Deadlines are confirmed before resources are checked
A date has been promised to an external or internal customer, but capacity, materials, staff and contractors have not yet been checked against that commitment.
Functional plans can exist, but do not form a single executable plan.
Priorities change manually
The sequence of work is reviewed by operational instructions without assessing the consequences for other orders and projects.
Shortages are identified late
Material, machinery, specialist or repair windows are not available at the start of the work, although the risk could be seen in advance.
Status is prepared separately
Management gets a picture of performance through meetings and summary materials, rather than from the actual progress of work.
Why this happens
Sales confirms a delivery date to the customer. Production sets its own sequence of work, procurement handles separate requests, projects compete for the same resources, and maintenance changes capacity utilisation without prior coordination.
Without a shared plan, the company continually revises the sequence of work. Priorities change through immediate instructions without assessing their consequences, shortages emerge just before work begins, and a separate status update is prepared for each meeting.
There are functional plans, but the overall executable plan does not add up.
The variance becomes visible when the choice is already limited by the postponement, additional costs or volume reduction.
The operating model turns commitments into a workable plan
A workable plan
What can the company really accomplish?
Demand, orders, projects, repairs and service obligations are compared with capacities, materials, resources and timelines.
Planning horizons, constraints, sequence, and admissible replanning rules
Constraint owners
Who is responsible for eliminating the risk of execution?
Each constraint has an owner: production, procurement, projects, maintenance, service, a site or a function.
Participant roles, constraint owners, escalation rules and accountability for action.
Control of variances
How does the plan return to execution?
A variance is assessed by its cause, impact on the commitment, time available and permissible actions.
Statuses, thresholds of variances, format of operational meetings and procedure for adjusting the plan.
More about the model
The operating model defines how commitments are delivered: planning horizons and levels, priority rules, capacity, material and staffing constraints, permissible replanning limits, recording of actual progress and escalation procedures.
Operational control needs to show more than status. Each significant variance has a recorded cause, owner, available time and permitted actions. Operational meetings focus on removing constraints that put delivery commitments at risk.
How we build an operating model for execution
The scope depends on the business, while the approach stays consistent: trace the commitment through delivery, check constraints, define execution rules and establish regular handling of variances.
Trace the path from demand to outcome
We analyse the full path of an order, project or service obligation: from confirmation of the deadline to actual execution.
More about our work
Starting point
Commercial, production, design and service plans exist separately and do not show the full path of commitment.
What we do
We document planning levels, handovers, constraint owners, statuses, inputs and rules for changing priorities.
How to check the results
It is clear where the obligation arises, who confirms it, what restrictions need to be checked and where there is a risk of non-performance.
Comparison of demand, capacity and resources
The plan is tested for feasibility before the commitment is accepted or modified.
More about our work
Starting point
Timings are confirmed before inspection of capacity, materials, manpower, contractors or financial constraints.
What we do
We link commercial forecast, order portfolio, available capacity, materials, manpower, contractors and financial constraints.
How to check the results
Each significant commitment shows required resources, shortages and their impact on the deadline.
Define rules for release, sequencing and rescheduling
The sequence of work follows agreed priority rules and impact assessments, rather than changing through verbal instructions.
More about our work
Starting point
Priorities are changed manually, and the consequences for other orders, projects or repairs are not fixed.
What we do
We define work release, dispatching, sequencing, rescheduling limits and constraint ownership.
How to check the results
Each priority change has a rationale, an owner and an assessment of its impact on other commitments.
Establish the operational cadence and variance management
Operational control shows not only the status, but also the cause of the variance, the owner and the action available.
More about our work
Starting point
Execution status is prepared for the meeting manually, and variances are discussed without a single format of cause and action.
What we do
Determine indicators, thresholds of escalation, composition of operational meetings, format of analysis of variances and order of corrective actions.
How to check the results
Each significant variance has a defined cause, owner, action deadline and impact on the commitment.
Services within this practice
Project formats and results: from the operating model and S&OP to the implementation of planning, logistics, WMS, MRO and execution control systems.
Operating model assessment
A map of gaps between demand, capacity, materials, resources, deadlines and commitments, showing where constraints are not visible in advance and execution depends on manual coordination.
Designing a planning and execution model
A target approach to managing commitments: how activities are planned, resources allocated, dates confirmed, constraints recorded and decisions made when resources are insufficient.
