Industrial infrastructure programs depend on coordinated decisions across engineering, procurement, construction, utilities, and operational readiness. Project controls generate information about these activities, but information improves delivery only when its meaning, ownership, and route to action are established. This structured narrative review examines the governance arrangements needed to connect project controls with accountable intervention in Saudi industrial infrastructure programs. Research on project governance, megaproject delivery, organizational maturity, digital information, and Saudi construction performance is considered alongside authoritative estimating and scheduling guidance. The synthesis proposes a framework linking decision authority, controlled baselines, contractor reporting, change assessment, interface management, and independent assurance. Its central argument is that governance should be assessed through the quality and timeliness of decisions rather than the number of reports, committees, or approvals produced. Two analytical tables and two original figures translate the argument into an operating model and an evaluation approach. An arithmetic illustration shows how unresolved decisions can accumulate when review capacity remains below incoming demand. The proposed mechanisms are relevant to complex industrial programs, but their effect has not been tested against an implementation dataset. The paper concludes that reliable governance requires traceable information, clear escalation, proportionate review, and feedback establishing whether approved actions actually address delivery constraints.