Transcript Stephen Jenner Presentation - Academic Conferences Limited

Realising Benefits from egovernment – a fool’s
errand?
ECEG, 29th June 2009
Stephen Jenner
Change programmes - the rationale
“The fundamental reason for beginning a
programme is to realise benefits through
change. The change may be to do things
differently, to do different things, or to do
things that will influence others to change.”
Office of Government Commerce (OGC)
“It
is only possible to be sure that change
has worked if we can measure the delivery
of benefits it is supposed to bring.”
Cabinet Office
But the track record is not good in the UK
“Implementation of IT systems has resulted in
delay, confusion and inconvenience to the
citizen and, in many cases poor value for
money to the taxpayer.”
Public Accounts Committee
“Deficiencies in benefits capture bedevils
nearly 50% of government projects” and, “3040% of systems to support business change
deliver no benefits whatsoever.”
Office of Government Commerce
Or in Europe…
“After at least a decade of large investments
(running into billions of Euro) at digitalizing the
public sector, governments in Europe are still
mostly unable to objectively quantify and
show the benefits and returns of such
investments.”
e GEP, 2006
“The Implementation of eGovernment
solutions is expected to bring a number of
advantages including efficiency, increased
user satisfaction, and reduction of
administrative burden. However, this cannot
be taken for granted any longer.”
eGovMoNet, 2008
Or in Australia…
“Data
from Australia on achieved benefit/cost
ratios [in] central government indicates that
rates of return on ICT investments often are
low or negative.”
OECD
“benefits realisation and the measurement of
benefits arising from investments in ICT are
areas where there is substantial scope for
improvement”
Sir Peter Gershon
Or indeed in the US…
“The United States federal government will
spend over USD 60 billion on ICT technology
and systems in 2006. This huge expenditure
has led many to ask if ICT investment is
providing more than USD 60 billion in value to
government agencies and, ultimately, tax
payers. The answer is increasingly that
nobody knows.”
OECD, 2006
“the committee has no confidence that the
amounts being assessed have any
relationship to the benefits anticipated.”
US Senate Appropriations Committee, 2006
And empirical research concludes…
“There is a demonstrated, systemic tendency for project
appraisers to be overly optimistic. This is a worldwide
phenomenon that affects both the private and public
sectors…appraisers tend to overstate benefits, and
underestimate timings and costs.” HM Treasury
Forecasts are “highly, systematically and significantly
misleading (inflated). The result is large benefit
shortfalls”.
Flyvbjerg
“Delusional optimism: we overemphasise projects’
potential benefits and underestimate likely costs,
spinning success scenarios while ignoring the
possibility of mistakes.”
Lovallo and Kahneman
Four explanations…
1. The technical explanation
2. The psychological explanation –
cognitive biases
3. The economic explanation
4. The political explanation –
“Strategic misrepresentation”?
Delusion or Deception?
“the planned, systematic, deliberate
misstatement of costs and benefits to get
projects approved.” In short, “that is
lying”.
Flyvbjerg et al
“Figures don’t lie, but liars can figure”
Sharpe and Keelin
38% of respondents in one survey
openly admitted to overstating benefits
to get funding.
Ward
The 3 Benefit Challenges
1. Ensuring benefits claimed are
robust and realisable.
2. Planning for all potential forms of
value created.
3. Realising benefits and creating
value – exploiting the capability
created.
