This major poultry producer had won an additional product-supply contract and broke ground on a new facility in early 2019, with startup planned for January 2020. The pressure was not only in pouring concrete and installing equipment. Executive leadership expected all personnel to operate the new plant effectively from the day it came online, which meant the ramp-up risk reached well beyond construction itself.
A major poultry producer brought a brand-new plant from construction to full budgeted operations in 90 days, on schedule and on plan, with initial product runs and customer sensory testing passing the first time.
Major Poultry Producer
Results at a Glance
90 Days
Startup to Full Ramp
On Plan
Budget and Schedule
Executive Brief
A major poultry producer had secured an additional supply contract and was building a new facility for a January 2020 startup, with executives expecting every leader and operator to run it effectively from day one and only 90 days to reach full budgeted operations. POWERS ran a two-phase engagement with joint client teams across three focus groups: process control, workforce and leadership, and equipment reliability and maintenance, defining process-control points, building leadership capability, and standing up maintenance protocols before startup, then validating processes, equipment, and product quality live during operational ramp. Through the first 90 days the plant reached full operations at incremental budgeted levels on schedule, with initial product runs and customer sensory testing passing, the full plant value stream mapped, and the Management Operating System, CMMS, SOPs, and labor-management tool implemented before and through launch.
The Situation
A new plant for a new contract, with executives expecting every person on the floor to run it effectively the moment it started, and only 90 days to reach full budgeted output.
This major poultry producer had won an additional product-supply contract and broke ground on a new facility in early 2019, with startup planned for January 2020. The pressure was not only in pouring concrete and installing equipment. Executive leadership expected all personnel to operate the new plant effectively from the day it came online, which meant the ramp-up risk reached well beyond construction itself.
Several forces compounded that risk at once. Construction had to be coordinated against an aggressive schedule, the workforce and new leaders had to be transferred and hired into a tight labor market, and the timing demanded preparation far earlier in the planning and build cycle than a startup of this kind would normally require. Process operations, line balancing, and equipment maintenance all had to be defined before there was ever a running line to observe.
Leadership did not need a one-time launch push that faded after opening day. It needed a system: process-control points defined station by station, leaders who genuinely understood the production processes and equipment, maintenance and preventive routines loaded before launch, and an operating rhythm capable of holding a 90-day ramp to budget.
The Diagnosis
Five structural gaps producing the same outcome from five directions.
Day-one expectations against day-one risk
Executive leadership expected everyone to run a brand-new plant effectively from the moment it started, yet the ramp-up risk reached well beyond the construction itself. Without a deliberate readiness plan, the gap between expectation and capability would surface as missed output during the most visible weeks of the launch.
Leaders for a plant that did not yet exist
The new facility required leaders capable of operating it on day one, but those capabilities had to be built before there was a facility to lead. Left unaddressed, leadership gaps would slow every decision during the ramp.
A tight labor market to staff and lead
The workforce and new leaders had to be transferred and hired into a tight labor market on a fixed timeline. Any shortfall in staffing or readiness would directly constrain the plant's ability to ramp to budget.
Process and line balancing defined with no line to watch
Process operations and line balancing had to be specified before there was a running line to observe. Without process-control points and work sequencing defined in advance, the plant would have no baseline to execute against at startup.
Maintenance readiness needed before launch, not after
Equipment maintenance, preventive routines, and OEM and LOTO readiness had to be built into a CMMS before launch rather than discovered after. Without that foundation in place, early reliability problems would stall the ramp before it gained momentum.
What POWERS Did
De-risked the startup so the new plant ran right from day one.
POWERS structured the work as a two-phase project with joint client and POWERS teams in three focus groups. In Phase 1, pre-startup development, Team 1 defined the key process-control points by equipment and station, Team 2 developed leadership capabilities and practices for the new facility, and Team 3 established maintenance protocols. Future plant leadership was deliberately embedded in this phase through value-stream mapping and hands-on equipment learning, so the people who would run the plant arrived at startup with full knowledge of the production processes and how the equipment operated.
In Phase 2, operational startup, the teams moved to live testing and validation of processes, equipment, and product quality. Equipment work was coordinated directly with OEMs to confirm operational specs, document LOTO, set preventive maintenance, and train technicians, while line balancing and work sequencing shaped labor management on the floor. In parallel, the Management Operating System tools were validated and implemented for performance management.
By launch and through the ramp these efforts came together as a single operating foundation. The full plant value stream was mapped, including labor-resource requirements, cycle times, and capacity targets by product type and flow. SOPs and operator guides were written for the new positions and equipment, an equipment list with asset numbers and OEM preventive-maintenance requirements was loaded into a CMMS before launch, technician training plans were built with OEMs and subject-matter experts, leaders were trained on MOS tools with guided shop-floor use, and a labor-management tool for loading resources to budget and volume was completed and put to work.
The Full Result
Two readiness outcomes that carried the new plant to full budgeted operations on its first attempt.
90 Days
Startup to Full Ramp
The new plant reached full budgeted operations within its first 90 days because future leaders learned the processes and equipment before launch, letting initial product runs and customer sensory testing pass on schedule.
On Plan
Budget and Schedule
The ramp landed at incremental budgeted levels on schedule because the full plant value stream was mapped and the Management Operating System, CMMS, SOPs, and labor-management tool were stood up before and through launch.
