You are well into a large-scale, long-term project and as the next steering committee meeting approaches, you’re reviewing the RAG status. There are no red lights, a few amber, but that’s only to be expected.
The majority are green, so there’s nothing to worry about. Yes, the timeline on a project of this nature is bound to slip a bit, and yes, it’s running a little over budget, but that’s what the contingency is for. So, why the nagging doubt?
Large and complex projects are not delivered overnight. By the time you’ve conducted a thorough selection process, concluded procurement and contracting, allocated resources, possibly carried out some back-filling, made a realistic plan (considering inevitable surprises such as financial year-end, Christmas, and summer vacation), and cleaned up your data for the dreaded migration, who wouldn’t be looking at a couple of years?
But is the business case as thorough and detailed as the project plan?
Do the assumptions and expectations match?
Having a financial contingency built into the plan is routine; however, it makes more sense when it is distributed across the project timeline and relates to the risk associated with the respective project phases. Otherwise, there is a chance that the reserve has been consumed in an earlier and/or lower-risk phase, leaving you short when you need it most.
Similarly, slippage in one sprint may be permissible, especially if thorough testing now can head off problems later. However, there is a limit to how long a go-live should be delayed or how long the entire organisation should be kept waiting while the migration workstream is spinning its wheels.
Many of the metrics suggest steady progress, and expecting everything to be green all the time would be unrealistic. The areas that are on amber have plausible explanations. The question is, even in the most open and transparent organisations, does anyone want to be the bearer of bad news?
While they may not be fearful of leadership’s reaction, it is human nature to talk positively about big projects and portray a can-do attitude, particularly in front of senior management. Moreover, even if an individual is not personally responsible for any potential failings, there may be fear of guilt by association.
When is the right moment to intervene?
Prolonging uncertainty and allowing inefficiencies to compound over time is rarely the solution. Whatever the objectives for the project were, the chances of reaching them diminish with every delay. It’s not merely in the context of short-term financial impacts; longer-term business results and shareholder value can erode, and market position may be jeopardised by delayed realisation of benefits.
Critically, and often underestimated, team morale can be severely sapped as people lose sight of the improvements that were foreseen; productivity declines, employee turnover increases, and key talent can be lost.
In such scenarios, an external perspective is invaluable, especially from someone knowledgeable in your field and familiar with similar situations. Acknowledging project statistics, it is fair to say that many who have worked on technology implementations in asset finance have encountered situations where all is not as it seems.
Independent review can unveil issues masked by familiarity, challenge assumptions, and reveal blind spots. There is an essential need for a transparent, objective assessment of the project's true state; time pressure intensifies with each passing day.
An impartial, non-partisan assessment can provide the board with actionable intelligence that swiftly diagnoses core issues and their causes. This approach avoids merely listing already familiar symptoms with formulaic, isolated treatments.
The advice and recommendations offered do not seek to apportion blame; the messengers do not have a career advancement to protect or a bonus to defend. Everyone at Finativ is accustomed to navigating internal politics and conflicting opinions, aligning boards and stakeholders on the best course of action, and building consensus on the way forward. There is no delegation to junior staff; you will work with experienced professionals who know the industry.
You gain clear visibility into your project’s true status and options for what can be done next. This will position you to make informed decisions based on expert, objective analysis, enabling you to realign your project with strategic business objectives and restore stakeholder confidence through decisive action.
The earlier issues are identified, the greater the chances of successfully preserving or restoring shareholder value. You will receive hands-on support for implementation and course correction, alongside knowledge transfer to bolster your team against future challenges.
While history may not always repeat itself exactly, there are always lessons to be learned.
Encountering challenges within a significant and complex project is hardly unique and is not confined to our industry. What matters is how you choose to respond.
We offer a proven track record in helping business leaders demonstrate effective leadership, showcasing your ability to navigate complex technological challenges, deploy proactive risk management in adversity, and display strategic agility in adapting to unforeseen project complications.
Allow Finativ to help you take immediate action to safeguard your project and organisational goals. For further insights and support, please contact me using the link below.
