Results

Complex asset decisions rarely suffer from a lack of information. The problem is that the technical, operational, financial, and contractual pieces do not tell one coherent story. These examples of the value I’ve delivered to clients show what becomes possible when the assumptions are tested, the trade-offs are made visible, and the right people can finally act on the same evidence.

Tripling revenue and doubling margins in facilities services

$1 million annual loss to break-even in healthcare P3

$13 million savings over 30 year infrastructure project

From a $1 Million Annual Loss to Break-Even for a Public Private Partnership

Healthcare Industry

The Problem

A large P3 operating contract was losing approximately $1 million each year. The problems were not confined to one budget line or operating function. Commercial obligations, day-to-day performance, capital requirements, and internal accountabilities were working against one another.

The organization needed more than short-term cost cutting. It needed to understand why the contract was underperforming and what had to change without compromising contract requirements in a mission-critical healthcare environment.

The Approach

I stepped into the operation and examined how the contract worked in practice—not only how it was written. I connected the financial performance to operating decisions, service obligations, project delivery, and the way work was being managed.

We established clearer accountability and stronger operating discipline around the contract. I also built a structured capital-project program that could address facility needs while operating as a commercially sound part of the business.

The Result

Within approximately 18 months, the operating contract moved from a $1 million annual loss to break-even.

An additional positive result was the capital-project program was developed and refined that went on to deliver margins of approximately 27% in the first year. It also supported significant work within the hospital, including a $15 million redevelopment of its medical-device reprocessing facility.

Infrastructure Decision / Business Case Support Resulted in $13 Million in savings over the 30 year term

Public-Sector Infrastructure

The Problem

A public-sector organization was considering three substantially different paths for a major infrastructure redevelopment. Each option carried its own construction costs, operating requirements, lifecycle obligations, and long-term risks.

The existing information made it difficult to compare the options fairly. Leadership needed to know which path offered the strongest whole-life value—not simply which one appeared least expensive at the outset.

The Approach

I developed a common decision framework that assessed all three options on the same basis. That meant looking beyond initial capital costs to examine ongoing operations, maintenance, lifecycle investment, risk, and the timing of future expenditures.

I tested the assumptions behind the forecasts and translated the findings into a clear comparison. Leadership could see where each option created value, where it transferred risk, and what it would really cost over time.

The Result

The analysis gave the organization a defensible basis for selecting the strongest option.

The recommended path identified more than $13 million in net-present-value savings. Just as importantly, the decision was supported by a whole-life view that could withstand financial and operational scrutiny.

Tripling Revenue While More Than Doubling Margins

Facility-Services Contract Portfolio

The Problem

An asset and facilities management business unit with multiple clients across regions and industries had strong technical capability, but its commercial performance did not reflect that expertise. Revenue growth was limited, margins were approximately 12%, and the business needed a clearer path to profitable growth.

The issue was not simply a lack of opportunity. The offers, operating models, delivery approach, and financial drivers were not sufficiently connected.

The Approach

I built greater commercial and operating discipline around the business unit. We clarified the value of the work, strengthened how services were structured and delivered, and created better visibility into the factors affecting revenue and margin.

The focus was not growth at any cost. Every decision had to improve the strength and scalability of the business—not just add activity or restructure the org.

The Result

The business unit tripled its revenue.

At the same time, margins increased from approximately 12% to more than 26%. The business grew because its technical capability was supported by a stronger commercial and operating model.