Industry
Defence
We work inside defence-facing projects where governance, accountability and a defensible schedule position matter as much as the delivery itself.
- Industry · Procurement · CapabilityProject types
- AS 4817 / EIA-748Aligned to
- Stand-up to close-outEngagement scope
- Eligible on requestClearance
What we bring
Assurance-ready controls across the project tier
Defence projects are run on assurance frameworks that scrutinise schedule, cost and risk at every stage. We bring the discipline that holds up to that scrutiny - and the records position that supports the case end-to-end.
Assurance-ready baselines
Baselines, EVM and reporting structured to the standards independent reviewers will apply - AS 4817 and EIA-748 principles.
Governance-aware reporting
Stage gates, approvals and accountability chains reflected in the schedule and the reporting cadence, not bolted on at audit.
Long-cycle discipline
Decades-long capability projects managed with the records and rebaselining discipline they need to stay defensible across leadership changes.
How we engage
Embedded inside the controls function
Defence projects are not run by parachuted reviews. We sit inside the controls team - aligned to the governance cadence and the assurance expectations.
Assess the controls state
Map what is in place across schedule, cost, change and risk - and where the reconciliation breaks down against the assurance framework.
Stand up the baseline
Performance Measurement Baseline established, control accounts framed, and reporting cadence aligned to the project’s governance tier.
Run the monthly cycle
Status, EAC, change, risk and reporting - owned end-to-end alongside the project team, on the rhythm assurance and steering expect.
Lift the team
Templates, training and documented procedures left behind so the project's controls function can sustain the discipline.
Where this bites
The moments defence schedules face hardest scrutiny
Project reviews rarely surprise the controls team that did the work. They surprise the one that did not. Here is where we are usually engaged.
Stage-gate readiness
A gate review is coming. The baseline, the EVM data and the change record have to evidence readiness - not assert it.
EVM challenge
An independent reviewer questions CPI/SPI calculations or the integrity of the baseline. Reconstructing under pressure is not an option.
Leadership transition
A long project changes leadership mid-cycle. The records and reporting have to make sense to incoming sponsors without translation.
What good looks like
Outcomes that hold up to assurance review
- A baseline that survives independent review
- EVM and reporting aligned to AS 4817 / EIA-748 principles
- Stage-gate readiness evidenced, not asserted
- Records and change history that support audit end-to-end
FAQ
Common questions about our defence work
Build a controls position assurance can defend.
Tell us where the schedule, the EVM cycle or the assurance position is sitting today - we'll put a senior practitioner on a short call and map what good looks like for your project.