Centralization vs Site Responsiveness
Publish a decision-rights matrix that places time-sensitive execution authority at site level while routing only strategic and high-consequence decisions through central functions.
CyberTRIZ analysis · GreenFieldIndustrialProjects contradiction SFR027 · one of 8,235 worked contradictions published by CyberTRIZ.AI
Regulations
Business Context
Centralized project functions improve consistency, standardization, procurement leverage, and governance. Site teams require rapid responses to actual construction, commissioning, logistics, workforce, and operating conditions.
Green Field Industrial Projects TRIZ Resolution
Centralize common standards, strategic resources, and enterprise-level decisions while locating time-sensitive execution authority close to the site. Use common information systems to maintain visibility without requiring central approval for routine decisions.
Applicable TRIZ Principles
Principle 1 – Segmentation separates centralized support from local execution authority.
Principle 3 – Local Quality locates decisions where relevant information is strongest.
Principle 15 – Dynamics adjusts decision distribution according to project phase.
Expected Outcome
Faster site response
Preserved organizational consistency
Better use of central resources
Reduced decision latency
Decision Indicators
Early indicators include:
Site problems wait for remote approval.
Central teams lack sufficient field context.
Local teams create informal workarounds.
Routine decisions escalate unnecessarily.
Centralization increases rather than reduces coordination effort.