Statement 1: "The programme has a clear, shared understanding of what success looks like."
You answered: "Agree".
You may be experiencing strong alignment around outcomes, with leaders and delivery teams describing success consistently. This supports clearer prioritisation and confident decision-making when trade-offs are required.
Statement 1: "The programme has a clear, shared understanding of what success looks like."
You answered: "Neutral".
You may be experiencing broad agreement on intent, but differing interpretations of success across stakeholders, creating ambiguity when priorities are challenged or progress is assessed.
Statement 1: "The programme has a clear, shared understanding of what success looks like."
You answered: "Disagree".
You may be experiencing uncertainty around objectives, resulting in teams focusing on activity rather than outcomes and struggling to determine whether the programme is genuinely on track.
Statement 2: "Programme scope is clearly defined, controlled, and actively managed."
You answered: "Agree".
You may be experiencing a well-understood scope baseline with structured mechanisms to assess and approve change without destabilising delivery.
Statement 2: "Programme scope is clearly defined, controlled, and actively managed."
You answered: "Neutral".
You may be experiencing incremental scope changes that feel reasonable individually but are not always assessed for cumulative impact on time, cost, or capacity.
Statement 2: "Programme scope is clearly defined, controlled, and actively managed."
You answered: "Disagree".
You may be experiencing scope creep, unclear boundaries, or inconsistent decision-making that increases delivery pressure and reduces confidence.
Statement 3: "Leadership sponsorship is visible, consistent, and effective."
You answered: "Agree".
You may be experiencing active sponsorship that reinforces direction, resolves conflict, and supports the programme through difficult decisions.
Statement 3: "Leadership sponsorship is visible, consistent, and effective."
You answered: "Neutral".
You may be experiencing sponsorship that is supportive but inconsistent, with limited engagement when issues become complex or politically sensitive.
Statement 3: "Leadership sponsorship is visible, consistent, and effective."
You answered: "Disagree".
You may be experiencing a leadership vacuum where accountability is unclear and delivery teams are left managing escalation and prioritisation.
Statement 4: "Governance forums provide timely, high-quality decisions"
You answered: "Agree".
You may be experiencing purposeful, outcome-focused governance that maintains momentum and clarity.
Statement 4: "Governance forums provide timely, high-quality decisions"
You answered: "Neutral".
You may be experiencing governance that provides oversight but does not consistently drive decisions, leading to repeat discussions or delays.
Statement 4: "Governance forums provide timely, high-quality decisions"
You answered: "Disagree".
You may be experiencing governance functioning mainly as a reporting exercise rather than a decision-making forum.
Statement 5: "Programme reporting provides an honest view of progress, risk, and issues."
You answered: "Agree".
You may be experiencing transparent reporting that balances progress with realism and enables early intervention.
Statement 5: "Programme reporting provides an honest view of progress, risk, and issues."
You answered: "Neutral".
You may be experiencing reporting that appears positive but lacks insight into emerging risks or delivery tension.
Statement 5: "Programme reporting provides an honest view of progress, risk, and issues."
You answered: "Disagree".
You may be experiencing overly optimistic or filtered reporting, with challenges becoming visible only when they are harder to resolve.
Statement 6: "Risks and issues are raised early and addressed constructively."
You answered: "Agree".
You may be experiencing a delivery culture that values transparency, challenge, and collective problem-solving.
Statement 6: "Risks and issues are raised early and addressed constructively."
You answered: "Neutral".
You may be experiencing selective escalation, where issues are raised only once they feel unavoidable or externally visible.
Statement 6: "Risks and issues are raised early and addressed constructively."
You answered: "Disagree".
You may be experiencing a culture where concerns are discouraged, leading to late surprises and reactive firefighting.
Statement 7: "The programme has the right capability and capacity to deliver"
You answered: "Agree".
You may be experiencing a delivery model with the appropriate mix of skills, capacity, and leadership to manage complexity and pace.
Statement 7: "The programme has the right capability and capacity to deliver"
You answered: "Neutral".
You may be experiencing teams compensating for capability gaps through effort rather than sustainable structure.
Statement 7: "The programme has the right capability and capacity to deliver"
You answered: "Disagree".
You may be experiencing persistent resourcing pressure, role overload, or reliance on a small number of key individuals.
Statement 8: "The project plan is robust, realistic, and clearly shows key dependencies across the programme."
You answered: "Agree".
You may be experiencing a well-structured and credible plan that reflects the true complexity of the programme, with dependencies clearly identified and actively managed to support confident delivery.
Statement 8: "The project plan is robust, realistic, and clearly shows key dependencies across the programme."
You answered: "Neutral".
You may be experiencing a plan that provides a high-level view of delivery, but where some dependencies are assumed rather than explicitly mapped or actively managed.
Statement 8: "The project plan is robust, realistic, and clearly shows key dependencies across the programme."
You answered: "Disagree".
You may be experiencing a plan that lacks realism or visibility of dependencies, leading to late surprises, rework, and limited understanding of true delivery risk.
Thanks for your submission. 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
