The four gates worth keeping
Gate one, concept: is this worth planning at all? The input is a paragraph, the decision maker is the sponsor, the answer takes a day. Gate two, commitment: the charter and plan are ready, money and people are about to be spent, and this is the last cheap moment to say no. Gate three, midpoint: the plan has met reality, and the honest question is whether the remaining spend still buys the promised outcome. Gate four, closure: did we get what we paid for, and what does the next project inherit from this one?
Everything else that enterprises add, architecture gates, procurement gates, readiness gates, is a specialization of these four. Add them only when a real loss traces to their absence.
Decision rights, written down once
Most governance failures are ambiguity failures. Write one short table: for each gate, who decides, who must be consulted, and what the decision maker needs to see. In an SMB the sponsor decides gates one and two, sponsor plus the person paying decides gate three, and the sponsor decides gate four. Publishing that table once ends the meetings-about-meetings pattern, because nobody needs to negotiate who is in the room.
The market trend is with you here: modern governance practice has been shifting from committee consensus to named single accountable approvers, precisely because committees dilute the accountability gates exist to create.
The fifteen minute gate review
A gate review needs three inputs read in advance: the charter or its current delta, the milestone picture, and the top risks with asks. The meeting itself is three questions: what changed since we committed, what does it cost to continue versus stop, and what single decision unblocks the most? Decisions are logged, the gate is stamped, everyone leaves. Fifteen minutes is enough when the material is honest, and the material becomes honest when teams learn the review is short and decisions actually happen.
Gates are built into the PMO Desk, not bolted on
The PMO Desk carries governance and stage gates natively: each project moves through named gates, the charter and plan attach to the gate record, and pending decisions surface on My Day until they are made. Steering packs assemble themselves from the live project record, so the fifteen minute review starts prepared.
Velora drafts the gate summary and flags what changed since the last gate, which turns governance from paperwork into a reading exercise. Included from the Plus membership on the workspace built for small and midsize companies.
Frequently asked questions
How many gates should a small company use?
Four: concept, commitment, midpoint and closure. Fewer loses the cheap stopping points; more adds ceremony that small teams will route around.
Who should own a gate decision?
One named person per gate, normally the sponsor, with the budget owner joining at the midpoint. Committees dilute the accountability the gate exists to create.
Do stage gates conflict with agile delivery?
No. Gates decide whether the investment continues; agile decides how the team delivers between gates. Keeping those concerns separate is what makes both work.