Mega-projects need value clarity, not just better governance

The Office for Value for Money has published an April 2026 report into UK government mega-projects.

Its conclusion is direct: many big, complex projects are not set up for success.

The report sets out the main changes the UK government is bringing in to improve mega-project performance, including a Strategy and Delivery Plan and simpler assurance and decision routes.

Those changes matter. But the deeper challenge is whether projects are clear enough about the value they are meant to create, how impact will be measured, and how decisions reduce uncertainty before commitments harden.

Key observations

Two recommendations stand out.

First, projects will need to publish a Strategy and Delivery Plan at the start and at key milestones.

Second, decision-making and assurance should become simpler.

That is sensible. If a project has unclear ownership, slow approvals, and several layers of review, it becomes harder to know who is making which decision and why.

Two things still seem to be missing.

The first is assumptions. Major project decisions are made under uncertainty. A good decision process should help teams reduce that uncertainty. It should make the important assumptions visible, test them, and update the plan when the evidence changes.

If assumptions are not central, what are the planned decisions actually trying to do?

The second missing point is value. The report is about value for money, but value itself does not seem to get enough attention. Even the portfolio table used to describe major government projects does not make benefits or value a visible column.

That feels like a root cause issue.

Implication for the reader

A project can have a cleaner decision route and still be unclear about the value it is meant to create.

It can have a delivery plan and still be carrying untested assumptions.

It can have stronger assurance and still be measuring cost, time, and process more clearly than benefits.

For any large project, the front-end questions should be simple:

1. What value are we trying to create?
2. Who is that value for?
3. What assumptions must be true for this to work?
4. What evidence would change our mind?
5. Which decisions reduce uncertainty?
6. Which decisions merely move the project forward?

Those questions are not just useful for government mega-projects. They apply to any project where the cost of being wrong grows over time.

Further reading

• Context: GOV.UK: Value for money study on governance and budgeting arrangements for mega projects
• What: Always Test the Big Assumptions
• How: Measure What Matters and Step Away