Profit leaks in operations: What Asset Managers are missing

Introduction.

Operating renewable energy assets is not a matter of set and forget. Once the asset goes live, a different kind of complexity begins. One that requires financial oversight, contractual clarity, and portfolio-wide visibility.

Operation isn’t the stable phase most assume it to be. It’s where value silently erodes if governance fails. The risk is not a major system breakdown. It's the silent inefficiencies that accumulate when responsibilities are blurred, data is fragmented, and underperformance becomes normalized.

For Asset Managers, the challenge is to go beyond surface KPIs and ask: Where are we losing value? What’s behind the deviation? Are we acting on the right signals?

In this article, we explore the structural blind spots of the operation phase and what strategic control truly looks like.

The illusion of stability: when indicators hide underlying risk.

Monthly reports are delivered. Production appears on target. SLAs look compliant. But beneath this layer of apparent control, deeper inefficiencies are at play:

• Contractual responsibilities that are not enforced.
  
• Long-term degradation masked by averaged KPIs.
  
• Cost escalations embedded in land leases or unmonitored curtailments.
  

These issues don’t raise alarms. Yet their financial impact is real and cumulative.

Without cross-functional integration, it becomes nearly impossible to trace underperformance to its true source. What starts as isolated data gaps can result in systemic loss across the portfolio.

Contracts: the hidden variable in operational performance.

Not all risks are technical. Many originate in the fine print.

• O&M providers delay interventions without contractual consequence.
• Land leases penalize higher production, yet no one tracks the thresholds.
• Maintenance scopes are split across vendors, with no clear accountability.

Vague terms, poor enforcement, and fragmented workflows create an operational grey zone. And when the contract is unclear, risk quietly shifts from the field to the balance sheet.

If obligations are not made traceable and enforceable, inefficiencies remain invisible until they surface as lost IRR. But contracts are just one part of the equation. The other is data — and how it’s managed.

Fragmented systems = partial visibility.

Performance tools, ticketing platforms, spreadsheets, SCADA, contract folders. Each offers data, but in isolation. And visibility without context is just noise.

Asset Managers need to see beyond dashboards. What matters is not the number. It’s the connection: between incident and resolution, SLA and response time, contract clause and financial outcome.

Without this structure, decisions are delayed, accountability blurs, and the edge is lost in operational entropy.

What strategic oversight really requires.

To stay in control, Asset Managers must build a framework that connects the dots:

• Performance deviations must link back to financial models.
• SLAs must be monitored, enforced, and tied to real events.
• Incidents must be traced over time, across assets.
• Contracts and documents must be version-controlled and deadline-aware.
  

This is governance in action. It is the difference between reacting to issues and leading with insight.

Conclusion: Operational value is a matter of governance.

Operation is not the quiet phase of an asset’s life. It is where its financial promise is tested every day.

Without structure, inefficiencies hide in plain sight. But when systems are aligned, obligations traceable, and insights actionable, Asset Managers can protect what the model promised.

Operational value isn’t just protected through tools — it’s protected through strategic alignment. That’s what tomorrow’s Asset Managers must build.