Two Programmes, One Middle-Manager Bottleneck
Westmere Council is a 2,000-person public body. It is simultaneously implementing a new regulatory compliance programme (mandatory, fixed deadline) and a 'digital-first' agile transformation. Both require the same 60 middle managers, who are also absorbing a recent restructure. A pulse survey shows 68% report change fatigue and 41% say they do not understand why the digital transformation is needed. Two directorates have paused their digital work to focus on compliance, causing cross-directory friction. The transformation office has 12 initiatives on its portfolio, but no capacity model. The chief executive wants both delivered on time and has asked for a 'change readiness score' for each directorate. The compliance deadline is non-negotiable; the digital benefits are expected in 18 months.
1. What organisational factors would you examine before issuing a readiness score, and how would you avoid the score becoming a misleading single number?
Read the worked answer
Examine readiness across several dimensions rather than one attitude measure: leadership alignment, middle-manager capacity, staff capability, process and system fit, culture and change history, and the competing demands already in the system. Use interviews, workload data, pulse survey cuts by directorate, and a review of recent change failures. Avoid a single score because it hides which factor is binding. A directorate might be positive but have no capacity, or compliant but confused about purpose. Present a heat map with narrative commentary and a clear 'so what' for each cell. Weight the dimensions according to the change type: for compliance, capability and process readiness matter most; for digital, understanding and leadership reinforcement matter more. State the limitations and date the assessment. The chief executive should see the trade-offs, not a false precision that implies both programmes can proceed unchanged.
2. How would you advise the chief executive to sequence and govern the two programmes given the shared middle-manager bottleneck?
Read the worked answer
Treat middle-manager capacity as the binding constraint and govern both programmes through one portfolio forum. Protect the compliance deadline because it is mandatory, but do not pretend the digital transformation can proceed at full speed. Stagger digital waves, pause low-value initiatives, and build a simple capacity model showing hours demanded per directorate. Give middle managers explicit air cover to deprioritise non-essential work. Establish a change network so they are not the only channel. Track benefits and change load together, not separately. The chief executive should chair a monthly portfolio review that asks two questions: what must stop, and what support is missing? This is not a failure of ambition; it is a realistic sequencing decision that protects both mandatory delivery and the credibility of the digital change.