The Due Diligence Double Standard

Imagine someone asking you to approve a £10m acquisition based on hope, internal spin, and a tidy slide deck.

You wouldn’t just push back – you’d shut it down. So why do we wave through program plans with the same risks, but half the scrutiny?

You’ve likely approved dozens of delivery plans that would not survive the scrutiny of due diligence you apply to even modest acquisitions.

That’s where the disconnect starts to show.

It’s a fair question – and more and more boards are starting to ask it. And it’s the right one.

An Independent Program Review (IPR) is the operational equivalent of financial due diligence

Yes, IPRs can help turn around troubled programs. But their true value is realised when they’re run early – before those problems take root.

And, just like financial due diligence, it should be non-negotiable.

It’s not a sign of weakness or indecision – it’s a smart, disciplined step that experienced leaders take because they’ve seen what happens when you don’t.

No credible investor would sign off a major acquisition based on guesswork, optimistic assumptions, or internal assurances alone.

Yet that’s exactly how many business-critical programs are launched – despite carrying equal or greater financial and reputational exposure.

Business plans don’t get approved if half the numbers are made-up or missing – yet bizarrely, many delivery plans do.

It’s a double standard that makes no sense given the stakes.

Why This Matters Now

Treating IPRs as an optional extra is, at best, a missed opportunity.

If you think program assurance means status reports and weekly steering meetings, you’re playing a very old game.

IPRs define what serious, modern assurance looks like – and help avoid the classic problems that derail even well-resourced programs: multi-month delays, budget overshoots, and muddled accountability.

No responsible board would approve a major investment without structured challenge – and the same standard should apply to delivery plans.

A Structured Challenge That Pays Off

Why Boards Should Expect It

IPRs are the structured challenge every board should expect before committing millions to a delivery plan. They don’t slow you down.

They make sure you’re not racing ahead on foundations that could crack under pressure – because those foundations are often built on unclear scope, vague accountability, or assumed dependencies that haven’t been nailed down.

How It Actually Helps

It’s specifically designed to strengthen your program – to spot the gaps insiders don’t always see, to validate what’s working, and to ensure you’re building on solid ground.

There’s no airy-fairy abstraction here – an IPR is grounded in hard facts, practical delivery logic, and structured scrutiny that every senior executive will recognise as essential, not optional.

The Cost of Waiting Too Long

An IPR isn’t necessary because something has gone wrong. It’s necessary because once these programs get moving, they’re notoriously difficult to steer without causing major disruption.

By the time problems reach steering groups or board packs, options have narrowed. Emotions are high. Costs escalate. Even simple fixes become expensive.

That’s why experienced organisations increasingly commission IPRs early – before the plan sets like concrete, while there’s still time to adjust course without upheaval.

It’s not a judgment on anyone’s ability. It’s just practical risk management – just like a formal due diligence exercise.

Why Now, Not Later

Let’s be honest: no credible leader wants to invest blind. Due diligence is a standard part of any serious investment process – because the stakes demand it.

And yet, when it comes to major internal programs, many leaders effectively skip that same discipline. Not deliberately – but because internal familiarity breeds overconfidence.

The logic goes: “We know the space. We’ve got good people. We’ve done reviews.”

But those beliefs often mask untested assumptions, vague accountability, and delivery plans built on optimism.

That’s why IPRs matter.

Every program begins with energy and optimism.

But optimism is not the same as certainty.

An early IPR gives leaders clarity precisely at the one moment when it’s still easy to act: before resource commitments, before delivery pressure builds, before timelines start driving decisions.

Done early, an IPR can sharpen scope, align teams, expose assumptions, and prevent costly missteps – like timelines based on wishful thinking or resourcing assumptions no one has pressure-tested.

No internal review can provide what an IPR does – not because your team isn’t smart, but because they’re part of “the system.” It takes days, not months – and the payoff can be enormous.

You might already be wondering: what would you learn that you didn’t already know? The honest answer is – you won’t know until you look.

And most leaders, once they’ve looked, never skip the process again.

It’s not about slowing down. It’s about starting strong.

What It Brings to the Table

Every board has blind spots – IPRs are built to find them. Before your assumptions turn into problems, here’s what a good IPR puts on the table:

A fast, structured look at the real delivery position – not just the reporting version.

• Independent insight into scope, risks, ownership, and delivery mechanics.
• A low-key, low-friction process that supports the team – not interrogates it.
• Early confidence for boards and sponsors: you’re backing a real plan, not a hopeful one.
• Protecting reputations, stakeholder alignment, and delivery momentum in the process.

Common Objections – Reframed

“We’ve already reviewed the plan internally.”

Of course you have. And you should. But internal reviews are shaped by relationships, past decisions, and the very same assumptions the program is built on. An IPR adds a neutral lens that helps you see what insiders might miss.

“We can’t afford the delay.”

Almost every team says this. But the review doesn’t delay – it runs in parallel. And more often than not, it speeds things up by helping you avoid months of rework later.

“We trust our team.”

As you should. This isn’t about trust – it’s about support. Strong teams usually welcome an external challenge. It gives them a chance to validate their thinking before execution pressure kicks in.

“It’ll make people nervous.”

That’s natural. But in practice, most teams feel relief. The review provides structure, clarity, and cover for difficult conversations that often need to happen anyway.

Final Thought

You might already be thinking, “This makes sense – but do we really need it now?”

Here’s the thing: early scrutiny isn’t a luxury – it’s what strong leadership looks like.

And in the context of a program – often one of the largest investments your organisation will make. It could be the most effective and value-protecting decision you make all year.

If you’re accountable for delivery at board level, this isn’t optional. It’s insurance.

About the author

David Hilliard is founder of Mentor, specialists in strategic program execution.

You can call him on 0118 359 2444 or email david.hilliard@mentoreurope.com.