Behind the numbers: Osazee Onaghinor on fixing Nigeria’s project delivery gap

Nimot Sulaimon

Across Nigeria’s infrastructure and energy sectors, delays, cost overruns, and stalled projects have become all too common. From procurement bottlenecks to misaligned planning, many promising ventures fail to meet their targets. Yet amid these challenges, a new generation of professionals is demonstrating that with data discipline, transparency, and proactive planning, project outcomes can be both predictable and profitable.

One of the leading voices in this movement is Osazee Onaghinor, a first-class civil engineering graduate of the University of Benin and Project Controls Advisor within a multinational energy upstream operator. In this role, he supports large, multi-million-dollar offshore and onshore campaigns, where delays and cost overruns can quickly translate into major production losses. With over a decade of experience in project execution, cost control, and analytics-driven decision-making, Onaghinor has played a pivotal role in improving procurement efficiency and governance across complex energy projects.

From establishing a Decision Support Structure that saved an estimated $23 million in avoidable logistics costs to developing a Materials Requirements Dashboard that accelerated long-lead deliveries by 16 weeks, his results are as practical as they are innovative.

In this exclusive interview, he discusses how timing, data, and transparency can transform how Nigeria executes large-scale projects.

Interviewer: Nigeria continues to face challenges in delivering projects on time and within budget. From your experience, what is the biggest cause of these recurring breakdowns?

Osazee Onaghinor:
Too often, what fails is not the technical side but timing and information flow. Planning happens at one speed, execution at another. Procurement lead times, vendor approvals, and financial sign-offs lag behind the rhythm that operations require. When those cycles fall out of sync, a one-day intervention becomes a multi-week shutdown.

I have seen teams waiting for essential parts while crews stand idle. That outcome is predictable, and it is a failure that can be anticipated. When we set up the Decision Support Structure, the data revealed these inefficiencies clearly: duplicated convoy runs, poor handovers, and redundant mobilizations. Once you see the pattern, you can act on it.

Interviewer: What specific steps did you take to correct those inefficiencies?

Onaghinor:
We started by instrumenting decisions, tracking the points where things typically break down. For us, that meant materials availability and vendor reliability.

From there, we developed a Materials Requirements Dashboard, a live interface combining procurement status, fabrication progress, and delivery estimates into one accessible view. Everyone, from engineering to procurement, could finally see the same truth in real time.

We also introduced vendor scorecards. Instead of negotiating based on assumptions, procurement teams relied on actual data about performance, cost variance, and delivery accuracy. That shift improved negotiation outcomes and helped us capture about $0.8 million in additional savings.

Interviewer: You have written and spoken about data analytics in procurement. How is data changing how projects are managed on the ground?

Onaghinor:
Data clarifies, and it disciplines. In 2019, I co-authored a paper on how big data influences supply-chain decision-making, and we are seeing it play out in real time. When you can use historical data to predict vendor performance or delivery risk, the conversation shifts from blame to prevention.

Even simple tools like Power BI dashboards linked to ERP systems can surface anomalies early. That allows teams to act before issues cascade into downtime. The truth is, predictive procurement does not have to be expensive. You can start with a spreadsheet and a structured review rhythm. The key is visibility and accountability.

Interviewer: Smaller contractors often feel predictive systems are out of reach. Can they realistically adopt this approach?

Onaghinor:
Absolutely. The biggest misconception is that you need enterprise-level software to be data-driven. Start small. Standardize your manifests, timestamp deliveries, and hold a brief daily review around the items on your critical path.

That is how our Decision Support Structure started: lean, fast, and practical. The $23 million savings came from preventing routine waste, not from expensive systems. Technology only amplifies what process discipline already achieves.

Interviewer: You have also introduced Agile-style work packaging in oil and gas operations, which is unusual for the sector. What does that look like?

Onaghinor:
It is about breaking down big scopes into smaller, predictable work packages that align with procurement cycles. Instead of waiting for every component to arrive before mobilizing, we identify the minimum ready scope for each phase and plan mobilizations accordingly.

That alignment between engineering readiness and materials availability makes contractor mobilization smoother. In one offshore case, this approach helped reduce gas production downtime by two days, avoiding significant revenue loss. It is a shift from “wait for everything” to “work with readiness.”

Interviewer: Transparency seems central to your approach. How do you get diverse stakeholders such as contractors, finance teams, and joint-venture partners to cooperate?

Onaghinor:
Transparency changes everything. We created open dashboards where vendors, partners, and finance teams could see the same performance metrics. That shared visibility eliminated ambiguity and built trust.

We paired that with governance frameworks that defined who owned what, how delays were escalated, and how claims were handled. Finally, we ran short training sessions so teams knew how to interpret the dashboards and act on insights. Once people see the cost of inaction in real numbers, collaboration improves naturally.

Interviewer: There is constant pressure in projects to deliver faster. How do you balance that with safety and compliance?

Onaghinor:
You do not compromise. Speed means nothing if it undermines safety. Our teams integrate SIMOPS (Simultaneous Operations) planning, HES gate checks, and staged approvals into every project cadence.

By shifting left and embedding these gates early, we prevent safety from becoming an afterthought. That discipline actually saves time through fewer reworks, fewer shutdowns, and a stronger safety record overall. A safe project is a predictable project.

Interviewer: Looking ahead, what is next for you and your predictive procurement work?

Onaghinor:
My focus now is embedding predictive procurement within project controls frameworks, moving from descriptive dashboards to forecasting models that alert teams before problems surface.

The goal is to make every decision measurable and forecastable, turning lessons from brownfield projects into reusable frameworks. I am interested in publishing these approaches openly so other teams can adapt them, not selling a product but sharing a method that works.

Interviewer: Finally, what is one practical thing any project owner could do tomorrow to improve delivery performance?

Onaghinor:
Pick one decision that consistently slows you down, often it is about materials or vendor timing, and make that decision visible. Assign ownership, track it daily, and plan contingencies before it fails.

When you treat key decisions like living products with metrics and owners, you prevent cascading delays. It is simple but transformative.