Successfully resetting major programmes

Emma Willson, Director, Major Delivery Hub, at the National Audit Office, on why there shouldn’t be a reluctance to reset a failing project when this could be the wisest course.

In an ideal world, programmes would motor along, powered by a clear vision and plan, delivering what is required to the cost and time intended. But how often do things change or not work first time? Albert Einstein said: “The measure of intelligence is the ability to change.” So why, when it is really necessary to make a change to (or reset) a major programme, does resetting have such negative perceptions?

Many of government’s largest and riskiest programmes, such as building new schools or IT systems, are complex and take years. We often see government bodies needing to improve how they are managed, particularly in their early stages, with external changes creating further complexities. Internal or external factors can mean a programme will no longer achieve its intended outcomes or make it too costly to do so. Given the negative perception of resets, government bodies may try to resolve unresolvable issues, leading to wasted effort and costs. Recognising the need to undertake a reset early could reduce this waste.

Our March 2023 report on HS2 at Euston station reinforced the value of getting resets right. We found that the government’s attempt to reset since 2020 had not succeeded. Even without record levels of inflation, HS2 Euston station costs had increased to a level high enough to prompt the government to reconsider. The latest cost estimate for a 10-platform design was £4.8bn, which is £2.2bn above the allocated budget. Further action was required to develop an affordable and viable station. The Comptroller and Auditor General, as head of the National Audit Office, emphasised that “the March 2023 announcement delaying parts of the HS2 programme should now give DfT and HS2 Ltd the necessary time to put the Euston project on a more realistic and stable footing. However, the deferral of spending to manage inflationary pressures will lead to additional costs and potentially to higher costs overall for the project that will need to be managed closely.”

Understanding these trade-offs, such as increased costs, is important for decision-makers assessing whether a reset is the right option. Our recent report, Lessons Learned: Resetting major programmes, draws our insights together and provides a practical guide to help decision-makers determine whether to do a reset and how to increase its chances of success.

Resets can be significant and risky. When decision-makers understand that they are carrying out a reset, they can more consciously consider whether they have the necessary activities and processes to manage risks. The building blocks to a successful reset are the same as those needed for any successful programme. But it can be more challenging to put these in place and get the focus right.

Our insights describe the need to identify quickly whether a reset is the right thing to do by examining management information and having defined checkpoints or specific milestones. A lack of honesty can mean reset triggers are missed – in 2020 we reported that staff leading the Home Office’s Digital Services at the Border programme had bred a culture of tightly controlled and manipulated communications, which made it difficult to honestly discuss programme options. The need for the right culture and behaviours is also critical to developing a shared understanding of how a reset will be done.

We also cover the processes and skills that need to be considered. This includes having governance arrangements tailored to the risks and allowing enough time and space, varying with the complexity of the programme or reset. It may take time to: understand the underlying issues and potential opportunities; involve (and potentially rebuild) a supply chain; engage stakeholders, including contractors; or seek programme approvals. We found that the time spent on a reset ranged from under three months to over a year.

Considering how these insights apply to your programmes may increase the chances of success.

• The NAO report Lessons Learned: Resetting major programmes
• What is Programme Management?
• Learn more about Programme Management with APM Learning

THIS ARTICLE IS BROUGHT TO YOU FROM THE SUMMER 2023 ISSUE OF PROJECT JOURNAL, WHICH IS FREE FOR APM MEMBERS.