Programme 1
Operating Performance Improvement
A structured approach to improving operational and financial performance: size the opportunity, find the root causes, design and prioritise interventions, and deliver them under leadership Decision Gates.
Outcomes
What you walk away with
- A sized, prioritised view of where value is lost.
- Tested root causes.
- An owned implementation plan.
- Leadership control through two Decision Gates.
- Internal consultants who can lead the next round.
Three formats
Choose the depth you need
| Format | Best for | What it is like | Output |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2-day programme | Leadership teams and senior managers | The full OPI method in two days, ending with a half-day working session on your own situation. | Leaders who understand the method and their Decision Gate role, and a sharper situational assessment of their own business. |
| 5-day programme | Managers and improvement teams | The same content expanded into five days, with many more exercises, case studies and simulations. | Participants who can apply every OPI tool on a realistic case. |
| 15-day project-based programme | Future internal consultants | Three five-day workshops over about six months, applied to a large live improvement project and reviewed at two Decision Gates. | A delivered improvement project and a cohort of internal consultants. |
The 2-day programme
Diagnose, design, apply
| Session | Modules | Focus |
|---|---|---|
| Day 1: Diagnose the performance gap | OPI overview · Financial Logic Tree · Overall Equipment Effectiveness · Value Matrix · Root cause analysis | Size the gap and find its root causes |
| Day 2 morning: Design the solution | Intervention brainstorming · Prioritization Matrix · Influence Model · Project management | Choose, prioritise and plan the interventions |
| Day 2 afternoon: Apply it | Working session with your leaders | Fine-tune your situational assessment: agree the financial levers and OEE elements so the Value Matrix is clear and precise |
The 5-day programme
Every tool, practised on a realistic case
| Day | Topics | Exercises and simulations |
|---|---|---|
| Day 1 | OPI overview · Financial Logic Tree | Build a personal-finance logic tree, then an FLT for a case company |
| Day 2 | OEE · Value Matrix and Value Map | OEE exercise on a leased asset; build an as-is and target Value Matrix and its Value Map |
| Day 3 | Root cause analysis | Rewrite weak problem statements as SMART ones; 5 Whys case; maintenance case with evidence cards; trim the tree; fix test; group the root causes |
| Day 4 | Intervention design | Brainstorming, brainwriting, “How might we…?” and reverse brainstorming; Prioritization Matrix and Influence Model exercises; Decision Gate role-play |
| Day 5 | Project management and simulation | Work breakdown structure and critical path; Work Plan with the 10 features; end-to-end business simulation presented to a mock Decision Gate panel |
The 15-day project-based programme
A completely different learning experience
Fifteen days of workshops, each applied straight away to a live improvement project. Three five-day workshops run over about six months, with guided project work and regular coaching check-ins in between, then a two-day capstone and graduation.
The focus shifts from tools to people as teams move into implementation, building four leadership dimensions: Lead Self, Lead Others, Lead Business and Lead Change.
First cohorts are trained and guided on real projects. Later, graduates sponsor and advise new teams, so the organisation leads its own improvement.
Workshop by workshop
Hard skills and soft skills, side by side
| Workshop | Hard skills | Soft skills | Milestone |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Assess the situation | OPI overview, business simulation, FLT, OEE, Value Matrix, Excel, data to charts | Personality profiling, interviewing, influencing, feedback and coaching, time management, leading teams | Situational assessment |
| 2. Test root causes | Root cause problem solving, intervention brainstorming, Prioritization Matrix, Influence Model, Decision Gate, project work plan | Structuring communication, presenting with impact, creating a compelling change story | Decision Gate 1 |
| 3. Implement and measure | Performance measurement, institutional capability | Facilitation, management alignment, visual management, conflict management, performance dialogue | Decision Gate 2, then capstone |
The OPI framework
Situational Assessment to Implementation
Three phases and eight steps turn assessment findings into action.
| Phase | Steps | What happens |
|---|---|---|
| Condition | Leading the change · Organising for change · Mobilising people | Set up sponsorship, the project structure and the team. |
| Situational Assessment | Performance opportunity sizing and breakdown · Issue analysis and root cause analysis of key gaps | Find where value is lost, how much is at stake, and why. |
| Implementation | Intervention design · Implementation and skill transfer · Extending the change | Design and deliver the fixes, transfer the skills and spread the change. |
Decision Gates
Leaders stay in control
Decision Gate 1: Choose the direction
The team brings the baseline, the size of the opportunity and intervention options. Leaders decide whether the problem is worth solving and which area deserves deeper diagnosis.
