It is that time of year where everyone has submitted their requests for a slice of that 2025 change budget, listing out their wish list of projects that they want to execute. With 80-90% of that budget typically taken up by the BAU, as well as overrun from the 2024 projects, mandatory system upgrades, and regulatory projects, the real battle is for the remaining 10-20% of truly discretionary project spend.
Competition is often fierce, with multiple products or functional areas vying for support and prioritisation of decision makers. Therefore, when it comes to creating the business case, its benefits need to be compelling, and flexibility in the proposed approach can be the difference between approval and rejection.
Citisoft’s recent Transformation Survey, which surveyed 28 UK-based asset managers and owners, found that 38% of all projects that fail to begin do so because of difficulties in sizing the problem and defining a clear, compelling business case.
That suggests over a third of projects identified to meet business goals are not getting over the first hurdle of having budget assigned. To avoid that pitfall, here are two strategies for making your business case stand out and secure that vital slice of the budget.
Historically, large-scale transformational change projects—particularly those replacing legacy technology—have been known to be painful. These multi-year efforts often result in late delivery and over-budget outcomes, leaving scars on the organisation and eroding stakeholder trust. A business case that proposes a lengthy, full-scale transformation may raise concerns, as it risks losing momentum and stakeholder focus, especially when benefits are years away and objectives are subject to change.
To mitigate this risk, business cases should adopt a phased approach, where progress and benefits are demonstrated within a 12–18-month horizon. By structuring the project into manageable phases, you provide decision-makers with the confidence that the initiative will yield tangible results early on. This improves return on investment (ROI) and allows teams to reassess at each stage, ensuring continued alignment with business goals.
Clearly defined success criteria for each phase are essential. These milestones should be transparent from the start, allowing stakeholders to see when and why the project can move forward—or be paused. This phased approach also enables flexibility, offering “off-ramps” if priorities shift or if benefits are not realised as expected. Phasing not only reduces the risk of project failure but also increases the likelihood of continued investment in future stages.
Budget constraints were a key topic at a recent roundtable hosted in collaboration with FundGuard,1 where participants highlighted the strain that legacy systems place on operational budgets. With some citing that up to 50% of their budget is spent on maintaining legacy systems, decision-makers can be reluctant to greenlight new initiatives. A phased approach helps alleviate this concern by requiring smaller initial investments and building confidence through successful delivery.
Proof of concept (POC) and proof of value (POV) often form part of this initial stage, validating the solution’s ROI before committing to a full budget, reassuring stakeholders that funds will be wisely spent. The cost of doing nothing should also be clearly highlighted, considering both the potential cost of an opportunity lost and the rising expenses associated with legacy technology or operating models.
One of the biggest hurdles in technology-driven business cases is uncertainty, not knowing the unknowns—whether the proposed solution will work, whether it can integrate into the existing ecosystem, or whether it will deliver on its promise. Many business cases don’t gain approval because stakeholders aren’t convinced that the risks have been fully considered or mitigated.
Including a Proof of Concept (POC) or Proof of Value (POV) in the business case helps validate the proposed solution. Although often used interchangeably, a POC demonstrates the end solution, helping to identify potential risks early and integrate those lessons into the project plan. Whilst, a POV proves the value of the solution, showing stakeholders that the project can deliver measurable benefits. By integrating these findings into the delivery plan from the outset, as well as working to mitigate the identified risks, teams can avoid repeated replanning or delays during execution. This approach helps build momentum and stakeholder confidence before full-scale delivery even begins.
It is also key all major stakeholders are represented in any POC/POV, including front office, operations, and technology. When these groups are involved from the start, it ensures that integration and connectivity issues are identified early, as well as any product gaps, and that everyone understands the project’s goals and limitations. This level of involvement not only strengthens the business case, providing clarity on the shared outcome, but also lays the groundwork for smoother implementation.
Additionally, engaging stakeholders in the POC/POV process creates a partnership approach that fosters commitment and accountability. The exercise may be time-consuming for both the client and vendor, but it ultimately reduces the likelihood of costly changes during later stages of delivery. If the POC or POV fails to deliver the expected or desired results, this “fail fast” approach will reveal shortcomings early, limiting the committed spend and allowing for course corrections.
Once you’ve defined your approach, it’s essential to frame the benefits of your project in a way that resonates with decision-makers. To secure some of that limited discretionary spend budget, the business case must highlight multiple types of benefits—such as revenue generation, cost savings, and risk reduction. Projects focused on legacy technology projects should carefully consider the total cost of ownership, including not just licensing, but also infrastructure, cost of change, and future upgrade costs. What is the cost of doing nothing and does that total cost of ownership actually increase? With a focus on resiliency and risk management, if the project can show improvement from an operational risk or vendor risk perspective, it will contribute to the incremental benefits of the initiative.
Lastly, ensure that key champions from across the organisation—front office, operations, technology, product—support the case. Too often, proposals are pushed by only one area and struggle to gain traction. By demonstrating cross-functional support, your business case will have a much higher chance of success.
Champions should be established within each of the key stakeholder groups to demonstrate a joint vision and commitment to the business case. Then, once budget is awarded—these champions become committed sponsors throughout the project lifecycle, holding the core project team accountable.
By structuring your business case around these two strategies—phased delivery and early validation through POC/POV—you’ll not only increase your chances of securing budget approval but also build a foundation for successful project execution. With this groundwork in place, the next step is the exciting part—delivery!
1 Roundtable Recap: The Case for Transformational Change (October 2024) FundGuard.