Ready to builddisciplined execution in your operation?
Every POWERS engagement starts with our intensive Discovery Process. We work with everyone on your team, identify the gaps in the five disciplines that hold execution back, and build the partnership that closes them. The results stay built long after we’re gone.
Stronger Execution. Stronger Performance.
Equipment Reliability · Frontline Leadership · MOS · Operational Readiness
A major poultry producer brought a brand-new plant from construction to full budgeted operations in 90 days, on schedule and on plan, with initial product runs and customer sensory testing passing the first time.
Major Poultry Producer
Executive Brief
A major poultry producer had secured an additional supply contract and was building a new facility for a January 2020 startup, with executives expecting every leader and operator to run it effectively from day one and only 90 days to reach full budgeted operations. POWERS ran a two-phase engagement with joint client teams across three focus groups: process control, workforce and leadership, and equipment reliability and maintenance, defining process-control points, building leadership capability, and standing up maintenance protocols before startup, then validating processes, equipment, and product quality live during operational ramp. Through the first 90 days the plant reached full operations at incremental budgeted levels on schedule, with initial product runs and customer sensory testing passing, the full plant value stream mapped, and the Management Operating System, CMMS, SOPs, and labor-management tool implemented before and through launch.
Results at a Glance
90 Days
Startup to Full Ramp
On Plan
Budget and Schedule
The Situation
A new plant for a new contract, with executives expecting every person on the floor to run it effectively the moment it started, and only 90 days to reach full budgeted output.
Several forces compounded that risk at once. Construction had to be coordinated against an aggressive schedule, the workforce and new leaders had to be transferred and hired into a tight labor market, and the timing demanded preparation far earlier in the planning and build cycle than a startup of this kind would normally require. Process operations, line balancing, and equipment maintenance all had to be defined before there was ever a running line to observe.
Leadership did not need a one-time launch push that faded after opening day. It needed a system: process-control points defined station by station, leaders who genuinely understood the production processes and equipment, maintenance and preventive routines loaded before launch, and an operating rhythm capable of holding a 90-day ramp to budget.
The Diagnosis
Five structural gaps producing the same outcome from five directions.
Day-one expectations against day-one risk
Executive leadership expected everyone to run a brand-new plant effectively from the moment it started, yet the ramp-up risk reached well beyond the construction itself. Without a deliberate readiness plan, the gap between expectation and capability would surface as missed output during the most visible weeks of the launch.
Leaders for a plant that did not yet exist
The new facility required leaders capable of operating it on day one, but those capabilities had to be built before there was a facility to lead. Left unaddressed, leadership gaps would slow every decision during the ramp.
A tight labor market to staff and lead
The workforce and new leaders had to be transferred and hired into a tight labor market on a fixed timeline. Any shortfall in staffing or readiness would directly constrain the plant's ability to ramp to budget.
Process and line balancing defined with no line to watch
Process operations and line balancing had to be specified before there was a running line to observe. Without process-control points and work sequencing defined in advance, the plant would have no baseline to execute against at startup.
Maintenance readiness needed before launch, not after
Equipment maintenance, preventive routines, and OEM and LOTO readiness had to be built into a CMMS before launch rather than discovered after. Without that foundation in place, early reliability problems would stall the ramp before it gained momentum.
What POWERS Did
De-risked the startup so the new plant ran right from day one.
POWERS structured the work as a two-phase project with joint client and POWERS teams in three focus groups. In Phase 1, pre-startup development, Team 1 defined the key process-control points by equipment and station, Team 2 developed leadership capabilities and practices for the new facility, and Team 3 established maintenance protocols. Future plant leadership was deliberately embedded in this phase through value-stream mapping and hands-on equipment learning, so the people who would run the plant arrived at startup with full knowledge of the production processes and how the equipment operated.
In Phase 2, operational startup, the teams moved to live testing and validation of processes, equipment, and product quality. Equipment work was coordinated directly with OEMs to confirm operational specs, document LOTO, set preventive maintenance, and train technicians, while line balancing and work sequencing shaped labor management on the floor. In parallel, the Management Operating System tools were validated and implemented for performance management.
By launch and through the ramp these efforts came together as a single operating foundation. The full plant value stream was mapped, including labor-resource requirements, cycle times, and capacity targets by product type and flow. SOPs and operator guides were written for the new positions and equipment, an equipment list with asset numbers and OEM preventive-maintenance requirements was loaded into a CMMS before launch, technician training plans were built with OEMs and subject-matter experts, leaders were trained on MOS tools with guided shop-floor use, and a labor-management tool for loading resources to budget and volume was completed and put to work.
The Full Result
90 Days
Startup to Full Ramp
The new plant reached full budgeted operations within its first 90 days because future leaders learned the processes and equipment before launch, letting initial product runs and customer sensory testing pass on schedule.
On Plan
Budget and Schedule
The ramp landed at incremental budgeted levels on schedule because the full plant value stream was mapped and the Management Operating System, CMMS, SOPs, and labor-management tool were stood up before and through launch.
POWERS|+1 678-971-4711|info@thepowerscompany.com|1801 Peachtree St NE, Suite 200, Atlanta, GA 303091 / 1