Lifecycle Readiness Misalignment in Brownfield EPIC Projects: A Practitioner-Informed Governance Framework for Interface Assurance and Value Delivery

Abstract

Brownfield engineering, procurement, installation, and commissioning (EPIC) projects are delivered within operating assets where production continuity, constrained access, legacy infrastructure, and multiple organisational interfaces create tightly coupled dependencies. Conventional controls can report high completion within individual functions while the overall system remains unready for commissioning or operations. This study offers a distinct reconceptualisation of project readiness through a preliminary construct termed lifecycle readiness misalignment (LRM). A practitioner-informed conceptual theory-building design was applied to four anonymised critical-incident accounts retrospectively reconstructed from the author’s own professional memories and non-confidential self-observations in oil and gas project environments. The accounts are conceptual propositions rather than independently verified historical cases and require multi-informant validation. They concerned transformer availability, electrical-submersible-pump cable and casing compatibility, vendor-specialist mobilisation, and delayed permanent grid connection. The accounts were standardised through a common reflective extraction protocol and examined using reflexive thematic analysis and cross-account comparison. Three accounts illustrated constrained downstream progression. A fourth illustrated how a local alternative, rapid decision authority, and a pre-mobilisation plan can absorb a readiness gap without critical schedule impact. The analysis suggests that local functional readiness can coexist with system unreadiness when dependencies are not formally accepted at lifecycle interfaces, while buffering and corrective capacity may moderate downstream consequences. No production, netback, financial-cost, or proprietary operational data were collected or estimated; value exposure is therefore discussed qualitatively. The article proposes LRM as a preliminary construct and develops the Integrated Lifecycle Readiness and Risk Governance Model (ILRGM), comprising evidence-based readiness gates, provider–acceptor accountability, leading indicators, lifecycle coordination reviews, and learning loops. Direct causal effects and validated performance improvements are not established. The study offers conceptual and analytical propositions for independent, multi-informant, comparative, longitudinal, and quantitative validation.