Representative Experience
Critical decisions. Real consequences.
The following examples reflect decision-making drawn from senior roles on major capital projects and programs prior to founding Sisu Project Advisory.
Commit or Defer
The numbers looked right, but had never been tested against the market.
A major capital project was approaching procurement with growing pressure to proceed. Estimates supported the business case, and internal momentum was building to commit funding.
The decision was simple: commit capital now or find out if the project was actually deliverable.
The procurement strategy was restructured from fixed price to a construction management model. Logistics and constructability were factored into the schedule, and trade-level pricing was tested before full commitment.
Costs were materially higher than expected, and sequencing constraints would extend the schedule significantly missing a key opening date.
The recommendation was to defer.
The decision avoided committing significant capital based on assumptions that would not have held. Funding flexibility was preserved, and the project was re-scoped and financed under conditions grounded in market reality.
No One Knew the Real Status
A failed audit. A strategic review. Undefined scope. No implementation strategy.
A large capital infrastructure program was under intense public scrutiny. With no plan in place, benefits realization was uncertain.
The program had momentum, but no control.
Dozens of projects were planned across multiple regions, but there was no integrated execution plan, no consistent baseline, and no reliable way to measure progress.
The question wasn’t how to improve performance. It was whether the program could be delivered as intended.
A full reset became necessary.
Program and project execution plans were developed across the portfolio, aligning scope, budget, and schedule into defined baselines. Delivery was reorganized into structured programs with clear accountability. Project managers and schedulers were deployed to establish control over scope, sequencing, and reporting.
For the first time, progress could be measured against something real, and outcomes could be forecast with confidence.
The program transitioned from uncertainty to execution.
Without that intervention, delivery risk would have remained hidden behind activity, and the consequences – cost escalation, delay, and failure to realize intended benefits, would have been unavoidable.
Leverage Before Litigation
Parts of the claim were valid. Most of it wasn’t.
A contractor submitted a significant delay claim tied to overlapping issues: design changes, site conditions, and coordination failures. The narrative was complex, and positions were beginning to harden.
The risk wasn’t the claim. It was losing control of how it would be resolved.
Instead of escalating, the claim was broken into discrete components. Each element was assessed for merit, documentation, and contractual standing. At the same time, vulnerability across all parties was evaluated, including commercial pressure, project dependencies, personal motivations, and broader market position.
The strategy focused on timing and leverage. Not legal argument.
The claim was resolved at a fraction of its original value, without arbitration or litigation. The outcome preserved flexibility, reduced exposure, and avoided a process where control would have shifted to external parties.
Scaling Without Losing Control
Growth was accelerating. Performance wasn’t.
A delivery organization was expanding rapidly, taking on more projects across multiple locations. Headcount was increasing, but results were inconsistent. Forecasting was unreliable. Margins were eroding.
The risk wasn’t growth, it was scaling faster than the organization could handle.
An independent assessment identified gaps in governance, controls, and accountability. PMO functions were established. Project controls teams were embedded. Roles were clarified. Delivery processes were standardized.
Execution plans and performance tracking were aligned across the portfolio.
The organization scaled, but this time with structure.
Delivery consistency improved. Forecasts became reliable. Financial performance stabilized. Growth continued, without loss of control.
Occupancy Was Not Optional
Delay wasn’t just a schedule issue, it was a business failure.
A major project tied to a fixed occupancy date was tracking behind schedule, with claims emerging and uncertainty increasing. Missing the deadline would have triggered revenue loss, operational disruption, and reputational damage.
The question wasn’t whether delay would occur, it was whether the outcome could still be controlled.
Claims were reframed as leverage. Settlement discussions were structured to align contractor incentives with achieving occupancy. Acceleration measures were introduced, tied directly to commercial outcomes.
The negotiation wasn’t about entitlement, it was about outcome.
Occupancy was achieved within an acceptable window. Financial exposure was contained. The project transitioned into operation without triggering the broader consequences of a missed opening.
Without intervention, delay would have extended, and the impact would have been material.
These are the types of decisions Sisu is engaged to support: where timing, judgment, and structure determine capital outcomes.
Confidential. No obligation. Senior-level from the first conversation.
© Copyright 2026.