Lean Construction Ireland Annual Book of Cases 2021 46 Figure 2. Examples of LPS Metrics andVisualWeeklyWork Plans This case study describes how one of our teams implemented LPS on a recent project when acting as a trade partner and with LPS not being adopted by the wider project team.The challenges faced by the team and the merits of using LPS in this situation are discussed. Regardless of the client, management team, trade partners or colleagues, we all have a part to play in the effective and efficient completion of our scope of work to ensure a project is handed over to the end user successfully. Nevertheless, sometimes the last gasp heroic type efforts to get a project to an end user can be forgotten when milestones and project dates are achieved. Scrambling to hit milestones can be an extremely rewarding feeling for a team, and can often improve morale; however, doing this for every milestone is not sustainable across the course of a major project.Construction projects are marathons not sprints, and they need to be treated as such. The project in question was complex in nature and involved multiple organisations, some working in partnership and others working directly with the client. Initially, a high-level schedule was created that all parties agreed to and a sequence was agreed describing which levels, zones, and elements would be completed in order of priority. Figure 3. Initial Project Baseline Schedule Unfortunately, the project coincided with a few macro-economic events that had a significant impact, the two most impactful being Brexit and the Covid pandemic.The challenges posed by these events was added to by design changes and supply chain issues experienced by multiple project stakeholders. Material and labour shortages became a challenge, and the project was completely stopped for 10 weeks due to the pandemic. The result was a schedule that lacked certainty and impacts that were not possible to predict. Elements that were not impacted would be accelerated to compensate for those that were delayed. Consequently, frustrations mounted in the field with supervision becoming increasingly disillusioned by unrealistic requests from management as original milestone dates began slipping.The handover priority originally agreed at project commencement began to blur and resulted in different trades working to differing sequences to minimise schedule impact. Due to the ongoing pressures of unreasonable timelines, we experienced negative attitudes and lack of engagement from our field supervision. As a result, this created a significant issue internally which needed to be reviewed, resolved, and actioned with immediate effect. Our management team were highly motivated, enthusiastic, and safety-conscious, and had previously delivered projects using LPS at a high level. As part of our project execution plans, we focus heavily on utilising LPS to ensure the successful completion of our works.Despite the investment in training, as a team, we unfortunately fell short of the fundamental requirements of LPS.Dates we were working towards had exceptionally tight timelines and people did not have faith they could be achieved.The effectiveness of the planning process was lost in the depths of unreasonable timelines, which could not continue. We sought opportunity to eliminate parts of the process that were not adding value.There was no alternative and a better solution was badly needed because, if the trend continued, we were inevitably going to fail. As simple as it seems, we re-energised our focus on what had delivered success previously – tasks that are available and work we Can Do through our LPS process. We stopped, assessed, and re-evaluated our situation and recognised the issues within – failed commitments, missed dates, the appetite for success had dropped. Following lengthy and sometimes intense discussions with our management team, a change in the LPS set-up was agreed.A key finding in our original LPS arrangements were meeting times and schedule review timings didn’t support field execution needs. Internal changes with a focused effort on detailed look-aheads at a time that worked for the entire team enabled more meaningful constraint management and effective communication amongst the group. With this subtle change, we immediately encountered a change in mindset towards what we were striving to achieve. Recognising the issues enabled a revised set-up to our LPS approach, thereby allowing the team to voice their thoughts and opinions through constructive planning meetings and daily Case 12
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTIzMTIxMw==