Benefits Realisation.

Making the business case real. Establishing the baseline before you start, tracking throughout, and verifying at month 12 that the benefits were actually delivered.

67% of programmes that missed their benefits case had no baseline measurement

PMI Pulse of the Profession (2023)

Without a baseline, benefit delivery cannot be demonstrated — or denied. CN baselines in week one. Full evidence →

Full practitioner methodology in the CN Portal Log in →

The key principles

How CN approaches this work.

The baseline is the most important document in the programme

Without a baseline measurement of the current state, no benefits can be demonstrated at month 12. The baseline is not a description of what the programme intends to achieve — it is a measurement of what exists now, against which future performance will be compared. It must be established before any programme activity changes the thing being measured.

Benefits must be connected to specific changes

A benefits case that asserts an outcome without specifying which operating model change will produce it is not a benefits case — it is an aspiration. Every benefit must be connected to a specific change in a specific layer of the operating model, with a credible mechanism that explains why the change will produce the benefit.

Tracking must happen throughout, not just at the end

Benefits that are first measured at go-live or at programme close will miss the leading indicators that predict whether the benefit will be realised. The tracking framework should identify the leading indicators — the early measures that predict whether the lagging outcomes will materialise — and track them from the start of the programme.

The month 12 review is a programme requirement, not an optional extra

The month 12 review must be written into the SoW before the programme starts. Programmes that plan the month 12 review retrospectively rarely conduct it — the team has moved on, the sponsor has moved on, the budget has been reallocated. Making it a contractual requirement from the start changes the incentives throughout the programme.

Honest reporting of variance is a design requirement

A benefits tracking process that only reports good news is worse than no tracking process — it provides false assurance while problems accumulate. The tracking framework must be designed to surface variance early, create accountability for addressing it, and maintain a transparent record of what was projected and what was achieved.

What good looks like

✓Benefits baseline established in week one of the programme
✓Every benefit connected to a specific operating model change with a credible mechanism
✓Leading indicators identified and tracked from programme start
✓Month 12 review written into SoW before programme commences
✓Benefits variance reported honestly and acted upon
✓Benefits register maintained as a live document throughout

Warning signs

✗No baseline — making month 12 verification impossible
✗Benefits case not connected to specific changes
✗Benefits first measured at go-live
✗Month 12 review not planned before programme starts
✗Benefits reporting focused on positive news only
✗Benefits register created but not maintained

Diagnostic questions

Use these in client conversations or team reviews to quickly surface where the real issues are.

QCan you show the baseline measurement for each benefit in the business case — established before the programme started?

QFor each benefit: which specific change in which operating model layer is expected to produce it, and why?

QWhat are the leading indicators that will tell you in month 3 whether you are on track to deliver the month 12 outcomes?

Full Practitioner Guide

The complete methodology is in the CN Portal.

The full guide covers: benefits baseline methodology, benefit-to-change mapping, leading indicator identification, benefits tracking framework design, variance reporting process, month 12 review methodology, and how to handle benefits that are not being realised.

Access Portal Join the network