From Methodology to Execution with Omega 365

Introduction

Industrial capital projects consistently face challenges related to schedule delays, cost overruns and quality shortfalls. Industry research shows that only a minority of projects meet their original targets, with a significant portion of failures linked to fragmented planning, late engineering deliverables and poor coordination between engineering, procurement, construction and commissioning.

Advanced Work Packaging (AWP) was developed to address these issues. Originating from initiatives led by the Construction Owners Association of Alberta (COAA) and the Construction Industry Institute (CII), AWP provides a structured execution framework that integrates workface planning with engineering and procurement, ensuring that construction activities are supported by complete and timely information.

Today, AWP is recognized as a proven best practice across multiple industries and project scales. When supported by a digital platform such as Omega 365, AWP evolves from a theoretical methodology into an executable, data-driven delivery model

What Is Advanced Work Packaging?

Advanced Work Packaging is a project delivery methodology that aligns engineering, procurement, construction and commissioning around a single guiding principle: the Path of Construction (PoC).

The PoC defines the optimal sequence in which a facility is built, tested and handed over. It is established early in the project lifecycle, typically during FEL 2, with strong involvement from construction and operations. Once the PoC is defined, all downstream activities are sequenced to support that construction path.

Engineering deliverables, procurement activities and field execution are therefore not developed in isolation. Instead, they are grouped, released and executed in the exact order required to support upcoming work fronts. This alignment continues through all project phases, from front-end planning to detailed design, construction, mechanical completion, commissioning and startup.

AWP uses a hierarchical structure of work packages:

AWP is built on a hierarchical and interdependent structure of work packages. The value of the methodology lies not only in defining these packages, but in understanding how they relate to each other and how information flows between them.

Construction Work Areas (CWAs)

Construction Work Areas represent geographical or functional areas of the project. CWAs are inherently multidisciplinary and form the structural backbone for defining construction scope.

A single CWA may include civil, structural, mechanical, piping, electrical and instrumentation work.

CWAs are defined early during Path of Construction workshops and serve as containers for Construction Work Packages.

Construction Work Packages (CWPs)

The Construction Work Package (CWP) is the central execution unit of AWP. Each CWP represents a defined constructible scope within a CWA and forms the basis for field execution, progress tracking and productivity measurement.

The relationship between CWAs and CWPs is one-to-many: a single CWA may contain several CWPs. CWPs are sequenced according to the Path of Construction, forming the Level 3 schedule. Predecessor and successor relationships between CWPs define how construction progresses through the project.

CWPs act as the integration point between engineering, procurement, installation and commissioning activities.

Engineering Work Packages (EWPs)

Engineering Work Packages bundle all engineering deliverables required to execute a specific construction scope. These may include IFC drawings, calculations, specifications, material take-offs and design criteria.

As a best practice, each CWP should be supported by a corresponding EWP, creating a one-to-one alignment between construction and engineering. This ensures that engineering effort is focused on enabling construction rather than producing information too early or out of sequence.

In practice, exceptions exist. A single EWP may support multiple CWPs, particularly when it represents overarching design criteria or vendor-driven documentation. Conversely, a CWP may depend on several EWPs due to interdisciplinary dependencies between civil, mechanical and structural engineering.

EWPs are sequenced according to the Path of Construction so that construction receives design information in the order required.

Procurement Work Packages (PWPs)

Procurement Work Packages define the materials, equipment and consumables required to execute a construction scope. PWPs are typically initiated based on EWP outputs such as technical requisitions, datasheets and specifications.

Within the AWP framework, PWPs do not necessarily represent physical field packages. Instead, they act as identifiers used to align procurement sequencing with the Path of Construction. A PWP may consist of one or multiple purchase orders and may cover long-lead equipment or bulk materials.

Best practice aims for a one-to-one alignment between PWPs and CWPs. However, commodity materials such as cable trays, supports or infrastructure items are often grouped into shared PWPs serving multiple CWPs.