Capturing all forms of value
Political
8
2 Develop
2 Develop
Community-based
Community-based
solution
solution
1 Re-engineer
1 Re-engineer
Project
Selection
Selection
&Project
Development
& Development
7
6 Improved
6 Improved
collaboration
collaboration
with
with
stakeholders
stakeholders
8
3
6
4
4 More integrated
4 More
integrated
state
direction
state direction
7 Reduced time
7 Reduced
time
for service
delivery
for service delivery
1
3 Transportation
3 Transportation
balanced
with
balanced
with
other
liveability
other
liveability
factors
factors
11 More
11 More
effective
effective
leadership
leadership
8
10 Better
10 Better
skilled
skilled
& equipped
&people
equipped
people
2
5 Human
5 Human
Resources
Resources
organisation
organisation
development
development
3
2
8
1 Improved
1 Improved
community
community
liveability
liveability
2 Improved total
2 Improved total
transportation
transportation
experience
experience
8 More effective
8 More
effective
public
investment
public investment
3
4
6
Effectiveness
9
9
3 Deploy
3 Deploy
maintenance
maintenance
strategy
strategy
Efficiency
2 Community
2 Community
Prepared
to
Prepared
to
adapt
behaviour
adapt behaviour
5 Established state
5point
Established
of view state
point of view
9
0
4
1
8 Higher
8 Higher
quality
quality
solutions
solutions
4 Oregon
4 Oregon
Transportation
Transportation
Initiative
Initiative
4
2
1 Balanced with
1 Balanced
with
growth,
revenue
growth,
revenue
base
& needs
base & needs
3 Enhanced
3 Enhanced
economic
economic
opportunity
opportunity
Foundation
Social
Iden
tify
Project
X
Project
K
Project
O
Project
Z
Project
Y
Project
L
Qual
ify
Project
H
Project
M
Project
N
Value
Inve
st
igat
e
Project
J
Project
P
Com
m
it
Project
F
Project
A
Live Projects
Project
D
Project
C
Project
E
Project
B
Project
Q
Opportunity domain
Cross department
Cross CJS
Intra CJO
Categories of Value
Moving beyond hurdle rates of return to ask – have all
potential forms of value been identified?
Going beyond forecast to creating value
•
Managing benefits from a portfolio
perspective.
•
Continuous Participative
Engagement.
•
Learning from experience.
From optimism in planning and pessimism in
implementation to realism in planning and enthusiasm in
implementation
But – the problem starts with the
business case so…
1.
Spend more time doing your homework and be
clear about the benefits you are buying.
2.
Triangulate and Validate benefit estimates.
3.
Appraise ‘Attractiveness’ in the context of
‘Achievability’.
4.
Use stage/phase ‘Gates with teeth’.
5.
Independent review.
6.
Maintaining a ‘Clear line of Sight’.
The Solutions:
1. Understand the benefits you are buying
“It has often been observed
when analysing IS/IT project
failures that all the
ingredients for failure existed
on Day One of the project, or
even before it started!”
Ward and Taylor
The Solutions:
1. Understand the benefits you are buying
Beware ‘Strategic alignment’ as an
investment justification,
“Our CEO defines ‘strategic projects’
as expensive projects without a
Business case.”
Corporate Executive Board paper
Strategic Contribution Analysis
Service Transformation Programme – High Level Strategy Map
Vision
To change public
services so they
more often meet the
needs of people and
businesses, rather
than the needs of
government, and by
doing so reduce the
frustration and stress
of accessing them.
The result will be
services that are
better for the
customer, better for
front line staff and
better for the
taxpayer (Service
Transformation
Agreement, October
2007).
Strategies
Metrics
Learning from citizens and businesses
– Customer Insight, Customer Journey
Mapping, Customer Satisfaction
Measurement
Government will monitor the customer
experience through journey mapping
and customer satisfaction tracking
mechanisms at the front line (STA Oct
07)
Grouping services in ways that are
meaningful to the customer e.g. Tell Us
Once, Directgov and Businesslink.gov
Rationalising services for efficiency and
service improvement – online
(Directgov and Businesslink.gov),
phone (contact centre accreditation);
face to face and helplines
Making better use of customer
information public sector already holds:
a. Strategic level – Home Office lead on
Identity mgt and MoJ on information
sharing
b. Tactical level – Tell Us Once
Key progress measures 1 - Reduction
in the amount of avoidable contact. To
achieve a 50% reduction by 31.3.11.
(STA Oct 07).
Key progress measure 2 - Building
better online services – citizen and
business e-services content migrated to
Directgov and Businesslink.gov. More
than 95% of websites to have migrated
by 31.3.11. (STA Oct 07)
Efficiency savings – the value in
recording the level of savings achieved
by departments is recognised, and the
CO will track these as this STA is
delivered. (STA Oct 07).
