Readiness Roadmap
Turn assessment findings into a governed plan for organisational and process improvement. Connect each action to evidence, an accountable owner and the decision it enables.
The roadmap supports human-led change, workflow orchestration, RPA and Agentic AI where justified. Use it across both tracks: IGX Enterprise Process Architecture uses the Wider Business Context Method to focus process attention; IGX Process Transformation uses the Thin Deep Slice Method to deliver a Gold Standard Process and reusable Blueprint.
Prioritise the conditions for responsible progress.
Every action traces to a finding from the initial assessments, architecture, process deep dives, decision gates, evidence gaps or applicable obligations. Apply these priorities in order, using the controls and assessment dimensions relevant to the proposed change.
- Prohibited or illegally blocked activity.
- Red critical gates or unmet essential controls.
- Fixed regulatory, contractual or operational deadlines.
- High-consequence unknowns.
- Amber critical gates or partially satisfied controls.
- Cross-cutting organisational dependencies.
- The weakest relevant assessment dimensions or capabilities.
- Gaps in evidence confidence.
- Value optimisation and opportunities for wider adoption.
Twelve workstreams, used where they apply.
Group findings so ownership and dependencies are clear. Select the relevant workstreams for the change; do not force an action into one that does not fit.
| Workstream | Focus |
|---|---|
| W1 | Strategy, sponsorship and value |
| W2 | Governance, accountability and risk classification |
| W3 | Process discovery and redesign |
| W4 | Data, knowledge, context and information lifecycle |
| W5 | Architecture and integration |
| W6 | Security, identity and permissions |
| W7 | Solution design, decision rights and human oversight |
| W8 | Legal, regulatory, ethics and affected-person rights |
| W9 | Workforce, roles, skills and change |
| W10 | Testing, simulation and independent assurance |
| W11 | Monitoring, incident response and resilience |
| W12 | Suppliers, economics and sustainability |
Make every action traceable and owned.
| Field | What to record |
|---|---|
| Action | A specific outcome to establish within a defined scope. |
| Source finding | The assessment question, decision gate or evidence gap that triggered it. |
| Why it matters | The value, consequence, obligation or dependency behind the action. |
| Accountable owner | One accountable person or role, with the contributors required. |
| Dependency | The actions or decisions that must precede it. |
| Required evidence | The artefact or operating evidence that demonstrates completion. |
| Priority | Critical, High, Medium or Later, using an agreed transparent scoring method. |
| Validator | The person or function who accepts the closure evidence. |
| Residual risk | The remaining exposure after the action is complete, with an owner. |
| Reassessment impact | The assessment answers, gates, dimensions and operating decision affected. |
| Target date and decision gate | When evidence is required and which decision depends on it. |
| Reassessment trigger | The event or review date that requires the decision to be revisited. |
Example action: clarify approval authority in supplier onboarding
- Source finding
- Supplier onboarding deep dive: no documented approval authority above £50,000 contract value
- Why it matters
- Undocumented authority delays onboarding and risks a commitment made without the right sign-off
- Accountable owner
- Head of Procurement
- Required evidence
- Approved authority matrix, updated process documentation and evidence the change has been communicated
- Reassessment impact
- The supplier onboarding process finding and the wider business context review
Seven points for accountable decisions.
Progress is an explicit decision against defined evidence. Scale the governance to the scope and consequence of the change. A controlled trial may concern a revised human-led process, a workflow, task automation or Agentic AI.
Gate 0 Discovery complete
Agree scope and multidisciplinary participants; record material unknowns; identify the process and owner; ensure prohibited activity is not being progressed.
Gate 1 Screening passed
Complete the process and use-case context; resolve red stop conditions; identify participants for deeper investigation and make principal evidence sources available.
Gate 2 Design and evidence complete
Complete and challenge the deep dive; close red gates or remove the blocked activity; document decision rights, human controls and any automation boundaries; complete applicable legal classification and approve testing and assurance plans.
Gate 3 Bounded trial authorised
Agree acceptance thresholds, a representative test setting and trial limits. Put relevant permissions, logging, containment, human supervision and stop conditions in place.
