Life Cycle Value Assurance
Pre-operational inspections, FAT validation, and value-based contracting control models
The Value Gap
Capital projects promise performance, but too often deliver underperforming assets. The gap emerges in three places: specification errors, fabrication deviations, and commissioning shortcuts. By the time operational teams discover problems, contracts are closed and vendors have moved on.
What We Do
We embed value assurance into the capital project lifecycle—from specification review through commissioning—ensuring that promised performance is actually delivered and contractually enforceable.
Pre-Operational Inspections
Independent validation of equipment specifications, design adequacy, and manufacturing compliance before installation—when changes are still low-cost.
Factory Acceptance Testing (FAT) Validation
Witness testing with instrumented verification that equipment meets contractual commitments—not just vendor self-certification.
Commissioning Support
On-site technical support during startup to ensure equipment operates as designed and contractual performance metrics are achieved.
KVB-C2M®: Value-Based Contracting Control Model
Proprietary Framework
KVB-C2M® is Knar Global's methodology for structuring contracts that align vendor incentives with actual business value—not just technical specifications.
Core Principles
- Outcome-Based Metrics: Contracts specify business outcomes (uptime, efficiency, throughput) rather than just equipment parameters
- Performance Validation: Testing protocols that prove contractual commitments before final acceptance
- Risk Allocation: Clear assignment of who bears risk for design errors, fabrication defects, or operational performance gaps
- Life-Cycle Accountability: Warranty terms linked to operational reality, not arbitrary time periods
Result
Vendors deliver what they promise because contracts are structured to make underperformance economically unacceptable—and because technical validation happens before payments are finalized.
Case Study: OCENSA Power Expansion P135
Challenge
OCENSA needed to expand power generation capacity but faced high uncertainty around equipment reliability and vendor performance claims. Historical projects had experienced cost overruns due to equipment underperformance discovered only after installation.
Solution
Re-engineered the scope of work using KVB-C2M®:
- Shifted contract terms from equipment specifications to guaranteed production capacity
- Built LCC-based evaluation matrix for vendor selection that accounted for reliability risk, not just capital cost
- Established FAT protocols with independent validation of performance claims
- Structured payment milestones around operational performance demonstration, not just delivery
Outcome
Project delivered on budget with equipment performing at contractually guaranteed levels. Vendor accountability was clear, and technical disputes were resolved using pre-agreed validation methods.
Case Study: Latin American Pipeline Operator Power Expansion
Challenge
A Latin American pipeline operator needed to expand power generation capacity but faced high uncertainty around equipment reliability and vendor performance claims. Historical projects had experienced cost overruns due to equipment underperformance discovered only after installation.
Solution
Re-engineered the scope of work using KVB-C2M®:
- Shifted contract terms from equipment specifications to guaranteed production capacity
- Built LCC-based evaluation matrix for vendor selection that accounted for reliability risk, not just capital cost
- Established FAT protocols with independent validation of performance claims
- Structured payment milestones around operational performance demonstration, not just delivery
Outcome
Project delivered on budget with equipment performing at contractually guaranteed levels. Vendor accountability was clear, and technical disputes were resolved using pre-agreed validation methods.
Case Study: Major Pipeline Operator Power Expansion
Challenge
A major Latin American pipeline operator needed to expand power generation capacity but faced high uncertainty around equipment reliability and vendor performance claims. Historical projects had experienced cost overruns due to equipment underperformance discovered only after installation.
Solution
Re-engineered the scope of work using KVB-C2M®:
- Shifted contract terms from equipment specifications to guaranteed production capacity
- Built LCC-based evaluation matrix for vendor selection that accounted for reliability risk, not just capital cost
- Established FAT protocols with independent validation of performance claims
- Structured payment milestones around operational performance demonstration, not just delivery
Outcome
Project delivered on budget with equipment performing at contractually guaranteed levels. Vendor accountability was clear, and technical disputes were resolved using pre-agreed validation methods.