A practical route from operating evidence to a defensible decision.
This guide turns the subject into four connected questions. Use it to structure a team discussion, challenge assumptions and agree what must be verified after action.
✓Define the decision and success criteria before modelling.
✓Use comparable weather, tariffs, schedules and operating limits.
✓Show ranges and sensitivities instead of presenting false precision.
Start with the decision
Define the intervention, the baseline, the operational constraints and what success would mean before building a scenario.
Use comparable assumptions
Options should share reference conditions so differences reflect the intervention rather than inconsistent weather, occupancy, tariffs or schedules.
Represent uncertainty honestly
Use ranges and sensitivity tests where evidence is incomplete. Separate measured inputs from modelled outputs and record unavailable evidence.
Plan verification before approval
Agree how implemented performance will be measured and how material changes in operating context will be handled.
Scenario comparison structure
Comparing HVAC tuning, solar and BESS
A site compared three options against one weather-normalised baseline. HVAC tuning offered the lowest delivery risk and immediate demand reduction; solar reduced daytime imports; BESS improved peak exposure only under specific tariff and dispatch assumptions. The combined sequence outperformed selecting the largest headline saving.
Before this decision moves forward
01Write the decision question in one sentence.
02Use one approved baseline across options.
03Separate measured inputs from model outputs.
04Test tariff, weather and utilisation sensitivity.
05Agree verification before approval.
Carry the evidence through the full decision.
Agree the reference position and name material gaps.
Compare options under consistent conditions and visible assumptions.
Measure what happened and return the outcome to the operating model.