Installation Work Packages (IWPs)

Installation Work Packages are short-duration, crew-ready packages derived from CWPs. IWPs are typically prepared by construction contractors and optimized for field execution.

Each IWP contains all information required to perform a discrete task safely and efficiently, including drawings, materials, tools, equipment, permits and quality requirements. A fundamental AWP principle is that IWPs must be constraint-free before being released to the field.

The relationship between CWPs and IWPs is one-to-many, as a single construction package is normally broken into multiple IWPs to manage sequencing, productivity and workface flow.

System Work Packages (SWPs) and Turnover Packages (TOPs)

As construction progresses, the project focus gradually shifts from area-based execution to system-based readiness. System Work Packages group portions of CWPs and IWPs into functional systems such as cooling water, gas compression or electrical distribution.

SWPs bridge construction and commissioning by enabling mechanical completion, inspection, testing and certification. Turnover Packages further consolidate these system scopes into closed circuits ready for handover, testing and startup.

The relationship between CWPs, IWPs and SWPs/TOPs is many-to-many. A single CWP or IWP may contribute to multiple systems, and a system may include components from several CWAs and CWPs.

This deliberate shift in perspective typically accelerates once construction reaches approximately 70 % physical completion, ensuring that system gaps are identified early and resolved before startup.

Interdependencies and Information Flow

The AWP structure is inherently interdependent:

• CWA → CWP: Each CWA can contain multiple CWPs.

• CWP ↔ EWP: Ideally one EWP supports one CWP, but cross‑disciplinary dependencies often require multiple EWPs per CWP or vice‑versa.

• CWP ↔ PWP: PWPs provide the materials and equipment to build CWPs; alignment ensures that procurement matches the PoC.

• CWP → IWP: Each CWP is broken into multiple IWPs for execution.

• IWP ↔ SWP/TOP: Portions of IWPs contribute to systems; SWPs and TOPs group packages by functional system for mechanical completion, commissioning and startup.

Typical roles, responsibilities and organizational alignment

Effective AWP implementation depends on clearly defined roles and strong organizational alignment.

These responsibilities are often visualized using swim lane diagrams that overlay AWP activities onto existing organizational processes, identifying collaboration points and handovers.

Why Adopt AWP? Key Benefits

The adoption of AWP has delivered demonstrable improvements across dozens of projects. Case studies compiled by COAA and CII show that implementing workface planning and AWP resulted in higher productivity, reduced cost and improved safety performance. O3 Solutions notes that AWP can reduce the total installed cost (TIC) by about 10 % while improving predictability and constructability. Other benefits include:

• Improved schedule reliability – Aligning engineering and procurement deliverables with construction ensures that work fronts are ready when crews arrive.

• Enhanced safety and quality – Releasing only constraint‑free IWPs reduces rework, hot work and interface clashes.

• Better workforce retention – Consistent work flow and clear packages allow crews to plan effectively and reduce downtime.

• Greater stakeholder alignment – Early collaboration between owners, EPCs, suppliers and operations promotes shared understanding of scope and priorities.

Path of Construction (PoC)

Definition and Purpose

The Path of Construction (PoC) is the cornerstone of AWP. It defines the optimal sequence in which construction activities, systems and areas will be executed, tested and handed over.

The PoC is established early, typically during FEL 2, and is developed collaboratively with input from construction, engineering, procurement, commissioning and operations.

Its purpose is to align all stakeholders on the sequencing logic that supports safe, efficient construction and predictable startup.

Development of the PoC

Developing the PoC is an iterative, collaborative process. It begins during FEL 2 and is refined through FEL 3 and execution.
The process includes:

• Defining Construction Work Areas (CWAs) based on physical layout, access constraints and system boundaries.

• Sequencing CWAs and establishing the logic for Construction Work Packages (CWPs).

• Aligning engineering and procurement deliverables (EWPs and PWPs) with the construction sequence.

• Identifying system priorities and the order in which systems will be commissioned.

