Previous heading | Top | Next heading

Key better practice summary

Better practices for senior executives responsible for the planning and approval of projects are listed on the following pages. The practices are grouped under the main sections of this chapter: concept plan, business case, and approval. For each section the practices are listed in two groups:

• Practices undertaken personally by the executive, for example maintaining a close relationship with stakeholders; and
• Review questions for use by executives to help check important aspects of the concept plan and business case, such as whether the costings are accurate. A version of these questions, arranged for convenient use in the review of a particular project is provided in Appendix F – Questions for executive review of project proposals at page 110.

There is some commonality between issues to be considered at each stage. Where there is substantive additional material in the guide, page numbers are provided which refer to the start of the sub-section containing the material.

Note: the following checklists are also available in word format

Previous heading | Top | Next heading

Concept Plan

BETTER PRACTICES FOR THE PROJECT SPONSOR
Be available to planning teams to discuss possible projects and entity priorities. (page 46)
Maintain a strategic awareness of policy directions, and the opportunities and risks of emerging technologies and alternative delivery approaches. (page 46)
Encourage a degree of questioning and innovation. (page 46)
Maintain active external relationships and involve fresh perspectives early. (page 46)
Keep the planning team focused at a concept level at this early stage, so as to avoid premature consideration of detail or specific solutions. (page 51)
POINTS OF EXECUTIVE REVIEW FOR A BUSINESS CASE
The project concept has been developed in a broad context – taking account of the entity’s strategic goals and the broader environment. (page 46)
Business outcomes are clearly expressed. (page 47)
The extent of improvement or performance for business outcomes is indicated. (page 47)
The business outcomes of the project are largely independent of factors external to the project scope. (pages 47, 49)
The focus is on business outcomes that are important to decision-makers and key stakeholders. (page 47)
There is a reliable chain of reasoning underpinning the key elements of the project. (pages 48, 49)
The broad project requirements that are necessary and sufficient to achieve the outcomes are listed.(page 51)
There is a definite contribution to broader entity goals – for example client satisfaction, entity flexibility and capability, cost control, and enabling staff. (page 53)
Any important assumptions, risks or constraints are identified. (page 53)
Overall, the project concept offers achievable and tangible business results, supported by a reasonable logic for the major project requirements.

Once a concept plan meets the above criteria, its potential value, and its relative merits in relation to other concept plans, should be considered before making the investment needed to develop a more detailed business case. (page 53)

Previous heading | Top | Next heading

The business case

This checklist assumes the business case is being prepared based on a project concept plan which meets the criteria listed on the previous page.

BETTER PRACTICES FOR THE PROJECT SPONSOR
At the start of detailed planning: confirm the broad concept, appoint an appropriate person or team to develop the business case, consider whether specialist assistance will be useful, and engage with stakeholders. (page 55)
Consider procedural requirements, including possible application of Gateway Review or the ICT Two Pass Review process. (page 55)
Gain assurance that common administrative requirements, such as probity and recordkeeping, will be addressed. (page 55)
During the planning process, provide enough time and resources so the business case is of a quality suited to the project’s size and risk. (page 56)
Keep watch on the direction and cost of planning. If planning is likely to be costly, consider a smaller proposal to justify the cost of a more comprehensive business case. (page 56)
Maintain a close relationship with senior stakeholders to help clarify requirements and constraints and to remain aware of their commitment to the project. (page 56)
Be readily accessible to the planning team, to provide guidance on strategic issues. (page 56)
Consider seeking independent assurance on the information in the draft business case. (page 57)
Assess realistically whether there is adequate internal capability to effectively govern and deliver the project. (page 58)
Consider which information is of most interest and relevance to decision-makers and stakeholders. Make it clearly visible for them in the business case, including outcomes which will not be delivered by the project. (page 61)
POINTS OF EXECUTIVE REVIEW FOR A BUSINESS CASE Reason and specification: why the project is desirable, what is needed, when by, and at what cost
The project’s business outcomes, costing and timeframe are clearly described and are sufficiently reliable to inform a decision. (page 61)
Responsibility is allocated for all project products and expenditure and the delivery of the business outcomes. (page 61)
The business outcomes will be measured before rollout, and subsequently. (page 61)
The project requirements, or product description, are complete (covering, for example functionality, quality, volume, security). (page 63)
The right people have been consulted on project requirements. (page 63)
The proposed operational manager agrees the acceptance criteria for the project products. (page 63)
The proposed operational manager agrees the business outcomes are achievable with those products. (page 63)