Linking local and central government
Engaging front line staff
Face-to-Face – The LGDC will develop
a progress measure reflecting the
FOSS approach for later inclusion in
this Agreement. (STA Oct 07)
Strategic Contribution Analysis
Using a consistent benefits categorisation
framework
User value
 Monetary
 Time-based non-monetary
 Value-based non-monetary
(such as less frustration from
reduced unnecessary contact)
Departmental efficiency
 Contributions to departmental
efficiency plans/targets (from
website rationalisation, channel
shift, shared infrastructure,
removal of duplicate processes)
Departmental effectiveness
 Improved policy impact
 Increased regulatory
compliance, etc
Wider Public Value
 Trust
 Reputation
 Inclusion, etc
The Solutions:
Understand the benefits you are buying
Beware staff time
savings – they are
vouchers
The Solutions:
2. Triangulate and Validate
• Use Reference class forecasting.
• Validate the benefits with the
recipients – before investment.
• Establish effective accountability
for benefits realisation & ‘book’
them.
The Solutions:
3. Appraise ‘Attractiveness’ in the
context of ‘Achievability’
The Solutions:
4. ‘Gates with teeth’
• Challenge and Support.
• Based on joint planning for success.
• Concludes with a formal recommitment to benefits realisation.
The Solutions:
5. Independent review
“humans
not only are prone to make
biased predictions, we’re also
damnably overconfident about our
predictions and slow to change them in
the face of new evidence. In fact, these
problems of bias and overconfidence
become more severe the more
complicated the prediction.”
Ayers
The Solutions:
5. Independent review
Ayers suggests an, “‘Advocatus Diaboli’…
whose job it is to poke holes in pet projects.
These professional “No” men could be an
antidote to overconfidence bias.”
Davidson Frame proposes the use of “murder
boards” to pull a proposal apart to, “make sure
that arguments in support of project ideas do not
have built into them the seeds of their own
destruction.”
Steve Jenner - I suggest a ‘fool’ to ask the
questions others don’t dare to ask and identify
those, ‘assumptions that masquerade as facts’.
The Solutions:
6. A Clear line of sight
• Contributor project benefits
report
• Recipient Organisation Benefits
Realisation Report
• Benefits Scorecard
CJS IT BENEFITS SCORECARD June 2006
CJS IT Benefits Realisation Plans
This table shows the full CJS IT Programme benefits picture, including ring fence benefits and benefits enabled by the ring fence infrastructure (£m)
Forecast Benefit Values
CJS IT Projects
CJS IT BENEFITS PROGRESS REPORT - QUARTER 4 2004-05 FOR CJS EXCHANGE XHIBIT PORTAL
10 Year Analysis
Q3
Assessment
Q3 Forecast
for Q4
Q4
Assessment
Efficiency
£M
Cashable
Opportunity
Crown
Courts
Q4 forecast
for Q1
Effectiveness
Cashable
Opportunity
74.240
0.000
117.820
0.000
52.760
0.000
15.3%
1,000
0.000
0.000
0.000
173.710
0.000
173.710
15.6%
800
0.000
694.860
62.4%
1113.390
100.0%
Outside CJS
0.000
0.000
12.700
153.440
0.000
694.860
0.000
947.250
170.580
0.000
£'m
35.620
Other CJOs
Cross CJS
Total £
0.000
6.7%
12.700
Quality of Benefits Forecast
Quality of Realisation Planning
25.920
Cumulative Benefits
Cumulative Costs
1,200
Scale of Benefits Forecast
Likelihood of Realisation
0.000
Total
%
£
Applications
Recipient
Self Assessment
Cumulative Cost and Benefit Forecast 2003-2013
Cost
Avoidance
600
400
200
Benefits Realised this financial year
£m
Monetary Value of Benefits Realised YTD
Now
