Give authority at decision points

What you will understand

• Identify the principal authorisation decisions in Directing a project.
• Distinguish board direction from project manager coordination.
• Recognise when project-level concerns require business-level authority.

The idea

The project board should be available when an important decision is needed, even when it is not meeting every day. Directing a project describes how the board exercises governance across the project. It connects decisions about investment and authority with day-to-day management delegated to the project manager. The board remains accountable while allowing the manager to manage.

Direction begins with considering whether to authorise initiation. The board examines the project brief and the proposed initiation stage plan before committing resources to that preparation. This differs from authorising the project after initiation. The later decision considers the project initiation documentation, the developed business case and the proposed delivery arrangements. The two decisions answer different questions and can have different outcomes.

The board also authorises a stage or an exception plan. At a normal boundary, the decision uses evidence about the stage ending, the updated outlook and the next stage plan. Where a forecast breach requires replacement planning, an exception plan may be requested and assessed. Authority should identify the relevant plan, resources and tolerances. A favourable conversation does not silently authorise every later stage or any future change.

Giving ad hoc direction allows the board to respond between planned decision points and to communicate relevant business information. Direction may be needed because priorities change, an exception is raised or a stakeholder concern affects the project. The board can support the project manager and resolve matters at its level. It should avoid taking over routine task allocation, which belongs within the delegated management arrangements.

Authorising project closure is another board decision. The project manager prepares the closure recommendation and evidence; the board considers whether suitable acceptance, handover, evaluation and follow-on arrangements are in place. Products being delivered does not make closure automatic. Equally, a project can require controlled premature closure if its justification disappears. Direction must accommodate stopping responsibly as well as continuing responsibly.

The executive represents business accountability, with senior user and senior supplier interests informing the board’s decisions. Assurance helps the board obtain confidence independently of project management. If the forecast exceeds project-level tolerances granted by the commissioning business, the board cannot simply enlarge its own delegated authority. It must seek a decision at the business level while making the implications clear to the project manager.

Direction spans the project

Points to remember

• The board authorises initiation, the project, stages or exception plans, and closure.
• Ad hoc direction can occur between planned decision points.
• The board delegates daily management without surrendering its accountability.

Your takeaway

Directing a project keeps investment decisions and delegated authority explicit throughout the lifecycle. Match the decision to the right level and keep routine coordination with the manager.