Advisory and programme delivery
Structuring multi-year programmes so that decisions are taken at the right moment and on the right evidence.
The issue
The problem as it presents itself.
Large public programmes rarely fail for technical reasons. They fail because responsibility is diffuse, arbitration comes late, and variances are seen too late to be corrected.
Intended outcome
What the organisation gets.
A programme whose governance is explicit, whose progress is measured on facts, and whose variances become visible early enough to be arbitrated.
Before committing
Four preliminary questions.
An organisation that cannot answer these questions does not yet have a programme: it has an intention. Formulating them costs less than discovering them mid-delivery.
- 01Who, by name, arbitrates when two directorates disagree on a programme priority?
- 02Is progress measured on verified deliverables, or on adherence to the announced schedule?
- 03Do your contracts contain reversibility and intellectual property clauses you could actually use?
- 04Would a variance identified today reach the decision-making body, and how long would it take?
Our role
What we take on.
- Framing, division into verifiable increments, and explicit exit criteria.
- Governance: bodies, mandates, decisions and traceability of arbitration.
- Steering on actual progress rather than on adherence to the announced schedule.
- Management of risks, dependencies and interfaces between suppliers.
- Procurement preparation and technical evaluation of bids.
Security
Principles applied.
- Security requirements written into the acceptance criteria of every increment.
- Independent verification of deliverables before payment.
- Reversibility and intellectual property clauses defined up front.
Deployment
Available modes.
- Embedded within the client’s teams.
- Client-side technical assistance.
The mode depends on the organisation’s own sovereignty, continuity and classification requirements. It is settled before design, not after.
Division of operational responsibility
Framing
Konect 9 / organisation 3
Requirements, exit criteria and the reversibility plan are established.
Build
Konect 8 / organisation 4
The organisation’s teams take part in design, not in acceptance testing alone.
Go-live
Konect 5 / organisation 7
Operation is conducted jointly, against written procedures.
Supported operation
Konect 2 / organisation 10
The organisation operates; Konect steps in on request.
Autonomy
Client organisation, alone
The engagement ends. The system runs without outside assistance.
Transfer of skills
End of engagement.
Formation and equipping of an internal programme team able to steer without outside assistance once the engagement ends.
Related domains.
Consultations · Pre-qualifications · Partnerships
Continue the conversation.
Detailed material — methodology, references, capability statement — is provided within a controlled framework, at the request of an identified organisation.