WorkflowCapital Projects & Commissioning

Stage Gate Review

Stage gate review that reads the whole package, ties each assumption to every page that uses it, and shows the panel where a number has frayed.

See the demo Book a demo

Follow the panel from the wall to two signatures ↓

The problem

Nearly four thousand deliverables, and a panel that can read a few dozen

At the last gate before the board decides, the package runs to thousands of documents from every discipline. The panel samples what it can in the days it has. The project team scores itself against the gate criteria, and its score is mostly what the panel sees.

Assumptions travel. A water cut taken from one year of a forecast ends up in the design basis, the heat and material balance and the estimate. When the forecast is reissued late, after the freeze, nothing tells the people who sized the plant.

Built forGate coordinatorsGate panel chairsDiscipline leadsCost estimatorsBoard secretaries

The Problem Today

The largest decision a project takes rests on what a few people can sample.

35%: average cost growth on projects that started up published

Sampled by hand today

Documents
Criteria
Forecasts
Estimate

Scores the team gives itselfThe panel sees claims, rarely the page behind them
Late filingsA forecast reissued after the freeze changes nothing downstream

The Solution

The whole package readEach deliverable read, and each one that could not be is listed
Assumptions tied across pagesEach key number traced to every deliverable that uses it
Claimed beside readThe team’s score next to what the pages can prove
The panel decidesHolds with owners and dates; two signatures on the record

Built-in controls

Agents never vote or change a score
Open holds stop release of the record
Unread deliverables accepted by name

What You Get

The panel decides on what the package proves, and the board gets a record that says why.

Frayed numbers foundA changed assumption shows on every page it touches
Holds that stop somethingEach names an owner, a date and the order it stops
A record for the boardDecision, reasons, holds and signers in one place

Gate 3, the day of the panel

Stage gate review of a $2.4 billion offshore development at its last gate

An oil development with 28 new wells, a wellhead platform and a processing platform comes to its last gate before the board’s investment decision. The team recommends Go. Here is the gate, from the morning read to the panel’s signatures.

demoThe field, the project team, the panel and every figure here are sample data.

01Morning
186 assumptions tied across the package, and three strings frayed
Gate coordinator
The wall draws each key assumption on the left and the deliverables that use it on the right, one string for each use. Most agree. Five were re-tied after team replies. Three are frayed: the water cut in the design, the produced water design rate and the electrical peak load. All three come from one document, filed after the freeze.
02Morning
3,771 of 3,812 deliverables read, and the 41 that could not be are named
Gate coordinator
By hand, reading the package is 1,906 hours at 30 minutes each, so panels sample. Here the agents read every deliverable they could open, discipline by discipline. The 18 files they could not open, process simulation and 3D model files among them, and 23 register entries with no file are listed, each with a button to ask for it. Nothing unread is guessed at.
03Morning
The team claims 201 criteria met, and the pages prove 168
Gate coordinator
Each square is one gate criterion, claimed on the top row and read on the bottom. The team says 201 met, 13 partly, none not met. The pages prove 168, with 23 partly, 18 not proved and 5 contradicted. Of 33 claims read below the team’s score, 28 were settled by replies and 5 stay open.
04Morning
35% water cut in the design, 58% by year six in the new forecast
Gate coordinator
Pulling the water cut string lights every page it touches. The design basis, the heat and material balance and the basis of estimate all use 35%, the year-three figure. The reservoir forecast, reissued after the freeze and the first revision to run past the plateau, reaches 58% by year six.
05Morning
The water train takes 60,000 barrels a day, and the peak is 92,000
Gate coordinator
The thread sets out the sum step by step. At year three the design gives about 60,000 b/d of water. At year six the forecast gives about 92,000. If water stays capped at the train’s rating, oil has to be choked back. The agent never picks the right value; the forecast’s owner does, so the thread goes to her first.
069:16 am
The subsurface lead opens her forecast and confirms it stands
Subsurface lead
She opens the reservoir forecast page herself and confirms it: 58% water cut by year six. Under the thread, the note changes: the forecast stands, and five claims need holds before the panel can sit on them.
079:18 am
Three holds drafted, each with an owner, a date and what it stops
Gate coordinator
The holds come as drafts from the confirmed gaps: resize the produced water train, reprice the fix and restate the estimate class, recheck the power balance at peak water. Each names its owner and date, and what it stops: release of the record, the produced water package order, the generator set order. A draft stops nothing until the chair confirms it.
089:26 am
The chair opens each hold and confirms it
Gate panel chair
The independent panel chair opens each hold, reads its owner, date and the claims it covers, and confirms it. Below the holds, what they stop is checked where the work happens: the water package order and the generator set order now wait on their holds.
092:04 pm
Go becomes Go with Holds, in the chair’s own words
Gate panel chair
At the sitting the chair accepts the 41 unread deliverables by name and moves the recommendation from Go to Go with Holds. Her reason is typed in her own words: the water train is sized for year three, not the peak the forecast now shows. The record beside her still reads not yet decided; it takes her words when she signs as chair.
102:08 pm
A second panel member reads the record and signs
Independent panel member
The second signature comes from an independent panel member, who opens the record before signing. The record now carries two signatures. Release to the board stays stopped while the three holds are open. The agents read and cite; they never vote.

How one forecast reissue changed the water sum

The design and the forecast use different years of the same field.

