A new report from the National Audit Office has highlighted repeated problems with the delivery of major Government programmes in four key areas: scope, planning, managing interdependencies and oversight.

Lessons learned from Major Programmes examines lessons from the UK’s independent public spending watchdog’s work on major programmes, including transport, defence and energy programmes.

Government programmes range from transport infrastructure, military capability and nuclear projects, to digital programmes or government building improvements. The report says that in order to secure best value from the significant amounts of public money the government has committed, it is crucial that it can successfully navigate the challenges of delivering its major programmes.

However, according to the NAO government programmes often encounter difficulties, taking longer and costing more than planned, and not delivering the intended aims, with significant and high-profile consequences.

The government auditor has examined major programmes across different parts of government and at different stages over many years.

The report draws together insights from recent reports on major programmes, including on Crossrail, Carrier Strike and Universal Credit.

The NAO said:

“While there is a wealth of literature and courses on major programmes, we repeatedly see similar problems. We think that many of these problems have their roots in four key areas: scope, planning, managing interdependencies and oversight.”

“This report examines the root causes of the issues we see most often and why we think they occur, in order to identify learning points that we think government should focus on in order to improve its performance on major programmes.”

According to the NAO, key lessons to be learnt include:

Scope - Bodies should establish a clear alignment between a programme’s objectives and its scope. When there are multiple objectives, these should be coherent, and any tensions clearly recognised. Bodies should also recognise that given the long-term, transformational nature of major programmes, the objectives or scope may need to be revised during the programme’s lifecycle.

Cost and Schedule estimates – Senior decision-makers should ensure that they understand the underlying bases of estimates, and where areas of risk and uncertainty lie. An estimate produced from early high-level information is unlikely to be suitable for setting a programme budget and schedule. Any early estimate of programme cost and schedule should be seen as provisional and be used only in an indicative fashion to guide long-term planning until a detailed design supported by industry pricing is available.

Ensure interdependencies are identified and managed - Major programmes are composed of multiple, smaller inter-related projects,which can themselves be significant undertakings. They may also be dependenton the progress of other programmes. Bodies should clearly define who is responsible for integration, and ensure that they have the appropriate authority and levers to co-ordinate other elements of the programme.

Consider operational planning from the start - Bodies should define at the outset how a programme is intended to be used in practice, and then continually develop their understanding of how it will operate as the programme develops. This should include considering what existing services and capabilities might be needed to support a new or enhanced service, and whether assumptions about the level of service to be introduced remain realistic.

Importance of transparency and honesty in major programmes - Bodies must ensure that information within their organisation is accurate, consistent, and timely. Decision-makers should consider whether the indicators they are given are the right ones, and how these would alert them to emerging issues. They should also actively consider whether the types of management information may need refreshing to keep fulfilling this purpose, and if so, when.

Organisations should examine their own, and their contractors’ culture and behaviours to ensure that they allow an effective line of sight from the working level up to the decision-makers, as well as to the wider public. They should also ensure that commercial arrangements incentivise transparency and honesty within the supply chain.

The Government Major Projects Portfolio (GMPP), which includes government’s largest, most innovative and most risky programmes currently includes 125 major programmes at a combined whole-life cost of £448 billion.

Click here to download the full report Lessons learned from Major Programmes