R
Reliox
Progress Step 1 of 10

Shutdown/Turnaround Excellence Assessment

Evaluate your turnaround management maturity across the full TAR lifecycle — from strategy through close-out. This assessment covers 60 questions across 6 sections in approximately 20-25 minutes.

Based on industry best practices:

  • ◆ TAR Lifecycle Management — Strategy through Close-out best practices
  • ◆ Industry Benchmarks — Solomon, IPA turnaround performance standards
  • ◆ International Scope — Gulf States climate, logistics & regulatory considerations

After completion you will receive:

  • ◆ Detailed maturity score per section (1.0-5.0)
  • ◆ Overall score with 6-section radar chart
  • ◆ Gap analysis and prioritized improvement roadmap
  • ◆ Comprehensive report via email

Assessment Structure (60 questions):

◆ S1: Strategy & Governance (10 q)
◆ S2: Scope Development & Challenge (10 q)
◆ S3: Planning & Scheduling (12 q)
◆ S4: Safety & Risk Management (10 q)
◆ S5: Execution & Progress Control (10 q)
◆ S6: Close-out & Lessons Learned (8 q)

Important Disclaimer: This assessment is a self-evaluation tool for educational and awareness purposes. Results do NOT constitute formal turnaround management certification or professional audit. Organizations seeking formal STO assessments should engage qualified turnaround professionals.

All answers are confidential. Your data is processed securely and never shared with third parties.

Company Information

Tell us about your organization so we can benchmark your results.

Section 1 of 6

Strategy & Governance

How well does your organization govern and strategize turnaround management at the enterprise level?

1. Does your organization have a formal turnaround management philosophy that is documented and communicated?

2. Does your organization maintain a rolling 5-10 year TAR schedule integrated with asset integrity strategy?

3. Does your organization use a structured cost estimation methodology with historical benchmarking for TAR budgets?

4. Is there a management steering committee with defined gate reviews governing the TAR lifecycle?

5. Is your TAR scope driven by inspection strategy and asset integrity data?

6. Is there a dedicated TAR manager role with clear authority and accountability for turnaround delivery?

7. Is a cross-functional TAR team formed at an appropriate T-minus milestone?

8. Are formal go/no-go gate reviews conducted at defined milestones before TAR execution?

9. Is TAR performance benchmarked against industry standards such as Solomon or IPA?

10. Does the organization have a structured improvement cycle that feeds lessons from each TAR into the next planning cycle?

Section 2 of 6

Scope Development & Challenge

How effectively does your organization develop, challenge, and control turnaround work scope?

11. Does your organization have a systematic process to collect TAR scope from all sources (PM, PdM, inspections, projects, deferrals)?

12. Are all work orders categorized as Mandatory, Opportunity, or Discretionary?

13. Is there a formal scope freeze enforced at a defined T-minus milestone?

14. Is every work order challenged for inclusion in THIS specific turnaround?

15. Is there a formal process for evaluating and approving scope additions during execution?

16. Are statutory inspection and regulatory requirements systematically identified and integrated into TAR scope?

17. Are capital project work packages integrated with the maintenance TAR scope and schedule?

18. Does equipment failure history and condition data drive TAR scope decisions?

19. Is TAR scope prioritized using risk-based criteria (consequence x likelihood)?

20. Is the TAR scope communicated to all stakeholders with clear ownership per work order?

Section 3 of 6

Planning & Scheduling

How mature are your turnaround planning and scheduling processes, from work breakdown to commissioning?

21. Does your organization use a formal WBS decomposition for turnaround planning (e.g., Site > Unit > System > Activity)?

22. Is your TAR schedule built using Critical Path Method (CPM) with predecessor/successor logic and float calculation?

23. Are craft and contractor resources leveled across the TAR schedule against actual availability?

24. Are long-lead items identified early with material staging and kitting planned before shutdown?

25. Does your organization use a formal T-minus countdown with defined deliverables per milestone?

26. Is contractor mobilization planned with adequate lead time for visas, permits, and accommodation?

27. Are laydown areas, cranes, scaffolding, and waste management planned in advance?

28. Does TAR timing consider climate, ambient temperature, and regional calendar factors (e.g., Ramadan, summer heat)?

29. Are shift patterns designed with fatigue management and handover quality in mind?

30. Is the startup and commissioning sequence planned as part of the TAR schedule from the outset?

31. Is work front-loaded before shutdown to maximize the available shutdown window?

32. Are schedule risks identified, quantified, and contingency built into the TAR plan?

Section 4 of 6

Safety & Risk Management

How effectively does your organization manage safety risks specific to turnaround environments?

