Transcript Process Protocol Demonstrator

Process Protocol Demonstrator
Process Network 7 March 2002
Implementation of the Process Protocol at the
Britannia Walk Development
Stuart Carmichael
Project Overview
• Project particulars:
– the development of a derelict site in North London
– has a construction value of about £12M
– has been in the gestation phase for several years
prior to formal contracts
– the construction phase is estimated at just less than
two years
Project Overview
• The project is quite complex having multiple
clients including:
–
–
–
–
–
Moorfields Eye Hospital
Islington and Shoreditch Housing Association (ISHA)
KHT
Propylion (JCMT)
AMSP
Proposed Development
• The accommodation has multiple types of
occupancy including:
–
–
–
–
–
–
Key worker housing
Housing association housing
Live/work units
Speculative offices
Underground car parking
Underground pharmaceutical manufacturing plant
with associated services
Block C
Block D
Block B
Block A (Spec
offices)
Block E
Block F
Block H (Spec
offices)
Block G
AERIAL VIEW 1
Aim of Demonstrator Project
• To try and enforce the Process Protocol
principles and rigorously assess the approach
– Without unduly disrupting the overall project
• Identify problems with implementation
• To make recommendations
Constraints
• The project was already underway at time of
implementation
• Initial contract documentation was in place
• Numerous clients
Suitably complex from which to learn lessons
Summary of Implementation Activities
• Many key activities defined by the protocol
deliverables have been addressed by the
project team
– However, they have not necessarily been
undertaken, communicated and updated in
accordance with the protocol methodology
Summary of Implementation Activities
•
Implementation activities addressed the
following areas, which were not being
rigorously undertaken on the project
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Process mapping
Addressing slippage in achieving design fixity
Structuring of information into team deliverables
Production process mapping and progress
monitoring
Computer model
Process Mapping
• Aims
– To communicate process strategy to the project team
– Identify responsibilities for the delivery of required
information
– Provide a common focus for the project
– Produce a tool for project monitoring
Process Mapping
• Initial maps consisted of:
–
–
–
–
–
Key design information
Key project events that might affect progress
Activity zones (5)
Stage gates
Time line (requested by PM)
Process Map
Based on Design Information
Results of Mapping
• Maps showed clearly that slippage was
occurring
– 68% of design information was received late
– Largely due to:
• Client changes
• Poor communication
• Information required based on separate drawings
(little co-ordination)
Addressing Slippage in Achieving Design
Fixity
• Pre-construction phase of project broken into
mini phases
– After discussion with the project manager and team it
was decided that the mini phases would consist of
the following:
1. All layouts and setting outs confirmed
2. Piling pile caps and ground beams
3. Steel work to PMU
4. PMU substructure
5. Superstructure: structural concrete details
Addressing Slippage in Achieving Design
Fixity
• Grouping of information into group deliverables
– Instead of asking for the provision of separate
drawings the PM asked for the provision of
completed deliverables
• Team were consulted as to when they could
provide these deliverables
Deliverables
• The deliverables decided upon were as
follows:











Structural Design Drawings
Piling design
Piling Works for Construction
Foundation works for Construction
PMU steel work, inc service shaft steel
PMU substructure
Superstructure Block A
Superstructure Construction Block E
Superstructure Construction Block H
Superstructure Construction Blocks B, C and D
Superstructure Construction Block F&G
Mini Phases and Associated Deliverables
Mini Phase
Participant
Deliverable
Gate
Information required
Effect
• Highly beneficial:
– Individuals started to work in teams within the
deliverables identified
– Individuals began to structure their programmes in
accordance with the deliverables and mini phases
– Asked others for specific information earlier
– Improved co-ordination
– Improved provision of timely information
Production Process Mapping and
Progress Monitoring
• PM required a specific map to help monitor the
production stage of the project
• The map was to incorporate three types of
information:
• Design information
• Procurement information
• Production information
Production Process Mapping and
Progress Monitoring
•
“Aim was to produce a map based tool, which could effectively
represent the relationship between the three types information
providing a clear and concise method of tracking project progress
for the project manager and a communication tool for the team to
refer to.”
•
‘Information strands’, describe the design and procurement
process of each specific package. These then link with key
activities in the production stage providing the project manger
with a holistic view of the design and production process for the
given period.
•
The project manager can then track the entire package delivery
process, from design, costing through to value engineering with
suppliers, and then ordering and finally construction.
Start on site date for package
Work Package and key contributors
Main package contractor
Off site start date
Order by date
Enquiry return date
Enquiry issue date
Date All SC revisions required
Design issue date
Design cost review meeting
Technical review of design info
Information
Strand
Progress of design team
Production Process Mapping and
Progress Monitoring
• Information strands produced for each main
work package consisting of:















Groundwater and drainage
Piling
BWIC and incoming services
Structural steelwork (substructure and shaft)
Concrete frame and floors
Screeding and waterproofing
M&E mains installation
Brickwork and blockwork
Scaffolding
Lightweight steel frame
Roof coverings & rainwater installations
Windows external doors and screens
Metal work including balconies
Wall cladding
M&E Layout
Project Process Map
Project Process Map
Summary
• Implementation focused on structuring of
deliverables and mapping of WP processes
• Techniques well received by project team
• Unavoidable barriers to effective
implementation
– Process strategy not developed up front
– Fragmented project team
– Poor communication & IT use
Recommendations
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Early planning and
agreement of process
strategy
Set the terminology
Buy in from the team
Clear communication
strategy (incl EDI)
Standard deliverable sets
Adopt partnering principles
Project workshop
A driven process
The right level of detail