What to expect from a programme governance review

A programme governance review sounds formal, and in some ways it is. It involves structured interviews, document analysis and a written findings report. But the purpose is practical: to give the programme sponsor a clear picture of whether the governance framework is fit for the work it is supposed to support.

What the review examines ¶

The review covers four areas. First, the governance structure itself: who sits on which boards, what decisions those boards are empowered to make, and whether the right people are in the right rooms. Second, the decision-making record: whether decisions are being made at the right level, documented clearly and communicated to the people who need to act on them.

Third, the risk register: whether it reflects the real risks the programme is carrying, or whether it has become a compliance document that nobody reads. Fourth, the reporting lines: whether the information flowing up to the executive sponsor is accurate, timely and actionable.

How the interviews work ¶

The review involves structured interviews with between four and eight people, depending on the size of the programme. The interviews are not recorded. Notes are taken and shared with the interviewee for factual accuracy before they are used in the report.

The questions are specific rather than open. Colin Dunmore prepares them after reading the existing governance documentation, so the conversation can go straight to the things that the documents do not explain clearly. That preparation is what makes the interviews useful rather than repetitive.

What the report looks like ¶

The findings report is a written document, not a slide deck. It is structured around the four areas above, with findings ranked by priority and each finding accompanied by a specific recommendation. The recommendations are written to be actionable by the programme team, not to require further consultancy work to interpret.

The report is typically 12 to 18 pages. It is delivered as a draft first, giving the sponsor the opportunity to flag any factual errors before the final version is issued.

A governance review is most useful when it is commissioned before a programme reaches a crisis, not after. If the reporting feels uncertain or the decision-making feels slow, those are usually early signals worth investigating.