Ambulances need to travel fast! Ambulance drivers must take risks that regular drivers do not. This includes running red lights and travelling at high speeds through busy roads. However, to avoid accidents, precautions are taken to manage risks. The driver is trained, there are flashing blue lights and loud sirens.

Delivering programmes at speed requires a similar assessment of risks. In our recent lessons learned report we show that some programmes have successfully delivered quickly but not all – just as not all vehicles can be driven like ambulances. Speed creates greater risks which will not be appropriate or sustainable for every programme or organisation.

Should the risks of speed be taken?

Programmes may need to be delivered at speed for various reasons, including in an emergency or where there is a fixed deadline. We recently reported on the Kickstart Scheme launched by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). In response to a significant forecast rise in youth unemployment given the COVID-19 pandemic, DWP wanted to set up support quickly. It launched Kickstart on 2 September 2020, after only around six weeks of work, in time for the expected end of furlough in October 2020. We have also seen programmes delivered at speed as government simply wants to achieve outcomes sooner. A clear rationale for speed, can make it easier to get wider support and justify taking risks. Other drivers understand an ambulance’s need for speed and often make way.

Decision-makers need to understand ‘why speed’ to assess if the risks of speed are necessary and justifiable. Risks can include cost increases, not achieving outcomes, or people being diverted into a programme at the expense of other work. Our recent report on bounce back loans highlights the impact when risk are not managed – the Scheme facilitated faster lending by removing credit and affordability checks and allowing businesses to self-certify their application documents. Prioritising speed contributed to high levels of estimated fraud.

Given the risks decision-makers need to ask:

  • Can I justify taking the risks?
  • Have I thought about things enough?
  • Is the end result worth it?

Monitoring and managing risks in practice

Where decision-makers choose to take the risks of delivering a programme quickly, they must proactively monitor and manage these increased and different risks. In November 2021, we shared insights from our lessons learned report with the Ministry of Justice team responsible for the Probation Reform Programme and the creation of the unified Probation Service to understand how this resonated with their practical experience. In June 2021, the Lord Chancellor had written to Parliament confirming probation services had been unified.

Th team told us that they consciously chose to deliver at speed and identified a clear narrative for the reforms being at pace. As such, everyone was clear on the reasons for the reforms. The team also made clear that there was zero contingency beyond the expected delivery date. Alongside setting a minimum expectation of the requirements needed for Day 1, this helped force the pace and prioritisation of effort.

The programme team also highlighted the importance of strong leadership, with a culture of accountability and responsibility, to deal with any uncertainties or issues. In particular, they spoke of a culture which encouraged people to raise any problems they’d encountered, rather than hide them or focus on the ‘good news’.

Additionally, the programme team said they had built a strong internal assurance team, comprised of former senior operations staff, to carry out site visits and desktop reviews to ensure the programme was on track.

Alongside this, the programme team outlined the advantages of a flexible programme structure. The team recognised that it was difficult to plan everything up front, and instead ensured they had the required processes and information needed to respond quickly. This was done through regional teams, with a dedicated senior manager, tasked with identifying risks as soon as possible. This meant that the central programme team could deal with ‘unknown unknowns’ effectively when they arose.

Our insights

Many of the points raised by the Probation Reform Programme team align with our insights. In particular:

  • Including speed as a specific programme objective to provide a clear framework for decision-making and help make trade-offs between speed, cost and outcomes.
  • Building teams with the right leadership, skills and experience to make clear, timely and reliable decisions.
  • Tailoring processes to add value and momentum to programme decision-making.
  • Recognising the uncertainties of delivering at speed and managing these.

As speed remains important for ambulances, so it will for some programmes, particularly with commitments to achieving ‘net zero’ greenhouse gas emissions by the fixed deadline of 2050. Our report helps those deciding whether to deliver at speed ask questions to determine when or how this should be done and then continually test whether a programme will achieve its outcomes.

Further reading

Authors

Jemma Dunne

Jemma has delivered numerous value for money reports across areas such as health and defence, including those on government programmes.

Jemma is a qualified chartered accountant (FCA) and holds the Association of Project Management’s Project Management Qualification (PMQ).

Josh Perks

Josh Perks

Josh is a qualified accountant with experience of working on the NAO’s transport team. His work has included audits of the main government transport bodies and value-for-money studies of major rail programmes. Recently, he has taken an active role in the NAO’s Major Projects Delivery Hub.

Latest insights