INSIGHTS ON INFRASTRUCTURE CO-DEVELOPMENT: The case of the T5
Programme
© Nuno Gil MBS 2006© Nuno Gil, MBS 2009
Nuno GilManchester Business School, The University of Manchester
© Nuno Gil MBS 2006
•Aims to give customers share of voice in development process
•Customer signs off design brief before work progresses into detailed design and physical execution
Infrastructure co-development problem
© Nuno Gil, MBS 2009
T5 project team
BAA Retail Business Unit, Heathrow Security Unit,
Heathrow Operations Unit (…)
Statutory Authorities: Home Office, Police,
Customs & Immigration, (…)
BA
ManufacturersConstruction Contractors
Architectural & Engineering Consultants
Supplier base
Systems Integrator
ProjectTeam
Customers(Internal/external)
Suppliers
End-users (internal/external)
BAA – 72,000 staff
Infrastructure Owner
PassengersHeathrow 4,500 staff
Immigration staff
Retail & Catering staff
BA staff
End-user base
(…)
Customers
Inst
itutio
nal F
ram
ing
BA
A b
ylaw
s, d
esig
n st
anda
rds
Cod
es o
f Pra
ctic
e, L
aws,
Sta
tute
s, H
SS
E R
egul
atio
ns, (
…)
Inst
itutio
ns (
inte
rnal
/ ext
erna
l)
© Nuno Gil MBS 2006
Relevant New Product Development literature…• concurrent engineering, set-based design, design
postponement (Clark and Fujimoto, Loch, Terwiesch, Ulrich, etc.)
Starvation
Duplication
Rework
Problem-solving cycle atinformation sender (upstream)
Preliminary Informationrelease (only one interaction iscaptured for illustrative reasons)
Final Informationrelease
Expected solution concept forproblem-solving
Common denominator between thepossible solution concepts
Alternative solution conceptfor problem-solving
Iterative Strategy Set-based Strategy
© Nuno Gil, MBS 2009
© Nuno Gil MBS 2006
but infrastructure co-development is different problem with different timescales (Gil et al. 2007)
ReworkDesign buffer out if early enough
Buffered solution to accommodatethe worst-case scenario
Leave buffer if too late
Iterative Strategy (P1a,b) Buffering Strategy P(2a,b)
Problem-solving cycle atinformation sender (downstream)
First release of preliminary Information
Subsequent release of preliminary information(only one interaction is captured for illustrative reasons)
Expected solution concept for problem-solving
Alternative solution concept for problem-solving
Upstream release of Information (only one interaction is captured for illustrative reasons)
© Nuno Gil, MBS 2009
© Nuno Gil MBS 2006
From Complex Products & Systems literature:
• Co-development is core process in developing CoPS (Hobday 1999, 2000; CoPS literature in general)
• ‘System integrators’ use co-development to develop customer-focused solutions (Brady et al.)
• Co-development can lead to conflict when (IT) projects are complex because of incompatible goals (Robey and Farrow 1982)
• Desirable situation: constructive conflict resolution where both parties openly raise problems and search for their solutions, cooperate, and engage in teamwork
• Failure to reach constructive conflict gives room to domination and stagnation, project failure
© Nuno Gil, MBS 2009
© Nuno Gil MBS 2006
Research method and base
• Building Theory from Multiple Case Study Research
• Sample of Co-development Processes
BA retail British Airways (BA) National Air Traffic Services (NATS)
• Data collection from April 2005 to June 2007
© Nuno Gil, MBS 2009
Empirical setting•£4.2bn (2005 prices) Heathrow expansion (T5)
•Testing ‘Rethinking Construction’ proposition
© Nuno Gil, MBS 2009
CA
R P
AR
K
PHASE 1 PHASE 2
Baggage System
Train System
- Aircraft StandsT
ER
MIN
AL
4
EX
IST
ING
TE
RM
INA
L
TE
RM
INA
L 3
TE
RM
INA
L 2
TE
RM
INA
L 1
?
