Benefits Realisation Plan

Supporting Templates

The Government undertakes expenditure, including investments in infrastructure capital projects, either to solve a problem or to take advantage of an opportunity. In either case, the expectation is that doing so will result in benefits. The benefits management process is just as important within the Infrastructure Investment Lifecycle as is cost management.

Benefits management goes to the heart of delivering projects successfully. If the Project Team dedicates appropriate time to benefits management early on in the project’s development, then it can shape clear project objectives based on an agreed understanding of stakeholder wants and needs. The Project Team can address issues that are crucial to the success of the project by focusing on rigorous benefits management from the start.⁠ (Footnote: See Guide for Effective Benefits Management in Major Projects, UK Infrastructure and Projects Authority, October 2017 )

Benefits realisation planning is concerned with ensuring that the necessary plans, structures, governance arrangements and processes are in place to realise successfully the anticipated benefits of a project (or Program or Precinct).

For Tier 1 projects (and Programs and Precincts that are expected to include at least one Tier 1 project), the Project Team is required to develop a BRP as part of Stage 2 – Prove to plan the realisation and measurement of the expected benefits of the investment identified in the ILM developed in Stage 1 – Develop and the Business Case developed in Stage 2 – Prove. The Project Team should prepare the BRP alongside the project, Program or Precinct Business Case to ensure that there is a clear plan for the realisation of the benefits that the Business Case outlines.

The Project Team must then implement the BRP as part of Stage 4 – Implement and Stage 5 – Measure to assess the actual benefits and economic costs realised by the project during delivery and ongoing operations against the expected benefits and economic costs described in the Business Case. The costs covered by the BRP are the economic costs of the project, not the monetary costs which Major Projects Canberra (MPC) will track and report separately (refer to the definitions of benefit and economic cost for more information. Benefits Realisation in the Capital Framework process diagram below highlights the activities that the Project Team needs to undertake across Stage 1 – Develop, Stage 2 – Prove and Stage 5 – Measure.

The BRP should define key dates for the measurement of benefits and economic costs, the organisational role responsible for monitoring each identified benefit and economic cost, and how each will be reported. The BRP should also outline any business changes and/or strategic enablers that are necessary to enable the project to realise the expected benefits, and the parties responsible for implementing, monitoring and reporting these changes.

Benefits Realisation in the The Capital Framework process

Overview of the Capital Framework and the key questions, activities and documents of each stage. Benefits realisation is undertaken throughout Stage 1 - Develop, Stage 2 -Prove, Stage 4 - Implement and Stage 5 - Measure of the Infrastructure Investment Lifecycle. The Benefits Realisation Plan is developed as part of Stage 2 - Prove of the Capital Framework and helps to answer the key questions of this stage: "What is the recommended project option? How well does it meet the service need, align with Government policy and optimise the balance between risk, benefits and cost? What is the proposed scope, budget and timeline?" Ongoing benefits realisation reporting is undertaken as part of Stage 5 - Measure of the Capital Framework and helps answer the key questions of this stage: "How well has the project realised the identified benefits? What lessons can Government learn from the implementation of the project?"

Tier requirements

  • Tier 1 projects: It is mandatory for the Project Team to develop a BRP
  • Tier 2 and Tier 3 projects: It is optional for the Project Team to develop a BRP
  • Programs and Precincts: It is mandatory for the Project Team to develop a BRP if the Program or Precinct includes (or is likely to include) a Tier 1 project. The Project Team is recommended to develop a BRP for the entire Program or Precinct if the Program or Precinct only includes Tier 2 or Tier 3 projects. The Project Team may also develop a BRP for individual projects within the Program or Precinct if it deems it appropriate or useful.

Purpose of this section

The purpose of this section is to provide a standard and structured approach for the Project Team to develop and implement a BRP and clearly explain key governance and risk considerations. Adopting a consistent approach to developing and implementing a BRP will improve the application of benefits realisation to infrastructure investments in the ACT.

The Project Team should use this document when:

  • Initially identifying benefits and economic costs in Stage 1 – Develop
  • Undertaking the Economic Appraisal and planning for benefits realisation in Stage 2 – Prove
  • Implementing benefits realisation reporting on an ongoing basis in Stage 4 – Implement and Stage 5 – Measure.

Objectives of a Benefits Realisation Plan

An effective BRP is a critical part of ensuring that a project achieves its expected benefits. The key objectives of a BRP are to:

  • Define benefits and economic costs clearly at the outset of the project (refer to the definition of benefit and economic cost for more information
  • Ensure the Project Team is committed to realising the project’s identified benefits by assigning ownership of and responsibility for each benefit
  • Outline the business changes and/or strategic enablers required to ensure the benefits associated with the project can be realised fully and the economic costs can be minimised
  • Provide a simple management tool to monitor, track and manage the benefits and economic costs of a project
  • Drive the process of realising benefits by providing a clear roadmap for benefits realisation
  • Provide Government with valuable data over time to identify future needs that may warrant further investment.

Relationship between the BRP and the Post Implementation Review (PIR)

There is a close relationship between the PIR and the BRP. However, the PIR and the BRP each serve a different purpose. The purpose of the PIR is to support continual improvement in project development and implementation across Government. The BRP, on the other hand, has a primary purpose to assess whether a project achieves its expected benefits over time, as outlined in the Business Case. The PIR is a one-off assessment for learning and improvement, whereas the BRP is an ongoing assessment for monitoring and correcting the benefits realisation process.

