How do you run a programme when it’s not just about the benefits?

How do you run a programme when it’s not just about the benefits? https://www.linkedin.com/posts/antlerboy_localgovernmentreorganisation-lgr-ugcPost-7480141607665635… Local Government Reorganisation wisdom from Aaron Osborne-Taylor and the RedQuadrant hub

#LocalGovernmentReorganisation isn’t a normal programme.



A normal programme has a sponsor, a mandate, a business case, a plan, a governance route, a set of tolerances, and a rhythm. #LGR has several sovereign councils (and other bodies), incomplete powers, future structures that do not yet legally exist, political uncertainty, staff anxiety, services that must not fall over, systems that cannot wait, and decisions with lead times longer than the formal transition window.

So if you try to run LGR as a version of a digitalisation programme, you can create exactly the failure you were trying to control.

Aaron Osborne-Taylor makes this point very cleanly in our latest RedQuadrant LGR video.

Some decisions cannot wait for the joint committee. ERP, case management, shared services, trading companies, contract extensions, vendor support, disaggregation, aggregation. These aren’t not things to start thinking about once the formal machinery finally arrives.

But the answer is — obviously — not ‘be brave’ and ignore governance. Especially with Section 24 controls in place; the answer is better governance.

Agree lead-council arrangements. Streamline internal sign-off. Review delegations and standing orders. Work closely with monitoring officers and internal assurance (and external, for those big S24 decisions). Honour equality, environmental, and consultation duties. Avoid waivers and exemptions becoming a habit.

And on programme governance: don’t needlessly reinvent the wheel, but use what’s needed, not what is lying around.

Much of LGR is not ‘benefits-led transformation’. It is safe and legal continuity under conditions of institutional redesign. It may not have a positive business case. It may not produce visible improvement on day one. It may simply reduce the chances of bad things happening while the new authority is born. That needs ever more discipline: risk-based, outcome-focused, adaptive, and proportionate.

The same applies to vendors. Many councils will need serious supplier help, especially on digital platforms. But detailed specifications may be impossible where no-one yet knows the full shape of the merge or split. In those cases, outcome-based specifications, capped pricing, hard deadlines, and intelligent use of frameworks may will be better than pretending ambiguity can be documented away.

LGR needs pace without recklessness, compliance without drag, and assurance without red tape.

RedQuadrant’s LGR offer brings together people who have done this before: governance, service design, PMO, digital, procurement, HR, finance, benefits realisation, operating model design, political and managerial alignment, and the difficult middle bit where councils have to keep today working while building tomorrow.

This video is one of a series from our extended LGR team, sharing the practical things that matter once the map-making stops and the work starts.

Video below. Conversation welcome if any of this feels uncomfortably familiar.

View the video on YouTUbe here:

And Learn more about the RedQuadrant LGR and Devolution hub here: https://www.redquadrant.com/lgrhub