Building in-house capability to analyze outages and improve operational reliability

Starting point

After a Canadian electrical reliability program had successfully identified chronic failure modes and prioritized interventions across regions, the operator’s US terminals wanted to adopt a similar approach. They saw the value of structured root cause analysis, but did not yet have a common method, facilitator capability, or governance cadence to run their own reliability studies.

Internal teams had different levels of maturity conducting root cause analysis, and approaches varied by terminal and by leader. The challenge was to transfer the method in a way that would stick, so the US organization could independently frame a reliability problem, run a study, and drive action without relying on external consultants.

‍

Approach

To support this, the operator engaged Bhuvan Maingi, who had successfully run the Canadian reliability program and is now leading Strathen Group, to help the US team adopt the RCA approach used for Canadian terminals. The mandate was to design and deliver a practical coaching immersion, leave behind a ready-to-run toolkit, and stay available as an advisor while the first US reliability study was launched.

The work began with a three-day on-site coaching program for a cross-functional cohort, including executives, directors, senior managers, and terminal operations leads.

• Day one focused on how to frame a reliability problem the way the Canadian program had done it: value at stake, stakeholder mapping, and charter design. Participants practiced turning loose problem statements into clear, scoped charters with success criteria they could take back to their own terminals.
  ‍
• Day two centered on how to run the analysis: evidence standards, data collection plans, site visit checklists, hypothesis logging, and building root cause trees. Rather than analyzing live US events in depth, the cohort worked through examples and templates, learning the method step by step so they could apply it themselves after the coaching.
  ‍
• Day three focused on how to prioritize and govern: using the operator’s risk matrix to rank actions, distinguishing no-regret moves from pilots and longer-term bets, and setting up an action register, reporting cadence, and facilitation roles. The group rehearsed facilitation scenarios so internal leads would be confident running their own RCA workshops.

‍

Alongside the coaching, he developed and handed over a practical toolkit. This included an RCA playbook and facilitator guide, standard workshop agendas, participant workbooks, templates for action registers and benefits tracking, a risk ranking matrix with guidance, and a governance cadence that linked study milestones to existing leadership forums. As the US team scoped and launched its first reliability study, he remained on call to advise on framing, evidence standards, and prioritization questions.

For operators, the real value of consultants is not another project, but investing in a partner who can build in-house capability and governance that last.

‍

Outcome

The engagement gave the US organization a clear, repeatable way to run root cause analysis on reliability issues, without depending on external facilitation. Leaders and terminal teams now shared a common understanding of how to frame a problem, what counts as adequate evidence, how to build and challenge root cause trees, and how to rank actions using the company’s risk matrix.

Time to first RCA was shortened because the team did not need to design the process from scratch. With a tested playbook, agendas, and templates, facilitators could focus on content and stakeholder engagement rather than mechanics. The governance cadence and advisor-on-call model helped maintain momentum through scoping, early analysis, and the first round of action planning.

Over time, the US terminals have been able to apply the method to their own reliability questions, using a consistent approach across sites. That consistency has improved decision speed and clarity, and it has made it easier for executives to understand and compare findings from different terminals.

The RCA capability build has positioned the US organization to extend its reliability work beyond the initial focus area, using the same tools and cadence to address other high-impact operational risks.

For operations and reliability leaders, the real gain was shifting from one-off, consultant-led RCAs to an internal capability with its own playbook, facilitators, and operating rhythm.

This work continues to guide how Strathen Group builds client capability, focusing on practical methods, toolkits, and governance rhythms that let operators run their own RCA programs long after consultants have stepped away.