• Establishing the Level 3 schedule, which breaks the PoC into time‑phased activities and defines predecessor/successor relationships between CWPs.

All major stakeholders—owner, EPC/EPCM, engineering, procurement, construction, commissioning and operations—participate in PoC workshops. Early involvement of field supervisors and craftspeople enriches the PoC with constructability insights.

The PoC is a living construct; it must be maintained and updated as project conditions change, ensuring that sequencing remains optimized and realistic.

Relationship Between PoC and Work Packages

PoC and CWAs: The PoC anchors the sequence in which CWAs are released and executed. CWAs are defined based on constructability and system handover priorities.

PoC and CWPs: Once CWAs are defined and sequenced, they are decomposed into CWPs. The PoC dictates the order in which CWPs are executed and forms the basis of the Level 3 schedule. Any change to the PoC directly affects CWP sequencing and influences engineering and procurement outputs.

PoC and EWPs/PWPs: Engineering deliverables must follow the PoC. EWPs are structured and released in the same sequence as the CWPs they support, ensuring design information is available when required. PWPs are derived from EWPs and aligned with the PoC so that materials and equipment arrive when needed.

PoC and IWPs/SWPs/TOPs: At the execution level the PoC drives the breakdown of CWPs into IWPs and their sequencing in look‑ahead planning. Completed IWPs are aggregated into SWPs and TOPs according to system sequences defined by the PoC. The PoC therefore underpins both the macro (CWA/CWP) and micro (IWP/SWP/TOP) views of execution.

Governance of the PoC

Ownership of the PoC typically sits with the EPC/EPCM under the governance of the owner.

Maintaining an effective PoC requires continuous collaboration across disciplines, formal workshops at key milestones, periodic reviews, and an ability to adjust sequencing based on execution feedback and changing conditions.

Planning and Implementation Stages

CII outlines four stages for implementing AWP throughout the FEL process. These stages map closely to FEL 2, FEL 3, execution and commissioning.

Stage 1 – Preliminary Planning (FEL 2)

This stage focuses on setting up the AWP framework:

• Develop an AWP execution plan and organisation chart to define roles, responsibilities and governance.

• Define data management and package ownership: assign responsibility for EWPs, CWPs, IWPs and SWPs; establish how information will be stored and updated.

• Delineate CWAs and draft CWP boundaries, ensuring that the entire scope is captured.

• Identify long‑lead materials and equipment by CWA; align EWPs with CWPs and hold interactive planning sessions to define the PoC and produce a Level 3 schedule.

• Onboarding and AWP culture: provide training and workshops to introduce concepts, terminology and the rationale for AWP.

• First PoC session (PoC 1): capture initial scope, premises, restrictions and risks; develop a high‑level construction strategy and preliminary CWAs.

Stage 2 – Detailed Engineering & Procurement (FEL 3)

Once the PoC is defined, detailed engineering and procurement activities must be sequenced accordingly.
Key activities include:

• Sequence procurement by EWP and required‑on‑site dates; prioritise vendor data and equipment deliveries to match the PoC.

• Build procurement tracking systems that report progress, expedite actions and manage vendor data submissions.

• Freeze CWPs and start producing IWPs, ensuring each CWP aligns with workface planning principles.

• Second PoC session (PoC 2): a collaborative planning workshop focusing on defining construction strategy, finalising CWAs and sequencing CWPs; establishing workface planning criteria.

• Third PoC session (PoC 3): refine packages (CWPs, EWPs, PWPs), align procurement sequencing and develop detailed constraints and readiness plans.

Stage 3 – Construction & Integration

During execution, workface discipline and continuous integration become the priority:

• Break CWPs into IWPs: WorkFace Planners develop crew‑ready packages, ensuring each package is constraint‑free before release.

• Verify constraint closure: confirm that drawings, materials, equipment, permits and quality plans are ready before releasing an IWP.

