Most project failures aren’t caused by a single issue - they’re the result of broken integration.

In this episode, Orion sits down with Ellie Moradinezhad, founder of tactHive Consulting and former Global Discipline Director at Hatch, where she oversaw project management development across 4,000+ projects in 70 countries - to unpack the most misunderstood concept in major project delivery: integration. Ellie introduces a practical three-part framework that separates vertical, horizontal, and cross-functional integration across three domains - systems, procedures, and people - and explains why organizations consistently misread integration failures as personality conflicts. If you've ever watched a project fall apart despite having all the right tools and talent in the room, this episode explains what was actually missing.

Ellie Moradinezhad is the President and Founder of tactHive Consulting, a Canadian advisory firm focused on business-driven PMOs, project governance, and performance improvement for complex capital programs. With 24 years of experience across infrastructure, energy, transportation, and industrial sectors — including Canada's Eglinton Crosstown LRT and GO Expansion — she most recently served as Global Discipline Director for Project Management Development at Hatch (70 offices, 150 countries). 🔗 LinkedIn | tactHive Consulting

Key Takeaways

• Integration is three things, not one. Ellie's framework distinguishes vertical integration (strategy connecting to field execution), horizontal integration (disciplines and functions aligned across the same organization), and cross-functional integration (separate organizations operating as one in JV or collaborative models). Most project teams are actively managing only one of these while the other two quietly break down.
• Your integration problem is being called a people problem. When cross-functional coordination fails, leaders default to blaming personalities. Ellie argues the root cause is almost always structural: role ambiguity, procedures designed for one team that everyone else is forced to use, and tools implemented without cross-discipline training.
• Change management failure starts at bid phase. By the time you're trying to align teams during execution, the structural misalignment is already baked in. Embedding change management from the earliest stages — when roles, norms, and working relationships are first being established — is the highest-leverage intervention available.
• In joint ventures, RACI isn't admin overhead — it's risk management. Ellie walks through how the absence of role clarity in collaborative delivery models creates the ambiguity that causes integration to collapse under schedule pressure and stakeholder conflict.

Timestamps:

• 00:00 — Introduction: Ellie's path from chemical engineering to systems thinking
• 08:15 — What "integration" really means beyond IT and systems
• 16:40 — The three-type, three-domain integration framework explained
• 24:30 — Why organizations misdiagnose integration failures as people problems
• 35:10 — Lessons from joint ventures and collaborative delivery models
• 44:20 — Role clarity and RACI as active risk management tools
• 55:00 — PMO design at scale: Hatch across 4,000 projects and 70 offices
• 1:05:30 — Why change management must start at bid phase
• 1:14:00 — AI's emerging role in planning, reporting, and risk analysis
• 1:22:00 — How systems thinking shapes the next generation of project leaders

Resources Mentioned:

• tactHive Consulting — Ellie's advisory firm
• PMI OPM3 — Organizational Project Management Maturity Model
• PRINCE2 / P3M3 — Project maturity frameworks
• Key concepts: Vertical/Horizontal/Cross-functional Integration, RACI, Systems Thinking, Change Management

Most project teams don’t fail because they lack a plan, they fail because they believe it.

In this episode, Orion sits down with Travis Arlitt, Senior Planning & Field Execution Specialist and co-founder of Day One Model, to unpack a fundamental gap in capital project delivery: the disconnect between planned schedules and field reality.

With over 25 years of experience across global megaprojects, from LNG facilities in Angola and Australia to refinery rebuilds and offshore platforms - Travis shares how traditional planning approaches often mask real risk instead of revealing it.

The conversation centers on two powerful ideas: execution realism and progress truth, a way of measuring performance based on actual production rates rather than static plans. Travis explains how focusing on real pace, rather than variance to plan, enables earlier decisions, clearer accountability, and dramatically better outcomes.

Through real-world examples, including decisions that saved hundreds of millions of dollars, Travis introduces the concept of “bow waves” (hidden schedule compression) and how his Day One Model reframes project forecasting into a forward-looking, action-driven system.

They also explore why incentives drive misalignment across projects, how reporting structures distort reality, and where AI is beginning to genuinely help project teams, particularly in reducing manual workload and improving planning speed.

If you’ve ever felt that schedules don’t reflect what’s actually happening in the field, this episode will fundamentally change how you think about progress, forecasting, and decision-making.

• Day One Model (Travis Arlitt) – Progress-based planning approach 👉 https://goforward.dayonemodel.com
• The Alchemist – Paulo Coelho
• The Fountainhead – Ayn Rand
• Reality Transurfing – Vadim Zeland
• The Alter Ego Effect – Todd Herman
• Freakonomics – Steven Levitt & Stephen Dubner
• AACE International – Project controls resources and recommended practices

Capital projects generate enormous amounts of data, yet many important project decisions are still made without timely access to the information teams need. When plans inevitably break and conditions change, leaders often lack the transparency required to respond quickly and confidently. The issue is not a lack of data, but a gap between the systems collecting information and the tools teams use to make decisions. This presentation explores why traditional reporting approaches fail to support real-time decision-making and how organizations can close the gap by building stronger data foundations, clearer reporting layers, and AI-driven insights that deliver the right information to the right people at the moment decisions happen.