Many large, complex projects cut across organisational structures that work for organisations when they are in ‘business-as-usual’ mode – project success requires multiple organisations to voluntarily collaborate and work together in he interests of delivering the project, and therefore to not focus solely on their organisational interests.

There are of course, numerous benefits that can arise from organisations jointly working on projects – such as capitalising on complementary assets and skills, sharing costs and resources, diluting risk, and learning from the good (and bad) practices of others. It is however inherent that joint working means more than one organisation has the right to make decisions that affect the project as a whole, and so no single organisation has exclusive control. Such projects are deemed to be co-owned, and it is the challenge of how to govern the project in such circumstances, to the satisfaction of different boards, that this guide attempts to answer.

I have had the privilege of working on a number of complex yet successful programmes – including both the London 2012 Games, and delivering the long term legacy from them – which can be regarded as co-owned. When we established the governance arrangements for 2012 we could not apply traditional project governance approaches as they generally assume a single sponsor/ owner and therefore would not adequately address co-ownership. Significant time, effort and indeed trial and error went into setting up and refining the vernance arrangements to address the complexities that co-ownership brings. This guide would have helped our journey and I am sure will help others facing similar challenges.

This guide is succinct and is helpful to boards and their advisors by providing a set of underlying principles and associated considerations that can be assessed and applied.

David Goldstone CBE

Chief executive

London Legacy Development Corporation