Units 3, 4 & 5 projectmanstramapping.pdf
-
Upload
arul-sujin -
Category
Documents
-
view
15 -
download
2
Transcript of Units 3, 4 & 5 projectmanstramapping.pdf
Lean Construction and Process Mapping
• Applicability of Lean to construction
• Process Mapping
• Process standardisation
• Generic Design and Construction Process Protocol
What distinguish construction from
other industries?
• One of a kind? • Housing?
• So is manufacturing?
– Construction Standardisation/modularisation/prefab?
• Site based production? • Agriculture, mining, fishing which are early parts of
manufacturing value stream
• Temporary multi-organisations? • So are other project based industries
– Partnering
Two Characteristics together
uniquely defining construction
(Ballard and Howell)
• Fixed position manufacturing (assembly has to be
done on site)
• Rooted in place (standardisation is limited,
customer is linked to the site, temporary teams)
• Hence the characteristics of site-based production,
unique product and temporary teams
How to make construction lean
• Make the production of construction
components lean and minimise site-based
assembly.
• Develop lean techniques for dynamic
construction
Lean Thinking and Process
Mapping
• Only a small fraction of the total time and
effort in any organisation or project actually
adds value for the end customer.
• By defining value for a product or service
from the end customer's perspective all the
non-value activities (waste), can be targeted
for removal
flow Conversion
Towards Lean Processes
• Production and management processes must be
mapped and analysed
• None value adding activities (flow activities)
would then be subject to reduction or elimination
• Value adding activities (conversion activities)
must be made more efficient (Standardisation,
Technology)
Process Mapping
• Identification of non value adding activities
(mapping of existing processes)
• Standardisation (reengineering processes)
• Many standard ways by which a process
map can be presented (e.g. IDEF)
Receive request
for information
and application
Send prospectus
and application
Wait for student to
respond
Send application
to PG director
Pass to colleague
Send to team
member
Send to group
leader
Consider
academic
qualifications
Mark Yes or No
and send to group
leader
Decide who to
supervise
Send to PG
director
Contact referees
Send offer
Make final
decision
Wait
Stop
2 30 2
5 1 5 200
5 0 5
30 5 10
Secretary Secretary
PG Director Group leader Team Member PG Director
Team Member Group leader Group leader PG Director
PG Director PG Director
Copy prospectus and
stamp
Record on workload Stamp
Stamp
120 days
Receive request for
information
Send prospectus,
application & request
for references
Wait
40 days
Send to research
group leader
Consider academic
qualifications and
referees’ comments
Decide who to
supervise
Send offer to student
2
Secretary
Prospectus
Application
Stamped envelope marked to PG director
To be sealed envelopes from referees
40 5
PG Director
1
Group leader and
team members
6
Group Leader
10
46 days
Process standardisation:
Construction Project Process
• RIBA Plan of Work
• British Property Federation Model (BPF)
• New Product Development (NPD) process
• The BAA project process
• Generic Design and Construction Process
Protocol
Process Protocol
Consists of 10 phases
• Phase 0: Demonstrating the Need
• Phase 1: Conception of Need
• Phase 2: Outline Feasibility
• Phase 3: Substantive Feasibility Study & Outline Financial Authority
• Phase 4: Outline Conceptual Design
• Phase 5: Full Conceptual Design
• Phase 6: Coordinated Design, Procurement & Full Financial Authority
• Phase 7: Production Information
• Phase 8: Construction
• Phase 9: Operation & Maintenance
NPD Stage/Gate Process (hard and soft)
Lean and Planning
• Fast track and traditional project
management
• Allocation of Buffers
• Last Planner (Ballard)
Traditional Planning (CPM)
• Activities start after previous one finish
• Critical path is determined and becomes
focus of control
• Other paths have slack and hence provide
flexibility
• Resources are unlimited or can be delivered
to site on time
Traditional Planning (CPM)
• Planning techniques are about control
(preventing bad change) and neglects
breakthrough (causing good change)
• Delay of tasks, if not on critical path is ok
• If on critical, something must be done (put
more resources) otherwise project will be
delayed
Traditional Planning (CPM)
• Underestimation of effort result in fire fighting
and further problems.
• Overestimation of effort needed result in
complacency and low productivity.
• Emphasis not on why but what can be done to
mend the situation (fire fighting)
• Planning system performance is not measured and
failure is not analysed to identify causes
• Planning is not conceived as a system but as an
art/skills.
Need for shorter duration
(drivers)
• Added competitivity to contractor
• Enhanced cost
• Added scheduling flexibility (choosing
starting dates more freely, added time for
design and planning)
• Added capacity (shorter time means more
projects)
How can we shorten a project
duration?
How can we shorten a project
duration?
• Increase speed of tasks (increase more
resources, use of specialist subcontractors,
better technology, cut out non value adding
activities)
• Overlap activities (fast track) (e.g design
and construction)
• Reduce the number of tasks (prefabrication
and pre-assembly, combine activities)
Problem encountered when
reducing duration (fast track)
• Increase level of subcontracting mean
activities are not controlled fully and
process is not integrated.
