Outcomes
Curzon delivered a clear articulation of programme vision, governance principles, portfolio management recommendations, and a set of design principles to reframe the programme and set it up for success. A realistic and achievable benefits case was established — identifying £200 million or more in savings or cost avoidance, alongside a 1–2% improvement in operational performance. Four initiatives were identified for near-term launch, providing the early wins needed to rebuild momentum and stakeholder confidence. The engagement gave the programme the strategic clarity and executive alignment it had previously lacked.
Background
The programme had been looked at multiple times before — a history that had left a residue of scepticism and fatigue across the organisation. Overlapping workstreams reporting into different directorates created confusion about boundaries and ownership, while the programme itself lacked the clear, compelling vision needed to drive genuine engagement from the regions and functions it depended upon.
Operational improvements and financial benefits had been identified in the past but had never been realised — and without a credible financial narrative or strong executive ownership, there was little reason to believe this attempt would be different. Despite positive initial engagement, momentum had stalled and the programme was at risk of becoming another initiative that looked credible on paper but failed to land in practice.
Curzon Approach
Curzon applied a systematic review framework — examining the programme across four critical dimensions: vision, governance, approach, and benefits case. This structured lens allowed us to quickly identify where the fundamental weaknesses lay, rather than treating the symptoms in isolation.
The absence of a clear, shared vision emerged as the central issue. Without it, there was no common understanding of what the programme was trying to achieve or why it mattered — and no basis for the stakeholder buy-in that regional adoption required. Curzon worked to articulate a compelling vision and translate it into a governance structure and set of design principles that gave the programme a coherent identity and clear lines of accountability.
Testing adoption levels across the organisation and with key stakeholders gave us an honest picture of where engagement was genuine and where it was superficial — informing a realistic assessment of what the programme could credibly deliver and over what timeframe. A financial narrative was constructed and stress-tested, grounding the benefits case in numbers that the organisation could recognise and own.
The output was a reframed programme — with early wins identified, a delivery timeline validated, and executive alignment secured around a set of ambitions that were both meaningful and achievable.