Gate 4 Controlled operational validation
Meet the agreed operational-readiness criteria; satisfy required gates or document permissible exceptions; complete end-to-end and recovery tests; formally accept residual risk and activate monitoring and incident response. An exception cannot authorise prohibited activity.
Gate 5 Wider adoption or expanded scope
Use sustained operating evidence to validate benefits and economics. Review incidents, overrides and different outcomes across affected groups; reassess capacity, resilience and supplier concentration; obtain independent assurance where consequences warrant it.
Gate 6 Retirement or replacement
Record the decision and trigger; revoke access and credentials where relevant; retain or delete information appropriately; reconcile open actions; complete supplier exit and continuity arrangements; capture lessons.
Close actions when the outcome is evidenced.
- The required outcome exists across the defined scope.
- Required evidence is attached or referenced.
- The named validator has accepted the evidence.
- Residual risk is recorded and owned.
- Affected assessment answers and gate statuses have been reassessed.
- The readiness decision and any limits on scope, automation or delegated authority have been updated where affected.
Publishing a policy or buying a tool does not demonstrate that the required operating outcome has been achieved.
Reassess when the business context changes.
- Objectives, responsibilities or authorised activities change.
- Scope, automation, delegated authority, volume, transaction value or the affected population increases.
- A material technology, model, product version or supplier changes.
- Instructions, rules, tools, integrations, permissions or information sources change.
- Processes, policies, systems, data or workforce arrangements change.
- Legal, regulatory or contractual obligations change.
- An incident, near miss, complaint, override trend or control failure occurs.
- Performance, cost or benefit moves outside approved thresholds.
- New delegation, orchestration or operational handovers are introduced.
- The process enters a new geography, customer group or regulated activity.
- An agreed review date is reached.
One set of actions, four useful views.
Executive view
Decisions, red and amber gates, owners, funding, benefits and dates.
Delivery view
Workstreams, dependencies, milestones and blockers.
Assurance view
Obligations, controls, evidence, validators and residual risk.
Process and solution view
Capability changes, operating boundaries and reassessment history.
Practical questions.
What does each roadmap action record?
A specific outcome, the finding that triggered it, why it matters, one accountable owner, its dependencies, the evidence that will show completion, a priority, a validator, the residual risk, and the assessment answers and decision gates it affects. Each action also carries a target date and a reassessment trigger.
When can an action be closed?
When the outcome is evidenced. The required outcome exists across the defined scope, the evidence is attached or referenced, the named validator has accepted it, residual risk is recorded and owned, and the affected assessment answers and gate statuses have been reassessed. Publishing a policy or buying a tool does not demonstrate that the outcome has been achieved.
When should the roadmap be reassessed?
When the business context changes: objectives, scope, delegated authority, technology, processes or obligations. An incident, a near miss, performance or cost moving outside approved thresholds, or an agreed review date also triggers reassessment. Record what changed, update the evidence and revisit the decision.
Turn the result into a governed plan.
Develop the roadmap through facilitated assessment and deep-dive work, then maintain it as a continuing governance workspace. It supports accountable approval, specialist advice and independent assurance wherever required.
Connected to the Readiness and Improvement Portfolio
Four assessments provide complementary starting points and evidence. The Organisation Deep Dive Assessment supports IGX Enterprise Process Architecture using the Wider Business Context Method. The Process Deep Dive Assessment supports IGX Process Transformation using the Thin Deep Slice Method. Deep Dives diagnose; consultancy implements an agreed scope.
Organisation Readiness AssessmentProcess Readiness AssessmentOrganisation Deep Dive AssessmentProcess Deep Dive Assessment
Separate three kinds of action
Confidence actions
Obtain missing information, validate claims, resolve disagreements and improve the evidence behind a decision.
Capability actions
Strengthen ownership, skills, information, controls, technology or capacity needed to operate effectively.
Operating-change actions
Deliver the justified process or organisational change and test its outcomes against the business case.
Make the target explicit
Record the current and justified target operating modes, definition status, fit decision, evidence confidence and business rationale. One process may combine several modes. Retaining a well-performing human-led arrangement can be the right decision; add monitoring and review triggers rather than an unnecessary implementation project.
Link shared organisational actions to the affected processes. Apply Agentic AI gates only where Agentic AI is in scope, and carry relevant human authority, intervention and recovery conditions into implementation.