts of a seemingly small decision, yet that single call can unravel months of work, triggering rework that must be absorbed into an already tight schedule and budget.
The actions by themselves are rarely dramatic, but the effects compound: second-guessing, delivery delays and more. Over time, value starts to erode. Critically, because the sponsor’s intent is never in question – simply because they’re known to be a good leader – the cause is rarely identified.
The challenge is rarely the character of the leader; most often, it’s a lack of familiarity with the sponsor role into which they have been thrust. The result isn’t just misalignment at the individual level – it’s a broader breakdown in how governance plays out across the project and the portfolio. When roles like sponsorship are assigned without clarity or context, the structure might look sound on paper, but the behaviours it enables (or fails to) tell a different story. What you end up with isn’t just a sponsor who’s unprepared, but a governance environment that quietly permits risk to flourish.
Governance is both structure and behaviour
Good governance requires structure; however, it’s also about how people implement that structure and behave in key moments. When project sponsors and SteerCo members understand their role and how it interacts with the delivery team, they become a source of momentum. Without that understanding, they become a risk vector – inadvertently shaping the wrong outcomes while believing they’re supporting the right ones.
This is where many governance models start to break down. Roles and committees might be in place, but the behaviours that bring them to life, along with decision rights, value levers and escalation paths, are often left undefined.
Project sponsors play a critical role in how effectively governance functions. Those who stay engaged, seek visibility into both good news and bad, and take an active role in supporting the team tend to drive stronger outcomes. Meanwhile, passive sponsors – those who rely solely on monthly updates and make decisions based only on what’s put in front of them – may be able to support low-risk, straightforward projects. But in more complex or high-stakes environments, that hands-off approach rarely delivers success.
Building sponsor clarity before it’s tested
Strong sponsorship doesn’t emerge by accident. It’s developed over time; through practice and the opportunity to learn before the pressure hits. The most effective sponsors are those who have had the chance to test their judgement in a safe environment, before real decisions are on the line.
Creating that space matters. When sponsors are equipped to navigate competing priorities and ask the right questions early, there are clear benefits to project delivery – not only in terms of schedule and budget, but also in terms of focus on delivering the expected value.
In one recent sponsor training session we hosted, the group arrived expecting a theoretical overview – something closer to a briefing than a challenge. What they got instead were real-world scenarios drawn from complex delivery environments. And within minutes, they were in at the deep end: debating risks and priorities; and realising how the smallest steer could shift the entire trajectory of a project.
What struck them wasn’t what they knew – it was how quickly they had to apply judgement without perfect information. That’s the heart of strong sponsorship – knowing how to lead when things are ambiguous or when the path to value isn’t obvious.
Skilled sponsors, stronger delivery
When sponsors have the chance to test their thinking before the pressure is real, delivery improves when it matters the most – teams move faster and decisions become clearer. SteerCos become stronger, acting as true decision-making bodies rather than performance theatre.
Good leadership is the foundation, but good sponsorship is a skill. And like any skill, it deserves to be taught, practised and respected. If we want projects to succeed more often, that’s the capability we need to build.
Quay Consulting is a professional services business specialising in the project landscape, transforming strategy into fit-for-purpose delivery. Meet our team or reach out to have a discussion today.
We believe that quality thought leadership is worth sharing and encourage you to share with your colleagues. If you’re interested in republishing our content, here’s what’s okay and what’s not okay.