• Variation of inflow (due to one of nature,
etc) are common (sensitivity to variation
increase with when overlapping)
REASONS WHY PLANNED WORK IS NOT DONE
Source: Ballard 1994
Traditional planning technique is
no longer appropriate?
• It hides relationship between design
(engineering), procurement and assembly (it
focus on assembly)
• It cannot cope with complexity of project
(difficult to match actual progress with
initial plan)
• Control affect human factors
Functions of buffers
• Compensate for differing average rates of
supply and use between two activities
• Compensate for uncertainty in actual rates
of supply and use (inflow variation)
• Allow differing work sequences by supplier
and using activity
Cost of buffers
• Buffers are expensive (storage space,
double handling, inventory management,
loss, buffer fill time, and idle inventories)
• Hard to size (actual supply and use rates
and unknown and they vary).
Arguments for buffers
• In current planning buffers do not exist and delays
and interruptions occur. Actual rates of
consumption are unknown because ‘normal rates’
includes delays due to waiting for resources.
• In order to find the uninhibited use rates we must
make it possible to work without interruptions.
• Allocating buffers has been proven to be a very
good thing and good managers hide resources in
the face of strong pressures to release them to
others for use.
Source: Howell and Ballard 1994
Source: Howell and Ballard 1994
Source: Ballard and Howell 1997
How to allocate buffers
• Between activities with different rates of
production
• Between activities with high inflow
variation (uncertainty) (need to assess
uncertainty progressively)
• Size of buffers should be limited to
minimum (better assessment, use of “Pull”
and “plan buffers”)
The Last Planner
by Ballard
• Provides a structure to planning (according
to level of details and size of window) and
gives power to the last planner
• An attempt to replace schedule buffers
(physical buffers) by planning buffers
(SHOULD, CAN, WILL, DID)
• Apply pull instead of push (downstream
activities determine size of workable
backlog)
Source: Ballard and Howell 1997
Source: Ballard and Howell 1997
Source: Ballard and Howell 1997
Planning System
Source: Howell and Ballard 1994
Managing Workable Backlog
Quality of weekly work plans
• Work is selected in the right sequence
(work in the sequence that best moves the
project towards its objectives - critical path,
workability)
• the right amount of work is selected
(amount of work that uses labour and
equipment capacity to the full)
• The selected work can be done (based on
workable backlog only)
The Last Planner:
Assessing quality of plan
• To determine where to intervene. The match
between output and directive at each level
should be measured and causes for
mismatched must be understood.
• Match between WILL and DID is measured
by Percent Plan Complete (PPC)
Performance Measurement and
Benchmarking
• Need for Performance measurement
• History of performance measurement
• Performance measurement frameworks
• Construction KPIs
• Benchmarking
Need for Performance
measurement
• Provides the information needed to take
business decisions
• Provides the bases and incentives for
continuos improvement
• Provides the information needed to perform
benchmarking.
History of performance
measurement
• The development in performance
measurement have progressed in two phases
• 1st phase concentrated on financial
measures (upto 1980’s) (lagging’ metrics)
• The second phase started in the late 1980’s
and involved non-financial measures
(leading indicators).
Performance measurement
frameworks
• The balanced scorecard (BSC)
• Performance measurement matrix
• The results and determinants framework
• Brown's framework of process metrics
• Performance pyramid
• The EFQM Excellence Model
• Construction KPIs
The BSC (Source: Kaplan & Norton, 1992)
Performance measurement matrix (source: Keegan et al, 1989)
Results and determinants framework (source: Fitzgerald et al, 1991)
Brown's framework of process metrics (Brown, 1996)
Performance pyramid (source: Lynch & Cross, 1991)
The business excellence model (source: EFQM, 2001)
Construction KPIs
• Client satisfaction: product & service
• Defects
• Predictability: cost & time
• Profitability
• Productivity
• Safety
• Construction cost
• Construction time
How to design a measurement
system
- Defining the strategic objectives of the company or a
process and determining how they are translated into
divisional goals and individual management actions.
- Deriving an appropriate set of measures by populating a
performance measurement matrix. - Instilling the performance measurement system into
management thinking. Critical here, is ensuring that the
measurement system actually drives day-to-day decisions
and actions.
Examples of impediments
- Fear of exposing poor performance
- Fear of exposing good performance
- Perception of more time and effort
- Fear of loss of autonomy
- Information overload
- Previous misuse and abuse of measurement
- Lack of skill and measurement masters
- Incompatible reward system
Benchmarking
Internal: compare processes within the organisations
Project/competitive: compares performance with its
competitors
External/industry compares performance with companies
in other but similar industries
Process/ generic: compare with different industries
Benchmarking process (source: Elmuti & Kathawala, 1997)