Sie sind auf Seite 1von 38

Measuring the Impacts of Advanced Work

Packaging (AWP) and WorkFace Planning (WFP)


on Work Package and Project Performance

Tannis Liviniuk, Bentley Aminah Robinson Fayek Ph.D., P.Eng.


Ryan Posnikoff, Bentley Yonas Halala, MSc student
Nima Gerami Seresht, PhD candidate
• Workshop objectives

• Background
• Research objectives
Workshop
outline • Data collection forms
• Next steps in study

• Research ethics
• Acknowledgements
2
Objectives of this workshop

• To summarize work done to date on AWP


• To discuss the need to quantify the costs and benefits of
implementing AWP
• To present an approach to measure all factors impacting
costs and benefits of AWP
• To obtain your feedback on proposed approach and future
needs
• To solicit your participation in data collection
• To provide you with a tool to assess the maturity of AWP
practices on your projects
3
Changes in Oil Price

4
The Reality of Projects Today

Cost Schedule Time on


Overruns Overruns Tools

73%
64%
33%

Data:
Ernst and Young, 2015
CII, 2013 5
The Reality of Projects Today

6
The Reality of Projects Today

7
Cost and Schedule Planning:
Integrated planning methods

Work package methods AWP

Have a Building information modelling


AIM plan (BIM) methods
Finish Integrated Activity-based job costing
projects on planning methods
time and
within Utilize a
Lean construction-based
budget control
methods
system to
manage
the plan Database framework method

8
What is Advanced Work Packaging (AWP)?

AWP

• Term coined by the Construction Industry Institute (CII)

• Developed in the context of large industrial projects and


megaprojects

• Defined as the overall process flow of all the detailed work


packages (EWP, CWP, IWP)

• Provides a disciplined approach to project planning and


execution
9
Relationship between AWP and WFP
(Workface Planning)
WorkFace Planning (WFP) is a subset of Advanced Work Packaging (AWP)
and relates to installation work packages (IWP).

CII, 2013

10
The Process of Planning AWP
Deliverables
Define CWAs
CWA boundary
Measure Performance definition within the
Performance measurement for plot plan
each hierarchical level of the
work package breakdown G A
(CWA, CWP, IWP) Path of Construction
Sequencing of the
Construction Work Areas
that have been defined
F
B

EWP Release Plan


E Planned sequence of
C EWP development to
support construction
IWP Release Plan
Sequence of IWP D
development to support
planned crew activities CWP Release Plan
Planned sequence of
CWP development to
support construction
11
Previous Research Methodology

Case Studies Survey Expert Interviews


Evaluation of project Survey of conference Also included focus groups.
data to determine attendees to validate Enabled the team to analyze
benefits of AWP as the benefits of AWP. specific processes and
well as maturity traits. complete maturity level
ratings.

12
AWP Maturity Stages

13
AWP Maturity Stages

14
AWP Maturity Stages

15
Benefits of AWP

The following benefits of AWP were observed by CII, based on 20 case studies.

Productivity • An average 25% increase

Cost • Savings between 5-10 % of TIC (Total Installed Cost)

Safety • Zero lost time in 25 million construction hours

Schedule • 13 projects met deadline, 6 were ahead of schedule

Quality • Enhanced quality with reduced rework observed

Predictability • High predictability in cost and schedule observed


16
Need for further AWP Research

Lack of sufficient quantitative data to verify


benefits of AWP.

Cost of implementing AWP is not quantified and


compared to benefits in order to determine ROI.

Impact of crew, foreman, and workface planners


on AWP implementation has not been addressed.

17
Advanced Work Packaging and WorkFace
Planning:
Research objectives

Assess maturity of AWP Practices

Determine additional indirect


costs of AWP implementation

Identify impact of crew, foreman,


workface planner characteristics

Develop metrics to measure impact


of AWP on project performance

Develop a framework for systematic


data collection

Develop a data analysis method


Report on findings and help to
update COAA’s AWP Audit Tool 18
Advanced Work Packaging and WorkFace
Planning:
Data collection forms

AWP indirect
costs

Performance AWP maturity


metrics assessment

Data
collection
forms
WorkFace
Foreman planner
characterization qualification
characterization
Crew
characterization

