Transcript Diapositiva 1

EFRTC Policy & Research
Committee
Market Strategy Report
Zürich
27 May 2011
Jeremy Candfield
Chairman
Introduction
• Spoke in Florence on the continuing delay in
completing the report of workstream A on Market
Strategies
• Intended to be the first of seven studies under a
joint initiative of EIM/CER/EFRTC following-up
Innotrack work:
EFRTC GM, Zürich 27.05.2011
Post-Innotrack Workstreams: A reminder
A
B
C
Market Strategies
Long Term
Funding and
Strategic Planning
Work
programming
D
E
F
Project
Management and
Logistics
Contracting
Strategies
Rules and
Regulations
G
Plant
EFRTC GM, Zürich 27.05.2011
Introduction
• Pending completion of A the Committee has not
met.
• But:
- the report has now reached Final Draft stage
- is being circulated by EIM to the WG for final
comment and then publication
- agreed with EIM will discuss Workstream B –
Long Term Funding – and Workstream E –
Contracting Strategy – once A is completed
- if need be we may take E forward by ourselves
• Patience is a virtue ....(but see later!)
EFRTC GM, Zürich 27.05.2011
The Study
• Participants
• Some Survey Conclusions
• Case Studies
• European Landscape
• Result
EFRTC GM, Zürich 27.05.2011
Participants
IMs
Contractors
Network Rail (UK) - Chair
ANIAF (Italy)
Adif (Spain)
Balfour Beatty (UK)
Banedanmark (Denmark)
BAM Rail (Netherlands)
Infrabel (Belgium)
Carillion (UK)
Jernbaneverket (Norway)
COMSA-EMTE (Spain)
LDz (Latvia)
Heitkamp (Germany)
LitRail (Lithuania)
Leonhard Weiss (Germany)
MAV (Hungary)
Railway Industry Association (UK)
National Rail Infrastructure Company
(Bulgaria)
Schreck-Mieves (Germany)
PKP PLK (Poland)
SOMAFEL (Portugal)
ProRail (Netherlands)
Spitzke (Germany)
REFER (Portugal)
TSO (France)
RFF (France)
VolkerRail (Netherlands)
RHK (Finland)
SNCF (France)
ZSR (Slovakia)
EFRTC GM, Zürich 27.05.2011
Some Survey Conclusions
• insourcing/outsourcing – decision-making criteria
• value-adding behaviours
• value-destroying behaviours
EFRTC GM, Zürich 27.05.2011
Part 1: decision-making criteria
Please rate the following criteria according to their
importance in taking decisions to in/outsource
maintenance & renewal works
1 = not important, 5 = essential
Average score
1
2
3
4
5
3
3
2
2
2
2,8
2
0
3
4
3
3,5
0
2
0
4
5
4,1
 Contractor’s track record of successful projects
1
1
1
1
0
1
1
2
2
1
0
0
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
6
1
1
0
0
2
3
3
3
1
5
4
5
3
2
2
0
6
4
5
3
5
5
4
2
5
4,0
3,6
4,1
3,7
4,3
4,0
3,5
3,0
3,5
 Evidence that the contractor has appropriate resources
and the capability to deliver the activity to the agreed
specifications and schedule
0
2
4
1
5
3,8
 There is a rigid, constraining framework (national law,
political context, pre-defined policy…) that limits
in/outsourcing decisions by the IM
 Competence available in-house vs. competence
available on the market
 How critical the activity is, desire to maintain a certain
level of control
 Keeping knowledge and know-how inside the company
 Large vs. smaller volumes of work
 Level of competition on the contractors’ market
 Access to technology / innovation / knowledge
 Cost optimisation
 Own resource optimisation
 Peak period leading to an overload of work
 A positive risk analysis has been carried out
EFRTC GM, Zürich 27.05.2011
In Order of Importance:
Please rate the following criteria according to their importance in taking
decisions to in/outsource maintenance & renewal works
1
 Cost optimisation
2
 How critical the activity is, desire to maintain a certain
level of control
 Level of competition on the contractors’ market
4,3
4,1
4,1
 Keeping knowledge and know-how inside the company
3
4
5
6
 Own resource optimisation
 Evidence that the contractor has appropriate resources
and the capability to deliver the activity to the agreed
specifications and schedule
 Access to technology / innovation / knowledge
 Large vs. smaller volumes of work
 Peak period leading to an overload of work
7
 Competence available in-house vs. competence
available on the market
 Contractor’s track record of successful projects
4,0
4,0
3,8
3,7
3,6
3,5
8
 A positive risk analysis has been carried out
3,5
3,5
3,0
9
 There is a rigid, constraining framework (national law,
political context, pre-defined policy…) that limits
in/outsourcing decisions by the IM
2,8
EFRTC GM, Zürich 27.05.2011
Survey of Value-Adding Behaviours –
Most Important:
• good safety and environmental culture at all levels
• clarity and simplicity of technical, legislative and
safety standards required to be met in delivering
the works
• collaboration and concise, clear, timely
communication
• work is delivered to the agreed quality first time
EFRTC GM, Zürich 27.05.2011
Survey of Value-Destroying Behaviours
• Lack of clarity in scope of work to be done,
frequent uncontrolled and late changes by client,
specifications, standards and capacity
• Poor site management or pressure to take short
cuts
• Short notice change to track access requirements
or availability
• Poor quality work requiring corrective actions and
thus reducing track capacities for operators
EFRTC GM, Zürich 27.05.2011
Case studies
• PRORAIL on process of outsourcing track maintenance in
the Netherlands
• RFF – examples from performance contract which may
affect outsourcing in France
• Network Rail system of performance assessment of
contractors offers and works in GB
• GB (RIA) Value Improvement Programme driving waste out
of the supply chain using collaborative behaviours
• Finland on collaborative process of product life cycle and
performance assessment by outsourcing
• Switzerland - positive experience from collaborative way of
working in whole supply chain with client (from long term
planning to performing the work)
EFRTC GM, Zürich 27.05.2011
The European Landscape
• Estimates were derived, mainly by EFRTC (SG), of
annual spend on track maintenance and renewal
by each IM
• Presented as an Appendix with further information
• Approximate total £20b pa, c40% by contractors –
mainly renewals.
EFRTC GM, Zürich 27.05.2011
Result
• A guidebook for both Infrastructure Managers and
Contractors to help encourage open dialogue,
develop transparency, promote value-adding
behaviours, and showcase good practice.
• Since it was written....
EFRTC GM, Zürich 27.05.2011
Post Scriptum
Network Rail website since 25 March 2011:
Partnering Framework for Infrastructure Works
EFRTC GM, Zürich 27.05.2011
Post Scriptum
Network Rail website since 25 March 2011:
Partnering Framework for Infrastructure Works
EFRTC GM, Zürich 27.05.2011
Post Scriptum
Network Rail website since 25 March 2011:
Partnering Framework for Infrastructure Works
EFRTC GM, Zürich 27.05.2011
Network Rail Partnering Framework
• It is still early days
• It is clear that senior management is committed
• Numerous other major changes are being made
simultaneously in costs, structure, contestability
and much else
• Will they break the Permafrost?
• To be continued.....
EFRTC GM, Zürich 27.05.2011
Thank you