DECLARED VS ACTUAL OPERATING MODEL ANALYSIS
Operating Model Truth Reconstruction
What Is Declared vs Actual Operating Model Analysis?
Declared vs Actual Operating Model Analysis is a side-by-side reconstruction of:
the operating model the organization claims to run (policies, org charts, SOPs, ERP logic, governance), versus
the operating model the organization actually runs (real decision flow, queues, workarounds, ownership, enforcement).
It does not critique strategy.
It exposes structural contradiction between stated governance and real execution mechanics.
This is a primary driver of:
strategy–execution disconnect
repeated “transformation” failure
KPI improvement without real performance gain
accountability collapse under pressure
Why This Is Needed
This service is used when:
leadership believes systems exist, but execution ignores them
“the process” is documented, but outcomes don’t stabilize
compliance is “paper true” but operationally false
operating rhythm differs across departments and sites
initiatives stall due to hidden counter-governance
Traditional tools fail because:
audits validate documents, not lived behavior
dashboards do not show governance contradiction
meetings create narrative alignment, not operating truth
How TJEG Performs the Analysis
Declared Model Capture
Collect stated operating logic: SOP structure, governance rules, decision rights, KPI definitions, ERP workflows.Actual Model Reconstruction
Map how work and decisions truly move: overrides, bypasses, informal approvals, workaround loops, real escalation behavior.Contradiction Identification
Pinpoint where policy conflicts with reality and creates systemic instability.Control-Point Redesign Options
Define what must change: decision rights, cadence, enforcement logic, interface control, and standard work architecture.
What This Delivers
Declared Model Summary (what leadership thinks is operating)
Actual Model Map (how execution really functions)
Contradiction Register (where policy and reality collide)
Failure Mechanism Impacts (how contradiction produces delay/rework/variance)
Corrective Operating Model Options (architecture-level)
Implementation-ready steps (client-executed)
Who This Is For
Organizations with persistent “we have a process” but unstable outcomes
Multi-site operations where standards fragment across facilities
Federal contractors where written governance exists but execution drifts
Leadership teams requiring a truth baseline before change or command action
Engagement Characteristics
Enterprise-level or facility-level deployment
Highly decision-ready output
Often paired with Decision Latency Mapping and SOP Architecture Design
Cost & Commercial Structure
Fixed-scope engagement.
Typical range: $25,000 – $75,000 (scope-dependent).
No contingent fees. No success fees.
Compliance Boundary
Operational intelligence and execution architecture only.
No legal advice. No regulated compliance certification. No financial/valuation analysis. No licensed engineering.
No outcome guarantees.
Start
Initiate Declared vs Actual Operating Model Analysis →
(Leads to intake: governance artifacts available, operating symptoms, scope span, urgency)

