Most steering committees don't steer. They receive information, nod at status updates, and adjourn. The programme continues exactly as it was, with no meaningful decisions made and no accountability shifted.
I've sat in steering committees where a 40-page programme report was tabled, summarised in five minutes, and approved without a single substantive question. The same committee would then spend 20 minutes debating the format of the next report. Real issues were being managed elsewhere, in corridors and bilateral calls, because the governance forum wasn't safe or structured enough to surface them.
A steering committee that isn't making decisions isn't governing. It's performing governance. The difference matters enormously for programme outcomes.
What a Steering Committee Is Actually For
A steering committee exists to make decisions that the programme team cannot make themselves, and to provide the executive accountability that keeps the programme aligned to its strategic objectives.
That's it. Everything else, status updates, progress reports, workstream summaries, is context for decision-making, not the purpose of the meeting.
The Three Things Every SteerCo Should Do
1. Make decisions. Every meeting should have a decision log. If a steering committee meets and makes no decisions, it either means the programme has no issues worth escalating (unlikely) or the governance structure is filtering problems before they reach the people who can resolve them (almost certain).
2. Review risk, not just status. Status tells you where the programme is. Risk tells you where it's going. A steering committee that spends most of its time on status updates is looking backwards. The forward-looking conversation, what could derail the programme, what decisions need to be made now to prevent problems later, is where steering committees add genuine value.
3. Hold the programme accountable to outcomes, not outputs. The question isn't whether the workstreams are on plan. The question is whether the programme is still on track to deliver the business case. Those are different questions, and conflating them is one of the most common governance failures in enterprise programmes.
The Signs of a Dysfunctional Steering Committee
Most steering committees know they're not working well. The signs are visible to anyone paying attention.
Reports are too long and too detailed. A 40-page steering pack is a sign that nobody has decided what the steering committee actually needs to know. Good governance packs are short, structured, and exception-based.
The same issues appear month after month. If an issue has been on the risk register for three consecutive meetings without resolution, the governance structure isn't working.
Attendance is inconsistent. When senior stakeholders start sending deputies, it's a signal that they don't see the meeting as valuable. That's a governance design problem, not a diary problem.
Decisions are made outside the meeting. If the real decisions are being made in bilateral calls before the steering committee, the committee is a ratification exercise, not a governance function.
Nobody disagrees with anything. Genuine governance involves challenge. If every recommendation is approved without question, either the programme is running perfectly (rare) or people don't feel safe raising concerns in the room (common).
How to Run a Steering Committee That Actually Works
| Agenda Item | Time | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| Programme health summary | 5 mins | Exception-based: red and amber items only |
| Key risks and decisions required | 15 mins | Forward-looking: what needs to be decided today |
| Strategic alignment check | 10 mins | Is the programme still aligned to business objectives? |
| Actions and accountability | 5 mins | Who is doing what before the next meeting |
A steering pack should be no longer than eight to ten pages, leading with a one-page executive summary. Every section should be exception-based: if something is green and on track, it gets one line. If something is amber or red, it gets a paragraph and a recommended decision.
According to Gartner's research on IT programme governance, poor governance is cited as a contributing factor in over 80% of large IT programme failures. The steering committee is the most visible governance mechanism on any programme. When it fails, everything downstream fails with it.
If your steering committee is performing governance rather than doing it, a governance reset is usually faster and less disruptive than it sounds. Our team has restructured steering governance on live programmes without breaking delivery momentum. Book a 30-minute discovery call.