Custody records fail operational acceptance
A police force programme is replacing custody records and cell management. The new system passed supplier testing and is due to go live in eight weeks. The blueprint describes a target operating model where custody sergeants authorise detention reviews digitally and inspectors audit 10% of cases remotely. In user acceptance testing, sergeants completed reviews but inspectors could not audit remotely because the audit module reports only by officer ID, not by case. The supplier says the requirement was not in the contract. The force's benefits case claims 15,000 officer hours saved annually from remote audit. Training has been booked for 400 officers. The programme manager has a quality management strategy requiring operational acceptance before transition. The go-live date is fixed by a ministerial announcement.
1. Should the programme manager approve go-live in eight weeks?
Read the worked answer
No, not on current evidence. The quality management strategy requires operational acceptance before transition. Operational acceptance is not the same as supplier testing; it means the target operating model works in the live environment. The blueprint requires inspectors to audit 10% of cases remotely. UAT shows they cannot, because the audit module reports by officer ID, not case. That is a blueprint failure, not a cosmetic defect. Approving go-live would transfer a known capability gap into operations and put the 15,000-hour benefit at risk. The programme manager should ask for a remediation plan with three options: supplier change to the audit module, a manual audit workaround with a risk assessment, or deferral of the audit capability to a later release. Only the first preserves the blueprint; the second may be acceptable for a short period if inspectors can still audit and the benefit is reforecast. The ministerial announcement is a constraint, not a reason to accept an untested operating model. Recommend a conditional go-live decision to the board.
2. How should the programme manager handle the supplier's claim that the audit requirement was not in the contract?
Read the worked answer
Check the evidence before accepting or rejecting the claim. Trace the requirement through the business case, blueprint, requirements catalogue, statement of work and contract. If the requirement is explicit, the supplier is obliged to deliver it; if it is only implied by the blueprint, the programme may need a change request. The programme manager should not rely on memory or email fragments. Convene the supplier, the force's contract manager and the business owner to review the traceability. If it is a genuine gap, raise a change request with cost, time and benefit impact, and negotiate against the contract's change mechanism. If the supplier is avoiding a known obligation, escalate through contract governance. In either case, do not let the supplier's position become the programme's position: the programme manager represents the force's operational need. Record the outcome and update the requirements baseline so future testing has a clear acceptance reference.
3. What should the programme manager do about the 400 officers booked for training and the benefits forecast?
Read the worked answer
Separate the training decision from the go-live decision. Training 400 officers on a system that may not be approved for go-live risks wasting time and creating expectations. The programme manager should ask the business owner whether training can be modular: core custody functions now, remote audit later. If go-live is deferred, reschedule training or deliver a shorter familiarisation. For the benefits forecast, do not leave the 15,000 hours unchanged. Reforecast with the audit capability either delayed or manual: if inspectors audit manually, some hours may still be saved, but not the full amount. Update the benefits realisation plan and the business case with a sensitivity range. Tell the board the benefit is at risk, not lost, and state what would recover it. The judgement is to protect credibility with officers and the board rather than to preserve an optimistic forecast.