• Track progress and adjust: measure Percent Plan Complete (PPC), earned hours and productivity; refine future IWPs based on actual performance.

• Roll IWPs into SWPs for mechanical completion; prepare inspection and test plans, punch list management and RFCC issuance.

• Collaborative six‑week look‑ahead sessions: align schedule, material readiness and workface needs; update the PoC and remove constraints.

Stage 4 – Commissioning & Start‑Up

In the final stage the focus shifts from construction progress to system readiness, in which the activities might include:

• Develop Test Work Packages and Start‑Up Work Packages: link commissioning activities to predecessor IWPs and ensure all pre‑commissioning and energization tasks are complete.

• Issue RFCC and RFOC certificates for each SWP to transition from construction to commissioning and operation.

• Capture lessons learned to refine PoC definitions, package boundaries and constraint management for future projects.

Integrating AWP with Existing Organizational Processes

AWP is not designed to replace existing project execution processes.

Rather, it overlays and complements them, creating structured touchpoints where engineering, procurement, construction and commissioning can align around a shared execution logic.

In practice, few organizations need to start from a blank page; success lies in identifying where AWP requirements intersect with current workflows and adapting accordingly.

Functional swim lane diagrams are valuable tools for mapping AWP activities across project phases and organizational functions.

They clearly show responsibilities, interfaces, overlaps and gaps between owner, EPC/EPCM, engineering, procurement, construction, suppliers and operations.

Swim lanes are not just documentation aids; they are change‑management instruments that help teams visualize how AWP alters decision‑making, sequencing and information flow while preserving familiar roles and accountabilities.

Early involvement of contractors and suppliers is critical.

By engaging contractors from the outset, projects benefit from constructability insights during PoC definition, CWA breakdown and package sequencing, significantly reducing execution risk.

Collaborative planning sessions—the “touchpoints” of AWP—are formal integration moments where stakeholders jointly review constraints, adjust sequencing, refine work packages and confirm readiness.
Rather than ad‑hoc meetings, these sessions form the backbone of disciplined AWP governance and execution.

Digital Enablement of AWP and the Role of Technology

Technology as an Enabler

Technology facilitates AWP by providing a single, consistent view of the project and making the methodology accessible to all stakeholders—from engineers and planners to field crews and executives.

Its purpose is to simplify execution, not to add complexity.

Effective digitalization allows teams to create, manage, visualize and communicate work packages in an intuitive manner; it connects information across disciplines and project phases, reducing fragmentation and manual handovers.

Digital Thread and Information Continuity

A core digital concept is the Digital Thread—the continuous transfer of structured information between systems and disciplines across the project lifecycle.

In an AWP context, the Digital Thread connects:

• engineering deliverables (EWPs),

• procurement and material management (PWPs),

• construction execution (CWPs and IWPs),

• quality and inspection records,

• commissioning and system completion (SWPs and TOPs),

• cost, schedule and progress data.

This continuity ensures that data generated in one phase is reused and enriched in subsequent phases rather than re‑created.
AWP thus becomes a data‑driven execution model, not a set of disconnected planning artefacts.

Visualization, BIM and 4D Planning

Visual technologies such as 3D modelling, BIM and 4D scheduling dramatically enhance the effectiveness of AWP.

Linking work packages to physical models and timelines allows teams to visually validate sequences defined by the PoC, identify spatial and sequencing constraints early, communicate plans effectively to field crews and support decision‑making through intuitive feedback.

4D visualization enables teams to test construction logic before execution; many projects have discovered sequencing conflicts and operational constraints through 4D simulation that were not evident in traditional schedules.

Integration Across Systems and Applications

Modern projects rely on multiple specialized systems for engineering, scheduling, procurement, construction management and commissioning.
Limited integration between these tools is a recognized challenge.

AWP addresses this complexity by providing a structuring framework: consistent work package identifiers and relationships enable meaningful integration between systems, whether through direct interfaces, standards such as IFC or data exchange workflows.

