Findings from our Programme Success Predictor
70% will fail without major intervention
Based on 26 programmes that we have analysed through our Programme Success Predictor. This figure is also recognisable in our experience from working on 400 programmes.
It's not all bad news. Two criteria consistently scored well
-
Alignment with Enterprise Strategy/Ambition
-
Teams are working with energy and creativity
And three criteria are showing promise but still under performing
-
Healthy SteerCo debate
-
Sponsor experience
-
Ambition Vs Capabilities
However, even with these moving in the right direction, why are 70% of programmes set up to fail? Our experience and the data in this report combine to suggest that most programmes contain one or more programme Serial Killers, elements of your programme that could severely hinder its chances of success.
Our PSP takes a deep dive into 4 areas of focus, Leadership, Team, Navigation & Continual Improvement. We marked each of the 26 programmes against 16 key criteria, and below we highlight our findings.
MAKE YOUR UNKNOWNS, KNOWN.
A Lack of 'LEADERSHIP'
A programme’s chances of success are significantly reduced if the company and programme’s leadership have not set it up for success. The PSP therefore starts by testing a programme's foundations. Whilst we found good alignment with enterprise strategy and ambition, our findings indicate objectives are not always achievable, suggesting there is work to be done in ensuring ego does not outstrip reality.
Lack of widespread support
50%
Across the 26 programmes we surveyed, only half (50%) report “strong support for the programme.”
Capabilities don’t match programme ambitions
46%
Report “the programme’s ambition is greater than the organisation's capabilities”.
Conflicts not addressed
69%
Of the programmes we surveyed report conflicts across the change portfolio.
Doing it for the right reasons
54%
Report that the “programme is strongly aligned to business strategies.”
'TEAM' inefficiency
A programme will only succeed if the team is working effectively together. Whilst our data suggests healthy debate in the key SteerCo meeting, there can be gaps where resources and partners do not align.
Positive conversations?
50%
Only half of the programmes report “healthy debate at Steer Co.”
Sponsors lack
experience
50%
Just half of the programmes report sponsors are viewed as “having little experience in running similar programmes”.
Limited cohesion
65%
Report suppliers “are not working as one team”.
A dearth of trust in teams
65%
Say “there is not good levels of trust between teams”.
Inability to 'NAVIGATE'
Major change programmes are complex and can be complicated. Success is more easily achieved if your team and organisation can navigate complexity and identify the unknown unknowns that inevitably lurk within a programme. Our survey suggests not many are.
Plans not aligned
25%
Only 25% say they are “confident they have a plan to deliver the required quality of solution”.
Dependencies are not accounted for
65%
Say that “dependencies are not being identified and managed adequately”.
Unconvincing business cases
54%
Only 54% are confident that “the costs and benefits are worth the effort”.
Undefined view of success
69%
Say that they “there is no consistent view of what good looks like and ‘when done is done".
'CONTINUAL IMPROVEMENT'
not baked-in
With the need to upskill important for all businesses, the PSP finally looks at how well companies learn from major change programmes. Whilst individuals and teams are working with energy, our findings suggest that companies still struggle to adapt and take forward learnings for the inevitable change ahead.
Energised creativity
54%
Say “solutions are being driven with energy and creativity".
A lack of rigour
33%
Only one third say that “the build, test and implementation ensure quality improvements”.
Inability to adapt
42%
Say “the business has the capacity, skills and motivation to adapt to new processes”.
Numerous competing priorities
62%
Nearly two-thirds say “competing priorities amongst stakeholders may hinder progress”.
How can you make your unknowns, known?
Our detailed findings help explain the headline stat that 70% of major programmes are likely to fail without major intervention. Whilst the findings may be stark, they do chime with both our experience across 400 major change programmes and the conversations we have and hear in the industry. They suggest the change industry needs to change itself.
What is more encouraging is that in our experience, you only need to make three key pivots across the programme to significantly enhance the programmes chances of success.
These pivots will likely address one of the dozen Serial Killers we have identified across nearly 400 major programmes worth a total of over £25bn in investment. The Serial Killers and the three pivot points will differ from programme to programme, but once you can quickly identify these, your programme is likely to be placed in the 30% of programmes that succeed.
To unmask your potential Serial Killers and start identifying the pivot points that will significantly improve your chances of success, get in touch or begin the PSP below.