Completix gives plant and corporate PMOs one place to rank capital requests, see which named engineers are committed to what, hold gate reviews on the record, and keep CAPEX forecasts honest between now and commissioning.
| Resource | W40 | W41 | W42 | W43 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| D. FontaineControls engineer | 130% | 130% | 95% | 80% |
| M. RuizProcess engineer | 70% | 90% | 115% | 115% |
| A. BergeronMechanical lead | 60% | 60% | 75% | 90% |
| S. OkaforMaintenance planner | 95% | 120% | 120% | 65% |
A packaging line upgrade rarely goes wrong during construction. It goes wrong when the business case is ranked on the loudest voice, when the gate review happens in a meeting nobody minuted, when the long lead order slips two weeks and the shutdown window is already booked. Completix holds the whole run in one system so the handoffs are visible.
Capital requests arrive on one form from every plant, with the sponsor, plant, requested envelope and driver captured the same way.
Requests are scored against your criteria and ranked in one queue, so the plant that shouts loudest does not automatically win.
A review at each gate, run under your policy. People approve, defer or reject, and the decision is recorded with the reviewer and date.
Long lead orders, FAT dates and vendor deliverables sit on the schedule with owners, next to the milestones that depend on them.
Forecast against approved budget, RAID kept per project, and variance surfaced in the Warning Center for the team to act on.
Posted periods, the decision log and the change record stay intact after handover to operations, so nothing has to be reconstructed.
Every stage in the strip is a place work actually sits in Completix. Nothing here is a roadmap item.
Most multi plant capital planning is a set of competing spreadsheets and a long meeting. Completix takes every request through one intake form and one scoring model, so the ranking you present to the capital committee can be explained line by line.
| Request | Plant | Capital | Score | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Line 4 packaging upgradeCAP-2214 | Rivard | 4,200,000 | 86 | Approved |
| Compressed air replacementCAP-2231 | Rivard | 1,150,000 | 74 | In review |
| Palletiser retrofitCAP-2240 | Selby | 860,000 | 69 | In review |
| Warehouse racking extensionCAP-2252 | Delmar | 620,000 | 51 | Deferred |
There is a version of this software category that claims the system enforces the gate. It does not, anywhere, and a plant that has lived through a real commissioning knows it. What matters is that the review happened, that the funding decision was taken there rather than drifting, and that six months later you can show who approved what and on what basis.
Approval is governed by your policy. Who may approve which gate, at which value, is a rule you set. Completix routes the review and holds the outcome, it does not decide it.
The funding decision sits at the gate. Money is not released by the system on a schedule. The committee commits the next tranche in the review, and that commitment is what the budget then reflects.
Variance does not live in the gate. Cost and schedule movement between gates surfaces in the Warning Center, where the project team sees it and decides what to do. The gate is where the decision is booked, not where the alarm goes off.
The trail is continuous. Gate outcomes, decision log entries and posted budget periods stay attached to the project after handover, so an internal audit or a customer dispute is a lookup rather than a reconstruction.
| Gate | Date | Reviewer | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| G0 Concept | 14 Nov 2025 | Capital committee | Approved |
| G1 Business case | 22 Jan 2026 | P. Halvorsen, VP Ops | Approved |
| G2 Design freeze | 09 Apr 2026 | Capital committee | Approved with conditions |
| G3 Readiness | Scheduled 02 Oct 2026 | Capital committee | Not yet held |
A fabrication date that moves in September is a manageable conversation. The same movement discovered in the last week of October is a lost shutdown window and a year of waiting for the next one. Completix keeps the vendor milestones on the same schedule as the work that depends on them, so the compression is visible the day it happens.
Capital plans are approved project by project and staffed by the same twenty people. Because Completix holds allocation against individual users rather than role types, the double commitment is visible before the shutdown is booked, with a name and a week attached to it.
Capacity is tracked per individual user. A plan that works at role level and fails at person level fails on site, so the person level is where the check happens.
Commitments are visible across every active project a person touches, including maintenance and obsolescence work running alongside the capital programme.
Seeing the clash in September is a scheduling decision. Seeing it in November is a shutdown you cannot use and a wait for the next one.
CAPEX erosion is rarely one bad decision. It is a series of small absorptions that nobody netted off, discovered at close when the margin is already spent. Completix keeps approved, forecast and actual on one card and keeps vendor commitments next to them, so the gap is a number somebody owns rather than a surprise.
Pick the project with the contested resource, the moved FAT date and the forecast nobody wants to present. We will walk it through intake, gate review, schedule and budget in a live session and you can judge whether the structure holds.