Implementation includes detailed design and physical execution
Salient features of co-development process
(Co-handling of public inquiry)
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Implementation
Developer-led design development (base building )
2008
Definition of hospitality/check-in/retail functions Airline/retail fit-out
ImplementationDesign definition
Definition of air traffic control function fit-out
ImplementationDesign definition
Definition of flight schedule function/configuration of aircraft fleet
Start roof erection
Design definition
Move cab to siteEnd mast erection
End of roof erection
Enabling works on site
2001200019991998199719961995
Design definition & Implementation phases(implementation includes design detail & physical execution)
Co-Development of the planning application
Customer-led design development (building infill)
Developer-led design development (aircraft stands )
Customer-led design development
Developer-led design development (base building )
Customer-led design development (building infill)
Evaluation of the planning application
• Extremely long• Intra- and inter-firm relationships• Overlap design-execution limits flexibility to accommodate late
changes at low risk to budget, schedule, asset performance
© Nuno Gil, MBS 2009
d/s – designers/suppliers
Units of analysis
Customer
Unit of Analysis ProjectCustomer Relation to Developer
Formal discussions
Archival documents examples D/
S (*)
Develop
er
Customer
BAA Retail
Layout of airside retail area
Main TerminalBuilding
Internal Stakeholder
Different business
unit
11 15 2
Briefs, drawings, requirements, press clips, schedule of facilities, supplier presentations
BA
Layout of the Commercially Important Passengers (CIP) departures lounge
Main Terminal Building
ExternalStakeholder
Different Blue Chip Company
10 14 5
Functional and operational briefs, drawings, specs, project requirements, schedule of facilities, customer interviews in press, customer presentations
Layout of the check-in area 10 15 5
Layout of the aircraft stands around main terminal building
Airfield 7 7 5
NATSConfiguration of air traffic control tower cab
Air Traffic Control Tower
External Stakeholder
Statutory authority
3 5 2
Drawings, specs, project requirements, user presentations
© Nuno Gil, MBS 2009
© Nuno Gil MBS 2006
Customer interests, information exchange
Unit of Analys
is
Customer Interests Characteristics of preliminary information exchanges
Flexibility to postpone design
decisions
Flexibility to make late design changes Precision Stability
Retail
Business-critical“In the world of retail, I have earliest responsible moments: dates before which I should not responsibly make decisions” (retail director)
Business-critical“I fixed subdivision and detail use of 140 units in 03/05; chances are someone decides not to occupy, and others request bigger units” (retail director)
High “The actual locations of retail units are to be confirmed; the areas in the schedule are placeholders only” (facility schedule 03/04)
Moderate for boundaries, low for interior layout: ~ 2002, fix circulation vs. retail space for ~15,000 m2 ~2004, fix user allocation (shops, catering, toilettes, etc)~2005, fix 150 retail units
© Nuno Gil, MBS 2009
© Nuno Gil MBS 2006
Developer interests
Unit of
Analysis
Developer interests in co-development
Meet customer needs Meet project budget and timescale, make sure it works
Retail units area
Recognize business criticality
“Retail is a valuable source of revenue. It is essential that the optimum amount of retail space is provided in the right locations” (design brief)
Gradually freeze design
“The only way to manage this [retail layout] is about being clear and say ‘what is fluid is within this box, you cannot move it all together or add a lot of new functions’” (development head)
Control for late changes
“I think that if they [retail] would like to change things now (04/05), we would say ‘Ok, let’s complete and see what we can adapt at the end’” (development manager)
© Nuno Gil, MBS 2009
© Nuno Gil MBS 2006
Design architecture: integral, modular?
Function
Customer-led design
Developer-led design
Design interfaces Exemplar
Retail
Infill systems:
lighting, raised floors, partitions, ceilings, kitchen, sprinklers, flight display, etc.
Base-building systems:
perimeter walls, floor plate, data/telecom, utilities (fresh air, drainage, power, water, etc.)
CoupledInterfaces:
(1) Expected loads must be agreed upfront;
(2) retail areas integral to floor plate and capacity of backbone utilities
“Even if you’re just changing the location of a toilette block, you have to resolve a problem.. we had big problems with moves of catering units because ducts need to be fully accessible ” (design manager)
© Nuno Gil, MBS 2009
© Nuno Gil MBS 2006
Core conflict: who pays for downside risks stemming from design fluidity? shall risks be
incurred at all?
Unit of
analysis
Co-development leads to conflict Resolving conflicts where they emerge
ExamplesMechanisms
to reduce conflict
ExamplesMechanisms
to resolve conflict
Retail Units “It is easier for them [retail] to go
into irresponsible moment, and to always want explanations why decisions need to be made” (developer project leader)
“They tend to ignore when I say ‘I can only give you an assumption by that date.’ They say ‘fine,’ but when it changes, they say ‘you cannot do that’” (retail director)
1, Change management process
2, Design postponement
3, Decouple systems (over design, modular design)
“They wanted decisions by this date, I said I could deliver by this date, we end up with a compromised date in between” (retail director)
1, Co-locate design teams
2, Prototype
3, Decentralize programme governance
© Nuno Gil, MBS 2009
© Nuno Gil MBS 2006
Cross-case comparison
•BAA retail case: Disappointed with lack of flexibility to cope with very late changes, but understood need to draw the line at some point
•Agreed to fund business-critical late changes•Bought notion of priority list for late change requests
•BA case: frustrated with lack of flexibility to accommodate very late changes
• ‘terminal building is not fit for purpose’• ‘we and BAA are not ‘good bedfellows’
•NATS case: modular design approach decoupled base-building system from internal layout
• over 22 changes to internal layout of the control tower cab• ‘we had positive interaction between 2 teams’
© Nuno Gil, MBS 2009
© Nuno Gil MBS 2006
Contributions
• Conflict in infrastructure co-development inevitable due to conflicting interests, externalities
• Conflict rise can be moderated by managing customer expectations• Manage expectations: agree timescales for design decisions
BUT DON’T PLAY GAMES• Implement change management procedure to dissuade non-
business critical change• Incorporating flexibility in design definition (modularity, buffers) • Co-locate team, prototype
• Conflict resolution• Decentralize programme governance, placing capability to
resolve conflicts where they emerge, so as to reduce conflict escalation
• Customer funds very late changes, priority lists© Nuno Gil, MBS 2009
Top Related