When $100 Million Technology Projects Fail, It’s the Board’s Fault—Every Single Time

2. January 2025
Kategorien
Subscribe to our newsletter

In Switzerland, rumors suggest that both Bank Julius Bär and Raiffeisen Schweiz are grappling with failed technology projects, each costing over $100 million so far. Bank Julius Bär is reportedly trying to replace its existing core banking system for the Swiss booking center with Temenos, while Raiffeisen Schweiz is attempting to build a modern e-banking app.  

Both organizations have allegedly hired third parties to review what went wrong and determine who’s to blame. While learning from failure and engaging external reviewers is sensible, the question of blame should already be crystal clear.  

When a multi-million-dollar technology project collapses under its own weight—costing shareholders, employees, and stakeholders dearly—there’s no escaping the brutal truth: the fault lies squarely with the board.  

You can explore my 20+ technology project failure case studies. Without exception, the boards involved failed to fulfill their responsibilities.  

The Board’s Job Is Oversight, Not Rubber-Stamping

Boards exist to govern. They approve strategy, allocate resources, and oversee risks. They are not passive observers—they are active stewards of an organization’s success. Yet in failed projects, it’s evident that many boards sleepwalk through their responsibilities. They fail to ask tough questions early, challenge overly optimistic assumptions, or ensure mechanisms are in place to detect and address problems before it’s too late.  

A board’s oversight role is not ceremonial. If a project spirals into disaster, the board either ignored the warning signs, delegated oversight to those ill-equipped for the job, or worse, never bothered to establish adequate checks in the first place.  

If a board lacks the expertise to fulfill its duties, it must seek external help. This could mean forming an advisory board with independent specialists or adding a temporary board member with the requisite expertise and experience. 

Failing Is Acceptable; Failing Late Is Not 

Failure is a natural part of innovation and growth. No board can eliminate risk entirely—nor should they try. But there’s a monumental difference between failing fast and failing late.  

Early failure allows a company to pivot, salvage resources, and preserve credibility. Late failure, on the other hand, is catastrophic. It burns cash, destroys morale, and erodes stakeholder trust.  

Boards must demand stage-gated project governance that clearly delineates when to proceed, pivot, or pull the plug. If a multi-million-dollar project reaches the point of no return before its inevitable demise, the board has failed in its primary responsibility—to safeguard the organization from reckless escalation.  

Why Boards Get It Wrong

So why do boards allow projects to go off the rails? Common reasons include:  

> Blind Faith in Leadership: Boards often rely too heavily on the CEO or project sponsor’s assurances. Trust is important, but blind faith is a recipe for disaster. A board’s role is to verify, not just trust.  

> Lack of Expertise: Some boards lack the technical or industry-specific knowledge to challenge assumptions. Instead of addressing this gap, they defer to management, undermining their oversight role.  

> Cognitive Biases: Boards are just as susceptible to biases as anyone else. The sunk cost fallacy, groupthink, and overconfidence often lead boards to double down on failing projects instead of cutting losses.  

> Weak Governance Processes: Many boards fail to establish robust governance frameworks for major projects. Without clear accountability, transparency, and regular checkpoints, projects are allowed to drift toward failure.  

The Path to Accountability  

To prevent future multi-million-dollar disasters, boards must:  

> Ask Hard Questions Early: Why are we doing this? What are the critical assumptions? What would make us stop? These questions must be asked before a single dollar is spent.  

> Insist on Independent Assurance: Boards should mandate independent audits and reviews for major projects. An objective view can often identify risks that insiders miss.  

> Monitor Progress Ruthlessly: Quarterly updates are not enough. Boards must demand real-time reporting on key metrics and intervene when milestones are missed.  

> Be Willing to Pull the Plug: The hardest decision for any board is to stop a failing project. But it’s also the most responsible one. Better to write off millions now than to lose billions later.  

In a Nutshell

When a multi-million-dollar project fails, the board cannot claim ignorance or absolve itself of responsibility. Failure at this scale is a governance failure, plain and simple. Boards that tolerate late-stage disasters are not just failing the organization—they’re failing every stakeholder who placed their trust in them.  

The lesson is simple: you can fail, but not that late. Boards must act as the last line of defense, ensuring that failure—when it happens—is swift, contained, and instructive. Anything less is negligence. 

That could also be of interest for you

Understanding and Managing Your Project’s Complexity

28. March 2020

One of the main reasons technology projects fail so often is their (underestimated) complexity. Managing this complexity should be an urgent concern for any organization doing large technology projects. Stephen Carver, Senior Lecturer at Cranfield School of Management created a simple but very useful tool to assess and help you manage project complexity. But before

Read more

Change Management and Your CAST of Characters

22. March 2020

There is a simple truth about projects. All projects result in change. Some projects bring about small modifications to the status quo, and others introduce a large-scale transformation. Many people in many roles will be affected by and instrumental in the change you’re promoting. It’s important to tend to their needs throughout the change journey. Here’s

Read more

How to Talk About Technology With Senior Executives

14. March 2020

One of the biggest hurdles that keeps senior executives from getting closer to technology is the complexity of today’s IT environments, further obscured by the endless stream of buzzwords, jargon, and product names. Working with executives over the last 15 years I realized that we can make it much easier for executives to “speak technology”

Read more

Raising Expectations and Performance

8. March 2020

We always compare performance on a relative basis. “Well, it’s better than it was last month…” My toddler son, for example, seems like a freaking genius compared to the baby he used to be. Some people around us have embraced a strategy of always lowering expectations so that mediocre effort is seen as acceptable. Over

Read more

More Leadership. Less Management.

29. February 2020

Why do so many projects continue to fail? An important aspect is the increased complexity of projects and the environments in which they are undertaken. Many factors contribute to this growing complexity – social and technological change, growing global interdependence, increasing numbers of stakeholders and the need to communicate and coordinate cross-culturally. Traditionally, a good

Read more

Projects Fail at the Beginning. And This is Why.

23. February 2020

Beginnings are always difficult. Projects are about people, people are about relationships, relationships are about trust, trust comes over time. So at the very moment your project is at its most vulnerable because you don’t have enough information, credible plans, nor stakeholder support, you also don’t have the relationships with key people to fall back

Read more

Project Success is a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy

16. February 2020

Project success is a self-fulfilling prophecy. Go around admitting doubt, and your project will fail. Tell everyone that it will succeed and they will believe it too, and you have every chance of getting there. You’re thinking it cannot be that simple? That it just sounds like self-help psycho-babble? All I can say is that

Read more

Project ≠ Product ≠ Business ≠ Company

9. February 2020

Last few weeks I had a number of heated discussions around these terms. People get confused and make wrong decisions because of this. This is my take on it. A project is a temporary endeavor undertaken to create a unique product, service or result. It is temporary in that it has a defined beginning and

Read more

Leadership Is Not for Cowards

3. February 2020

Fewer “bad leader” types have the capacity to paralyze a team more than a coward – the leader who praises poor performance, avoids difficult issues, and buys loyalty by saying yes to anyone and any idea. The dictionary defines the word coward, when used as a noun, as “a person who lacks courage in facing

Read more

What Makes a Good Project Manager?

27. January 2020

Over the years I’ve noticed a key distinction for project managers that deliver results and the ones that don’t. Project Manager Type A is a person who is very smart, knows the process, knows the business, knows the client, knows the technology, etc. They do an excellent job of reporting on how things are going,

Read more
PreviousNext