Investment decision brief
AlphaWhat goes in front of the people who hold the delegation: the ask, the options, the three numbers they will ask about, and what happens if they wait.
What it is for
To let senior leaders decide in one sitting. The business case is the analysis; this is the decision. Boards do not decline investments because the analysis was thin — they defer them because the ask was unclear.
- Audience
- Board, executive committee, or whoever holds the investment delegation.
- The decision it supports
- Approve, approve a smaller version, defer with a named condition, or decline.
Inputs — 7 blocking
Blocking means the document cannot be honestly drafted without it. The rest can be left open and marked as such.
The ask, stated as a decision
Only you have it
The amount, the delegation it sits under, and what approval actually authorises — the whole programme, or the next stage only. Stage-gated asks get approved more often and cost less to be wrong about.
Sponsor
The three numbers
In the library
Total cost to deliver, the change to ongoing run cost, and the quantified benefit. Leaders will ask for these whatever else is in the pack, and the run cost is the one usually missing.
Finance · Comprehensive Guide to ERP Project Budgeting: Ensuring Financial Health Amidst Complexity
Options on one page, including doing nothing
In the library
Fix, upgrade, replace and defer, each with its cost and its consequence. A single-option paper is a request for endorsement, not a decision.
Sponsor and finance · Finding the One
Cost of delay
Only you have it
What twelve months of waiting costs and what it forecloses — end of support, a regulatory deadline, a retiring capability. If delay is free, expect it.
Sponsor · ERP Health Check
Accountability
Only you have it
The named sponsor, whether they will still hold the role at the end, and who owns each benefit. Sponsor turnover is one of the more reliable predictors of failure.
Executive · Change is the word
Capacity answer, honestly
Only you have it
Who does this work and what they stop doing. If the answer is the same people who are already fully committed, the pack should say so rather than let the board assume otherwise.
Executive · Digital Transformation Readiness Checklist
What we are not doing
From /scope
Named exclusions. Boards approve scope by implication, so anything unstated is assumed included and becomes a change request later.
Sponsor
Draft around these if needed
The two or three risks that could stop it
In the library
Not the delivery register — the risks material to the investment decision, each with what would mitigate it and what it would cost.
Delivery · Digital Transformation Readiness Checklist
Stop condition and the next gate
In the library
What would bring this back to the board, and what the next gate has to prove. An investment with no stop condition cannot be governed after approval.
Sponsor · PMO & Programme Governance
Assurance position
In the library
Who has independently checked the numbers and the readiness, and what they found. An unassured pack puts the board in the position of being the assurance.
Assurance · Be a Hero
What your scope already answers
- Scope and exclusions: 6 topics across 3 modules — including Customer Relationship Management, Financial Accounting, unpicked.
- Release order: 1. Order Management · 2. Accounts Receivable
- Assumed already in place: Inventory, General Ledger — depended on, not included.
First draft
1/8 sections the scope could speak to
Generated from your scope. It is not a finished document and it does not pretend to be — where a section needs something only you have, it says so rather than inventing a plausible sentence, because plausible sentences are the ones that get left in.
Investment decision brief
The ask, and what approval authorises
To write. The scope cannot supply this one.
Why now, and the cost of waiting
To write. The scope cannot supply this one.
Options and the recommendation
To write. The scope cannot supply this one.
Cost, run-cost impact and funding
To write. The scope cannot supply this one.
Benefits, owners and when they land
To write. The scope cannot supply this one.
What we are not doing
Customer Relationship Management and Financial Accounting were not chosen. They are in scope because the value streams the chosen areas sit on cross into them, so work happens there whether or not it was planned for. This needs to be accepted or the scope reduced — it should not be left unstated.
The scope depends on Inventory and General Ledger without including them. That is fine if they are staying as they are, and a gap in the plan otherwise.
Risks that could stop it
To write. The scope cannot supply this one.
Accountability, assurance and the next gate
To write. The scope cannot supply this one.
Still needed
- The ask, stated as a decision — The amount, the delegation it sits under, and what approval actually authorises — the whole programme, or the next stage only. Stage-gated asks get approved more often and cost less to be wrong about.
- Cost of delay — What twelve months of waiting costs and what it forecloses — end of support, a regulatory deadline, a retiring capability. If delay is free, expect it.
- Accountability — The named sponsor, whether they will still hold the role at the end, and who owns each benefit. Sponsor turnover is one of the more reliable predictors of failure.
- Capacity answer, honestly — Who does this work and what they stop doing. If the answer is the same people who are already fully committed, the pack should say so rather than let the board assume otherwise.
As markdown, to lift into a document
# Investment decision brief ## The ask, and what approval authorises > To write. The scope cannot supply this one. ## Why now, and the cost of waiting > To write. The scope cannot supply this one. ## Options and the recommendation > To write. The scope cannot supply this one. ## Cost, run-cost impact and funding > To write. The scope cannot supply this one. ## Benefits, owners and when they land > To write. The scope cannot supply this one. ## What we are not doing Customer Relationship Management and Financial Accounting were not chosen. They are in scope because the value streams the chosen areas sit on cross into them, so work happens there whether or not it was planned for. This needs to be accepted or the scope reduced — it should not be left unstated. The scope depends on Inventory and General Ledger without including them. That is fine if they are staying as they are, and a gap in the plan otherwise. ## Risks that could stop it > To write. The scope cannot supply this one. ## Accountability, assurance and the next gate > To write. The scope cannot supply this one. ## Still needed - **The ask, stated as a decision** — The amount, the delegation it sits under, and what approval actually authorises — the whole programme, or the next stage only. Stage-gated asks get approved more often and cost less to be wrong about. - **Cost of delay** — What twelve months of waiting costs and what it forecloses — end of support, a regulatory deadline, a retiring capability. If delay is free, expect it. - **Accountability** — The named sponsor, whether they will still hold the role at the end, and who owns each benefit. Sponsor turnover is one of the more reliable predictors of failure. - **Capacity answer, honestly** — Who does this work and what they stop doing. If the answer is the same people who are already fully committed, the pack should say so rather than let the board assume otherwise. _First draft from a scope. 1 of 8 sections had something the scope could say; the rest need a person, and so does everything under Still needed._
Outline
- 01The ask, and what approval authorises
- 02Why now, and the cost of waiting
- 03Options and the recommendation
- 04Cost, run-cost impact and funding
- 05Benefits, owners and when they land
- 06What we are not doing
- 07Risks that could stop it
- 08Accountability, assurance and the next gate
What separates a useful one from a compliant one
- —It can be read and decided in one sitting.
- —It names the delegation the approval sits under.
- —Doing nothing and deferring are both costed.
- —The capacity answer is honest, including when it is uncomfortable.
- —There is a stated condition that would bring it back to the board.
- —Every benefit has an owner who is not the programme.
The rest of the set