33. Is a TAR-specific safety plan developed and communicated to all personnel before execution begins?

34. Is the permit-to-work (PTW) system scaled for TAR volume with adequate authorized signatories?

35. Are simultaneous operations (SIMOPS) identified, risk-assessed, and actively managed during the TAR?

36. Are confined space entry and hot work managed with TAR-specific procedures and rescue provisions?

37. Are heat stress, weather, and environmental hazard mitigation plans in place for TAR execution?

38. Are contractor safety qualification, induction, and supervision adequate for TAR scale and complexity?

39. Is a TAR-specific emergency response plan in place covering changed site conditions during turnaround?

40. Is there an active safety observation and intervention program during TAR execution?

41. Is fatigue risk managed through work hour limits, rest requirements, and monitoring during the TAR?

42. Is daily safety performance tracked, reported, and acted upon during the TAR?

Section 5 of 6

Execution & Progress Control

How effectively does your organization track progress, manage changes, and control execution during the turnaround?

43. Is earned value or equivalent progress tracking used against the baseline schedule?

44. Is there a formal approval process for emerging or break-in work with schedule impact assessment?

45. Are defined methods available for schedule recovery when the TAR falls behind plan?

46. Are quality hold points defined and inspection releases managed without causing schedule delays?

47. Is there a structured handover process between shifts covering safety, progress, and outstanding issues?

48. Are vendor and specialist activities sequenced and coordinated within the TAR schedule?

49. Is equipment preservation managed during extended shutdown (desiccation, nitrogen blanketing, shaft rotation)?

50. Is the supply chain responsive during TAR execution for emergency procurement and local sourcing?

51. Is commissioning and startup executed per a defined sequence with formal readiness checks?

52. Is there a central coordination hub (war room) with daily planning meetings and real-time status visibility?

Section 6 of 6

Close-out & Lessons Learned

How well does your organization close out turnarounds and capture lessons for future improvement?

53. Is the punch list tracked with clear ownership, priority, and completion deadlines?

54. Are as-found and as-left conditions documented for all major equipment opened during the TAR?

55. Are actual TAR costs reconciled against estimates at the work order level?

56. Is the planned vs. actual schedule analyzed with root causes identified for variances?

57. Is a structured multi-stakeholder post-TAR review conducted within 30 days of completion?

58. Are lessons learned formally captured, categorized, and assigned to owners for action?

59. Are TAR KPIs (safety, cost, schedule, quality) formally reported to management after completion?

60. Are lessons and data from this TAR systematically integrated into the next TAR planning cycle?

Additional Insights

Optional: Help us understand your turnaround context for more tailored recommendations.

Thank You!

Your Shutdown/Turnaround Excellence assessment has been submitted successfully.

Your personalized report will include:

  • ◆ Overall TAR maturity score and level
  • ◆ Score per section (6 TAR lifecycle sections)
  • ◆ 6-section radar diagram visualization
  • ◆ Gap analysis (distance from Competent level)
  • ◆ Prioritized improvement roadmap
  • ◆ Recommended resources matched to weakest sections

Questions? Contact us at info@reliox.ai

Explore More Assessments

P
P&S Assessment

60 questions across 10 planning & scheduling pillars
M
Maintenance Maturity

56 questions across 5 SMRP pillars & 21 capability areas
T
TPM Assessment

48 questions across 8 TPM pillars + OEE & 5S foundations
R
RCM Compliance

52 questions across 8 SAE JA1011 compliance sections

Implementation Resources

★ Free Starter Kit FREE

5 essential maintenance templates — download instantly
★ Pro Templates 127+

Complete template library for Maintenance, TPM & ISO 55000