Last report
0.01 NPV £m*
-
-
154.301
3-04
4.1
Forecast in latest published Delivery Plan
YTD
200
IRR %
Variance
-4.09
4-05
200
5-06
200
6-07
200
7-08
200
0.0%
94.2
8-09
200
9-10
200
0-11
201
1-12
201
Benefits
Realisation
Status
Impact
Performance
£M
Benefit Category
Main
Recipient
Strategic Alignment
Name(s) of recipient
agreed with
Realisation Ramp Up
Key Measures/Indicators of Benefit
Time from CC result to PNC update
1 Reduction in the cost of crime
173.71 Effectiveness opportunity
2 Reduction in the cost of crime
PNC update
down to 3
days
694.86 Effectiveness opportunity
CJS
To start 6 months after completion in a
CJ Area
UK economy
To start 6 months after completion in a
CJ Area
Infrastructure
Benefit
realisation
behind Plan
PSA Target 5
PNC update
down to 3
days
Time from CC result to PNC update
Benefit not
yet due for
realisation
PSA Targets 1 and 3
No. of adjournments as a result of no PSR
Benefit ahead
of or in line
with plan
PSA Targets 2, 3 and 5
3 Court time saving (PSR adjournments)
Improvement
from 15% to
3.4%
4.06 Effectiveness opportunity
4 Court time saving ( Ineffective Hearings)
Assumption
of
improvement
of 1-10%
31.78 Effectiveness opportunity
5 Court time saving (Same day delays)
-
Crown Court
From Go-live at each court centre
Crown Court,
Police, CPS,
Probation
From 6 months after Go-live at each
court centre
Crown Court
From 3 months after Go-live at each
court centre
Crown Court
From 1 month after Go-live at each court
centre
CPS
3 months after go live in a CJ Area
Police
3 months after go live in a CJ Area
Percentage of ineffective hearings
Benefit not
yet due for
realisation
Prog
PSA Targets 1, 2, 3 and 5
Number of disposals
Benefit ahead
of or in line
with plan
PSA Targets 2, 3 and 5
5.98 Effectiveness opportunity
79.08
10.95
5.70
0.61
18.15
OASys
NOMIS (70%)
ViSOR
CJSE Release 1a (NSPIS-CMS)
CJSE Release 1b (NSPIS - Libra)
Secure Email/Emailing Securely
CJSE Release 3a
CJSE Release 3b
COMPASS infrastructure (50%)
Libra enabled
NOMIS infrastructure (30%)
OMNI infrastructure
OMNI cost effectiveness
348.06
14.06
52.74
25.02
3.43
154.31
9.29
1.88
7.11
12.02
21.15
26.04
1.49
0.00
1.10
85.95
30.17
2.17
1.03
-
1.90
0.01
2.13
95.79
34.26
21.43
3.11
9.36
8.68
11.79
9.78
15.61
433.41
TOTAL BENEFITS
7.80
16.50
149.10
21.43
113.53
999.74
Strand Board Alignment1
Self assessment of RAG status
10 Year Total
239.12
162.33
6.08
17.88
37.29
5.85
16.50
41.41
CEI
Economic/Social Value Benefits
199.82
5.08
20.79
9.66
1.21
81.70
93.18
50.00
2.21
9.76
19.08
LINK enabled
Shared Access
Equip direct
Equip enabled
CSR07
79.52
5.06
0.93
1.63
0.87
XHIBIT/CJSE Release 2a&b (XHIBIT Portal)
PROGRESS
2-13
201
Year
*NPV discounted at 3.5%
Project Life Cycle Benefits Profile (Top 5-10 benefits over 10 years)
Benefit Description
SR2004
NSPIS Custody & Case Prep
PentiP
COMPASS CMS (50%)
NWNJ IT tool (WMS)
SOCA
Libra application (includes benefits jointly delivered with 3a)
Quality of
Benefit
Forecast
Scale of
Benefits
Forecast
Quality of
Realisation
Planning
Likelihood of Confidence
Realisation
AMBER
AMBER
AMBER
AMBER
GREEN
GREEN
AMBER
AMBER
GREEN
AMBER
GREEN
AMBER
GREEN
GREEN
GREEN
AMBER
GREEN
GREEN
GREEN
GREEN
GREEN
RED
AMBER
AMBER
6 Crown Court Efficiency benefits
-
7 CPS Benefits
-
2.3 Efficiency opportunity
8 Police Benefits
-
115.52 Efficiency opportunity
Benefit ahead
of or in line
with plan
Number of disposals
35.61 Efficiency opportunity
Number of enquiries made to CC
PSA Target 5
No of daily lists faxed/time taken.