Validation: that the approach is better than alternatives and is feasible
Options have been thoroughly considered. (page 66)
The range of options provides a real choice to decision-makers on the level of investment. (page 66)
Risks have been reliably identified and assessed. (page 68)
Any significant residual risks from the project have been identified, and the relevant person is willing to accept them. (page 68, 79)
Ongoing monitoring of risks and appropriate risk mitigation is included in the budget and activity plans. (page 68)
Assumptions – particularly high-impact assumptions – have been identified and are either considered reliable or treated as a risk for monitoring and mitigation actions. (page 68)
Operational requirements (such as staff and accommodation) have been identified and budgeted for. (page 70)
Data issues are addressed: requirements, availability, security and privacy aspects, and ongoing data management. (page 70)
Implementation: gain confidence the project can be effectively managed and delivered
The communications and stakeholder relationship approach is appropriate – in concept and in resourcing – to the size, risks and impact of the project. (page 71)
The project is compatible with other projects and workloads. (page 73)
The staging of the project takes account of the relative priority of the various business outcomes and related benefits. (page 73)
The staging of the project includes review and exit points that sensibly manage exposure to loss if problems occur. (page 73)
The entity has the capability to develop or procure the products. (page 73)
The resources are available or budgeted for product rollout and handover to operations. (page 73)
The roles, availability, skills and decisiveness of the project governance team are appropriate to the risks of the project. (page 74)
For cross-boundary projects, there is a shared understanding of, and commitment to, the project by the parties. (page 76)
Overall, the business case puts forward business outcomes that are realistically achievable within the proposed timeframe and cost, with appropriate risk mitigation, risk responses and fall-back options.

The next step is for a business case to be considered for approval by the decision-maker. This will usually involve a screening and priority assessment process. (page 28)

Previous heading | Top | Next heading

Approval

See pages 78 – 81 for supporting material

BETTER PRACTICES FOR DECISION-MAKERS
Be clear about scope of roles as a decision-maker or adviser.
Encourage an environment of open and honest discussion, and of continuity of attendance by committee members.
Focus on the central elements of project proposals relevant to approval (such as outcomes, costs, timeframe, feasibility, risks, and contribution to goals).
Consider the overall effect of projects under consideration, including opportunities or difficulties arising from the impact of one project on another, or their effect on business–as–usual activities.
Keep in mind the option of conditional or staged approvals to help the agency better manage projects risks.
Regularly consider opportunities to improve the assessment process (for example, the format of submissions, role and resourcing of support).
POINTS OF EXECUTIVE REVIEW WHEN CONSIDERING A PROPOSAL FOR APPROVAL Decision-makers should review and make their own judgement on important aspects of the business case, taking into account the broader context of government and entity priorities, resource availability, and other projects under consideration.
The relative importance of the proposed outcomes and contribution to entity and government goals.
The likelihood the project can be completed within the planned timeframe and costs.
The allocation of responsibility for delivery of the project products and achieving planned business outcomes.
The selection of the project option providing the most appropriate level of investment.
The appropriateness of acceptance or action on significant residual risks.
The appropriateness of project review and exit points to sensibly manage exposure to loss if problems occur.
The appropriateness of the roles, availability, skills and decisiveness of the project governance team to the risks of the project.
That the project complies with entity and APS policies, such as business strategies, ICT architecture and procedural requirements.
That the project is compatible with other projects and workloads.
The setting of specific controls at project commencement to provide senior management with the information needed for external liaison, to monitor progress and initiate any corrective action.
Overall the project is an appropriate use of resources, taking into account the outcomes, costs, risks and alternative uses of funds.
Following the decision, make a clear record of who made the decision, and the advice used as the basis of the decision

---

Previous: Approving the project

Next: Overview of project implementation