Domain 04 of four

Investment Portfolio and Delivery Governance

Helping organisations select the right technology investments, allocate limited resources effectively and maintain control over projects and programmes.

Start with the Investment Portfolio and Delivery Preliminary Assessment

Request an assessment All services

Why it matters

The problem this addresses

Technology spend is easy to approve one item at a time and very hard to see as a whole. Renewals continue because stopping them is unfamiliar. Projects finish and nobody returns to the business case to ask whether it happened.

The result is a portfolio nobody deliberately chose, carrying commitments that were each reasonable in isolation.

Scope

The assessment may examine

Alignment between investments and organisational strategy
Business-case quality and decision criteria
Project and programme prioritisation
Governance roles and decision rights
Delivery risk, dependencies and constraints
Resource capacity and competency
Portfolio performance reporting
Benefits ownership and realisation

Key standards: Framework alignment is a statement of method, not a certification claim.
COBIT 2019: Portfolio, budget and cost management, and the governance of programmes and projects.
PRINCE2: Project governance, stage gates and controlled delivery.
PMBOK Guide: Delivery practice and terminology.
ISO 21502: Project, programme and portfolio management guidance.
Management of Portfolios: Portfolio definition and delivery cycles.

Assessment

Included in the Assessment

Portfolio governance maturity summary
Priority investment and delivery risks
Business-case and prioritisation gaps
Capacity and resource constraints
Executive findings presentation
Practical 90-day portfolio improvement roadmap

Price: Quoted on request. Each Preliminary Assessment is a paid, fixed-scope advisory engagement, confirmed before commencement based on the agreed scope, the number of stakeholders and the depth of evidence required.
Not an audit: Preliminary Assessments are advisory reviews. They are not certification audits, penetration tests, statutory audits, or formal legal and regulatory compliance opinions.

Implementation

Available as an Implementation Engagement

An assessment that ends at a report has done half the job. Building what it recommends is a separate engagement, scoped and quoted against what you need, and never bundled into the assessment.

Further advisory services

Technology investment portfolio governance
Investment prioritisation frameworks
Business-case evaluation
Project and programme assurance
Benefits realisation management
Delivery risk and dependency management
Capacity, competency and resource planning
Portfolio performance dashboards
Governance committee design
Project stage-gate reviews
Post-implementation reviews
Portfolio optimisation and reprioritisation

How it is priced: Quoted on request. Fixed scope and fixed fee, agreed in writing before work begins. We do not work on an open-ended basis.
Independence: Assessment and implementation are separately scoped engagements, quoted and agreed in writing before either begins. Keeping them separate is deliberate. It is what allows the assessment to stay independent, and it means you are never presented with findings that happen to recommend more of our own work. Where we have implemented something, any later re-assessment of that work says so plainly.

Intended outcomes

Greater transparency over technology expenditure
Stronger alignment between investments and strategy
Improved project and programme prioritisation
Earlier identification of delivery risks
More effective use of financial and human resources
Clearer accountability for outcomes and benefits
Better evidence for continuing, adjusting or terminating investments

Where does this sit for you today?

If you are not sure whether this is the right starting point, the Quick Diagnosis takes about two minutes and gives you a position on the page. Nothing is sent anywhere.

Discuss a governance concern Try the Quick Diagnosis