So what does it take to get this right?

The most common mistake is underestimating the scale of the challenge. Organisations frequently try to manage major programmes within their existing frameworks rather than asking a harder question: what do we need in order to succeed?

Critical capability gaps often cluster around programme strategy and set up, and the establishment of a programme management office (PMO). Specifically:

  • Defining the programme and its business case clearly.
  • Agreeing a credible delivery strategy.
  • Selecting a procurement model that supports strategic goals.
  • Designing an operating model capable of governing and executing it.

An organisation is ready to take on this level of complexity only when it’s defined its performance outcomes. It must also commit to a proven delivery strategy and put in place the processes, systems and integrated baseline needed to measure and drive performance objectively.

These aren't abstract principles. Successful programmes are built and delivered on these foundations.

In the early stages of any major programme mobilisation, the temptation is to move fast on everything. However, the more effective approach is to move deliberately on the things that matter most.

Drawing on experience mobilising complex, multi-billion-dollar infrastructure programmes, we’ve found that the first 90 days often focus on:

  • Meeting key stakeholders to understand the programme, its objectives and its challenges.
  • Assessing the maturity, capability and capacity of the existing team.
  • Designing and beginning to implement a programme controls operating model aligned to programme objectives.
  • Putting a 12-month plan in place across people, organisation, process, information and technology workstreams.

It’s also always worth establishing the operational support structures that allow delivery teams to focus entirely on programme delivery at an early stage. Leadership must activate global talent mobility earlier to bring in the breadth of capability that differentiates high-performing programmes.

The logic is straightforward. Enabling your people to do their best work is not a secondary concern. It's a delivery accelerator.

Defence programmes don't operate in isolation, they sit within politically sensitive environments where timelines are fixed and the consequences of slipping are significant. Building a programme structure that can absorb that pressure requires three things working in tandem.

First, performance outcomes and deliverables need to be defined clearly and communicated widely, not just internally but to all stakeholders. Ambiguity is a risk in its own right.

Second, the designed operating model must be created to govern and execute the delivery strategy as efficiently as possible. Structure follows strategy, not the other way around.

Third, performance needs to be measured objectively and reported in real time. When everyone can see the same picture, conversations about risk and progress become more productive and less political.

Beyond that, a relentless focus on beating the baseline – through design for rapid construction, modern methods of construction (MMC), and active risk and opportunity management – is what keeps programmes on track when pressure mounts.

Leadership structures will vary by programme, but the areas that consistently require strong leadership on complex defence programmes include governance and assurance, design and engineering, procurement and commercial, information and technology, project controls and baseline management.

Technical competence matters. But at this scale, the qualities that distinguish effective leaders are less about technical expertise and more about how they operate under pressure:

  • Resilience and perspective: understanding that complex programmes are long-term endeavours, not short sprints.
  • Empathy: recognising that people struggle at different points and responding constructively.
  • Collaboration: drawing on experience from across the programme rather than assuming any one person has all the answers.
  • Calm under pressure: approaching complex problems in a measured, deliberate way.
  • Clarity: providing focus and direction even in uncertain conditions.
  • Alignment: setting objectives that connect directly to programme outcomes and enabling the team to deliver against them.

The right leaders don't just manage programmes. They shape the environment in which good work gets done.

It's rare that only one singular thing helps deliver a successful programme. Rather, it tends to be three things delivered correctly and simultaneously.

Establishing the standards,valuesandbehavioursthat theprogrammeneeds, and holding everyone within theorganisationaccountable to them.

Cultureisn'ta soft consideration. Itdetermineshow people behave when things gethard.

Definingobjectives,agreeingthe delivery strategy and procurement model, and implementing the rightdesignedoperating model as quickly as possible. Time spent getting this right at the start pays back many times over.

Establishing a credible, well-understood baseline andmaintaininga relentless focus on beating it.

Thismeans driving innovation and managing risk and opportunity actively, at every level of theprogramme.

Programmes that struggle tend to get one or more of these wrong, often because the urgency to start delivering overrides the discipline needed to set up properly.

Scaling to manage major defence infrastructure programmes is difficult. The organisations that do it well don't rely on effort alone. They invest in the right structures, the right people and the right systems, and they commit to them before the pressure arrives.

Getting the foundations right isn't a luxury. It's the only reliable path to delivery at this scale.