Program Recovery
Programs don't fail at go-live. They erode — governance loosens, decisions get deferred, scope expands without trade-offs. By the time leadership acts, the cost of recovery is already compounding. Stabilizing critical systems and eliminating operational drag for companies navigating high-growth thresholds.
Recognizing the Problem
Most organizations don't search for program recovery. They describe symptoms. One of these is a warning; three or more is a pattern that won't self-correct.
Go-live dates have moved more than once without a credible re-baseline.
Delivery teams are busy but rework is increasing, not decreasing.
Executive sponsors are disengaging or escalating past program leadership.
The SI relationship has become adversarial or contractually defensive.
Scope keeps expanding but nobody is retiring trade-offs.
Status reporting no longer reflects what people say in the corridor.
Supporting details
How we deliver value
Recovery requires someone who can see the program as it actually is — not as it's being reported, not as the vendor describes it, and not as leadership hopes it will resolve itself.
When Ginger is involved, the picture becomes honest fast. What's broken gets separated from what's working. The decisions that have been deferred get made. Leadership leaves with a recovery position they can take to the board — not a revised timeline built on the same assumptions that created the problem.
In recovery engagements, Ginger often steps in as interim client-side program leadership — assuming the PMO function from your side of the table, resetting vendor dynamics, and driving the program to a defensible outcome. This is not staff augmentation; it is experienced operators taking accountability for recovery when internal capacity or credibility has eroded.
The entry point
A structured 10-day independent assessment. No engagement scope, no commitment beyond the diagnostic.
You leave with a clear, honest picture of where the program actually stands and what recovery genuinely requires. If recovery support is warranted, we'll say so. If the program is healthier than it feels, we'll say that too.
Illustrative example
An example
A large-scale ERP implementation had stalled six months past its original go-live. Three workstreams were in rework and executive sponsorship had fragmented. Within 30 days of Ginger's involvement, a recovery plan was in place — re-baselined milestones, restored alignment, and a revised vendor rhythm. The program reached go-live within four months of intervention.
What you get
A Defensible Recovery Plan
A recovery plan leadership can defend — not an optimistic re-baseline built on the same assumptions that created the problem.
Reset Dynamics
Decision authority and vendor dynamics reset before they do further damage.
Credible Narrative
A board and executive narrative grounded in what's actually happening — and a credible path forward.
Frequently asked questions
What is program recovery?
Program recovery is independent, client-side intervention for a transformation or ERP program that has stalled, slipped past go-live more than once, or lost executive confidence. Ginger diagnoses what is actually happening, resets governance and vendor dynamics, and drives the program to a defensible outcome.
How is this different from adding more consultants or staff augmentation?
It is not staff augmentation. Ginger often steps in as interim client-side program leadership — taking accountability for recovery from your side of the table, managing the system integrator, and forcing the decisions that have been deferred. The mandate is your outcome, not billable hours or protecting a vendor's scope.
How does recovery start, and what does it cost to begin?
The entry point is a structured 10-day independent assessment, with no engagement scope or commitment beyond the diagnostic. You leave with an honest picture of where the program stands and what recovery genuinely requires — and if recovery support isn't warranted, we'll say so.
When should we call for help?
Most organizations describe symptoms rather than asking for recovery by name: go-live dates moving more than once, rework increasing instead of decreasing, sponsors disengaging, an adversarial SI relationship, or status reports that no longer match what people say in the corridor. One is a warning; three or more is a pattern that won't self-correct.