Benefit ahead
of or in line
with plan
Total 10 year CJS IT Application benefits Ring Fence only
1274.65
CJS IT Application NPV Ring Fence only
250.18
CJS IT Application IRR Ring Fence only
12.90%
No of enquiries made to CC
PSA Target 5
No of daily/warned lists sent and time taken
No of bail forms sent and time taken
Benefit ahead
of or in line
with plan
Benefits to the CJS and Society
x-CJS, 9%
Benefit ahead
of or in line
with plan
9
Social Value,
16%
Benefit ahead
of or in line
with plan
10
Benefit not
yet due for
realisation
PSA Target 5
9 NOMS Benefits
-
36.9 Effectiveness opportunity
-
12.7 Efficiency cashable
NOMS
Following rollout to all prisons in a CJA
Crown Court
From 1 month after Go-live at each court
centre
Reduced waiting time claim values
Benefit not
yet due for
realisation
PSA Targets 2, 3 and 5
10 Reduction in solicitor waiting
Home CJO,
76%
Approved by SRO:
Home CJO
x-CJS
OBTJ
Enforcement
Re-offending
HD=1
HD=1
M=1
M=1
Total
NK=1
GREEN
GREEN
GREEN
GREEN
MC=2
GREEN
GREEN
GREEN
MC=1 HD=1
GREEN
GREEN
GREEN
GREEN
GREEN
GREEN
GREEN
AMBER
AMBER
GREEN
AMBER
RED
GREEN
AMBER
GREEN
GREEN
GREEN
AMBER
AMBER
AMBER
AMBER
AMBER
AMBER
Q1 03/04 - Q4
05/06
Realised
31.40
0.13
Efficiency Cashable
Effectiveness
M=1
M=4
D=1
M=1
2006/07
Actual
2006/07 Q1
Plan
Q1 03/04 - Q4
05/06
D=2
Realised
2.59
2.59
Efficiency Cashable
Actual
Efficiency Opportunity
Effectiveness
Total
0.39
26.136
0.94
27.473
0.71
50.59
1.12
52.42
2006/07
2007/08
Forecast
8.88
0.39
35.50
1.56
2006/07 Q1
Plan
Actual
0.53
0.34
0.87
41.87
2007/08
Forecast
-
0.70
2.67
2.54
5.91
17.45
1.70
4.42
23.57
2006/07
2007/08
NOMS Benefits Realisation Plan
Q1 03/04 - Q4
05/06
24.05
55.00
311.00
D=2
Realised
Efficiency Cashable
Efficiency Opportunity
45.54
D=9 M=1
291.21 NOTE: Benefits shown only include quantified, validated
1.
HD=3 D=5 M=1 HD=11 D=3 M=1 D=5 M=1 NK=1
D=1 M=1
Effectiveness
Total
2006/07 Q1
Plan
26.77
5.68
12.40
39.17
5.26
10.94
Actual
Forecast
-
22.70
24.36
21.06
43.76
21.21
45.57
2006/07
2007/08
benefits but other enabled benefits have been identified Based on BRP submissions & agreed with Strand Board leads, this shows the number of benefits to the
Strands in terms of value (ie. mission critical, highly desirable etc)
and will be included as further work is undertaken
KEY
MC = Mission Critical, HD = Highly Desirable, D = Desirable,
M = Minimal, NK = Not Known
YJB Benefits Realisation Plan
Q1 03/04 - Q4
05/06
2. Independent Scores assessed by Proving Services
Benefits as %
of Cost
Cost Benefit Analysis3
2003/04
2003-05
2003-06
2003-07
2003-08
Total Police RF Cost/Budget
57.09
90.37
142.59
183.78
202.01
Direct Benefits
0.53
1.63
5.21
32.69
85.10
Enabled Benefits
Total Police Benefits
0.53
1.63
5.21
32.69
85.10
42%
Total Corrections RF Cost/Budget
111.21
194.71
269.22
408.09
519.61
Direct Benefits
5.50
15.38
39.29
83.26
129.20
Enabled Benefits
8.55
10.12
19.22
49.96
Total Corrections Benefits
5.50
23.93
49.40
102.47
179.16
34%
Total CPS RF Cost/Budget
25.05
58.82
97.87
132.70
170.63
Direct & Enabled Benefits
2.05
31.53
68.59
110.46
Total CPS Benefits
2.05
31.53
68.59
110.46
65%
Total HMCS RF Cost/Budget
154.55
283.61
426.40
512.40
585.28
Direct Benefits
0.30
2.59
8.50
32.07
Enabled Benefits
3.23
8.43
18.80
32.10
47.28
Total HMCS Benefits
3.23
8.73
21.39
40.60
79.35
14%
3
Ring Fence costs from 2003-06 and Delivery Plan RF budget from 2006-08. Full benefits by recipient used. Corrections includes YJB.
