Governance Assurance & Capital Stewardship
GDI for Feasibility & Decision
Forward governance insight before capital is committed
- Home
- > Governance decision intelligence
- > Feasibility & decision
Feasibility & Decision as a Governance Priority
From identification to focused owner-side governance
Feasibility approval establishes the basis for proceeding, but it does not guarantee that the capital, cost, schedule and production outcomes implied at approval will ultimately be realised. As projects progress toward design, procurement and execution, commitments escalate rapidly and the ability to correct foundational decisions diminishes. Governance Decision Intelligence (GDI) provides independent, owner-side governance insight at this critical stage by maintaining forward visibility over whether approved feasibility intent is likely to remain aligned with evolving conditions as commitments form. Operating above studies, advisors and delivery structures, GDI supports early owner awareness while optionality remains available and exposure remains governable.
Purpose and Intent
To govern the quality, authority and defensibility of feasibility and pre-commitment decisions before capital is committed, ensuring approved intent remains aligned with evolving conditions and owner accountability is preserved as commitments form.
Governance Pressure
Governance Gap
Mandate Activated
Governance Pressure
Governance Pressure
Where exposure begins to concentrate
| Where pressure concentrates | As approved feasibility intent is translated into binding scope, risk and commercial commitments, optionality reduces rapidly ahead of capital commitment. |
| Why it matters | Decisions at this stage shape long-term owner exposure before execution performance reveals whether assumptions will hold under real conditions. |
| Owner exposure | Accountability, capital, schedule and production exposure can harden early, limiting the ability to correct foundational decisions once commitments are made. |
Governance Gap
Governance Gap
Where decisions harden without sufficient governance
| What becomes under-governed | Decision authority, assumption defensibility and alignment between approved feasibility intent and emerging commitments. |
| Typical gap | Feasibility decisions progress into binding commitments without sufficient owner-side governance over how assumptions will perform as conditions evolve. |
| Consequence if unaddressed | Loss of decision defensibility, erosion of board confidence and exposure embedded before execution risk becomes visible or reversible. |
Mandate Activated
Governance Mandate Activated
Formal owner-side governance is now applied
| Activation Basis | GDI confirms that feasibility decisions and commitments require formal owner-side governance to preserve authority and defensibility before capital commitment. |
| Mandate applied | A Decision Governance mandate is activated to govern decision authority, assumption integrity and alignment between approved intent, risk and commercial positions. |
| Owner outcome | Decisions relied upon by owners, boards and financiers remain transparent, auditable and defensible, without replacing feasibility studies, advisors or delivery teams. |