Adoption, Support & Scale

The straight answer

Why does adoption need its own workstream?

Because the reasons these programmes fail are rarely technical. Executive sponsorship fades once the pilot budget ends; supervisors keep the parallel spreadsheet because it's faster; nobody proves the business case actually landed, so funding for phase two never appears. Adoption work addresses all three: redesigning daily management routines around the system, training and supporting frontline users properly, and tracking benefit realisation with the same rigour as the build.

When this is relevant

You probably need this if…

You have a system that went live and usage has quietly declined since.
Supervisors are still keeping a parallel spreadsheet “just in case”.
You can't prove the last investment paid back, so the next one is hard to fund.
One plant is running well and the other six haven't started.
Your original implementation partner has finished and disappeared.
Every site is customising differently and you're losing comparability.

What we fix

Problems we address

Training delivered once at go-live and never again as people rotate.
Daily management routines that still run off the old report, so the new system is extra work.
Benefits claimed in the business case and never measured afterwards.
Systems that decay because nobody owns enhancement after the project closes.
Rollouts restarted from scratch at each site rather than templated.
Local customisation so extensive that cross-plant comparison becomes meaningless.

Our approach

How we work through it.

Redesign the routine, not just the tool
If the morning meeting still runs off the old spreadsheet, the new system is additional work and will be abandoned. We redesign the daily management routine so the system is the path of least resistance rather than a parallel obligation.
Train the supervisor before the operator
Supervisors decide whether a system lives or dies. If the shift-in-charge isn't fluent and convinced, no amount of operator training compensates.
Measure adoption as a metric
Completion rates, capture latency, override frequency and parallel-record usage are tracked and reviewed. Declining adoption is a leading indicator of failure and it is visible months before anyone says so out loud.
Prove the benefit in their numbers
We baseline before go-live and measure after, in the same units the business case used. Where the number didn't move, we say so and investigate — a programme that can't be honest about its own results can't be trusted about the next phase.
Template before you replicate
The second site is where you decide what is standard and what is legitimately local. Getting that boundary right is the difference between a rollout and eight separate projects.

Scope of work

What sits inside C05.

C05.01

Adoption Diagnostics

Finding out whether the system is genuinely being used, and where it isn't.

Usage and completion analytics
Parallel-record detection
Frontline interviews and observation
Friction point analysis
Adoption risk scoring

C05.02

Change Management

The organisational work that makes a technical change stick.

Stakeholder and resistance mapping
Communication planning
Champion and super-user programmes
Role and responsibility redesign
Leadership alignment sessions

C05.03

Training & Enablement

Building capability that survives shift rotation and turnover.

Operator and supervisor training
Train-the-trainer programmes
Role-based documentation and SOPs
Refresher and onboarding material
Multi-language and low-literacy formats

C05.04

Daily Management Redesign

Rebuilding the operating rhythm around the new system.

Shift handover redesign
Daily and weekly review structure
Escalation and accountability model
Tiered meeting cadence
Visual management standards

C05.05

Benefit Realisation

Proving what actually changed, with the same rigour as the build.

Pre-go-live baselining
Post-implementation measurement
Variance analysis against the business case
Leadership reporting
Corrective recommendations

C05.06

Managed Support

Keeping the system healthy and improving after we hand over.

Application support with defined SLAs
System monitoring and health checks
Enhancement releases
Platform and version upgrades
Named support engineers

C05.07

Multi-Site Rollout

Getting past the first plant without restarting each time.

Rollout playbook and templates
Site readiness assessment
Standard vs. local governance
Deployment sequencing
Cross-site benchmarking

C05.08

Programme Recovery

Restarting something that stalled — including work we didn't do.

Root cause assessment of the stall
Salvage vs. restart analysis
Re-scoping and re-sequencing
Stakeholder re-engagement
Completion programme

C05.09

Capability Transfer

Making your team self-sufficient rather than dependent on us.

Internal admin and configuration training
Documentation handover
Knowledge transfer sessions
Internal support model design
Capability and hiring guidance

Deliverables

What you get

An adoption plan with named owners, measured against usage data.
Trained supervisors, operators and internal super-users.
Redesigned shift handover and daily management routines.
A benefit realisation report comparing measured results to the business case.
A support agreement with defined response and resolution commitments.
A rollout playbook templated for the remaining sites.
Full documentation and capability transfer to your internal team.

Outcomes

What changes

The system becomes the way work is done, not an extra thing to update.
Usage holds steady after go-live instead of quietly declining.
You can prove what the last investment returned, which makes the next one fundable.
The second site takes a fraction of the time the first one did.
Cross-plant comparison stays meaningful because the standard held.
Your team can configure, extend and support the system without us.

Engagement

How we partner on this.

Model	Scope	Typical duration
Adoption Sprint	Diagnostic and intervention on a live system where usage is declining.	3–6 weeks
Change & Enablement Workstream	Runs alongside a build programme from design through to post-go-live stabilisation.	Duration of build
Orbit Care	Ongoing managed support, monitoring, enhancements and upgrades.	Annual retainer
Multi-Site Rollout Programme	Templated deployment across the plant network with central governance.	6–24 months
Programme Recovery	Assessment and completion of a stalled implementation, including third-party work.	Variable

Questions

Frequently asked

Yes, and it's a meaningful share of what we do. We assess what was built, what's salvageable and what it would take to finish or replace it. We're not precious about the origin — recovering a half-finished implementation is usually cheaper for you than starting again, and we'll tell you when it isn't.

Through usage data rather than opinion: workflow completion rates, time between event and capture, override and exception frequency, and evidence of parallel records still being kept. Those four indicators tell you the truth several months before anyone admits the system isn't working.

Usually, and the resistance is usually rational. Operators reject systems that are slower than what they replaced, that create work with no visible benefit to them, or that feel like surveillance. Each of those is a design problem with a design fix. What doesn't work is treating it as an attitude problem to be trained away.

Defined response and resolution SLAs, monitoring and health checks, bug fixes, an agreed allocation of enhancement work, and platform upgrades. It's deliberately structured so the system keeps improving rather than freezing at go-live and decaying into another legacy tool.

The rule we use: standardise the data model, the KPI definitions and the escalation logic; allow local variation in workflow steps, approval chains and terminology. If sites can define OEE differently, cross-plant comparison is theatre. If they can't adjust their own approval chain, they'll build a workaround.

Go-live is the midpoint, not the finish line.