The decision to execute changes the project
There is a significant difference between developing a project and committing to its execution.
During studies, options can still be evaluated, scope refined, estimates developed and delivery strategies tested. Once execution begins, decisions become progressively more expensive to change.
Contracts are awarded. Resources mobilise. Equipment is ordered. Construction work fronts open. Commitments increase and the owner’s ability to alter direction without cost or schedule consequences begins to reduce.
For that reason, the decision to move into execution should involve more than confirming that a study has been completed or that funding has been approved.
It requires confidence that the fundamental elements of the project are sufficiently aligned to support successful delivery.
Five questions can help test that readiness.
1. Is the scope sufficiently defined?
Execution cannot be controlled effectively against a moving target.
Before proceeding, the owner should understand what is being delivered, where significant areas of uncertainty remain and how those uncertainties are being managed.
This does not mean every detail must be finalised before execution starts. On complex projects, some development will inevitably continue.
The important question is whether the level of scope definition is appropriate for the proposed delivery strategy and whether outstanding items are visible, understood and reflected in the project controls.
If significant scope uncertainty remains hidden within an apparently fixed baseline, it is likely to emerge later through change, cost pressure or schedule disruption.
2. Is the cost position realistic?
An approved estimate does not automatically provide cost certainty.
Owners should understand the basis of the estimate, its level of maturity and the assumptions on which it depends.
Does it reflect the current scope? Are market conditions and procurement information sufficiently current? Have escalation, contingency and risk been treated appropriately? Are indirect costs and the implications of the proposed schedule adequately represented?
It is also important to understand the relationship between the estimate and the budget against which the project will subsequently be controlled.
A baseline should provide a credible reference point for measuring performance – not simply a number against which expenditure is reported.
3. Is the schedule achievable?
A project schedule can contain thousands of activities and still fail to provide a realistic execution plan.
Before execution, owners should look beyond the headline completion date.
Is the schedule logically linked? Are engineering, procurement and construction activities properly integrated? Have long-lead items been identified? Are access, approvals and interfaces reflected? Do activity durations and productivity assumptions stand up to scrutiny?
Most importantly, does the schedule reflect how the project is actually intended to be delivered?
A credible schedule establishes more than a completion date. It creates the time-based framework against which progress, change, risk and performance can subsequently be assessed.
4. Is the delivery strategy ready?
Even a well-defined scope and robust baseline require an effective delivery model.
Before execution, the owner should be clear about how the project will be managed and where accountability sits.
Which responsibilities remain with the owner? What is delegated to the EPCM consultant, EPC contractor or other delivery partners? How will interfaces between engineering, procurement, construction and commercial functions be managed? Are governance and decision-making authorities clear?
The Owner’s Team also needs sufficient capability to oversee the chosen delivery model.
That does not mean duplicating the functions of consultants and contractors. It means ensuring the owner retains the appropriate technical, commercial and project-management capability to understand performance, challenge information where necessary and make informed decisions.
5. Are the key risks understood and owned?
A risk register alone does not mean risk is being managed.
Before execution begins, the owner should understand which risks could materially affect project outcomes, who is responsible for managing them and whether the proposed responses are realistic.
Risk should also be connected to the wider project.
If a significant risk has potential cost or schedule consequences, those implications should be understood in the estimate, programme, contingency or forecast where appropriate.
Ownership is equally important.
A risk without a clearly accountable owner can remain visible on a register for months without meaningful action being taken.
The objective is not to eliminate uncertainty before execution — that is rarely possible. It is to understand where uncertainty exists and ensure the project is positioned to manage it.
Readiness is about alignment
None of these five questions exists independently.
Scope influences cost. Engineering maturity affects procurement. Procurement affects schedule. The delivery strategy determines contractual and commercial exposure. Risk runs through all of them.
Execution readiness therefore depends on the degree to which these elements tell a consistent story.
A project may be strong in four areas and still carry significant exposure because the fifth has not been adequately resolved.
That is why the period before execution is so important. It provides an opportunity to challenge assumptions, close gaps and align the project before commitments increase and the cost of change becomes greater.
Creating confidence before commitment
There will never be a point at which every uncertainty has disappeared from a complex capital project.
The objective should instead be to understand whether the project has reached an appropriate level of maturity for the decision being made.
At R&R Project Services, our experience across project delivery, engineering, project controls, commercial management and advisory reinforces a consistent principle: the quality of preparation before execution has a significant influence on the owner’s ability to maintain control during execution.
Before asking whether a project can proceed, it is worth asking a more important question:
Are we genuinely ready to execute?