Owners and sponsors
For owners and sponsors: test the delivery basis before the commitment becomes irreversible.
This page is for owners, developers, and sponsors of major capital projects. Torvane measures whether the field can carry the plan, at the points where a decision is still available, and reports what it observes in writing. Advisory only: Torvane does not direct construction, and the owner keeps every decision.
The decisions an owner cannot delegate
An owner can delegate design, procurement, and construction. It cannot delegate the decision to commit capital, the decision to release the field to build, or the decision to change course when the plan and the field have separated. Those three decisions stay with the sponsor, and each one is only as good as the evidence behind it.
Most of that evidence arrives through the parties being measured. Progress is reported by the people producing it, readiness is asserted by the team that will be blamed if it is not there, and the reporting chain filters bad news slowly upward. An independent measurement does not replace that reporting. It gives the sponsor one set of observed facts to test it against, before the next commitment is made.
Before FID: is the execution plan real?
Before a final investment decision, the capital request rests on a delivery basis: a schedule, an estimate, a craft assumption, and a contracting strategy. Any of the four can be internally consistent and still fail a field test. The useful questions are whether the sequence can be built in the order shown, whether the craft peak exists in that region, whether supervision has done this scope before, and what the contract lets the owner do when it does not hold.
Torvane reviews the plan, the bid, the estimate, and the contracting approach with field eyes and reports the assumptions most likely to break, along with the conditions an approval should carry. Execution plan and bid review before sanction.
Before mobilization: is the site ready?
Readiness is a physical condition, not a status colour. It means work packages complete to the work front, materials on site, access and laydown sequenced, temporary facilities in place, supervision hired, craft available by trade with hands that can do the work, and a commissioning organization that exists. Every one of those can be observed and reported before the field is released to build.
The ten-day construction readiness assessment tests those gates on site, ranks the gaps, and states what has to be true before mobilization is a sound decision.
In execution: where is the project, actually?
In execution the question stops being readiness and becomes condition. Reported progress and physical progress separate slowly, then quickly. Rules of credit drift. Craft attrition appears in the numbers a quarter after it appears on site. A recovery plan built on productivity the project has never achieved will restate the same date twice.
Torvane states the condition plainly, tests the forecast against achieved rates, and sets out the options with what each requires. Project condition and recovery options diagnostic.
Before start-up: will it turn over?
A project that looks finished can still be months from turnover. Systemization, turnover package quality, checkout sequencing, punch-list trend, and the boundary between construction, commissioning, and operations decide the start-up date more than area completion does. Owners usually learn this after the date has been announced.
Commissioning and turnover readiness tests that condition system by system, while the date is still a choice.
What the owner receives
A written report in plain language: what was observed, where it differs from the plan, a ranked list of gaps with what each one requires, the options available with their consequences, and a short readout for the sponsor and the board. No dashboards, no maturity scores, no adjectives. Fixed scope and a fixed fee confirmed in writing before work begins, under NDA, and the person who conducts the work is the person accountable for the finding.
Related: how the review is done · request an assessment
Frequently asked questions
Does Torvane replace the owner's project team?
No. Torvane adds an independent measurement, not a layer of authority. It does not direct construction, act as construction manager or owner's representative, certify payment, or approve design. The owner's team keeps its role, and the owner keeps every decision the report informs.
Will an independent review damage the relationship with the contractor?
Handled properly it does the opposite. Interviews are conducted plainly, findings are about conditions rather than people, and the contractor sees the same observed facts the owner does. Most site teams already know what is not ready; a written, neutral statement of it usually relieves pressure rather than adding it.
What if the owner does not like the finding?
The finding still says what was observed. Torvane takes no fee tied to an outcome, a sanction decision, or a bid result, so there is no reason to soften a report. The owner is free to accept, reject, or act on any part of it, and remains accountable for the decision either way.
Get the readout before the next commitment.
Fixed scope. Defined timeline. Principal-led. A confidential 30-minute call is enough to tell you whether an assessment fits.