2019Case12Clancy

Following the company wide rollout of LPS, research was undertaken to quantify the impacts on project outcomes and the specific impact on programme and defect performance. The research covers data from the 15 most recent projects completed. These projects vary in scope, size, and location, but when aggregated, allow us to assess the impact of LPS under a number of headings. Each construction project has its own unique challenges but by controlling for project value we can make meaningful comparisons across different projects. Four of these were completed using LPS and the remainder were completed using traditional project management techniques. The analysis shows that LPS contributed to: • 27% reduction in programme over runs; and • 32% reduction in defects. RFIs One of the benefits of LPS is that all stakeholders are involved. This allows the right people to raise queries at the earliest possible time. To assess the impact of this, we divided each project into quartiles. This allowed us to understand what stages queries were generated on site and if LPS was leading to earlier answers. The results are shown in Figure 1. Analysis of the data shows that the actual quantum of RFIs generated has increased on the four LPS projects. The critical finding here though is not the volume of RFIs, but the timing of them. There is a clear shift towards submitting more RFIs and submitting them earlier in the project cycle. This graph is evidence of a clear shift in the mindset of the construction teams. By increasing the forward planning in the earlier stages of a project, more resources are freed up to focus on programme and quality as the project reaches conclusion. This is also very positive for design teams and clients as they receive queries ahead of time for the most part, so it allows them time to get answers or make decisions. This directly contributes to a reduction in waiting, rework and over-processing. The impact of this is further seen in the following results. Programme Programme was analysed by comparing the planned Practical Completion (PC) date to the actual PC date. Figure 2 shows that the introduction of LPS contributed to a 27% reduction in programme delays across all projects. 48 L EAN C ONSTRUCTION I RELAND A NNUAL B OOK OF C ASES 2019 project manager must carry out on any given day. The template also lacked an adequate review function, where a project manager must “look back” and assess if planned works were completed on time. Another area identified for improvement was the timely issuing of RFIs to the design team. The traditional project management techniques generated waiting waste and poor workflow. The Proposal This analysis, combined with recent successful trials of the Last Planner System (LPS) , lead to the commi ttee recommending the roll out of LPS on all sites. LPS is an alternative to the traditional method of project planning. Tradi t ional methods of construct ion were driven on productivity versus time where critical path tasks were monitored closely and stakeholders working on the project worked in silos. LPS takes a hol i st ic approach to a project where stakeholders are asked to work in collaboration to ensure workflow and better transitions between each trade. Words such as Plan, Do, Check, and Act are used to describe a process within the LPS system where these actions are required on a continuous basis during the project duration. Planning refers to a review of the master programme, a six week look-ahead programme, pull planning sessions, and finally the fortnightly programme. Once these are in place, the requirement to complete the works as planned can take place and agreed milestones can be met. It is critical to review the plan to ensure compliance and close out any incomplete works. Constant review of future works allows project teams look ahead and identify potential stumbling blocks in time to address them. By issuing RFIs early in the project cycle, waiting and reworking can be minimised. When this review process is in place it allows design teams and clients to keep ahead of the construction works. It also fosters a better working relationship between the design team and contractor, which in turn allows a project run smoother. Implementation The LPS system has now been rolled out across all Clancy sites. LPS training was completed by several senior managers who now act as champions within the company. A standard wish list to implement the Clancy LPS system was created to simplify the set-up stage for each project. New templates such as the fortnightly programme and daily white board meetings were created, and site teams have been trained to use these successfully. The LPS system has been backed by Clancy senior management and its significance for the overall functioning of the company has been highlighted during company management meetings. This has been another effective element for the implementation process. LEAN INITIATIVE IMPROVEMENTS & IMPACT Figure 1. Impact of LPS on RFI Timing