The Sponsoring Agency should ensure that, where it develops both a BRP and a PIR, they complement and integrate with one another. This could occur in the following ways:

  • The PIR Advisor should use the BRP and any benefits realisation reporting that has been undertaken prior to the development of the PIR to inform the ‘Needs’ and ‘Benefits’ Evaluation Areas, within the ‘Need’ Evaluation Category
  • The Benefits Manager (the Agency or individual with overall responsibility for the project—see Benefits management governance table in Governance section) should use the lessons learnt and findings of the PIR with respect to the ‘Needs’ and ‘Benefits’ Evaluation Areas to inform ongoing benefits realisation reporting and continuous improvement.

Key success factors

The following factors are important to the success of a BRP:

  • Clearly articulated: The Project Team should define what will make the project a success early in the project’s development, including identifying and clearly articulating the project’s expected benefits
  • Measurable: The Project Team should ensure that the data required to measure the expected benefits and economic costs are available for the Base and Project Cases, and that the tracking and monitoring needed for the BRP is kept up to date. As noted under Identify ways to measure benefits and economic costs, benefits and economic costs should be tracked using measures that follow the SMART principle—that is, measures should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and timely
  • Committed: Key stakeholders and senior management must be committed to benefits realisation and participate actively in the process. Benefits must be owned by appropriate stakeholders, sponsors and managers who are accountable for their realisation. These Benefit Owners must engage in benefit definition and identification at the early stage of the project, and maintain a focus on benefits realisation across all phases of the project
  • Integrated:Benefits management must be integrated with Government’s portfolio, program and project delivery and management. The benefits identified should also align with Government’s strategies and policies. This alignment should be confirmed through the Business Case process and described in the Business Case
  • Realistic:The number of benefits identified for ongoing monitoring should be limited to a manageable number of relevant and significant benefits.

What is a benefit?

A benefit is the measurable and advantageous change resulting from an outcome that one or more stakeholders experience. The term ‘benefit’ covers both advantageous changes that can be measured in monetary terms (e.g. travel time savings) and those advantageous changes that are real but that cannot be expressed in monetary terms.  Benefits that cannot be expressed in monetary terms may include social and environmental benefits, including those that the Wellbeing Framework describes.

Benefits are specific outcomes that provide a way for the Project Team to define and establish a project’s positive impact on the community, and therefore its level of success. The Project Team can assign accountability for the monitoring of and reporting on specific benefits to various stakeholders within Government.

It is important to note that, although all benefits are measurable in some way, not all benefits are sufficiently quantifiable to provide meaningful data on benefits realisation over time. Additionally, the BRP may have different measures of benefits to those in the Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA). For example, a CBA for a transport project can only estimate travel time savings for an average traveller. However, once the project is operating, it may be possible to measure actual journey times for each traveller.

Benefits generally provide an improvement in quality of life to the community or a certain group within the community. Where possible, benefits should be categorised within the domains of the Wellbeing Framework and be measured partly in terms of which groups in the community will benefit, to reflect their relative impact on the ACT community as a whole.

What is an economic cost?

Economic costs are the opposite of benefits: they are disadvantageous changes resulting from an outcome that one or more stakeholders experience. These Guidelines use the term ‘economic costs’ to cover social costs, environmental costs and other costs that are not monetary. Although these Guidelines predominantly refer to benefits, the Project Team should note that a project may also cause negative outcomes. It is important for the Project Team to track economic costs alongside benefits to gain a full picture of the overall impact of the project on the community. For example, a public transport project may benefit public transport users by decreasing travel time and costs and may benefit the environment by reducing emissions. However, the same public transport project may impose an economic cost on private vehicle users by increasing travel times.

Therefore, the Project Team should ensure that the BRP addresses the potential for the project to result in economic costs, as well as benefits.

What are possible types of benefits and economic costs?

The Project Team can identify benefits and economic costs across a broad range of areas—from internal organisational processes to economic, social and environmental outcomes. Some examples are provided below, noting that economic costs are the opposite of a benefit under each category.

Types of benefits

Type

Description

Quality of service

Benefits to the users or customers of a service

Legal or policy requirements

Benefits that enable an Agency to meet policy objectives or to satisfy legal requirements

Internal processes

Benefits that are internal to an Agency, such as in decision making or service management processes

Cost effectiveness and efficiency

Benefits that enable an Agency to achieve the same outcome with fewer resources

Personnel or human resources

Benefits such as a more skilled or more motivated workforce (that, in turn, have flow-on impacts on economic indicators such as productivity)

Risk reduction

Benefits that better prepare an Agency for managing future risks

Economy

Benefits such as increased productivity, improved housing affordability, business growth, more jobs or better access to jobs

Social

Benefits that improve quality of life such as improved health or education outcomes, even if they only affect specific groups within the broader community

Environment

Benefits that deliver improved environmental outcomes such as cleaner air and water or increased populations of endangered species

Revenue enhancement

Benefits that bring increased revenue or the same revenue in a shorter timeframe

Financial enhancement

Benefits that reduce ongoing operational / maintenance costs for Government

Strategic fit

Benefits that contribute to the achievement of broader Government commitments, policies, vision and objectives

Footnotes: