Governance
Governance sets the rules; management does the work
Program governance is the framework of authority, decision rights, and oversight that keeps a program aligned and controlled. It supplies a framework (policies, standards, decision gates), functions (oversight, decision-making, escalation, change control, quality, risk, compliance, audit), and roles (program governance board or steering committee, sponsor, program manager, PMO, component managers, benefit owners).
The most reliable distinction: the governance board approves, prioritizes, and authorizes; the program manager proposes, executes, and escalates. The sponsor chairs or sits on the board, champions the program, and secures resources. The PMO supports with standards, tools, and reporting; it does not own program decisions.
Traps. Answers that have the governance board directing component work or running the program; answers that let the program manager approve the program charter, business case, or major scope changes; skipping the escalation path to go straight to the sponsor's manager; equating governance with status reporting; and confusing the sponsor (an individual) with the governance board (a body).
Rule of thumb - the who-can-say-no test. For any decision, ask who has authority to reject it. If the answer is the governance board, the program manager's correct action is to prepare the recommendation, impact analysis, and options, then escalate within the tolerance thresholds defined in the governance plan.
Worked example. A vendor change would push a benefit milestone out by two months and exceed the program manager's approved cost tolerance. The correct path is not to absorb it quietly: the program manager documents the benefit impact, assesses options, raises the decision to the governance board, and records the outcome through change control.