Thought starter
Three forecasts for a transformation's benefits, and what the gap tells you
Report a transformation's benefits as three forecasts side by side: the one the board last saw, the revised one, and one weighted for confidence. The gap between them is the range the board is relying on. One forecast hides it.
Why one number misleads
A year in, many programmes report one forecast, and it reads "on track". The plan may have been re-based along the way, so "on track" can mean on track against a smaller target. The board cannot see which.
Three forecasts fix that. Each answers a different question.
- The board's last forecast. What the board was told, and still expects.
- The revised forecast. What the programme team now thinks, line by line.
- The confidence-weighted forecast. Each initiative's benefit multiplied by the chance it lands.
What the gap shows
The revised forecast often stays close to the board's. The confidence-weighted one is where the realism sits. In the example above, it sat about a quarter to a third below the board's number in every year. That gap is not a failure. It is information the board needs before it spends the benefits.
Making it work
- Count against the original plan. Never re-base it quietly. Show the plan as first approved, and what has landed against it.
- Name each leak. For every shortfall, say which initiative and why: late, smaller or volatile.
- Split the variance. Some of any month's gap is the programme. Some is the underlying business, and some is outside effects such as currency. Only the first belongs to the programme.
Where to go next
- The move guide on making the benefits stick, with the full method.
- The transformation readiness check, about ten minutes.