7.1 A common way of implementing effective project governance is through a system of boards. Feedback and experience has shown that a system comprising a number of boards can address the various needs of the different project stakeholders, and can be a helpful way of ensuring that the required activities are undertaken.
7.2 A number of different boards (i.e. with different representation and terms of reference) may be needed to meet the specific objectives of the project, and these will vary with the project phase. For example, it would be expected that the project governance arrangements will need to vary significantly between different project phases:
• During concept and convergence phases, and the initial competitive procurement stage;
• Post preferred bidder selection;
• During construction and acceptance;
• In the operational phase; and
• Disposal and exit.
7.3 Care must be taken, for example in the timing of the meetings and preparation of the papers that the boards that have been set up interact efficiently. The tendency to develop an overly complex web of boards should be resisted.
7.4 A project governance board structure needs to be able to address the distinct requirements of a project. The main activities are related to programme direction, project ownership and sponsorship, ensuring the effectiveness of the project management functions, and reporting and disclosure. Some references use the acronym RACI (responsible, accountable, consult, inform) as a shorthand for these issues. In summary effective project governance will provide a framework for:
• decision-taking and agreeing trade-offs (e.g. affordability against scope);
• the management of the two-way information flows (project delivery team to stakeholder and the reverse) and other consultation, reporting and formal disclosure activities;
• the high level ownership and advocacy functions;
• access to best practice and expert advice to support working level problem solving and to provide neutral challenge;
• oversight of project management functions; and
• instigating and dealing with reports from key stage project reviews (including OGC Gateway reviews etc.).
7.5 There are two separate dimensions for project governance structures: internal arrangements (i.e. comprising only public sector representatives), and those that go outside the public sector and include private sector representatives. This is because, depending on the phase in the project lifecycle, some of the above requirements can only be met through joint boards involving both the public sector, as commissioner and end-user or customer, and the private sector as supplier. For example, during the run up to contract award a joint board involving the preferred bidder, including its shareholders if it is a consortium, has been shown to be an effective way of resolving issues. Another example is during the operational phase where engagement between the contract managers and end-users in the public sector with the private sector service delivery organisation is essential.