Many forms are based on criteria established by CII and COAA. 19


AWP Indirect Costs

Owner costs
Costs from e.g., Appointing AWP
AWP-exclusive manager
tasks
PM and CM costs
e.g., Aligning AWP
processes

WorkFace planning
manager
AWP salaried
employees
AWP indirect WorkFace planners
costs
AWP training costs AWP-specific training

IT

AWP-related costs
Company systems
adaptation

20
AWP Maturity Assessment:
Sample evaluation criteria

AWP maturity assessment

Phase I: Planning Phase II: Detailed engineering Phase III: Construction

1.1 The requirement for AWP is 2.1 Schedule is developed for all CWPs 3.1 A process for constraint
written into contracts and EWPs prior to start of detailed identification and resolution is in
engineering place
1.2 A documented AWP strategy is
in place 2.2 IWP process is well documented in a 3.2 Work is always packaged in IWPs
written procedure
1.3 Documented AWP protocols
are developed 3.3 IWPs always identify work to be
2.3 Specific, detailed divisions of completed (as indicated by
1.4 A detailed project execution responsibility to support AWP technical data, drawings, and
plan that includes AWP is content are in place specifications)
developed
2.4 Dedicated IWP planner(s) have been 3.4 All IWPs identify the general
identified and a written job sequence of work and labour
1.5 AWP champion/manager is
description for planners is in place necessary to complete the work
identified for each stakeholder
3.5 All IWPs identify the required
2.5 All planners are on the distribution list material necessary to complete
for all project documentation the work

2.6 Detailed constructability reviews are


performed after AWP planners have
been appointed 21
AWP Maturity Assessment Survey:
Maturity measurement scale

Maturity Measurement

Scale value Scale description


Not
Use of the practice is non-existent on this project
Applicable
Level 1 Use of the practice is not consistently applied on this project
Level 2 A disciplined process exists for the practice on this project
A disciplined process exists for the practice across the different
Level 3
projects within the same organization
Quantitative process control is used across the organization to
Level 4
proactively manage the execution of the practice on this project

Continuous process improvement is used across the organization to


Level 5
optimise the practice on this project

22
AWP Maturity Assessment Survey:
Importance measurement scale

Importance Measurement

Scale value Scale description

1 Practice is extremely unimportant to the associated phase

2 Practice is unimportant to the associated phase

3 Practice is neither unimportant or important to the associated phase

4 Practice is important to the associated phase

5 Practice is extremely important to the associated phase

23
WorkFace Planner Qualification
Characterization

Self Essential duties


Evaluation

Safety

WorkFace planner Project planning


qualification
characterization Knowledge required

Skills required
Supervisor
Evaluation Other desireable characteristics

Importance of competency Agreement of proficiency


24
WorkFace Planner Qualification
Characterization
Essential Duties
No Evaluation criteria
1.1 Ensures that safety, quality and efficiency at the WorkFace are considered
Uses his/her hands-on construction expertise to develop Installation Work
1.2
Packages (IWP).
Coordinates with and provides WorkFace construction knowledge to project
1.3
schedulers, engineers, superintendents and managers.

Safety
No Evaluation criteria
Knows, understands and communicates the safety regulations (Occupational
2.1
Health and Safety Act) and project specific safety policies and procedures.
2.2 Identifies specific risks associated with executing the planned activities.
Provides or arranges for inclusion of safety compliance in IWP to mitigate
2.3
specific risks.
25
WorkFace Planner Qualification
Characterization

Project Planning
No Evaluation criteria
Prepares required project IWP, which includes determining required activities,
3.1
resources, special conditions, quality control, risk planning, interdependencies
Determines and coordinates resource requirements and works well with
3.2
resource coordinators

Knowledge Required
No Evaluation criteria
4.1 Has knowledge of health, safety and environmental programs

4.2 Knows the company and project environment


Has the requisite construction field or technical experience to effectively perform
4.3
their duties without step by step instruction from field supervision.
26
WorkFace Planner Qualification
Characterization

Skills Required
No Evaluation criteria
5.1 Has good problem solving skills

5.2 Is able to resolve conflicts

5.3 Has strong leadership skills

Other Desirable Characteristics


No Evaluation criteria
6.1 Is willing to accept challenges

6.2 Is willing to learn

6.3 Is responsible and accountable

27
Crew Characterization

Crew size

Adequacy of crew size

Crew composition

Crew experience

Crew makeup changes


Crew
characterization Crew turnover rate

Crew skill level

Crew motivation

Level of interruptions

Number of languages spoken on crew


28
Foreman Characterization

Foreman experience

Change of foreman (frequency)


Foreman
characterization Foreman planning skills

Leadership and supervisory skills

Coordination of crews and equipment

29
Performance Metrics (KPIs)

Measured at CWP or IWP levels; if cost estimate at tender stage is available for
individual IWPs, all metrics should be evaluated at IWP level.

