2018Case3DPSGroup

20 L EAN C ONSTRUCTION I RELAND A NNUAL B OOK OF C ASES 2018 ‘Client driven changes/delays’ had the largest negative impact in WW -32 and this was greatly reduced in WW-33. ‘Client documentation signoff delays’, which impacted WW-30 and were addressed, arose again with a major negative influence in WW-33. This re-occurrence, so soon after it had been initially identified and considered resolved, warranted investigation and a separate meeting to address the issue was convened. A 5 Why analysis and scientific problem-solving technique in the form of an A3 problem repor t was undertaken, and the root cause was identified as Client resources being diverted from the planned task to prepare for an upcoming external audit within the facility. The Client worked around the issue and the construction project was sufficiently supported to enable it stay on schedule. The use of the functions of LPS, namely the commitment of planned tasks to the WWP and the prompt generation of the PPC report, allied to the trending of PPC over time, had resulted in the identification of issues that could impact negatively on the schedule. Thi s al lowed countermeasures to be implemented promptly, thus avoiding delay to the project. The data recorded from the huddles and the daily marking- up of the WWP, and which was communicated through the weekly reports, was further collated into a Pareto analysis of all the variances. This ensured that the entire team was using data-based decision-making project management, thus completing the connection between the social interaction- based weekly production and the traditional critical path schedule-based management process. LEAN INITIATIVE IMPROVEMENTS & IMPACT The major difference from the traditional planning process, and from the previous experience of DPS Group and the Client using LPS, was the inter-departmental participation and collaboration in the Pull Planning and WWP sessions. Engineering and Procurement produced their own joint WWPs and Pull Plans, Construction produced their own plans, and so did Commissioning. While LPS enabled cross- trade collaboration within each department, its crucial contribution to the case study project was the facilitation of the interaction and collaboration between EPCM&V and focussing all parties’ attentions on the project’s overall goals. All functions of LPS were used on the project, and this is what contributed the greatest benefits to the project. Its creators declare that LPS is a system of interconnected parts and that omission of any part curtails the system’s ability to accomplish its functions. The full integration of the teams from Engineering/Design, Procurement, Construction, and Commissioning phases was enabled by the visualisation of each department’s position and role on the overall project milestone schedule. The separation of the different phases of the schedule and associated Pul l Plans al lowed each department to focus on its own goals whilst also actively progressing and coordinating their tasks towards the overall project complet ion date. The weekly and monthly governance meetings, where the LPS data was reviewed at management level, was key to steering the project on course. The Last Planners held their daily huddles and weekly LPS coordination meetings at site level ensuring that the connect ion from high- level mi lestones to the dai ly production planning was complete. The extremely tight schedule was achieved with some areas being completed and handed over ahead of the target date. This was despite the Client’s independent risk analyst calculating the probability of achieving this schedule as being 10%. Figure 3. The DPS Team Doing LPS Despite the very aggressive schedule, extremely tight site footprint, restrictive working space, and 24-hour work days totalling 144,600 hours worked on site, there were zero lost time incidents or accidents. Both DPS Group and Client Safety Of f icers attr ibute great credi t to LPS for the achievement of this key project goal and mention the increased understanding by the supervisors and trade foremen of their own and others daily work tasks, leading to a greater coordination and spreading of work across the work zones, lessening congestion, and leading to improved and safer working conditions. The Construction Manager insisted on accurate resource numbers being entered in the WWPs, which were then filtered per area which highlighted if any work zone was overloaded with multiple trades. This practice assisted trades in ensuring availability of a clear area in which to carry out their work and avoided unnecessary reorganisation and firefighting. As a major issue in construction delivery is trades waiting to commence their own work or waiting for other trades to finish, it was satisfying to receive the following quotes from the contractors on the project confirming the coordination benefits of LPS: • The Electrical Contractor said that “We were able to meet deadlines and in turn, not hold up any other trades in carrying out their own work and achieving their own goals”. • The Civils Contractor said that “Last Planner had a big part to play in this project as all contractors had a large volume of work within a tight work area”. • The Specialist Clean Room Contractor said that “Last Planner reinforced the team element of the project with all trades being aware of other trades requirements”. A major problem in any construction project close-out is the management of punch-lists and their timely close-out. While the punch-lists were managed through a separate dashboard, the walk-downs and approaching deadlines were coordinated through the WWP and the daily huddles. This proactive approach of addressing punch items as work was progressing was, in the eyes of the Construction Manager, respons ible for the reduct ion of punch i tems by approximately 30% when compared with previous projects of a similar nature. By focussing on the punch-list items from an early stage through the WWP, an atmosphere was created where quality at every stage of the production process became engrained in the trades executing the work. In conjunction with the 5S workplace implementation which focussed on organised and tidy workplaces, it was possible to close-up walls and ceiling spaces at the earliest possible time as rework had been minimised by this increased quality focus. No time allowance was therefore required for rework which resulted in satisfied contractors and which in turn led to improved employee satisfaction as the project neared completion. An important qualitative benefit of the integrated use of LPS was the improved vendor, sub-contractor, supplier, and broader supply chain engagement and collaboration which