Closing a programme with unrealised benefits

The programme is not ready to close merely because the projects are done. MSP distinguishes delivering capability from realising benefits. Three of five benefits are realised; two depend on a regulatory change in 18 months. Closing now would leave those benefits without an owner, a plan or funding. The board should test closure readiness against three conditions: the blueprint is embedded in business as usual, the benefits realisation plan is transferred to a named owner, and residual risks and issues have a home. The operations director is willing to own the residual benefits, which is necessary but not sufficient - willingness without a plan and business change manager funding is an unfunded promise. The programme manager should recommend a managed transition: close the current tranche, retain a small benefits realisation function, or extend the programme at minimum cost. If the board closes, it should minute the residual benefits as a business-as-usual obligation and commission a post-programme review. The audit committee's question is the right test.

The plan should be owned by the operations director, not the programme manager, and should specify: the two residual benefits and their measures, such as the fraud loss target and straight-through processing target; the dependency on the regulatory change and its trigger; the business change activities still needed; the business change manager role and funding; review points, quarterly for 18 months; escalation if the regulatory change slips; and the data sources for measurement. It should also state what the programme will stop doing and what business as usual will start doing. Include a risk assessment for the handover: does business as usual have the capability and capacity to track benefits? If not, fund a lightweight benefits office. The plan should be signed off by the operations director and the sponsor before closure, and the post-programme review should test whether the plan was followed. The key judgement is that a benefits realisation plan is a live management tool, not a closure document.

Answer directly: the operations director will own them, but only if the board approves a transition plan with named accountability and funding. The programme manager should not claim that business as usual will pick them up without evidence. Explain the current position: three benefits realised; two dependent on a regulatory change; no business change manager funding yet. State the proposed arrangement: operations director as senior responsible owner for benefits, a named benefits lead in business as usual, quarterly reporting to the portfolio or finance committee, and a post-programme review at 12 months. Distinguish accountability from activity: the programme can transfer the plan, but business as usual must resource it. If the board declines to fund it, record that the residual benefits are at risk and that the audit committee should be told. The programme manager's role is to make the choice explicit, not to absorb the risk after closure.