This article provides a practical framework for discussion. The right answer depends on the specific Dynamics 365 configuration, requirements and constraints of your organisation.
1. Milestones repeatedly move
A moving date is not automatically a crisis. Repeated movement without a clear root-cause response is different. It can indicate unresolved scope, weak decisions or delivery dependencies that are not being managed.
2. Customisation grows faster than standard design is being validated
If gaps are converted to development too quickly, the programme may be encoding assumptions before standard D365 capability has been properly challenged.
3. Key Finance requirements remain open late in delivery
Important accounting, reporting, tax, cash or control requirements should not still be ambiguous as the programme approaches UAT.
4. UAT is discovering requirements
UAT should validate the agreed solution. If users are defining fundamental requirements during testing, the design lifecycle has slipped.
5. Finance confidence falls while RAG status stays green
A programme can be technically on plan while operational confidence is deteriorating. Both signals matter.
6. Data ownership is unclear
Opening balances, master data and reconciliation require named owners, controls and evidence.
7. Spreadsheet workarounds are designed before go-live
Some spreadsheets are inevitable. A growing workaround estate before deployment can indicate unresolved design gaps.
8. Defects are closed without removing root causes
Repeated symptoms often point to a deeper issue in requirements, setup or integration.
9. Partner and customer disagree on issue classification
If every issue is debated as a defect, change request or requirement gap, governance and design ownership may be weak.
10. Go-live is being driven by calendar pressure
Dates matter, but go-live readiness should be evidence-based.
Use a focused review to separate root causes from symptoms and define the right next action.