How do we report one status across predictive and adaptive workstreams?
Incompatible progress measuresUse shared outcome, milestone, risk, and decision information while preserving each workstream's relevant detail. Do not average story points and percentage complete into a meaningless score.
What to do now
- Define common program outcomes
- Map workstream evidence to those outcomes
- Show forecasts and dependencies consistently
- Retain method-specific detail below the summary
When to escalate
Escalate when
The combined report conceals a critical readiness gap.
Who decides
The delivery owner and relevant governance authority
Example
The program reports whether each integrated capability is ready, regardless of how its teams planned the work.
Mistake to avoid
Creating one numerical progress score from incompatible measures.
Prevent a repeat
Check whether governance decisions use real delivery evidence rather than forcing incompatible reporting rituals.
Suggested ApprovedFlow setup
- Projects
- Tasks
- Documents
- Approvals
Keep decision milestones and iterative task work connected, with explicit evidence required at each approved gate. See the platform
Related cases
- Can one project use different methods in different workstreams?Tailored delivery coordination
- Who owns integration in a hybrid program?Missing end-to-end accountability
- AI writes our status report but sometimes invents progress. How do we stop it?Ungrounded generated reporting
- How do we show agile progress to executives without misleading percentages?Outcome-focused adaptive reporting