Programme recovery

Programme recovery.

Rapid diagnosis and stabilisation for programmes in distress — restoring credibility, control and momentum at pace, when there is no time to lose and no margin for further failure.

The challenge

Programmes in distress rarely fail suddenly.

Programme failure is almost always preceded by recognisable warning signs — signals that are present months before the situation becomes critical. The earlier a recovery engagement begins, the more options remain available.

An honest note

Programme recovery is difficult, costly and disruptive. The best outcome is one where it isn't needed — which is why every Medasi engagement begins with an honest assessment of whether prevention is still possible. If you are reading this page, act now. The window between "programme in difficulty" and "programme in crisis" closes faster than most organisations expect.

Milestone slippage is becoming routine. Dates are missed and revised without meaningful accountability or root cause analysis.

Milestone slippage is becoming routine. Dates are missed and revised without meaningful accountability or root cause analysis.

The board is hearing good news but sensing problems. Reporting has become optimistic; hard questions aren't being surfaced.

The board is hearing good news but sensing problems. Reporting has become optimistic; hard questions aren't being surfaced.

The business case is no longer credible. Costs have grown and benefits have been quietly scaled back, but the original case remains the reference point.

The business case is no longer credible. Costs have grown and benefits have been quietly scaled back, but the original case remains the reference point.

Key people are leaving or disengaging. Experienced team members are exiting and not being replaced at the same level.

Key people are leaving or disengaging. Experienced team members are exiting and not being replaced at the same level.

Scope is expanding without governance. The programme is absorbing adjacent work without formal assessment of impact on delivery.

Scope is expanding without governance. The programme is absorbing adjacent work without formal assessment of impact on delivery.

Nobody can clearly articulate what success looks like. The outcome definition has drifted and the team is executing against outputs, not outcomes.

the 90-day approach

A structured, time-bounded approach to recovery. Built around restoring confidence first.

Days 1-5

Rapid diagnostic

An intensive, on-site assessment designed to establish an honest picture of the programme's current state — without the filter of optimism bias.

  • Structured stakeholder interviews at all levels

  • Document review: plans, RAID logs, financials, governance records

  • Root cause analysis of delivery failure

  • Rapid written assessment for board and executive sponsor

Days 6-30

Stabilisation

Immediate action to stop further deterioration, restore governance and give the board the confidence that the programme is back under control.

  • Governance and accountability reset

  • Reporting cadence redesign — honest by design

  • Immediate risk mitigation and dependency resolution

  • Stakeholder confidence management

Days 31-90+

Rebase & deliver

A realistic, credible programme replan — with a revised business case, clear accountability and a delivery cadence that can be sustained.

  • Programme replan with honest milestone sequencing

  • Business case refresh with stress-tested assumptions

  • Operating model and team structure review

  • Ongoing oversight through to stable delivery

What recovery looks like

The markers of a successfully recovered programme.

1.

Board confidence restored

The executive and board have an accurate, shared understanding of programme status and a credible path to completion.

1.

Board confidence restored

The executive and board have an accurate, shared understanding of programme status and a credible path to completion.

2.

Honest reporting embedded

A reporting environment in which problems are surfaced early, not suppressed — and where the programme team feels safe to raise risks.

2.

Honest reporting embedded

A reporting environment in which problems are surfaced early, not suppressed — and where the programme team feels safe to raise risks.

3.

Realistic plan in place

A rebased programme plan with milestones the team believes in, a business case that reflects current reality, and clear accountability at every level.

3.

Realistic plan in place

A rebased programme plan with milestones the team believes in, a business case that reflects current reality, and clear accountability at every level.

4.

Root causes addressed

The structural conditions that caused the programme to fail have been identified and resolved — not papered over. The same problems won't recur.

4.

Root causes addressed

The structural conditions that caused the programme to fail have been identified and resolved — not papered over. The same problems won't recur.

5.

Delivery momentum resumed

The programme is moving again — with a cadence, a rhythm and a sense of purpose that was absent during the period of distress.

5.

Delivery momentum resumed

The programme is moving again — with a cadence, a rhythm and a sense of purpose that was absent during the period of distress.

6.

Internal capability built

Where possible, the recovery engagement builds internal capability so the organisation is better placed to manage complex programmes in future.

6.

Internal capability built

Where possible, the recovery engagement builds internal capability so the organisation is better placed to manage complex programmes in future.

Who calls us

This is a familiar moment for a lot of good leaders.

Bringing in outside support for a struggling programme isn't a sign that something has gone unusually wrong. It's a normal part of running large scale change. The leaders we work with tend to be the ones who act on the warning signs rather than waiting for the situation to resolve itself.

CEO or MD

Accountable to the board for a programme that is losing credibility

Executive sponsor

Responsible for a programme where delivery confidence has broken down

Non-executive director

Seeking independent assessment of a programme the board is concerned about

PE operating partner

A portfolio company transformation that is threatening the investment thesis

Common questions

How quickly can you begin?

In most cases, we can begin the diagnostic phase within one week of engagement. Recovery situations are treated as priority engagements — we understand that time is a critical variable.

Will this be disruptive to the programme team?

The diagnostic phase involves structured interviews and document review. It is necessarily intensive, but designed to be as non-disruptive as possible. The stabilisation phase typically reduces disruption — it brings clarity and structure that teams in distress are usually relieved to have.

What if the programme can't be recovered?

We will tell you that, honestly, in the diagnostic phase. Not every programme should continue. Sometimes the most valuable outcome is a clear recommendation to close the programme in a controlled way and redirect the resources to something that can succeed.

How do you charge for recovery engagements?

Recovery engagements are typically structured as a diagnostic retainer, followed by a time-and-materials arrangement for the stabilisation and rebase phases. We will discuss the most appropriate structure at first contact.

Act now

Every day matters. Let's talk today.

Every day matters.
Let's talk today.

A confidential conversation costs nothing. Waiting costs more than most organisations realise until it's too late.