Approval-Ready Business Cases: The 12 Elements Executives Expect (and Why Cases Get Sent Back)

Many business cases don’t fail because the idea is bad. They fail because the case is not approval-ready.

Across the business cases we review, a frequent pattern is that at least three of the 12 approval-ready elements are missing or under-developed, which reduces approval confidence and drives revision cycles.

Executives and finance leaders assess business cases quickly. They look for clarity of the decision-recommendation, the evidence and defensible logic, and for implementation success. When a case doesn’t clear the approval bar, it’s sent back for “more detail,” “clearer numbers,” or “a better implementation and change management plan”—which typically means rework, delays, and lost momentum.

This article gives you a practical standard: the 12 elements decision-makers expect in an approval-ready business case, plus the most common reasons cases get returned and how to fix them.

What “approval-ready” actually means

An approval-ready business case enables a decision-maker to say yes (or no) with confidence because it provides:

• A clear decision request and rationale
• Credible strategy, evidence and assumptions
• Comparable options and a defensible recommendation
• Financial and non-financial benefits that stand up to scrutiny
• A delivery plan that reduces execution risk

If your case reads like a narrative pitch without the structure, strategy and evidence, it will be returned.

The 12 elements executives expect

1) Clear decision statement (the “ask”)

What they expect: A one-sentence decision request that is unambiguous.
Why cases get sent back: The ask is buried or vague (“seeking support,” “requesting consideration”).
Fix: Structure and frame the case for decision-making, state what approval is required, why now, how much, by when, and for what scope.

2) A compelling case for change (why now)

What they expect: The business problem/opportunity, consequences of inaction, and the trigger for action now.
Why cases get sent back: It describes the situation but not the cost of doing nothing.
Fix: Quantify pain where possible (cost, time, risk exposure, revenue leakage) and make urgency explicit.

3) Strategic alignment (why this matters)

What they expect: Direct linkage to strategic priorities, KPIs, and current commitments.
Why cases get sent back: Generic alignment statements (“supports our strategy”).
Fix: Map to specific strategic objectives and measurable outcomes.

4) Scope and boundaries (what is included/excluded)

What they expect: What you will deliver, what you will not, and what assumptions define scope.
Why cases get sent back: Scope creep risk and unclear deliverables.
Fix: Define inclusions/exclusions, dependencies, and constraints in plain language.

5) Stakeholders and customers (who benefits and who must support)

What they expect: Who is impacted, who owns outcomes, and who must endorse.
Why cases get sent back: No owner, no change impacts, no change management and stakeholder plan.
Fix: Identify key stakeholders, impacts, change management and who will sign off at each stage.

6) Options analysis (a real choice set)

What they expect: Typically, 3 options (including a do minimum and a do-nothing options), compared using consistent criteria.
Why cases get sent back: Only one option is presented, or not all feasible options are evaluated (a “you are recommending the option you want decision”).
Fix: All feasible options should be genuinely evaluated (not strawmen) and include trade-offs.

7) Recommended option (and why it wins)

What they expect: A clear recommendation, with justification tied to objectives, benefits, costs, and risk.
Why cases get sent back: Recommendation is preference-based rather than strategy and evidence-based.
Fix: Link the recommendation to the weighted criteria and benefits logic.

8) Benefits case (measurable outcomes, not promises)

What they expect: Benefits that are defined and defendable, measurable, time-bound, and owned.
Why cases get sent back: Benefits are aspirational (“improve efficiency”) without defendable evidence-based measures.
Fix: Use a benefits register: benefit → measure → baseline → target → timeframe → owner.

9) Cost and investment model (complete and transparent)

What they expect: Full costs (Capex/Opex, internal effort, change, risk allowances), timing, and confidence.
Why cases get sent back: Only vendor costs are listed; internal and change costs are missing.
Fix: Show total cost of ownership and highlight key cost drivers over the full lifecycle.

10) Financial evaluation (how value is proven)

What they expect: Appropriate financial model over the full lifecycle, including funding and metrics for the context—ROI, NPV, payback—plus sensitivity.
Why cases get sent back: Numbers exist but assumptions are unclear or fragile.
Fix: Make assumptions explicit and include at least one sensitivity scenario e.g., low/likely/high demand; benefits delayed by 3 months; costs +10%. See our article on financial modelling.

11) Risk and mitigation (what could derail this)

What they expect: The material risks, mitigations, owners, and governance controls.
Why cases get sent back: Risk is generic and not tied to the option or delivery approach.
Fix: Focus on “decision-recommendation” risks: delivery, adoption, compliance, cost escalation, benefits realisation.

12) Implementation roadmap and governance (how this will be successfully delivered)

What they expect: Milestones, resourcing, dependencies, and decision gates.
Why cases get sent back: There’s no credible path to implementation success.
Fix: Provide a minimum roadmap (phases, milestones, owners, change management, governance cadence).

The 6 most common reasons business cases get returned

If you want a quick diagnostic, most returns fall into these patterns:

1. The ask is unclear (what decision is being requested?)
2. No true options analysis (only one path presented)
3. Benefits are not measurable or owned or are overstated (optimism bias)
4. Costs are incomplete (missing internal/change/ongoing costs)
5. Assumptions are hidden (numbers can’t be trusted)
6. No delivery confidence (weak roadmap, unclear governance and change management, unmanaged risk)

If you fix these six, your approval probability rises materially.

Use this as your approval-ready self-review

Before you circulate your next business case, test it with these questions:

• Can a busy executive understand the decision ask in 30 seconds?
• Are there credible options (including do nothing) and a fair comparison?
• Are benefits measurable and owned, with baselines and targets?
• Do costs reflect full lifecycle and change impacts?
• Are assumptions explicit and defensible (with sensitivity)?
• Does the implementation roadmap reduce risk and show delivery confidence?

If any answer is “no,” your case is not yet approval ready.

Download: Approval-Ready Checklist + Review Scorecard (PDF)