Realised
Efficiency Cashable
Efficiency Opportunity
0.11
Effectiveness
0.11
Total
2006/07 Q1
Plan
Actual
0.05
0.05
Forecast
0.21
-
0.21
RAG of Benefits in SR2004 Benefits Realisation Plans
Q3 05/06
Q4 05/06
Benefits Rating
No.
%
No.
Benefit behind schedule
6
6%
2
Difficulty with tracking/measure.
26
27%
35
Benefit on track/ahead of schedule
13
13%
19
Benefit not yet due for realisation
52
54%
41
Effectiveness
30%
Benefits By Type
Efficiency
Cashable
9%
Social Value
ATTRACTIVENESS ANALYSIS
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS*
NPV (£M)
IRR (%)
PAY BACK PERIOD
(YEARS)
EXCLUDING OPTIMISM BIAS
INCLUDING OPTIMISM BIAS
CONFIRMATION THAT THE ABOVE FIGURES ARE COMPLIANT WITH BENEFITS ELIGIBILITY FRAMEWORK (BEF)
ACHIEVABILITY ANALYSIS
CONFIRMED BY:
COMMENTS:
Yes
No
PROVING MODEL ASSESSMENT
DATE OF CURRENT ASSESSMENT:
ACHIEVABILITY SCORE:
BENEFITS ANALYSIS OVER 10 YEAR PROJECT LIFE CYCLE (£M)
PROGRESS
SINCE LAST
STATE 10 YEAR PERIOD COVERED OR PROJECT LIFE
SPAN IF LESS THEN 10 YEARS:
ACHIEVABILITY ASSESSMENT:
RECIPIENT
EFFICIENCY –
CASHABLE
CJO: Police
CJO: CPS
CJO: DCA
CJO: NOMS
CJO: YJB
CROSS CJS:
BEYOND THE
CJS(SPECIFY):
TOTALS:
EFFICIENCY –
EFFECTIVENESS EFFECTIVENESS –
OPPORTUNITY
CASHABLE
OPPORTUNITY
VALUE
VALUE
PROVING SERVICES ACHIEVABILITY SCORE BREAKDOWN
CONCEPT CASE (COMPLETE AS APPROPRIATE)
(1) TOTAL PROJECT COSTS
Score
Stakeholder Analysis (Achievability)
YEAR
RESOURCE
CAPITAL
Indication
(£M) Achievability
(£M)
Complexity Analysis
Achievability Total
TOTAL
(£M)
NOT YET
AGREED
SOURCE
OF CONFIRMATION
OR)PROPOSED
BUSINESS CASE
(COMPLETE
AS APPROPRIATE
ACTIONS & TIMESCALES TO ENSURE
Score
BENEFITS ARE INCLUDED(2)INRBESOURCE
ENEFITS /CAPITAL CURRENTLY ALLOCATED FROM
THE RING FENCEComplexity Analysis
REALISATION PLAN
YEAR
RESOURCE
CAPITAL
TOTAL
Processes
& Capability
(£M)
(£M)
Ownership(£&M)Accountability
Clarity & Perception
Benefits Realisation Management
Stakeholders Analysis
TOTAL
Achievability Total
RESOURCE/CAPITAL GAP (1-(2+3))
(3) OTHER FUNDING SOURCES
RESOURCE
(£M)
CAPITAL
(£M)
TOTAL
(£M)
RESOURCE/CAPITAL REQUIRED FROM
THE RING FENCE
Police
CPS
DCA
NOMS
YJB
Others [specify]
RESOURCE
(£M)
FUNDING – OTHER ISSUES
TOTAL
(£M)
AVAILABILITY CONFIRMED?