Successful digital AWP implementations recognize integration as a critical planning activity; they define data ownership, transfer mechanisms and update responsibilities early to avoid inefficiencies during execution.

Features and Benefits of Omega 365

The Omega 365 suite illustrates how digital platforms can enable AWP implementation across the entire lifecycle.

Omega 365 supports package lifecycle management: each EWP, CWP, IWP, SWP and PWP can be created, updated and tracked with status, document references, material take‑offs and constraints.

It provides constraint logging, allowing teams to record missing drawings, materials, scaffolding or permits and assign actions to close them; IWPs cannot be released until all constraints are marked complete.

Integration with BIM models enables 3D visualization and 4D planning; planners can define CWAs on the model, generate quantities, simulate installation sequences and link the model to the schedule, producing a visual 4D plan.

Omega 365 also centralizes mechanical completion and commissioning through its Scope Explorer: users perform progressive verification, record test results and issue RFCC/RFOC certificates, with all certificates linked to corresponding SWPs and assets.

Dashboards provide live KPIs such as IWPs ready vs. total IWPs, constraint closure rate, progress toward RFCC/RFOC, Percent Plan Complete and productivity per discipline.

Finally, Omega 365 connects all AWP data to a 3D digital twin, allowing users to visualize packages spatially, filter by discipline and colour‑code the model based on completion phase.

Completed IWPs appear in green, active ones in yellow and upcoming ones in grey, giving teams and management an immediate visual understanding of progress and pending work.

Challenges and Best Practices for Digital Integration

Despite the benefits, integrating multiple applications remains a challenge.

There are many software options but limited interoperability; data silos can hinder information flow.
To mitigate this, organizations should:

• Map data flows and integration requirements early.

• Use standards (e.g., IFC) and well‑defined work package identifiers to enable cross‑system referencing.

• Recognize that digital systems are tools to support AWP, not replacements for disciplined planning and collaboration.

Best‑Practice Guidelines

The CII recommends several best practices for successful AWP implementation:

1. Engage construction early: involve field supervisors and craftspeople in PoC definition to priorities work fronts and identify constructability issues.

2. Develop a robust work package breakdown: clearly define EWPs, CWPs, IWPs and SWPs; ensure CWPs represent logical areas or systems and that IWPs can be executed in one to two weeks and are constraint‑free.

3. Align procurement with the PoC: use PWPs and procurement plans to ensure long‑lead items arrive when needed; integrate vendor data requirements into engineering deliverables and schedules.

4. Implement rigorous constraint management: verify that all constraints (drawings, materials, tools, access, permits, resources and quality hold points) are closed before releasing an IWP; maintain a live constraint log and resolve issues in advance.

5. Define governance and roles: document roles and responsibilities in the AWP execution plan; ensure collaboration between the AWP Champion, EPC AWP Manager, WorkFace Planner and supply chain lead.

6. Use digital tools and BIM models: digital platforms like Omega 365 can store packages, manage constraints, track progress and integrate 3D models; BIM helps delineate CWAs, visualise installation sequences, extract quantities and monitor progress.

7. Measure and improve: establish baselines for cost, schedule and quantities; track performance using metrics such as PPC, constraint closure rates and RFCC/RFOC counts; hold regular reviews to capture lessons learned and refine processes.

Beyond CII: Practical Implementation Flow

Building on CII guidance and lessons learned from projects, the following detailed flow expands the planning and implementation roadmap:

1. Onboarding and cultural alignment: Introduce AWP concepts and foundation; train teams on roles, terminology, package structure and PoC methodology.

2. Demand capture and PoC 1: Gather project requirements; conduct an initial PoC session to map scope, premises, restrictions and risks; identify CWAs and high‑level sequencing.

3. Conceptual and preliminary engineering: Hold PoC 2 as the first collaborative planning session; define construction strategy, refine CWAs and develop an initial Level 3 schedule.

