The engagements below are real projects described with client permission and figures rounded to preserve confidentiality. Where a result depends on a client-side decision we say so, because attribution matters when you are deciding whether to hire us.
11
Engagements documented
6
Industries represented
9-24
Percent capacity released
Results as measured using the client's own systems of record at the engagement close.
Every result below was measured in the client's own systems of record.
The engagements below are drawn from our completed work. Details are rounded and client names withheld under our standard confidentiality terms, but the shape of each problem, the method applied and the outcome are described honestly. Where a result depended on a client-side decision we say so.
Health system, 14,000 staff, 22 weeks. A regional health system had a scheduling backlog that delayed elective procedures. Outcome: baseline showed 31% of scheduler time spent reconciling three conflicting rosters. Consolidating to a single source of truth and redesigning the escalation path released the equivalent of 18 full-time roles, redeployed rather than removed.
Logistics operator, 6,200 staff, 16 weeks. Night shift dispatch was missing departure windows. Outcome: measurement showed the bottleneck was not dispatch but trailer availability at two sites. Changing the yard-release sequence improved on-time departures from 84% to 93% within the pilot, sustained at re-measurement eight weeks later.
Specialty insurer, 3,400 staff, 12 weeks. Claims cycle time had drifted upward for two years with no clear cause. Outcome: per-case touch counts revealed 41% of touches were rework caused by an upstream form field. Fixing the field and the validation rule cut average cycle time by nine days.
Manufacturing group, 11,000 staff, 24 weeks. Maintenance planning consumed planner capacity without improving asset availability. Outcome: the baseline showed planners were doing scheduling the CMMS could do. Redeploying that time to criticality review raised planned-work compliance from 61% to 79%.
What the engagements have in common
In all four cases the presenting problem was not the actual cause. Schedulers were blamed for a roster problem, dispatch for a yard problem, claims handlers for an upstream data problem, and planners for a system-usage problem. The value of a rigorous baseline is that it moves the conversation from who is failing to what is failing, which is a far more productive argument to have.
A second common thread is that the fix was cheap. None of these engagements required new software purchases or reorganisations. They required seeing the flow clearly and changing a handful of decisions. That is not always true, but it is true more often than the consulting market would have you believe.
How we measure and report
We measure at close and again at approximately twelve weeks, using the client's own systems. If a gain has not held at re-measurement we report that plainly, along with our best explanation. We would rather publish a partial result honestly than a headline number we cannot defend under questioning.
A result you cannot re-measure is not a result. It is a story.
We use strictly necessary browser storage to remember your consent choice. We do not load analytics, advertising, or third-party tracking scripts on this site. Read our cookie policy.