Cost performance

Schedule performance

Quality performance
Performance metrics
(KPIs) Safety performance

Productivity

Predictability

30
Performance Metrics:
CWP cost performance metrics

CWP Cost Performance Metrics

ID KPI Name Formula


𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 − 𝐸𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡
1.1 Work package cost growth
𝐸𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡
1.2 Work package budget factor
𝐸𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 + 𝐴𝑝𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑑 𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒𝑠
Work package indirect cost 𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡
1.3
factor 𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡
Work package direct cost 𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡
1.4
factor 𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡
Work package net variation 𝑁𝑒𝑡 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑣𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠
1.5
over final cost 𝐸𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡
1.6 Cost per unit at completion
𝑄𝑢𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑤𝑜𝑟𝑘
𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑓𝑦𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑑𝑒𝑓𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑠
1.7 Cost of defects warranty
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡
Performance Metrics:
IWP schedule performance metrics

IWP Schedule Performance Metrics

ID KPI Name Formula

Work package schedule 𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛


2.1
factor 𝐸𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑑𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 + 𝐴𝑝𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑑 𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒𝑠

Work package schedule 𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 − 𝐸𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑑𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛


2.2
growth 𝐸𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑑𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛

𝐼𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑒|𝐷𝑒𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 − 𝐸𝑥𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛


2.3 Time variance
𝐸𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑑𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛
2.4 Time per unit at completion
𝑄𝑢𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑤𝑜𝑟𝑘

32
Performance metrics:
IWP productivity performance metrics

IWP Productivity Performance Metrics

ID KPI Name Formula

Construction Production 𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐷𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑊𝑜𝑟𝑘 𝐻𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠


6.1
Factor (Physical Work) 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐼𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑑 𝑄𝑢𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑡𝑦
Construction Productivity 𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐷𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑀𝑎𝑛 − 𝐻𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠
6.2
Factor (Physical Work) 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐼𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑑 𝑄𝑢𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑡𝑦
Construction Productivity 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐼𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑑 𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡
6.3
Factor (Cost) 𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝐷𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑀𝑎𝑛 − 𝐻𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠
Productivity Estimate 𝐸𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑒
6.4
Accuracy (Productivity Index) 𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑒
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑀𝑎𝑛 − 𝐻𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠 𝐿𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝑡𝑜 𝐴𝑏𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑒𝑖𝑠𝑚
6.5 Project Absenteeism Rate
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝐷𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑀𝑎𝑛 − 𝐻𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠

33
Advanced Work Packaging and WorkFace
Planning:
Next steps in study

   
Develop a tool Determine Assess Identify the
to assess additional qualifications of impact of crew
maturity of indirect costs of WorkFace and foreman
AWP AWP planners characteristics

Pilot data
Develop and Develop
collection
Update AWP validate data metrics to
methodology
audit tool collection measure
and analyze
methodology impact of AWP
data
… …  
34
University of Alberta Research Ethics
Protocol
Informed Consent

Participants are fully informed of study goals and consent process.

Voluntary

Participation is purely voluntary.

Anonymous

All information is anonymized.

Confidential

Only aggregated results are published in academic research and


technical reports.
35
Would you like to learn more about this study?

We are still currently recruiting participants to contribute projects for the


Impacts of Advanced Work Packaging and WorkFace Planning on
Work Package and Project Performance study.

Please let us know if your organization is interested in learning more about this
research, and if you can help us obtain projects for data collection and analysis.
We have a sign-up sheet you can use to record your interest.
36
Acknowledgements

COAA AWP Subcommittee

Tannis Liviniuk Ryan Posnikoff

Stephen Atkinson Andrew Foy

Petra Polster Doug Hill

Barry Tymchuk

37
Thank you Dr. Aminah Robinson Fayek
NSERC Industrial Research
Chair in Strategic Construction
Questions Modeling and Delivery
& Ph: 780-492-1205
aminah.robinson@ualberta.ca
Discussion

www.strategic-construction.ualberta.ca

38