ZOPSYS

Fictional ZOPSYS Case Study · Sample Business Assessment Results

Summit Pest Solutions

Summit Pest Solutions is a fictional business. This is a demonstration — no assessment was submitted and no data is stored.

Industry
Pest Control
Employees
12
Revenue
$2M–$3M
Years in business
7
Owner role
Owner / General Manager
Owner hours
51–60 per week

ZOPSYS Business Assessment · V2.0

Your Operating Snapshot

01 · Your Objective

Reduce my day-to-day involvement

Supporting: Increase profit / margins; Build a stronger management team; Stabilize the business before pursuing growth

02 · Current Operating State

Operating Constraint Score

75.0 / 100

High Constraint

Higher scores indicate more reported operating constraint—not general business quality.

03 · Goal Gap

Owner Objective → Current Operating State → Goal Gap

Ryan wants to move from a heavily involved operating role to primarily leadership and strategy, while reducing his involvement from 51–60 hours per week to approximately 20–30 hours. Summit’s reported operating conditions suggest that the business currently depends on significant owner visibility, intervention, escalation, and coordination.

That gap—not the score itself—is what ZOPSYS investigates next.

04 · Strongest Indicated Foundation

People, Roles & Accountability; Systems & Integration

These areas showed the lowest level of reported constraint among the areas measured.

05 · Greatest Indicated Constraint

Revenue Flow & Capacity

Next: Visibility & Resilience

Strongest foundation is relative only — both areas still report High Constraint. People, Roles & Accountability and Systems & Integration are tied at 65.0.

06 · What We Would Investigate Next

Priority 1

Visibility & Resilience

Investigate how operating information reaches management, where exceptions become visible, and what Ryan must personally monitor in order to keep work moving.

Priority 2

Leadership & Key-Person Dependency

Determine which decisions, approvals, relationships, and exceptions currently require Ryan or another key person, and whether authority can be moved into defined roles and operating rules.

Priority 3

Revenue Flow & Capacity

Determine where lead response, follow-up, sales visibility, capacity planning, and customer growth are creating coordination work that could obstruct Ryan’s desired operating role.

07 · Six-Dimension Scorecard

Leadership & Key-Person Dependency

75.0 / 100

5/5 numeric · 0 excluded · Constraint rank 3

People, Roles & Accountability

65.0 / 100

5/5 numeric · 0 excluded · Constraint rank 5

Processes & Knowledge

70.0 / 100

5/5 numeric · 0 excluded · Constraint rank 4

Systems & Integration

65.0 / 100

5/5 numeric · 0 excluded · Constraint rank 5

Visibility & Resilience

85.0 / 100

5/5 numeric · 0 excluded · Constraint rank 2

Revenue Flow & Capacity

90.0 / 100

5/5 numeric · 0 excluded · Constraint rank 1

All outcome-linked investigation priorities

Investigation rank 1

Visibility & Resilience

High relevance · reported signal

Investigate how operating information reaches management, where exceptions become visible, and what Ryan must personally monitor in order to keep work moving.

  • Primary: Reduce my day-to-day involvement — Owner monitoring limits stepping back.
  • Supporting: Better management visibility — Directly named as a desired capability.

Investigation rank 2

Leadership & Key-Person Dependency

High relevance · reported signal

Determine which decisions, approvals, relationships, and exceptions currently require Ryan or another key person, and whether authority can be moved into defined roles and operating rules.

  • Primary: Reduce my day-to-day involvement — Escalations to the owner consume owner time.
  • Supporting: Routine decisions without escalating to me — Directly named as a desired capability.

Investigation rank 3

Revenue Flow & Capacity

Moderate relevance · reported signal

Determine where lead response, follow-up, sales visibility, capacity planning, and customer growth are creating coordination work that could obstruct Ryan’s desired operating role.

  • Primary: Reduce my day-to-day involvement — Revenue coordination may route through the owner.
  • Supporting: Steady controlled growth — Growth adds coordination load.
Your desired operating context
Growth objective
Steady controlled growth
Desired owner role
Leadership / strategy
Desired capabilities
Operate reliably when I’m unavailable; Routine decisions without escalating to me; Better management visibility
Concerns
Business remains too owner-dependent; Growth creates complexity
Timeframe
6–12 months
Current → desired owner time
51–60 hours/week → 20–30 hours/week

A reduction of roughly 30 hours per week.

Biggest obstacle (your words)
I’m still the person everyone calls when something changes. We have good people and software, but too much of the business still depends on me knowing what to do next.
Evidence coverage and exclusions

30/30 answered · 30 scored · 0 excluded · 0 missing · 6/6 valid dimensions

All 30 scored statements were answered with no exclusions, so all six dimensions contributed to the overall score.

08 · What a Systems Review Produces

Current-State Organization + Orchestration Map

  • —Roles
  • —Decisions
  • —Workflows
  • —Systems
  • —Handoffs
  • —Dependencies
  • —Owner / key-person dependency
  • —Escalation
  • —Existing automation

The org chart shows who reports to whom. The orchestration map shows how work actually gets done.

Target-State Organization + Orchestration Map

  • —Future roles
  • —Authority
  • —Systems
  • —Automation
  • —AI / digital capability
  • —Human fallback
  • —Metrics / reporting

Design the role first. Then decide who—or what—fills it.

Improvement Blueprint

  • —Executive diagnostic
  • —Baseline
  • —Dependencies
  • —Workflow / friction
  • —Future state
  • —Accountability
  • —Decision rights
  • —Systems architecture
  • —Automation / AI opportunities
  • —Dashboard requirements
  • —Roadmap
  • —Target operating model
  • —Implementation scope

A prioritized plan that connects findings to the changes most relevant to your objectives.

Case study continues

The assessment identifies signals only.

It shows where the gap appears — not what causes it. The next stage follows what ZOPSYS examined in the Systems Review.

See What ZOPSYS Investigated Next