Statement 1: "Team members avoid speaking up or challenging ideas."
You answered: "Agree".
You may be experiencing conditions where people are reluctant to raise concerns or challenge ideas. This can limit open discussion, obscure emerging issues, and result in decisions being taken without the benefit of diverse input.
Statement 1: "Team members avoid speaking up or challenging ideas."
You answered: "Neutral".
You may be experiencing a mixed level of confidence and engagement, where some team members contribute while others hold back. The quality of debate may be variable, with opportunities to build more consistent challenge and open discussion to reach the right outcome.
Statement 1: "Team members avoid speaking up or challenging ideas."
You answered: "Disagree".
This suggests you have a culture of open contribution and psychological safety, where people speak up, ask questions, constructively challenge and work together to solve problems. When input is valued, voices are heard and collaboration drives better decision making.
Statement 2: "PMO is seen as a box-ticking exercise rather than value-adding."
You answered: "Agree".
You may be experiencing a process-heavy PMO that adds noise rather than clarity. If reporting lacks insight and governance feels burdensome, the PMO will struggle to influence planning or decision-making.
Statement 2: "PMO is seen as a box-ticking exercise rather than value-adding."
You answered: "Neutral".
This suggests a mixed view of PMO credibility and governance quality, with only some team members recognising the value-add. Reporting may offer useful insights at times, though not always in a way that fully informs decision-making or drives action.
Statement 2: "PMO is seen as a box-ticking exercise rather than value-adding."
You answered: "Disagree".
This suggests you have a strategic, value-adding PMO that provides insight, drives action, and strengthens decision-making. Reporting improves clarity, and governance feels enabling rather than restrictive.
Statement 3: "People wait for senior leaders to speak first."
You answered: "Agree".
You may be experiencing a culture where decisions escalate unnecessarily, roles lack clarity, and individuals lack confidence to take ownership. If individuals are unsure when they can act, progress slows as the programme waits for senior direction.
Statement 3: "People wait for senior leaders to speak first."
You answered: "Neutral".
You may be experiencing a mixed level of empowerment and delegated authority, where some people feel confident to contribute while others hold back. Roles and ownership may be understood in parts, but not consistently enough to enable fully independent discussion and decision-making.
Statement 3: "People wait for senior leaders to speak first."
You answered: "Disagree".
This suggests you have a culture of empowerment where people understand their authority, take ownership, and act without needing constant escalation. When programmes get this right, decisions move quickly and accountability is strong.
Statement 4: "Reporting feels overly positive given the known challenges."
You answered: "Agree".
You may be experiencing surface-level reporting because the detail is not well understood or issues are being masked. Risks are poorly understood or underplayed, leaders lack real insight to make informed decisions, and problems may emerge too late.
Statement 4: "Reporting feels overly positive given the known challenges."
You answered: "Neutral".
The quality of reporting may not be consistent enough to gain the transparency you need. Some updates may reflect reality well while others may feel optimistic. Risk visibility may be improving but not yet consistent across all areas.
Statement 4: "Reporting feels overly positive given the known challenges."
You answered: "Disagree".
This suggests a culture of transparent reporting where progress and risks are discussed openly. When communication and reporting are effective, challenges surface early, enabling informed decisions, appropriate escalation, and proactive mitigation, leading to stronger delivery outcomes.
Statement 5: "Actions and decisions are not consistently followed through."
You answered: "Agree".
You may be experiencing weak ownership where actions stall, decisions are revisited, and progress feels slow or inconsistent. Alignment may be low and delivery confidence may also be slipping.
Statement 5: "Actions and decisions are not consistently followed through."
You answered: "Neutral".
This suggests some variability in accountability and follow-through, with certain actions progressing well while others stall. Alignment and discipline may be present in pockets, but not consistently enough to ensure dependable delivery across all areas.
Statement 5: "Actions and decisions are not consistently followed through."
You answered: "Disagree".
This suggests a culture of clear ownership and follow-through. Actions are delivered, decisions stick, and commitments reliably turn into progress. Momentum is visible and consistent.
Statement 6: "Meetings frequently run over or get derailed."
You answered: "Agree".
You may be experiencing meetings without clear purpose or alignment. If meeting discipline is ineffective, discussions drift into unnecessary debates and priorities are unclear. This leads to reworking and a loss of control around the plan.
Statement 6: "Meetings frequently run over or get derailed."
You answered: "Neutral".
You may be experiencing a variable level of clarity, governance and alignment across the team. Some meetings stay focused and on track, while others drift or run over, suggesting that scope and expectations may not always be consistently understood or reinforced.
Statement 6: "Meetings frequently run over or get derailed."
You answered: "Disagree".
This suggests you experience well-structured meetings where decisions are made quickly and time is respected. It sounds like your governance is working well, where people understand the purpose of each forum, enabling productivity to remain high.
Statement 7: "There is hesitation to flag risks until they become serious."
You answered: "Agree".
You may be experiencing a reactive risk culture where issues stay 'green' until 'red.' People hesitate to escalate early, leading to firefighting, blame behaviours, and reduced predictability.
Statement 7: "There is hesitation to flag risks until they become serious."
You answered: "Neutral".
You may be experiencing a mixed risk culture, where some risks are raised early but others surface later than ideal. Psychological safety and risk maturity may be developing, with room to build more confidence and consistency in early escalation.
Statement 7: "There is hesitation to flag risks until they become serious."
You answered: "Disagree".
This suggests you have a proactive risk culture where issues are surfaced early, escalation is encouraged, and controls are effective. The programme operates with stability rather than crisis management.
Statement 8: "It's unclear how the programme links to our company strategy."
You answered: "Agree".
You may be experiencing a programme focused on activity over outcomes. People struggle to explain the value being created, morale dips, and the strategic narrative is fragmented or missing.
Statement 8: "It's unclear how the programme links to our company strategy."
You answered: "Neutral".
You may be seeing some variability in engagement and understanding of programme outcomes and vision, with parts of the team clear on the link to strategy while others are less certain. Communication and strategic alignment may be partly effective but not yet consistent across all stakeholders.
Statement 8: "It's unclear how the programme links to our company strategy."
You answered: "Disagree".
This suggests a strong strategic alignment where people can clearly articulate outcomes of the programme and how their work contributes to value. The narrative is shared, motivating, and guides decision-making.
Thanks for submitting the programme health check. We’ve noticed that all of your responses were marked as neutral, which can often indicate uncertainty or hesitation rather than an accurate reflection of the programme’s current health.
To get real value from this exercise, and to ensure we’re identifying risks and opportunities effectively, it’s important that the responses are as honest as possible. Neutral answers make it difficult to gain meaningful insight or take action.
Why not revisit the questions and answer with the mindset that there are no right or wrong answers? The purpose is purely to help you improve clarity, alignment, and delivery.
How drama free is your change programme? take our free programme health check
Our change and transformation Podcast Listen to our latest Podcast