FUNDING AVAILABLE TO REALISE BUSINESS CHANGE?
CONFIRMATION THAT OVERSPENDS WILL BE MET BY
DEPARTMENTAL BASELINES
RECYCLING OF COST SAVINGS
YEAR
LEGACY SYSTEM
SAVINGS
TOTAL
CAPITAL
(£M)
N/A
TOTAL
LOW
MEDIUM
YEAR
RESOURCE
CAPITAL
TOTAL
ASSESSMENT OF DEGREE OF BUSINESS CHANGE REQUIRED
(£M)TO REALISE(£BENEFITS
M)
(£M)
RECIPIENT
BRL ASSESSMENT
COMMENTS
HIGH
OR AGREED IN PRINCIPLE BY THE
POLICE BENEFITS REALISATION
LEAD(BRL)
BENEFITS INCLUDED IN THE CPS
BRP OR AGREED IN PRINCIPLE BY
THE CPS BRL
BENEFITS INCLUDED IN THE DCA
BRP OR AGREED IN PRINCIPLE BY
THE DCA BRL
BENEFITS INCLUDED IN THE NOMS
BRP OR AGREED IN PRINCIPLE BY
THE NOMS BRL
BENEFITS INCLUDED IN THE YJB
BRP OR AGREED IN PRINCIPLE BY
THE YJB BRL
AGREED IN
PRINCIPLE
INCLUDED IN
BRP
TOTAL
BENEFITS INCLUDED IN THE POLICE
BENEFITS REALISATION PLAN (BRP)
SAVINGS
RECYCLED?
Yes
No
Yes
No
BY:
DATE
BY:
DATE
AMOUNT BY WHICH THE RING FENCE
REQUEST CAN BE REDUCED
• Portfolio Analysis
Summary of Key Mitigating Actions
1 Scale of CJS IT benefits forecast
1. Settlement Letter Conditions/Hurdle rates 2. Root Cause Model 3. Social Value Research 4. Analysis of benefits enabled by CJS IT funded
infrastructure
2 Quality of CJS IT benefits forecast
1. Quarterly Benefits Integrity Check 2. Benefits Eligibility Framework
3 CJSIT benefits realisation
• Investment Appraisal report
RAG
39.04
2.83
37.06
2006/07
Risk Register - CJS IT Benefits Management
Risk Description
2007/08
Forecast
31.53 9.27
HMCS Benefits Realisation Plan
Total
HD=1 D=2
28.49
2,334.36
2006/07 Q1
Plan
4.95 2.69
0.26 0.24
5.21 2.93
CPS Benefits Realisation Plan
Efficiency Opportunity
AMBER
AMBER
GREEN
Q1 03/04 - Q4
05/06
Efficiency Opportunity
Effectiveness
GREEN
4.78
AMBER
RED
0.02
AMBER
6.07
GREEN
252.74 see COMPASS CMS
95.54 see LIBRA application
69.57 see NOMIS application
6.48
36.37
Police Benefits Realisation Plan
Relative
Contribution to
Strategic
Drivers2
Realised
HD=1 NK=1
Backlog count
PSA Targets 2, 3 and 5
Victims and
Witnesses
Efficiency Cashable
D=2
1. Process Modelling 2. CJO Benefit Realisation Plans approved by OB and BWG 3. Project Benefit Realisation Plans approved by BWG
Efficiency
Opportunity
61%
Efficiency Cashable
• Proving Model report
Efficiency Opportunity
Effectiveness
0.37
0.37
%
2%
36%
20%
42%
And remember…
1. Spend more time doing your homework - be clear
about what benefits you are buying.
2. Look beyond the hurdle rate of return.
3. Use stage/phase gates with formal re-commitment to
benefits realisation.
4. Joint accountability - planning for success, with a
forward looking perspective.
5. Track performance and use it to inform investment
appraisals.
6. Use summary documentation – size is the enemy of
understanding.
7. Ensure there is a clear line of sight from strategic
intent through to benefits realisation.
8. Manage benefits from a portfolio perspective.
9. Shift the focus to - realism in planning and enthusiasm
in implementation and….
10. Be ‘wise enough to play the fool’
Available from www.academic-publishing.org