Governing a multi-project digital transformation programme
Several transformation projects running in parallel with no common structure: putting programme governance in place to give management a reliable overall view.
- Role
- Programme manager & business analyst
- Period
- 3.5 years
- Projects
- Several projects in parallel
- Delivered
- Governance, common reporting, escalation paths, project delivery
The challenge
A semi-public organisation in the construction sector was running several transformation projects in parallel: digitising membership management, overhauling the accounting chain, and supporting entrepreneurs through research and onboarding. These projects shared resources and priorities, but had no common structure for governing them together.
Several interdependent projects were moving forward at the same time, each with its own deadlines and resource needs. Without a clear governance structure, trade-offs between projects were made case by case, priorities changed without visibility for the teams, and management lacked a reliable overall view of actual progress.
The friction points at the start
-
Friction 01
Interdependent projects
Each project had its own deadlines, but they all shared the same resources and priorities.
-
Friction 02
Case-by-case trade-offs
Without a common framework, priorities changed without visibility for the teams.
-
Friction 03
No overall view
Management lacked a reliable picture of actual progress.
The approach
The assignment began by putting a concrete governance structure in place. This included regular steering committees, common reporting formats across all projects, and clear escalation paths for decisions that went beyond the operational level.
Resource allocation and trade-offs between competing interests across departments became a regular part of the governance process, rather than an ad hoc negotiation whenever priorities clashed.
External consultants were managed through rigorous contract follow-up, quality control of deliverables, and close monitoring of agreed scope and timelines.
Alongside this, sustained work went into data governance. Centralised reporting gave management a shared view of project progress and supported the gradual adoption of new platforms across the organisation.
What was delivered
-
A governance structure
Regular steering committees and clear escalation paths for decisions beyond the operational level.
-
Common reporting
Formats shared by every project and centralised reporting for management.
-
Provider management
Contract follow-up, quality control of deliverables, agreed scope and timelines monitored.
The result
Over three and a half years, the programme delivered its various projects while maintaining a coherent overall view. Management had regular reporting on progress, risks and strategic decisions. The governance structure put in place outlasted the assignment itself and still provides a framework for subsequent projects.
What the project made possible
-
Projects delivered
Over three and a half years, with a coherent overall view throughout.
-
Management kept informed
Regular reporting on progress, risks and the strategic decisions to make.
-
A framework that lasted
The governance outlasted the assignment and still frames subsequent projects.
Key takeaways
This project shows what well-structured programme governance brings.
-
Steer the whole
An overall view across interdependent projects, rather than project-by-project steering.
-
Shared criteria
Trade-offs based on common criteria, rather than the balance of power at any given moment.
-
Data as a lever
Data governance as a management tool, not a separate administrative exercise.
Is one of your processes eating up your time? The Process Scan gives you a first reading in 5 minutes, free. Take the Process Scan →
Several projects can move forward without ever becoming one coherent programme
If your projects share resources, dependencies or competing priorities, I can help bring structure to the program as a whole.