Building the S&OP process
A regular cycle aligning sales, operations, inventory, capacity, procurement and the financial implications of decisions, with a clear calendar, roles and escalation rules.
Implementing planning and execution management systems
A working planning and dispatch framework: orders, production tasks, project activities, resources, constraints, status, actual execution and corrective actions.
Digitalising logistics, WMS and inventory management
A target warehouse and logistics environment: requirements, procurement, deliveries, put-away, picking, shipping, stock balances, shortages and the link between inventory and the execution plan.
Implementing maintenance and asset management
An asset operations model: equipment criticality, maintenance plans, repair resources, requests, status, downtime and the effect of technical condition on delivery commitments.
What the management team receives
Execution map from demand to result
The path of an order, project or service commitment, with handovers, statuses and constraint owners.
Planning model
Horizons, planning levels, priority rules, allowable replanning boundaries.
Verification of feasibility of the plan
The relationship between demand, capacity, materials, labour, contractors and financial constraints.
Constraint management rules
Procedures for work release, sequencing, dispatching, recording actuals and assessing consequences.
Operational rhythm
Composition of operational meetings, indicators, thresholds of escalation and format of corrective actions.
Requirements for execution systems
Requirements for ERP, APS, project management, dispatching or MRO, formed from the actual execution model.
What changes in execution management
Results are visible in the ability to identify a constraint early, assess its impact and take action before a deadline is missed, as well as in the status of work.
Early detection of variancesVariances become visible before the available actions are limited.
Starting point
Management learns about the shortfall or risk of a deadline immediately before the start of work.
What's changing
Data on the deficit and its impact are available up to the commitment date.
How to check the results
Each risk shows the deadline, resource, order or project affected and the actions still available.
Constraint-based planThe plan is checked against real capacity, materials, manpower, contractors and time.
Starting point
Functional plans are formed separately and do not show the overall feasibility of obligations.
What's changing
Demand is correlated with capacity, materials, manpower, contractors and available time.
How to check the results
It is clear for the commitment which restrictions are checked and where the deficit arises.
Managed replanningA change in priority has a basis and an assessment of the consequences.
Starting point
Priorities change through operational instructions without recording the impact on other orders and projects.
What's changing
Replanning is carried out according to established rules with the owner and assessment of consequences.
How to check the results
Each priority change records its cause, initiator, affected commitments and expected impact.
A shared cycle across functionsSales, production, supply, projects, repairs and finance all work with one picture of execution.
Starting point
Functions keep their own plans and check them manually at meetings.
What's changing
Functions operate in a general cycle of planning, control and escalation.
How to check the results
The status of the order, project or repair is formed from the overall execution model, and not from individual reports.
Scalable executionNew sites and subdivisions are connected to a single execution model.
Starting point
The rules for launching, dispatching and controlling depend on individual managers and local practices.
What's changing
The rules of planning, dispatching, control and work with variances are applied uniformly.
How to check the results
The new site is connected to the general planning horizons, statuses, indicators and rules of escalation.
When this practice is especially useful
This practice is needed when commitments to customers, projects or production change faster than the company can align resources and constraints.
Deadlines are confirmed before resources are checked
The company accepts the obligations before checking the feasibility of the plan.
More details
- Customer deadlines are confirmed before checking capacity, materials or project resources
- Commercial plan is not matched with production restrictions
- Resource deficits are identified after the commitment
- Postponement becomes the main method of reaction
- The financial consequences of the breach are assessed late.
Daily replanning
Production or project plans change constantly, but the consequences are not recorded
More details
- Priorities change according to operational guidelines
- The reasons for the change in sequence are not documented
- Impact on other orders and projects is not assessed
- The deficit is compensated by manual coordination.
- Managers receive different versions of their status
Competition for resources
Multiple orders, projects or repairs compete for the same resources.
More details
- Projects compete for specialists, equipment or contractors
- Critical material is not available at the beginning of the work
- Inventory grows while required items remain in short supply
- Repairs disrupt the production calendar
- Resource plan is not related to business priorities
Management through meetings
Execution status is collected manually for each meeting
More details
- The actual progress is not visible from the systems.
- status is prepared by separate reports
- The reasons for variances are discussed without a single format.
- The owner of the corrective action is not always determined.
- Escalation occurs late when choice is already limited.
This practice in projects
