Understand what’s slowing delivery. Plan a workable recovery.
Independent digital programme review and recovery
Complex digital transformations can run into difficulty long before a deadline is first missed. Our input helps stabilise web-platform delivery at the first signs of trouble or recover a programme that has lost momentum.
Our independent review establishes the current state of your project, including what can be retained and what needs to change. We assess whether the delivery plan is achievable within your budget and deadlines. If needed, we can then help put those priorities into action through practical, hands-on technical leadership.
For CTOs, transformation directors, programme sponsors, investors, and legal advisers.
When digital programme recovery helps
Delivery needs stabilising
Priorities keep changing, dependencies remain unresolved, or milestones are starting to slip. We help you establish what is causing the difficulties and what needs attention first, so you can work with your team to stabilise delivery before the problems grow.
Different teams see different problems
The business, engineers, and supplier describe different blockers. We listen to each account and examine the work behind it, so you can understand how technical constraints, dependencies, and unresolved decisions are affecting delivery.
The current approach is no longer working
Before committing more time and money, you need to know whether the existing work can be carried forward and what changes to the plan or team would give delivery a realistic chance.
A real engagement
Establishing what was holding delivery back
A C-suite programme sponsor approached John when a web transformation was missing milestones and its scope kept shrinking. An international business wanted to consolidate separately operated websites and applications onto shared foundations, reducing duplicated investment and taking ownership of ongoing development. An agency was delivering the first stage before a planned handover to an internal team, but the sponsor was receiving conflicting accounts of the delays.
Understanding the delivery constraints
John examined the delivery evidence and reported blockers. Some internal integration work had arrived late or in a different sequence. These were real constraints, and the changes had been communicated in advance, but the delivery plan had not adequately adapted.
Repeated changes of agency engineers also meant that knowledge established during discovery was being lost. Despite substantial documentation from the client, handovers between incoming and outgoing engineers did not preserve enough context. The number of engineers involved did not make up for that lost continuity, and the available design capability was insufficient to meet the agreed standard.
Rebuilding the capacity to deliver
John recommended ending the agency engagement at its agreed deadline and bringing delivery in-house. He then worked with the internal team to establish what could be retained, what remained incomplete, and where defects or rework would prevent a viable release.
Internal capacity was expanded with support from specialists at an existing trusted supplier. Design, product, and engineering rebuilt the plan around the work required. John supported the transition, helped establish team governance, and challenged shorter deadlines where there was no evidence the work could be completed sooner. Later regional launches were moved back to give the first release the time needed to establish reliable shared foundations.
Returning to delivery
The first release met the revised delivery plan. Earlier delays still pushed back the wider rollout, but the intervals between territory launches were significantly shorter than originally forecast. The stable internal team and retained knowledge supported that faster pace, and the business took ownership of the platform and its ongoing development.
What we examine
We agree the scope, depth, and access with you before work begins.
Architecture and implementation
We examine the architecture, source code, and repositories to understand what the platform can support and how much effort it takes to change. Platform and framework choices, maintainability, and technical debt built into its structure all affect which parts can be retained and where recovery will need more work.
Content, integrations, and dependencies
We trace how content and data move through the platform and its integrations. This includes the content management system (CMS) architecture, content models, technical dependencies, and the completeness of any migration, so we can identify missing connections or unfinished work that could hold up delivery.
Working software and production behaviour
We check how software is tested and released, including the deployment pipelines the team relies on. Performance, accessibility, and resilience show how well the platform works in use. We also examine analytics, consent, localisation, and technical SEO (search engine optimisation), where problems can affect how people find and use the website or how the business measures its performance.
Delivery feasibility and recovery
We look at the work completed and still to do, then compare that with the plan, the team’s capacity and skills, and the technical constraints. Conversations with the business and delivery team help explain where expectations differ and what time, people, or changes would be needed to make recovery achievable.
How we work with you
Agree what we need to establish
We start with your programme: what has happened, which decisions have already been made, and what you need to decide next. Together, we agree the questions to investigate, the people to involve, and the access needed, taking your deadlines into account.
Look at the work in progress
We speak with the people funding, leading, and delivering the programme and examine the architecture, code, and working software. Seeing both helps us understand the difficulties the teams describe.
