What Went Wrong with HS2 — From a Project Delivery Perspective?
June 4, 2026
PMO Value Readiness: The Overlooked Driver of PMO Success
June 4, 2026
Project Management has long benefited from established frameworks such as the Project Management Institute's PMBOK® Guide, the Association for Project Management Body of Knowledge, and the AACE International Total Cost Management (TCM) Framework.
Yet, despite these, a fundamental question remains:
Do we have a globally recognised Body of Knowledge that truly represents Project Controls? In my view — not yet.
The Current Landscape — Strong Foundations, Partial Coverage
Existing frameworks provide significant value:
Broad project management principles
Comprehensive, UK-led perspective
Deep focus on cost engineering and lifecycle control
However, these frameworks were not designed exclusively for Project Controls.
As a result, Project Controls often sits:
As a subset of project management
Or a specialism within cost engineering
But rarely as a fully defined, end-to-end discipline in its own right
What's Missing?
Through industry discussions and practice, several gaps become evident:
Most frameworks address these elements — but often in silos.
Project Controls requires:
- A truly integrated model where cost, schedule, risk, and change are dynamically linked
This integration is still weakly defined and inconsistently applied
Current guidance leans heavily on processes and techniques.
What's less developed is:
- How insights are translated into decisions
- How Project Controls influences outcomes
- The role of Project Controls as a decision enabler, not just a reporting function
Modern Project Controls is fundamentally data-driven, yet:
- There is limited guidance on data models, structures, and governance
- No clear standards on integration across systems
- Minimal focus on single source of truth principles
This is a critical gap — especially in an AI-enabled future.
Unlike project management, there is:
- No widely accepted Project Controls maturity model
- Limited benchmarks to assess capability across organisations
This makes it difficult to answer: "How mature is our Project Controls function?"
Project Controls still suffers from:
- Inconsistent role definitions globally
- Titles ranging from Planner → Cost Engineer → Project Controls Manager → Project Services
A unified Body of Knowledge could help:
- Define core competencies
- Establish clear career pathways
- Strengthen the identity of the profession
Current frameworks were not built for:
- AI-enabled analytics
- Automated data pipelines
- Digital twins and advanced simulation
Yet, this is where the discipline is heading.
A PCBOK must address: How technology augments Project Controls — without diluting its quantitative foundation.
Project Controls varies significantly across:
There is a need for a common foundation with sector-specific adaptability.
Why This Matters Now
The need for a PCBOK is not academic — it is practical.
As projects become larger, more complex, and more data-driven, organisations are asking:
How do we ensure consistent, reliable, and predictable delivery?
Without a unified framework, we risk:
- Continued fragmentation of practices
- Inconsistent capability development
- Slower professional advancement
What Could a PCBOK Enable?
A well-defined Project Controls Body of Knowledge could:
Establish a global standard for the discipline
Provide a common language across industries and regions
Enable consistent maturity assessment
Support education, certification, and career pathways
Integrate data, analytics, and AI into core practice
Final Thought
This is not about replacing existing frameworks.
It's about complementing them — by giving Project Controls the clarity, structure, and recognition it deserves as a discipline.
Project Management defines how we deliver. Project Controls determines whether we will succeed.
Perhaps it's time we formalised that distinction.