4. Basic engineering and planning: Conduct PoC 3; detail CWPs, EWPs and PWPs; align procurement sequencing and update schedule logic.

5. Detailed engineering and planning: Use collaborative planning sessions to refine construction strategy at the package level; adjust CWPs, EWPs and PWPs based on detailed design and procurement status.

6. Execution readiness and field mobilization: Integrate vendor documents; generate the master WP schedule (Level 3); release IWPs only when all constraints are cleared; run continuous monitoring and six‑week look‑ahead sessions to manage readiness and remove constraints.

7. Construction execution and six‑week look‑ahead: Apply Last Planner System techniques; monitor PPC and productivity; update the PoC and package structure based on field feedback.

8. System completion and turnover: Group completed IWPs into SWPs and TOPs; plan testing, commissioning and handover; shift focus from area‑based productivity to system readiness and startup.

9. Lessons learned and continuous improvement: Evaluate performance of work packages, constraint trends and schedule adherence; feed insights into future projects and update PoC strategies

Lessons Learned and Continuous Improvement

Continuous improvement is central to AWP.

At project completion, teams should review package performance, constraint trends, schedule adherence and root causes of delays.

Omega 365 supports post‑project analysis by providing historical data; lessons learned are captured and stored for application on future projects.

This feedback loop ensures that each new project begins with a more mature and data‑driven AWP foundation.

Conclusion

Advanced Work Packaging has evolved from a supporting practice to a proven delivery system for complex capital projects.

By aligning engineering, procurement, construction and commissioning around a well‑defined Path of Construction, AWP addresses root causes of cost and schedule overruns.

The hierarchical package structure, clear roles, detailed planning stages and rigorous constraint management provide a disciplined framework for execution.

Integrating AWP with existing processes and using digital tools such as Omega 365 enable data continuity, visualization and real‑time decision making.

Projects that adopt AWP and leverage digital enablement consistently report improved predictability, higher productivity and safer outcomes.

AWP in Omega 365: From Planning to Commissioning

Although AWP does not prescribe a specific software platform, a digital environment such as Omega 365 can greatly enhance implementation.

By storing all packages, drawings, materials and constraint logs in a single system, Omega 365 provides a “single source of truth.” It supports:

• Package lifecycle management – Each EWP, CWP, IWP, SWP and PWP can be created, updated and tracked with status, document references, MTOs and constraints.

• Constraint logging – Teams can log missing drawings, materials, scaffolding or permits and assign actions to close them; IWPs cannot be released until all constraints are marked complete.

• 3D visualization and 4D planning – Integration with BIM models allows planners to define CWAs on the model, generate quantities and simulate installation sequences. Linking the model to the schedule produces a visual 4D plan that helps teams identify clashes and sequence changes.

This section describes a step-by-step implementation of Advanced Work Packaging (AWP) using Omega 365, mapping the CII-recommended AWP stages to practical actions and applications within the Omega 365 platform.

Rather than presenting tools in isolation, the focus is on when each Omega 365 module becomes relevant, what role it plays, and how it supports AWP discipline throughout the project lifecycle.

1. AWP Setup & Governance

(Early FEL 2)

Every successful AWP implementation in Omega 365 begins with clear governance.

During project setup, the team defines the AWP execution structure, aligning organizational units, system hierarchy (System → Subsystem → Tag), coding conventions, and roles. This ensures that all upcoming packages — from EWPs to SWPs — share a consistent data backbone.

The Omega 365 Meetings app plays a critical role at this stage, serving as the central place to capture decisions, assumptions, action items, and agreements related to AWP adoption.

Key Actions in Omega 365

Organizational and Access Setup

• Configure Organizational Units (Owner, EPC/EPCM, Contractors)

• Define user roles and access rights aligned with AWP responsibilities

Define Coding Standards and Structures

• Establish naming conventions for Systems, Subsystems, Tags, and Work Packages

• Align coding with existing project and asset standards

AWP Awareness and Training Support

• Prepare reference views and sample structures to support onboarding

• Align AWP terminology across teams and disciplines

Main Omega 365 apps involved

• Activities & Workflows

• Object Register

• System Register

• Meetings

At this stage, Omega 365 acts primarily as a governance and collaboration backbone, preparing the organization for construction-led planning.