Understand what is holding delivery back
We compare what we have heard with what has been built, looking at constraints within the business as well as engineering problems. We explain how those constraints affect the work still to do and what could help delivery move forward.
Work through the recovery options
We discuss what can be retained, what needs to change, and the work each option would involve. That includes what the business and team would need to commit, so you can choose a practical next step.
Your report and briefing
Why delivery is struggling
Your written report explains the causes of delay, with the evidence behind the findings. It gives you a basis for deciding whether to continue with changes, undertake a wider recovery, replace parts of the work, or stop.
Priorities for recovery
We set out what needs attention first and what the team would need to make progress. Where evidence is missing or an assumption is still untested, we explain how that affects the recovery options.
A conversation about the findings
Your sponsor briefing is a conversation with John about the report. There is time to question the findings and discuss what they mean for your plans. We can also agree briefings for the people who need to act on them, from engineers and suppliers to senior leadership and the C-suite.
Support with stabilisation and recovery
We can work alongside your existing team or supplier to put the review’s priorities into practice. That may involve helping resolve difficult architecture decisions, agreeing what needs attention first, and rebuilding the delivery plan around the work still to do.
We can also help you establish the team size, structure, and mix of skills needed to stabilise and sustain delivery. If you need this support, we discuss what it would involve and agree its scope separately from the independent review.
Further experience
Investigating a loss of search traffic
After a website replatform launched as part of a wider digital transformation, daily visitors from Google fell from roughly 25,000 to around 300. John was brought in to investigate the loss of traffic and help restore it.
He compared the old and new websites. Missing redirects had left old URLs without a route to their replacements, and a failed content migration had left pages with empty, missing, and corrupted metadata. These were among a wider set of findings from the audit.
Restoring traffic through staged repairs
John worked through the technical SEO corrections in stages over a couple of weeks, repairing the migration problems and using the audit to improve on the previous website’s setup.
Traffic began returning soon after the first changes. Around six weeks into the engagement, visits from Google were well above their level before the replatform launched.
Practical questions
How are scope and fees agreed?
We start by discussing what you need to decide, your deadline, and the platform involved. We can then establish whether the work is a good fit and confirm our availability. Before investigation begins, we agree the scope, fees, and access with you, including who needs to be involved and the arrangements for your written report and sponsor briefing. Any recovery support is scoped and agreed separately.
What access does a review need?
Usually, we need access to repositories, architecture material, a working environment, and delivery records, plus time with the people involved. We agree the access and handling arrangements with you before investigation begins. If something or someone is unavailable, we explain what that prevents us from establishing.
Does Kavanagh Digital replace the delivery agency?
No. We provide an independent review and, where agreed, hands-on technical leadership alongside your team or supplier. We can help you understand what needs to change in the delivery arrangements, but we do not take on the work as a replacement delivery agency.
Is the review automated?
No. John conducts the core investigation and is responsible for the judgement and recommendation. AI-assisted analysis is only used with your approval and suitable security controls; it does not replace his examination of the evidence.
Who does John interview?
John speaks with the people funding and sponsoring the work, business stakeholders, and those designing, building, and delivering it. We agree who needs to take part and the access required. Comparing their experience with the software and delivery evidence helps us understand expectations, constraints, and what needs attention, without apportioning blame.
What affects the effort and timing?
The time needed depends on the platform’s complexity, the questions you need answered, and how readily we can access the software, supporting material, and people involved. We discuss your deadline and our availability before agreeing the scope, so you know what we can realistically examine in the time available.
About Kavanagh Digital
Practical experience to support recovery.
John Kavanagh, founder of Kavanagh Digital, brings more than two decades of experience in hands-on development, front-end architecture, and engineering leadership. He leads every review and takes responsibility for its conclusions.
His wider work building platforms and supporting delivery teams informs both the investigation and the recovery priorities. John connects the causes of delay with the technical work and team capability needed to restore progress.
Discuss digital programme recovery
Tell us what’s happening.
Tell us about your platform, the decision you face, and your deadlines. We’ll discuss how we can help, what the work would involve, and our availability.
Email us