Executive Project Assessment Guide

The Executive Dashboard of Risk

👑 Leadership & Governance

Poor Leadership & Indifference ▼

Strategic Impact: Key stakeholders show indifference or fail to make timely decisions.
Executive Action: Re-evaluate the business case and enforce active, ownership-level support.

No Bad News Reported ▼

Strategic Impact: Challenges are hidden and status reports stay "green" while reality erodes.
Executive Action: Demand unfiltered reality and mandate an independent third-party audit.

Lack of Fact-Based Plan ▼

Strategic Impact: The plan is based on assumptions or unattainable expectations rather than data.
Executive Action: Halt progress and re-baseline the project using verifiable performance data.

🎯 Scope & Value

Fuzzy Outcome & Scope ▼

Strategic Impact: Business outcomes lack quantifiable measures, leading to strategic erosion.
Executive Action: Define "Done" with absolute precision before authorizing further spending.

Too Many Requirements ▼

Strategic Impact: Requirements are not aligned with vital business needs, driving cost and rework.
Executive Action: Aggressively prune the scope to focus exclusively on core ROI drivers.

Too Many Changes ▼

Strategic Impact: Late-stage changes destroy project stability, testing quality, and launch readiness.
Executive Action: Freeze the scope and enforce a rigid, formal change management process.

⚙️ Execution & Process

Missed Commitments Trend ▼

Strategic Impact: Consistent missed milestones signal a systemic breakdown in execution logic.
Executive Action: Mandate immediate leadership changes or structural reorganization of the project.

Poor RID Resolution ▼

Strategic Impact: Risks, Issues, and Decisions (RID) pile up unresolved, causing total paralysis.
Executive Action: Unblock critical decisions within 48 hours or move to cancel the project.

Lack of Process Discipline ▼

Strategic Impact: Commitments are not documented or tracked; delivery becomes "best effort" only.
Executive Action: Enforce mandatory documentation standards and vendor accountability metrics.

👥 Team Health

High Team Turnover ▼

Strategic Impact: Key resources leave due to poor leadership, causing massive productivity drains.
Executive Action: Diagnose root causes of turnover and stabilize the core delivery team.

Excessive Overtime ▼

Strategic Impact: Persistent burnout leads to high-risk technical errors and talent erosion.
Executive Action: Reset timelines or increase delivery capacity to maintain quality standards.

Poor Organization ▼

Strategic Impact: Poor role definition and accountability vacuums create cross-functional confusion.
Executive Action: Appoint a single, empowered lead for each critical workstream.

The Six-Step Executive Approach

Step 1: Align on Objectives ▼

Define a specific assessment scope targeting key risk areas like governance or decision speed.

Step 2: Select an Assessor ▼

Mandate independence. Hire an unbiased expert unconnected to any current project vendor.

Step 3: Establish an Approach ▼

Validate scope, timing, and communication protocols for reporting sensitive findings.

Step 4: Conduct Assessment ▼

Conduct a 360-degree review involving all leaders, team members, and delivery partners.

Step 5: Report Results ▼

Review findings with leadership first. Focus on a treatment plan rather than assigning blame.

Step 6: Post-Project Assessment ▼

Institutionalize knowledge via an After Action Dialogue (AAD) to prevent repeat failures.

⚠️ THE UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTH: Be prepared for recommendations of "significant surgery" on scope to preserve budget and core benefit integrity.

Sustaining Value Post-Launch

Approximately 20% of the total cost of ownership (TCO) is related to project costs, while 80% is related to its post-implementation operating costs.

20%

Project Costs
(Initial CAPEX OPEX for Delivery)

DEPLOYMENT / GO-LIVE

80%

Operating Costs
(Post-Implementation Maintenance & Support)

100%

Benefit Realization

💡 100% of project benefits are realized ONLY after implementation.

Strategic Sustainment Mandate:
To realize 100% of the benefits, users need supplemental training, and additional funds must be approved to correct and add new functionality or features as business needs dictate.

Project Health Stress Test (MISSION™)

Answer the following diagnostic questions. Any unclear or muddled response should be marked as "No".

If you see these Risk Signs... 🚩	Check these MISSION™ Criteria 🧪
Leadership & Governance 👑	Sponsorship (S), Stakeholders (S)
Scope & Value 🎯	Mission (M), Nurture (N), Stakeholders (S)
Execution & Process ⚙️	Interdependencies (I), Integration (I), Sponsorship (S)
Team Health 👥	Organization (O), Trust Test 🤝

Mission: Can every team member deliver a coherent 30-second response addressing purpose, outcome, and benefits? Yes No

Interdependencies: Does the team explicitly articulate all necessary connections to other systems or processes? Yes No

Sponsorship: Do leaders demonstrate active, ownership-level support and attend meetings? Yes No

Stakeholders: Are the fully committed stakeholders drawn from the frontline (the primary users of the solution)? Yes No

Integration: Does the solution plan quantify the work required to integrate other applications and technologies? Yes No

Organization: Are the required changes to roles, skills, and structure specified and quantified? Yes No

Nurture: Is a clear, funded plan in place for continuous nurturing over the solution's life? Yes No

The Trust Test: Look around the room. Would you go into a potentially career-threatening battle with the people sitting around the table? Yes No