2. Defining the Path of Construction (PoC)

(FEL 2)

Once governance is established, the next step is defining the Path of Construction (PoC) — the optimized sequence in which systems and areas will be built, tested, and handed over.

In Omega 365, planners use the Object Register and the BIM Viewer to visualize construction zones, define Construction Work Areas (CWAs), and logically group them into CWPs.

The PoC becomes the anchor for scheduling, material flow, and resource planning. Omega 365 links each work package to the master schedule (P6 / MS Project), enabling look-ahead planning and forecasting.

Key Actions in Omega 365

Structure the Physical and System Hierarchy

• Populate Systems and Subsystems reflecting operational boundaries

• Validate hierarchy against commissioning and startup strategy

Define Construction Work Areas (CWAs)

• Define the construction-driven sequence

• Identify CWAs and high-level system priorities

• Group objects into CWAs based on geography, access, and constructability

• Validate CWAs using 3D/BIM visualization where available

Capture the Initial PoC Logic

• Document PoC assumptions and sequencing logic

• Prepare PoC inputs for collaborative planning sessions

• Use Scope Plans & Schedules to support PoC logic and phasing

Main Omega 365 apps involved

• Object Register

• Object Explorer

• BIM Viewer

• Scope Plans & Schedules

• Meetings

• Activities & Workflows

Here, Omega 365 enables collaborative, construction-led planning, making the PoC a shared, traceable, and continuously updated reference.

Read more about Omega 365 Scope Plans & Scheduling here: Introduction to Planning of Scope Plans & Scheduling

3. Engineering Work Packages (EWPs)

(Late FEL 2 / FEL 3)

Engineering deliverables feed the entire AWP process.

In Omega 365, Engineering Work Packages (EWPs) contain design documents, isometrics, calculations, and Material Take-Offs (MTOs), all aligned with the PoC.

Each EWP is structured around objects in the Object Register, while documents are managed in the Document Register, where metadata links them directly to their target CWA or CWP.

As EWPs are approved and issued “Issued for Construction” (IFC), they unlock downstream work packages, ensuring that engineering progress directly drives construction readiness.

Key Actions in Omega 365

Define Engineering Work Packages

• Group engineering deliverables required for each CWP

• Link documents and objects to EWPs

Track Engineering Readiness

• Monitor document status (IFR / IFC)

• Identify engineering constraints impacting CWPs

Main Omega 365 apps involved

• Document Register

• Object Register

• Status Dashboards

• Meetings

• Activities & Workflows

Read more about Omega 356 Document Management app here: Introduction to Omega 365 Document Management

4. Procurement & Material Management (PWPs)

(FEL 3)

Procurement sequencing is critical to avoid workfront delays.

Within the AWP framework, a Procurement Work Package (PWP) does not represent a physical field package. Instead, it is a logical identifier that groups materials and equipment aligned with a specific EWP or CWP, following the Path of Construction.

In Omega 365, PWPs can be represented as structured lists or documents, connected to materials, purchase orders, and vendor data. The Material Management module provides full lifecycle tracking from identification through delivery and release to the field.

Key Actions in Omega 365

• Group materials and equipment aligned with CWPs

• Track long-lead items and bulk materials

• Link purchase orders, vendor documentation, and delivery milestones

• Identify procurement constraints impacting the PoC

Main Omega 365 apps involved

• Material Management

• Object Register

• Document Register

• Status Dashboards

• Meetings

• Activities & Workflows

At this stage, procurement shifts from a support function to an active contributor to construction readiness.

5. Construction Work Packages (CWPs)

(Construction Planning)

CWPs form the foundation for field execution.

