PRINCE2 2017 Tailoring and Organisational Adoption

Executive summary

Tailoring versus adoption

The source distinguishes two related activities. Tailoring adapts the method to a particular project. Adoption adapts it for an organisation and then embeds the adopted version into organisational working practices. An organisation may therefore have a standard project-management framework that already reflects its governance, terminology, quality system and reporting requirements, while each project still tailors that framework further for its own scale, risk and context.

This distinction prevents two extremes. Without organisational adoption, every project may reinvent basic governance and terminology. Without project-level tailoring, teams may apply the corporate framework mechanically even when parts of it add no value or fail to provide enough control for a difficult project.

What can be tailored

The supplied 2017 material says tailoring can be applied to processes, themes, roles, management products and terminology. In practice, that means the method can change its level of formality, combine compatible roles, combine or simplify documents, use existing organisational systems, adjust reporting frequency and align terminology with the business environment.

The value test for tailoring

The source gives a simple but powerful criterion: tailoring should add value. Reducing a document is not automatically good tailoring, and adding a report is not automatically good governance. The question is whether the change improves the project’s ability to make decisions, control uncertainty, coordinate work and demonstrate accountability at a proportionate cost.

Who decides and where it is recorded

The source assigns the project manager responsibility for determining the level and type of project tailoring, with the project board reviewing or approving the proposed approach as part of initiation. Tailoring requirements are documented in the project initiation documentation so the project team and assurance functions can understand what has been adapted and how control will operate.

This record is important because informal tailoring can otherwise become invisible. If a team silently stops producing information or combines roles without considering conflicts, assurance cannot determine whether the method is still effective. A concise tailoring statement can be enough, but it should explain the chosen approach, not merely say “PRINCE2 has been tailored”.

Tailoring themes and organisational approaches

The theme tailoring slides encourage projects to use existing organisational approaches where appropriate rather than creating duplicate systems. For example, an organisation may already have risk categories, issue management software, quality procedures, configuration controls or reporting templates. The project can adopt those mechanisms when they satisfy the method’s minimum management needs.

The practical test is traceability. If the project uses an organisational system instead of a named PRINCE2 management product, a reviewer should still be able to determine where the equivalent information is held, who owns it, how it is controlled and when it is reviewed.

Tailoring processes

The source’s process-tailoring material reinforces that the purposes and objectives of the seven processes must still be achieved. A small project may perform several activities in one meeting or decision package. A large project may split activities across committees, systems and specialist teams. Either approach can be valid if the management logic remains intact.

For example, the pre-project start-up work should still answer whether there is a worthwhile and viable project before significant initiation effort is authorised. Initiation should still establish a reliable management baseline before major execution spend. Stage control should still delegate work, monitor status, handle risks and issues and escalate forecast exceptions. Closure should still confirm acceptance and transfer outstanding actions even if the documents or meeting names differ.

Adopting and embedding the method

Organisational adoption creates a standard starting point for projects. The adopted method can align PRINCE2 concepts with the organisation’s governance model, investment approvals, terminology, document systems, quality management and capability. Embedding then makes the adopted method part of normal working practice through guidance, tools, training, assurance and leadership expectations.

An adopted method should leave room for project-level tailoring. A rigid corporate procedure that cannot scale up or down undermines the tailoring principle; a framework with no minimum controls creates inconsistency. The most useful adopted method defines mandatory organisational controls, identifies where equivalent PRINCE2 information is held, and gives project managers a clear process for documenting proportionate deviations.

Tailoring decision framework

A disciplined tailoring workshop

Tailoring can be made practical by reviewing the project through four lenses. First, consider scale, complexity, risk and novelty. Second, map organisational systems that already provide planning, risk, quality, change or reporting capabilities. Third, examine delivery approach and supplier interfaces. Fourth, identify governance requirements that cannot be weakened, such as independent assurance, customer acceptance or escalation authority.

For each process, theme and management product, decide the lightest form that still achieves its purpose. A small internal project might use one integrated digital register for risks and issues, concise Stage Plans and short Board decisions recorded in meeting notes. A high-risk multi-supplier project may need more formal baselines, assurance evidence, detailed Work Packages and frequent checkpoints. Both can be legitimate if principles, purposes, objectives and decision rights remain intact.

Document the decisions so later participants do not “tailor the tailoring” independently. Explain combined roles, renamed products, tool mappings, reporting cadence and any controls strengthened because of risk. Revisit the tailoring at stage boundaries when project conditions change. Tailoring is therefore a controlled design choice throughout the lifecycle, not a one-time permission to omit inconvenient management.

Practical verification checklist

• Distinguish organisational adoption from project-specific tailoring.
• Assess scale, complexity, risk, team capability, supplier arrangements and inherited governance before tailoring.
• Confirm that all seven principles still apply after tailoring.
• Map every theme’s minimum management need to either a PRINCE2 product or an equivalent organisational control.
• Ensure every process purpose and objective is still achieved even if activities or documents are combined.
• Document the tailoring approach in the project initiation baseline.
• Use existing organisational tools where they add value rather than duplicating systems.
• Review the tailoring approach when the project environment or control need changes.

Common mistakes to avoid

• Calling the removal of inconvenient controls “tailoring” without checking whether management needs are still met.
• Copying a corporate method unchanged onto every project regardless of scale or risk.
• Creating duplicate project systems when established organisational controls already provide the required information.
• Combining roles without checking accountability, assurance independence or conflict of interest.
• Documenting tailoring so vaguely that the project team cannot tell which controls have changed or where equivalent information is held.

Related KEVOS handbook pages