2019Case8Exyte

35 L EAN C ONSTRUCTION I RELAND A NNUAL B OOK OF C ASES 2019 were already being actioned by regional and central offices to get teams mobilised. The focus quickly turned to a logistical concern, and one that needed to be managed by easing resources from one project to another whilst maintaining momentum on closeout for the existing project and whilst allowing the right expertise to be made available for the timely ramp-up of the new project. A quick comparison was carried out and an agreed Lean Logistics Strategy was pencilled out in draft. Lean logistics, in the simplest terms, refers to the method of identifying and eliminating wasteful activities from the supply chain. In this case, we treated our EPCM functions as components of the project supply chain and adopted a Just In Time (JIT) approach which would enable Exyte and MPM to cut down on wasted/repeated efforts of recruiting additional or specialised project resources in a recognised and notoriously busy industry and marketplace. Figure 2. Exyte Data Centre Server Bank The Lean Logistics Strategy Developed & Deployed Step 1 – Detailed list of activities to be executed in short, medium and long-term from the EPCM phases of the new project. In parallel, the impact of scope creep and executing a timely closeout on the current project was carried out. Step 2 – Traditional methods of mobi l ising project resources were challenged through Kaizen cycles to see how the process could be improved. Following on from those exercises, MPM proposed to Exyte that Pul l and JIT techniques should be implemented, and these became the pillars of our Demobilising/Mobilising strategy. Pul l System – The concept of a pul l system i s a fundamental pillar in a Lean approach. At a strategic level, pull identifies the real need to deliver the product and resources to the client along with an “absolute need date”. The traditional construction process pushes the client into an often protracted development process where risk and uncertainties are prevalent. The principle of pull involves the decision-making ability to define quickly what the client needs from each phase of the project in relation to their business, and subsequently customising and delivering those needs more predictably when the client requires them. JIT – This is classified as amongst the most developed Lean Construction tools designed to eliminate non-value-added (NVA) activities and to reduce process variability. The JIT philosophy is based on the concept that stocks/resources that do not bring added value to the customer before the time they are required (internal or external) should be considered as sources of wastes. So, the resource must be available only when it is necessary and not sooner so as to provide comfort to the client that we would be mobilising a full team at the start of the project. Step 3 – A CPM schedule was created alongside a Last Planner Pull session for the Engineering and Procurement phases, and the program of works was driven in the short- term to the Mobilisation on site milestone. Step 4 – Forecasting in terms of both the needs of the ongoing project as well as the new project. Detailed forecasting, derived from detailed knowledge about resources and when best to utilise them, had to mature from being merely speculative figures. A simple yet effective approach for this is was to measure our capacity (for instance, the hours our Engineers can put in) against the demand we could see based on PDCA/Kaizen cycles and Last Planner lessons learned from the current project versus the number of hours upcoming projects required. That way, we confidently calculated whether we had more people than we had a need to mobilise or vice versa. Step 5 – Comparisons were drawn between cycle times and capaci ty ut i l i sat ion of the speci f ic members of the Engineering team from Exyte and MPM. We planned our resources to high levels of utilisation, and theoretically had a more efficient team and system with less wasted money on potentially unused capacity. The variables we were looking to directly reduce in this exercise were: • Knowledge Transfer Risk • Uncertainty for client and project teams • Lack of impact to subcontractor performance • Loss of integrated and harmonised workforce • Decreased multi-tasking LEAN INITIATIVE IMPROVEMENTS & IMPACT In paral lel to implement ing these Lean ini t iat ives , management were engaged in ongoing contractual talks, estimation completion, and prioritising equipment purchases. Then, the Project Management Team (PMT) arrived at the point of “potentially too late to implement” the JIT approach as the initial kick-off phase of the project was prolonging and gaining little momentum in a physical sense. In an assessment of the new project’s estimation and engineering phase, it became apparent that stakeholders that could influence Exyte’s abi l ity to del iver to the proven Lean logistics techniques of Pull and JIT sat outside Exyte’s and MPM’s remit of responsibility. Thus, our focus, and one of the most significant impacts, related to collaborative engagement and onboarding of key stakeholders. The two main outcomes Exyte and MPM were seeking to obtain were: 1)A focus on schedule certainty and an agreed strategy on how to implement an improved utilisation of project resources whilst remaining focused on client needs and project timescale. 2)Creating a smooth workflow and eliminating the waste of leaving potential key members of the new project in a role serving the current clients need for comfort and stability, but once again obtaining thi s whi l st maintaining momentum on the existing projects close-out activities. Having the ability to engage internal resources, controlling Exyte’s Lean processes, better planning, and visualisation all gave us better predictability and better understanding among the workforce about the challenges we faced and how the process would need to be managed across all levels of the