Step	Value
Year three, design basis	35% of 171,400 b/d, about 60,000 b/d of water
Year six, new forecast	58% of 158,600 b/d, about 92,000 b/d of water
Short of the peak	32,000 b/d
Water train rating	60,000 b/d

demoSample data, from the working solution. If water stays capped at the rating, oil is choked back in the wettest years. The agent shows the sum; the owners decide which number is right.

Around the gate

The estimate class, the changes since Gate 2 and the record behind them

Five more screens the coordinator and the panel use.

Estimate class check by cost area: Class 3 for most areas, the produced water package read no better than Class 4 — **Is it really Class 3?**Each cost area against the basis behind it. Class 3 holds for $2,252M of $2,400M; the $148M water package is priced at a duty the forecast has passed.

Changes since the last gate: cost bridge by area, late filings after the freeze, and assumptions that moved — **What changed since Gate 2**37 of 186 assumptions moved, and the estimate rose $350M, mostly from four more wells and heavier topsides. Late filings are listed with what they touched.

All 186 tracked assumptions with value, owner, string count and state: agrees, re-tied or frayed — **All 186 assumptions**Each assumption with its value, its owner, how many strings it has and whether they agree, were re-tied or frayed.

Audit trail of the gate: holds confirmed, the decision, the countersignature and the agents’ reads — **Audit trail**Each read, reply, hold, confirmation and signature in order, by person or agent, and no line on it can be changed afterward.

Stage gate review checklist rules and roles: sample rate, fray threshold, record keeping and who may do what — **Gate rules**Sample rate for bulk sign-off, the difference that frays a string, how long records are kept, and who does what. The chair signs each change.

demoSample data, from the working solution.

Who runs the gate, who owns each number, and who signs

Gate coordinator

Sees: The wall, the package read and the claims below the team’s score
Signs: Sends threads and drafts holds; never votes

Discipline leads

Sees: The strings on their own assumptions
Signs: Confirm or reissue their own numbers, and own their holds

Gate panel chair

Sees: Each hold, the unread list and the record
Signs: Confirms holds, decides and signs first

Independent panel member

Sees: The record before signing
Signs: Countersigns or sends back

Board secretary

Sees: The released record
Signs: Reads only

Calls the agents leave to the panel and the owners

Choosing which number is rightThe tracer shows where values differ. The assumption’s owner confirms or reissues.

Voting or changing a scoreCriteria are read and cited beside the team’s claim. The panel decides.

Raising or closing a holdHolds are drafted. The chair confirms each one, and closes it once its owner files the reissue.

Changing a costThe estimate check reads the class by cost area. The cost estimator reprices.

Adding an opinion to the recordThe record is laid out from what the panel ruled, in the chair’s words.

Behind the wall

Seven agents read the package and tie the numbers, and none of them votes

Each hands its work to a named owner.

Package reader

Reads each deliverable and lists what it could not.

Never guesses at an unread file

Assumption tracer

Ties each assumption to each page and frays on a difference.

Never chooses which value is right

Criteria reader

Cites what proves each criterion.

Never votes
Never changes a team score

Estimate basis checker

Tests the claimed class by cost area.

Never changes a cost

Change spotter

Compares with the last gate and re-reads late filings.

Reports, never judges

Hold drafter

Drafts holds with owner, date and what they stop.

Never raises or closes a hold

Record writer

Lays out the record from what the panel ruled.

Never adds an opinion

What gate panels ask about stage gate review

What is a stage gate review?

A stage gate review is the check a capital project passes before it moves to the next phase, ending with a decision such as Go, Go with Holds, Recycle or Stop. Here agents read the whole package, trace each assumption across deliverables and set the team’s claims beside what the pages prove. The panel decides and signs.

Can it support an FID readiness review?

Yes. The sample is the last gate before final investment decision. The record the panel signs goes to the board with the decision, the reasons, the holds and who signed.

How is this different from a front-end loading assessment score?

A score summarizes the team’s view. Here each criterion shows the team’s claim and what the pages can prove, side by side, and any criterion read below the claim gets a reply from the team or an open finding.

What happens to deliverables the agents cannot read?

They are listed by name, with a request for each. Before signing, the chair accepts the unread list by name, and the record says so.

Does a phase gate review here change the estimate?

No. The estimate check reads the class claimed in each cost area against its basis and flags where it falls short. The cost estimator reprices under a hold.

What does a hold actually stop?

Each hold names what it stops, such as release of the record or a package order, and those are stopped where the work happens until the owner files the reissue and the chair closes the hold.

Capital Projects & Commissioning

Bring one gate package
before your panel sits.

We’ll read it, tie its assumptions and show your panel where the claims and the pages differ.

Book a demo Browse solutions

Stage Gate Review

Nearly four thousand deliverables, and a panel that can read a few dozen

The Problem Today

The Solution

What You Get

Stage gate review of a $2.4 billion offshore development at its last gate

186 assumptions tied across the package, and three strings frayed

3,771 of 3,812 deliverables read, and the 41 that could not be are named

The team claims 201 criteria met, and the pages prove 168

35% water cut in the design, 58% by year six in the new forecast

The water train takes 60,000 barrels a day, and the peak is 92,000

The subsurface lead opens her forecast and confirms it stands

Three holds drafted, each with an owner, a date and what it stops

The chair opens each hold and confirms it

Go becomes Go with Holds, in the chair’s own words

A second panel member reads the record and signs