Forecast accuracyQuantafuel
+30%
Before
After
Integrated planning made the confidence band smaller and the decision clearer.
01 Hei · Oslo
Plans people
can check.
I make complex industrial projects legible—scope, schedule, cost and risk turned into something a team can use and leadership can act on.
Open to work
Oslo · 2026
01
Scope
What has to land
02
Schedule
When it can land
03
Decision
What happens next
The controls person teams can actually talk to.
- Permit
- May 2027
- Norwegian
- A2–B1 · improving
02 The numbers
Six instruments.
One operating picture.
Not decorative counters. Each measure shows the operational change behind it.
Resource usePortfolio
+50%
One resource model became the planning backbone.
Reporting turnaroundPMO
20% faster
Old cycle
New
Less time assembling updates; more time available for decisions.
Portfolio30+ pipeline · 12+ active
Actively scheduled Pipeline
People trainedOmega365
50+
Training was part of delivery, not an afterthought.
Largest modificationSkive, DK
£10M
0510
The model outlived the project and served the portfolio.
03 Project dossiers
Four cases.
Different control problems.
The portfolio goes deeper on the work that best proves delivery, systems adoption, and judgment.
One existing plant. One blank sheet.
Two 150,000 t/yr assets needed the same controls discipline without pretending the same plan would fit both.
BrownfieldVestBuild around what is running
GreenfieldMalmBuild the case from zero
- Control
- Scope · schedule · cost · risk
- Lifecycle
- Engineering → production
- Scale
- 2 × 150k t/yr
The model that stayed after handover.
A £10M production-line modification needed schedule, resource load and cost visibility in one operating picture.
Disciplines
Integrated model
Portfolio reuse
- Value
- £10M
- Adoption
- 50+ trained
- Result
- One source of truth
Migration was the easy part. Adoption was delivery.
The team moved from Omega PIMS to Omega365 across planning, resources, document control and asset management.
Legacy PIMSRequirementsSetupTrainingOmega365
- Owned
- Vendor → governance
- Training
- On-site + remote
- After
- Operational independence
Two sides. One comparison. Their decision.
Engineering in Oslo and production in Denmark disagreed on when to execute. The job was not to pick a winner.
OsloEngineering caseInterview · constraints · consequence
DenmarkProduction caseInterview · constraints · consequence
Unbiased comparison → Executive decision
- Role
- Facilitator
- Method
- Scenario comparison
- Decision
- Left with executives
04 Career route
Lucknow to Oslo.
One control thread.
The roles change; the through-line does not: make complex work visible enough for people to decide and deliver.
Project coordination and delivery foundations.
Owner-side PMO, controls and operating systems.
Digital business alongside Nordic delivery work.
Portfolio planning, reporting and system adoption.
Brownfield and greenfield controls in Norway.
Study in parallelMechanical Engineering · 2012–16Digital Business · 2022–25
05 After hours · Systems lab
I gave a team of AI agents
a project manager.
Six owned systems, governed as one ecosystem. Select a node to see the rule behind it.
Main system · One layer of truth
Weaveplane
A project's method lives in one place, so every connected tool reads the same truth instead of keeping a private copy and quietly drifting.
- Problem
- Method drift across tools
- Rule
- One canonical source
- Control
- Human approval at decisions
06 My operating system
Six moves.
One example all the way through.
The Omega365 migration follows the complete route—from understanding the real constraint to improving the system after adoption.
01 / Understand
Audit what is actually there.
Who decides, what constrains the work, and what the schedule is really carrying—not what the process document says it carries.
Omega PIMSTool auditUser needs
07 The person
The part a CV
cannot show.
Principles are only useful here when a named person or a specific behaviour can carry the claim.
Transparency
Numbers people can check beat numbers people must trust.
“Measurable KPIs and clear accountability structures.”Structure that serves
A plan should help a team decide, not just record what they did.
Respect
People contribute more when it is safe to disagree.
Integrity
A decision has to be workable and defensible.
One thing I correct
I say yes too readily. The fix is to scope the help before absorbing the whole problem.
08 Recommendations
Three perspectives.
One repeated signal.
Manager, people and peer evidence is kept separate from my own description of how I operate.
01 · Manager“Measurable KPIs and clear accountability structures.”
René Ortiz · manager perspective
02 · PeopleCreates trust by making progress and ownership visible.
HR / people perspective
03 · PeerRespectful collaboration—especially when viewpoints differ.
Jaime Arenillas · peer perspective
What repeatsClear accountability · visible progress · respectful disagreement
09 Handover
Looking for
the next one.
Project controls, PMO and delivery systems—where planning meets people and the work needs to be visible enough to challenge.
Nordic + international
English-language organisations where project controls, digital systems and quantified delivery matter now.
Norwegian controls
Consultancies and operators where Omega365, OPC and owner-side controls carry a premium. Norwegian A2–B1, actively improving.