Unlocking large-scale programme value through collaborative operating models

Large-scale transport programmes are becoming more frequent as governments around the world see the chance to boost economic growth by investing in new infrastructure.

In the UK, for example, analysis suggests that the Planning and Infrastructure Bill could boost the economy by as much as £7.5 billion over the next 10 years.

But the grander the vision, the greater the complexity. And the bigger the risk that programmes will run over time and budget, or that outcomes won’t match the promise of that early artist’s impression. This challenge is compounded by global macroeconomic challenges, such as heightened trade tensions, tariff increases, and delays in infrastructure investment.

From individual goals to shared wins

It’s easy to see why large-scale programmes can run into problems of the sort that has delayed the UK’s High Speed 2. These goliath-sized programmes are often made up of multiple projects, each with their own stakeholders, supply chains, objectives, milestones, and deadlines – many of them enshrined in their own contracts. From the start, this encourages project teams to focus on their own goals rather than work with each other towards shared overall outcomes.

As individuals, people working on a major programme understand the importance of collaborating across projects, and there are shared goals declared early in a programme, warmly endorsed by everyone involved. But because teams don’t have the structures and environment to encourage and enable collaboration, ingrained habits kick in once work starts in earnest. So how can major programmes avoid the pitfalls of paying lip service to collaboration and make integration a priority to lock in economic gains?

The route to successful collaboration in complex programmes is a combination of rewired behaviours, structures, and processes that stimulate and sustain collaboration – all of which underpin a new kind of integrated operating model.

This is the approach we’ve taken with several major programmes, most recently The Euston Partnership (TEP). It’s also allowed our clients to get even more practical value from many of the principles of Project 13 – an initiative mainly driven by the civil engineering sector. Here’s what we learned and how leaders can use it to drive growth.

Drive programme success through leadership commitment

Ideally, project teams will commit to shared outcomes early in the programme. The programme’s client, or sponsor, should visibly and regularly get behind these shared outcomes from the start, and champion the collaborative behaviour needed to achieve them. This way, everyone is clear how much a collaborative culture matters to the most senior decision-makers.

Project teams will have success measures for delivering their own work, so it is important to incentivise integration across projects too. This embeds the idea that compromising on individual projects’ success measures is positive and even desirable if it helps achieve the programme’s overarching objectives.

This commitment to shared outcomes is vital. It helps move away from a transactional mindset, where organisations are contracted to deliver specific elements of a programme, and towards a more strategic one, where partners work with a shared interest in overall goals.

Co-design the collaborative process

Integrating a programme’s individual projects calls for a new way of working, rooted in clear structures, processes, governance, roles, and responsibilities, which are understood by all project teams. But instead of imposing a new way of working on stakeholders, involve them in building and applying it from the start, particularly those who are sceptical about a more collaborative approach.

This might well mean slowing down the pace of the programme to get details right and hear everyone’s view. A slower pace could feel counter-intuitive, especially when everyone feels they already know the answer and wants to just ‘get on with the job’. But temporarily taking the foot off the gas will ultimately be worth it.

If the process for designing and defining collaboration is itself collaborative, the arrangements are more likely to stick. The more ownership of the ultimate goal stakeholders feel, the deeper their commitment to it will be.

Create collaborative structures to support governance

Integration won’t happen by itself. Structuring the programme as, for example, a merger or joint venture, is one way to design collaboration in from the beginning. But for various reasons – from regulatory restrictions to conflicting employment terms – it’s often not practical.

Alternatively, an ‘integrator’ with an overall view of the programme can bring stakeholders together and work with them to create the environment and structures for collaboration to happen. For example, our work with UK’s Ministry of Defence as systems integrator is helping to transform the defence supply chain by breaking down traditional ‘us and them’ barriers.

On the TEP programme, the integrator was a team resourced by the main programme partners. It included a Programme Management Office with functions common to most programmes, such as managing costs, requirements, scheduling, and reporting. The integrator’s functions also included joined-up communication and engagement, and research and analysis that helped consider investments in terms of value for the whole programme, not just individual projects.

Ideally, the integrator will be granted authority to make some programme decisions directly, without the need to escalate to the client or sponsor. Delegating authority to the integrator to make some programme decisions will drive pace and even greater value from establishing these collaborative structures. Regardless of how the role is constituted, the integrator should have a public mandate from the programme client or sponsor to reinforce its importance among project teams.

Develop integration capabilities for programme success

Complex programmes also need the right capabilities to knit projects together and help collaboration to flourish, whether it’s driven by the integrator or other members of the programme management team.

The most important capabilities will become clear as the operating model takes shape. For TEP, research and analysis capabilities existed in project teams but needed developing at programme level to support genuine integration. Assessing the current state of any existing capabilities and the relative costs and benefits of developing new or improved capabilities can help determine which are the most important capabilities to focus on first.

Programmes need technical capabilities, like whole-life cost analysis and schedule integration. But just as important are softer skill capabilities such as the facilitation skills to bring project teams together to work through problems and make decisions. For TEP, we worked with programme partners to create a forum for this facilitation to happen. The process itself helped to embed the behaviours and habits essential to help collaboration take root.

Integrated operating models unlock economic gains

Project teams know it makes sense to collaborate with each other but need the right environment for it to happen. Ideally, it will be in place before integration issues start slowing down design and delivery.

Most importantly, integration must be a guiding light, not an add-on. This mindset will minimise the frictions and bottlenecks that typically push programmes out of scope and over budget. It will also reveal opportunities for individual project teams to achieve more together than they would alone. And that will put programmes on the road to realising even the grandest vision.

This article was originally published in Rail Director.