Decision Gate 2: Approve implementation
The team brings tested root causes, the intervention plan, timeline, owners, benefits, risks and any budget. Leaders approve, amend or defer.
Capstone review
The team presents results against the baseline. Leaders decide to sustain, scale up or extend.
Problem solving
The 5-step root cause analysis
How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time. Break the problem down and start where you can act.
Define the problem
Write the problem as one plain statement of the gap, not a question, a cause, a solution or blame, then make it SMART.
Test: two people read it and picture the same gap.Start the actionable lever
Split the problem into its main branches and start where the gap is biggest and you can act. Park what you cannot influence.
MECE split · Can we influence it? · Is it big? · Do we have the data?Gather data and iterate the tree
Ask “Why?” about five times along each branch, backing every box with data. Cut branches the facts don’t support.
5 Whys tree · trim the treeTest
Read the tree back from the root cause: if we fix this, is the box before it solved?
Fix test · evidence test · MECE check · expert challengeGroup root causes
Sort each verified root cause into Leadership, Capability, Mindset & Behaviour or Technical.
The OPI toolkit
Tools that answer real questions
| Tool | What it is | Question it answers |
|---|---|---|
| Financial Logic Tree (FLT) | Breaks the income statement down to EBITDA and links it to the operational levers that drive it. | Which levers drive our bottom line, and where is value leaking? |
| Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE) | Availability × productivity × quality, shown as a waterfall of losses for any revenue-generating asset. | How much asset potential are we losing, and to what? |
| Value Matrix and Value Map | Sizes gaps across price, design and efficiency as Maximum and Target Potential Value. | How much is each lever worth, and what is realistic? |
| 5 Whys root cause tree | The 5-step root cause analysis above. | Why does the gap exist, and which causes are real? |
| Intervention brainstorming | Brainstorming, brainwriting (6-3-5), “How might we…?” and reverse brainstorming. | What could fix this root cause? |
| Prioritization Matrix | Impact to business against ease of implementation: do first, plan via a Decision Gate, test viability, or scrap. | What do we do first? |
| Influence Model | Role-modelling, understanding and conviction, talent and skills, and formal mechanisms. All four must be covered. | Will people actually change? |
| Project management | Scope, work breakdown structure, critical path and a Work Plan with ten features. | How will we deliver on time? |
From root causes to interventions
Four groups of root cause
| Group | The root cause is about | Test question | Example interventions |
|---|---|---|---|
| Leadership | Direction, ownership and accountability | Is it about who owns it, decides, sets priorities or follows up? | Named process owners; KPIs with performance dialogue; governance forum; Gemba walks; leader standard work |
| Capability | Knowledge, skills and authority | If they wanted to, could they do it right? | Training; on-the-job training; coaching; job shadowing; competency assessment |
| Mindset & Behaviour | Beliefs and habits | They know how, so why don’t they? | Recognition; make the problem visible; frontline co-design; peer accountability |
| Technical | Equipment, systems, tools, procedures | Would it still fail if everyone did their job perfectly? | Preventive and predictive maintenance; updated SOPs; critical spares; mistake-proofing; condition monitoring |
Using AI in OPI
Faster analysis, human decisions
| Where AI helps | How | Human check |
|---|---|---|
| Data preparation | Clean and combine maintenance logs, financials and production data; draft the first FLT and OEE loss waterfall. | Analysts confirm the numbers and assumptions. |
| Problem statements | Check a draft problem statement against SMART and suggest sharper versions. | The team agrees the final wording. |
| Root cause analysis | Search incident reports and work orders for patterns; suggest possible branches for the 5 Whys tree. | Every branch must be backed by data; the team runs the fix test. |
| Interventions | Generate long lists of intervention ideas per root cause; draft “How might we…?” questions. | The team scores ease and impact. |
| Planning and reporting | Draft Work Plans, Gantt charts and Decision Gate summaries. | Owners and leaders approve. |
Examples
What the method looks like in practice
Teaching cases used in the programme. Figures are illustrative, not client results.
IllustrativeEscalator downtime: out of service 14% of hours against a 3% target. Data cut three believable branches, and the root causes covered all four groups: no owner for the spares list, only day shift trained, firefighting praised over maintenance, and an out-of-date manual.
IllustrativeLate overnight maintenance: track possessions started late on 14 of 37 nights. It looked like a crew problem. The root causes were roles, authority and what management measured, and retraining the crew landed in the “scrap” quadrant.
IllustrativeLeased asset: raising OEE from 72% to 90% lifted EBITDA from about RM11.8 million to RM21.4 million in the Value Matrix.
Talk to us about your performance gap
Email our consulting advisor at advisor@oscarinitiatives.com or call +60 16 323 7799.