Multi-Site Operating Model
Four sites, four maturities, one organisation. The hard question is not which site is doing best — it is which things must mean the same thing everywhere, and which things are supposed to differ.
Every percentage here renders with its denominator, and the denominators differ by design — different products, different scopes, different regulators. That is why nothing on this surface sorts by a figure: a sortable readiness column is a league table however it is labelled, and a readiness percentage compared across four sites is, in the study’s words, a number that will be misused within a week of being published. What the comparison is for is finding where one site has already solved a problem another is facing, and seeing where one supplier or one requirement change reaches more than one place at once. Verified readiness is computed from approved evidence over scoped criteria; reported completion is the site’s own figure and cannot be derived from anything — the gap between them reaches 26 points at Kestrel Point, which makes it the site whose reporting and evidence disagree most, not the worst site. The sites and every figure are fictional; a real portfolio would be tenant-isolated and server-enforced. For how readiness itself is calculated, see the operational readiness command center.
The network
Four sites at four different maturities. Every one of them has an unresolved tension, and none of the four is a process problem — they are all consequences of how the network came to exist.
Ravensholt
ReferenceBuilt 1994 · 340 people · AR-01 to AR-06Original site. Sterile fill and finish, oldest quality system, deepest inspection history.
The corporate standard is, in practice, this site's way of working with the local details removed. That is efficient and it is also the reason the other three sites experience harmonisation as being told to become Ravensholt.
Procedure architecture, deviation taxonomy, training curricula, supplier list.
Equipment-specific work instructions, local regulator commitments, shift patterns.
Its practice is treated as the standard without ever having been assessed as the best available.
Twenty years of investigation history that the newer sites could learn from and currently cannot search.
A synthetic four-site network for orientation. Sites, figures and procedure identifiers are fictional. A real portfolio would be tenant-isolated and server-enforced; nothing here is a ranking, and a lower figure is not a worse site.