Engagements › OPA Readiness
Facility Readiness · Lifecycle Economics · Migration Planning
Collaborative Systems Integration (CSI) assesses Open Process Automation readiness for owner/operators evaluating a distributed control system (DCS) replacement, a brownfield migration or a new architecture. The paid, project-scoped OPA Readiness Engagement connects your facility's data to a business case, readiness gaps and a practical migration pathway.
An Open Process Automation (OPA) readiness assessment establishes whether an existing plant has the architecture, information, operating capability and business case needed for a scoped O-PAS-based change, and identifies the gaps to resolve before implementation.
Collaborative Systems Integration (CSI) provides this assessment through its paid OPA Readiness Engagement. CSI works with the owner's controls, operations, maintenance, cybersecurity and project teams to examine retained assets, compare migration options and define the next decision. The owner supplies site evidence and retains investment and operating authority.
The assessment can lead to a pilot, a brownfield migration planning scope, or further investigation. It can also identify reasons to retain or upgrade the installed DCS rather than proceed with OPA.
The introductory assessment and the readiness engagement serve different decisions.
Complimentary introduction
A structured first conversation with CSI about your current system, lifecycle pressures and possible OPA fit. This is an initial assessment to decide whether to investigate further.
See the introductory assessment →Paid · scoped per project
A defined engagement using facility inputs to assess architectural and organizational readiness, compare lifecycle economics, explore migration options and prepare a leadership decision report.
Scope, required inputs, deliverables, schedule and commercial terms are agreed with CSI before work begins.
Start with the information you have. CSI and your team identify missing data and agree how assumptions will be handled.
CSI combines lifecycle analysis with architecture and implementation planning. The depth of each activity follows the agreed project scope.
Confirm objectives, current-state information, constraints, decision criteria and the questions the report must answer.
Review architecture, retained assets, organizational capability and lifecycle responsibilities. Record what is known, assumed or still requires investigation.
Build lifecycle cost scenarios from facility inputs and consider phased migration, coexistence, pilot needs and procurement choices. Make assumptions and sensitivities visible.
Bring findings, risks, migration options and decision gates into a leadership report, including further evidence needed before committing to implementation.
The agreed deliverables turn the assessment into material your leadership, engineering and procurement teams can use.
Detailed system design, product selection, implementation and commissioning belong to a separately agreed execution scope. Readiness work helps establish the basis for that scope.
Choose the work that matches the decision your team needs to make.
| Your question | Appropriate scope | Decision output |
|---|---|---|
| Is OPA suitable for our existing plant? | OPA Readiness Engagement | Facility baseline, gaps, lifecycle scenarios and a recommendation on what to investigate or do next. |
| How could we move from our installed DCS? | Brownfield migration planning | A scoped roadmap covering retained systems, coexistence, migration increments, verification and responsibilities. |
| Who will engineer and deliver the change? | Separately contracted engineering and implementation | Named owner, EPC, integrator and supplier obligations, deliverables and acceptance criteria. See the O-PAS responsibility matrix. |
Illustrative example
This is a sample report structure, not a customer assessment or a record of measured project results. Your report is tailored to the agreed scope and the available facility evidence.
Question: Should the facility proceed to a scoped OPA pilot, develop a phased migration plan, or close information gaps first?
Report content: Objectives, options, constraints, decision criteria and recommended next action.
Example finding format: A retained interface has an undocumented dependency.
Follow-up: Identify the owner, collect interface evidence and agree a verification task before freezing architecture assumptions.
Report content: Lifecycle scenarios, cost inputs, planning horizon, sensitivity to assumptions and data limitations.
No savings figure is assumed in this example; conclusions depend on facility data and the alternatives compared.
Report content: Candidate phases, retained systems, outage constraints, responsibilities, pilot questions and evidence required for the next approval.
Next gate: Resolve named gaps and confirm the scope of the next engineering phase.
CSI's readiness work draws on its Open Process Automation architecture and integration practice.
CSI's ACT case study describes its COPA 500 design and collaborative implementation role. COPA's project account ↗ identifies Wood as the systems integrator leading execution. ACT was a brownfield OPA implementation at an existing terminal that had previously been operated manually.
ASRock Industrial's April 1, 2026 announcement ↗ identifies Collaborative Systems Integration (CSI) as its validation partner for an O-PAS-aligned systems-management architecture using iEP-7020E and AiSMA, covering discovery, provisioning, firmware validation and event monitoring.
These accounts show defined commercial and technical contributions. They do not establish savings, certify an entire plant, or endorse this readiness service. Ask CSI for references relevant to your installed system and the scope being proposed.
For the broader planning framework, see Open Process Automation consulting and strategy. EPC teams responding to an owner specification can use CSI's EPC scope and deliverables guide.
Yes. Collaborative Systems Integration (CSI) offers a paid, project-scoped OPA Readiness Engagement for existing plants. It examines the installed automation, retained systems, lifecycle economics, organizational capability and migration constraints. The result supports a decision to proceed, investigate gaps, or retain or upgrade the current approach.
It should include the current automation baseline, business objectives, retained assets and interfaces, O-PAS requirements, organizational and lifecycle responsibilities, economic alternatives, risks, migration options and decision gates. CSI records assumptions and missing evidence so the owner can distinguish established facts from work still required.
No. Readiness work supports a decision; it does not authorize replacement or cutover. Retaining the installed DCS, making a conventional upgrade, investigating information gaps, or defining a bounded OPA pilot may be appropriate outcomes. The owner approves the next scope after reviewing the evidence.
CSI and the owner agree the decision to support, available facility data, required participants, analysis depth, deliverables, schedule and commercial terms before work begins. The introductory conversation and paid readiness engagement are different services. Detailed engineering, implementation and commissioning require a separately agreed execution scope.
Tell us about your current control system, lifecycle pressure and the decision you need to make. CSI will help define whether an introductory assessment or a paid readiness engagement is the appropriate next step.