Adviser, Enterprise Technology Decision Rights

Work from decisions, not an organisation chart

The adviser will help an enterprise clarify technology decision rights across central leadership, business units and specialist control functions. The engagement focuses on operating governance and executive accountability. It will produce recommendations and facilitate agreement, without assuming management authority or making personnel decisions.

The client needs a model that works when priorities conflict. Central technology teams may seek common platforms while local leaders require speed or specialised capability. Security and privacy requirements can affect both. The adviser will use actual decision examples to identify where authority is unclear, duplicated or separated from the consequences of the choice.

Design around recurring decisions

The assessment will cover investment prioritisation, architecture exceptions, supplier selection, service acceptance and material risk escalation. For each, the adviser should distinguish who recommends, who contributes specialist evidence, who decides and who remains accountable for the outcome. A committee title alone does not establish effective authority.

Recommendations must reflect the enterprise's leadership capacity and operating structure. Some decisions can be delegated within clear guardrails; others require a central view because they create dependencies for several units. The adviser will explain the tradeoff between local responsiveness and enterprise consistency, including the cost of escalation and delay.

Specialist authority must remain explicit

Where healthcare systems are involved, the model must respect clinical and operational accountability. Technology governance cannot authorise changes to professional practice or sensitive-information use merely because an investment has been approved. The adviser will work with relevant leaders to identify the correct decision routes.

Make the model usable

The final output will include a concise decision-rights map, forum purposes, escalation rules and worked examples. Proposed reporting should contain the information necessary for a decision rather than reproduce detailed programme status. The adviser will recommend a transition approach and identify existing policies that need alignment.

Success means that leaders know which decisions they can make and what evidence is required when a matter must move elsewhere. The engagement should reduce informal vetoes and repeated debate while preserving appropriate challenge. Management remains responsible for adopting the model, appointing accountable owners and addressing behaviour that continues to undermine the agreed arrangements.