ERP Program Operating With Unclear Accountability Across Delivery Partners

A Multi-Vendor Municipal ERP Program Reporting On Plan, With No Single Party Accountable For End-To-End Delivery. An Independent Governance Review Reconstructed Decision-Rights Across Three Partners Ahead Of A Council Audit Committee Oversight Cycle — Protecting An Estimated $8–10M In Additional Cost Exposure And Restoring A Defensible Audit Trail.

Accountability re-anchored to a single end-to-end prime
Audit trail reconstructed ahead of Council Audit Committee review
Engagement Snapshot
Client
City CAO / CIO / CFO (Council Audit Committee engaged)
Engagement type
Delivery Governance Assurance
Duration
5 weeks
Investment at risk
$32M program · $8–10M additional exposure if uncorrected
Assurance depth
Integrated — Decision-Rights & Accountability Reconstruction
Decision horizon
Audit Committee review in 6 weeks; year-end close behind it
Scope
Multi-vendor municipal ERP (financials, HR, procurement)
Decision supported
Restructure accountability, reset decision-rights, or accept residual risk
Key Findings At A Glance

~50%

Gap perceived vs validated governance

8 + 5

Unowned + out-of-scope decisions

~35%

Decisions lacking defensible audit trail

$32M

Program envelope protected
Context & Trigger

Assumed trajectory

The Steering Committee believed the systems integrator was effectively prime and that the existing RACI accurately described accountability. The remaining phases — procurement consolidation and reporting-layer landings — were forecast to complete within the existing 36-month envelope.
Assumed trajectory
The Steering Committee believed the systems integrator was effectively prime and that the existing RACI accurately described accountability. The remaining phases — procurement consolidation and reporting-layer landings — were forecast to complete within the existing 36-month envelope.
Validated delivery position
Independent validation identified that no single party held end-to-end accountability. Decision rights had diffused across three delivery partners; primary accountability was ambiguous in the master agreement and had not been explicitly assigned in any of four amendments. Approximately one in three in-flight decisions could not be defended to external review without further reconciliation. An estimated $8–10M in additional capital exposure if uncorrected.
Delivery Position — Before Vs After Validation
Confidence gap — perceived vs validated governance
Perceived governance strength

80%

Validated governance strength

30%

Audit trail defensible on demand

65%

~50% confidence gap at Council oversight level
Information Mix Shift
Before — decision basis
70% steering narrative
30%
After — decision basis
15%
85%
Escalation cycle reduced from ~4 weeks to ~10 days · Audit trail reconstructed ahead of Council oversight
Context & Trigger

From diagnosis to recovery

1

Immediate mitigation

Designated a single end-to-end accountable prime through a formal master agreement amendment. Paused new commercial commitments to the partner ecosystem pending RACI reconciliation. Surfaced the eight unowned decision categories and five out-of-scope decisions to the Steering Committee for explicit ratification.

2

Waste containment

Reconstructed the active RACI against the master agreement plus four amendments. Re-allocated the eight unowned decision categories to specific partners under the designated prime. Formally ratified or reversed the five decisions taken outside contracted scope.

3

Structural alignment

Reconstructed the audit trail for the approximately one in three in-flight decisions that lacked defensible documentation. Established a standing pre-reconciliation cycle ahead of each Council Audit Committee oversight window. Cascaded partner SLAs under the designated prime so accountability flows end-to-end rather than running in parallel.

4

Future assurance

Established a quarterly governance refresh tied to amendment cycles. Aligned governance cadence with year-end close, payroll, and citizen-facing service continuity windows. Embedded ongoing independent validation through the remaining phases.

Assurance Verdict

Outcomes delivered

$32M

Capital secured
program envelope brought back under explicit accountability — single end-to-end prime designated

$8–10M

Exposure prevented
Additional capital exposure ruled out on evidence; recovery substituted for continuation under unclear accountability

8 + 5

Decisions reconciled
Eight previously unowned decision categories re-allocated; five out-of-scope decisions formally ratified or reversed

~35%

Audit trail restored
Audit trail reconstructed for the ~35% of in-flight decisions that previously lacked defensible documentation
Download

Full Case Study — Healthcare Digital Transformation: Recovery Diagnostic & Capital Protection

Complete forensic findings, root cause hierarchy, 90-day stabilization roadmap, and assurance operating model. Written for Board-level and executive review.

PDF · Full detail · No form required

Recognize a similar situation in your own program? We can help.
Get Started

Seeing similar signals in your own program?

Multiple delivery partners each performing well; no clear end-to-end owner; an audit or oversight cycle approaching that will test what reporting alone cannot. We can validate the actual governance and accountability position — in 4 to 6 weeks, without disruption to operating cycles.

Confidential

Findings shared only with the commissioning executive.

Independent

No vendor ties. Evidence-based, free from internal bias.

No obligation

Briefing is complimentary. Scope agreed before any commitment.

Explore More

More case studies

Competing Initiatives Creating Hidden Sequencing Risk Across The Portfolio

Public Sector · ERP Implementation

A Member-Owned Electric Cooperative Carrying $200M Of Active Capital Across Seven Concurrent Programs — Each Reporting Healthy At Program Level — With A General Rate Case Twelve Months Out And A Member-Board Capital Plan Review Behind It. An Independent Portfolio Review Surfaced Five Cross-Program Sequencing Dependencies And Produced A Defensible Re-Sequenced Capital Plan Ahead Of Regulatory Filing.

Strategic Vendor Missing Milestones Ahead Of A Multi-Year Renewal

Public Sector · ERP Implementation

A Mid-To-Large Omnichannel Retailer Six Months From Renewing A $45M Five-Year Strategic Tier-1 Vendor Contract — The Vendor Having Missed Three Of The Last Five Implementation Milestones, The CIO And CFO And CPO Not Yet Aligned On Whether To Renew, Renegotiate, Or Replace. An Independent Vendor Contract Review Reconstructed The Milestone-Miss Record, Quantified The Renegotiable Value, And Produced A Single Board-Defensible Renewal Posture Inside The Pre-Renewal Commercial Leverage Window.

Digital transformation program stalled after missed go-lives — recovered before the third re-baseline

Public Sector · ERP Implementation

Two consecutive missed phased go-lives. A third re-baseline being drafted. A new CIO inheriting the trajectory. An independent recovery diagnostic produced a defensible recovery posture in 4 weeks — protecting an additional $18–22M in projected cost exposure and routing clinical-safety risk back to clinical governance.