Each CWP in Omega 365 groups related EWPs, PWPs, and engineering disciplines under a common construction scope. CWPs are linked to the Level 3 schedule, enabling time-phased control and earned-value reporting.

Main Omega 365 apps involved

• Processes

• Object Explorer

• Scope Plans & Schedules

• Meetings

• Activities & Workflows

6. Installation Work Packages (IWPs) & Work Preparation

(Construction Phase)

CWPs are decomposed into short-duration, Installation Work Packages (IWPs) optimized for workface execution.

IWPs can only be released once all constraints are cleared. Omega 365 enforces this discipline through readiness checklists and workflows, ensuring that crews never arrive at an unprepared workfront.

Main Omega 365 apps involved

• Processes

• Checklists

• Activities & Workflows

• Material Management

• Meetings

Read more about Omega 365 Checklist Library here: Checklist Library

7. Constraint Management & Readiness Reviews

Constraint management is at the heart of AWP discipline.

Omega 365 allows constraints related to engineering, materials, access, permits, safety, and quality to be tracked and resolved through configurable checklists and workflows. Once all constraints are closed, the IWP status changes to “Ready for Field.”

Main Omega 365 apps involved

• Checklist Library

• Activities & Workflows

• Status Dashboards

• Meetings

• Scope Explorer

Read more about Workflows in Omega 365 here: Activities and Workflows

8. System Work Packages (SWPs) & Testing Integration

(Late Construction / Early Commissioning)

As IWPs are completed, Omega 365 groups them into System Work Packages (SWPs) representing functional systems such as Cooling Water, Gas Compression, or Electrical Distribution.

SWPs bridge construction and commissioning, linking installed scope to inspections, tests, and ITRs.

Main Omega 365 apps involved

• System Register

• Scope Explorer

• Completion Management

• Activities & Workflows

9. Completion Management & Turnover

Omega 365’s Scope Explorer centralizes Mechanical Completion and Commissioning activities.

Here, teams perform progressive verification, record test results, and issue RFCC (Ready for Commissioning) and RFOC (Ready for Operation) certificates, all linked to SWPs and assets.

Main Omega 365 apps involved

• Completion Management

• Scope Explorer

• Document Register

• Meetings

• Activities & Workflows

Read more about Omega 365 Completion Management app here: Systematic Completion

10. Reporting, Dashboards & Analytics

(Across All Stages)

Throughout execution, Omega 365 consolidates data from all modules into live dashboards.

Typical KPIs include:

• IWPs ready vs. total IWPs

• Constraint closure rate

• Progress toward RFCC/RFOC

• Percent Plan Complete (PPC)

• Productivity per discipline

Main Omega 365 apps involved

• Status Dashboards

Read more about Omega 365 Status Dashboards here: Status Dashboards

11. Digital Twin & 3D Visualization

(Across All Stages)

Omega 365 connects all AWP data to the 3D Digital Twin using the BIM Viewer.

Users can visualize packages spatially, filter by discipline or system, and color-code progress (e.g., green for complete, yellow for active, grey for upcoming). Visualization is used as a decision-making tool, not only for reporting.

Main Omega 365 apps involved

• BIM Viewer

• Object Explorer

• Scope Explorer.

• Activities & Workflows

Read more about Omega 365 BIM Module here: Docs - BIM Introduction

12. Lessons Learned & Continuous Improvement

After project completion, Omega 365 supports structured lessons learned through historical data analysis. Package performance, constraint trends, and delay causes can be reviewed and fed into future projects.

This closes the AWP loop and ensures continuous maturity.

Main Omega 365 apps involved

• Lessons Learned

• Status Dashboards

In Summary

Omega 365 supports AWP not through a single module, but through the coordinated activation of applications across the project lifecycle. Meetings, Materials, Documents, Planning, Completion, and Visualization all play distinct roles at different stages, while sharing a common data backbone.

This staged, integrated approach is what transforms Omega 365 from a collection of tools into a true AWP execution platform.