AWP: The Silver Bullet for Solving Productivity
Problems on Projects?
Jim Rammell, Wood Group Mustang
Panel Discussion
AWP Conference 2014 October 7-8 • Houston, TX
Introductions
Wayne Crew, Director, CII
Bill O’Brien, Associate Professor, The University of Texas at Austin
Jim Rammell, VP Construction Operations, Wood Group Mustang
Glen Warren, Workface Planning Committee Co-chair, COAA
Discussion Panel
• Moderator: Jim Rammell
• CII & COAA Research on Productivity: Wayne Crew
• Recent RT272 & RT319 Research Overview: Bill O’Brien
• AWP / WFP Applications from the Field: Glen Warren
• Wrap Up / Q&A: Jim Rammell / All
Where We Are . . .
Summary Benefits
• Productivity
• Predictability
• Safety
• Quality / Reduced Rework
• Alignment / Communication
CII and COAA Joint Effort
Wayne Crew
CII & COAA Research on Productivity
• How does this fit into FEL?
• Also 252, 215, last 5 years of effort
• Holistic approach, 272/319 fits into theme
• Alignment thermometer, front end planning
• AWP fits in here & here, connects the dots through capital
project life cycle
Where We Are . . .
CII and COAA Joint Effort
Bill O’Brien
AWP: So what’s really new?
• We KNOW Front End Planning helps projects
– Statistics, logic, case examples
• AWP is the extension of FEP across the project lifecycle
– People, processes, tools
• AWP promotes success at the work front
– Provides pre-requisites for effective short-interval (field) planning
AWP is a disciplined process to overcome problems resulting from a
fragmented and specialized industry
Two key ideas: (1) CWP/EWP definition; (2) Role of WorkFace Planners
Documented Benefits
• 25% productivity improvement
• 10% decrease in total installed cost } multiple case studies
• Greater schedule & cost certainty
• Improved safety performance
• Improved quality
• Improved contractor profitability
• Improved stakeholder alignment
• No silver bullet – achieving the benefits takes work!
• But no reason to wait…
Preliminary Statistical Results
Compared to poor AWP implementation, effective implementation shows
• 30% increase of Safety performance
• 20% increase in Quality performance
AWP drives Project Cost and Schedule Predictability
(25% explanatory power)
Small sample, but robust results from statistical analysis.
The math for the business case:
X% increase in field productivity x %field labor of TIC
= % decrease in TIC
25% field improvement x 40% field costs =
10% decrease in TIC
• Field studies show tremendous opportunity for improvement
in tool time on almost all projects.
• Small improvements pay for up front costs.
Why can you trust the research findings?
Multiple Sources of Evidence
•Case Studies
•Expert interviews
•Workshops
•Surveys
•Team deliberation
•External review TRIANGULATION
Main areas of Enhancement:
– Project definition
– Construction & engineering planning
– CWP & EWP boundary development
– IWP and workface planning capability/discipline
Plan for Work Packaging
Refine Sequence of Construction
Define Construction
Sequencing
Preliminary IWP
release plan
Levels of Design
Plan for Work Packaging
Define EWP Standard
Review Project Definition Deliverables
Glen Warren
KEY BARRIERS TO AWP/WFP IMPLEMENTATION
FROM 2012 WORKSHOP - SELECTED INDUSTRY EXPERTS
• STAKEHOLDERS DON’T BELIEVE BENEFITS
• STAKEHOLDERS THUS DON’T “BUY-IN”
SOLUTION - REQUIRE MORE CASE STUDIES
CASE STUDIES
DOCUMENTATION OF CASE STUDIES IS GROWING
2 REPRESENTATIVE EXAMPLES
• ALASKA
• ALBERTA OIL SANDS
WHY IS WFP PRODUCTIVITY NOT CONSISTANT
• FRONT END DELIVERABLES
– NOT COMPLETE
– NOT DELIVERED IN RIGHT SEQUENCE
PLANNED PATH OF CONSTRUCTION PROCESS
Issued IFC Work commences
8 week lag CONSTRUCTION WORK
ENGINEERING WORK
PACKAGE EXECUTED
PACKAGE (EWP)
USING IWPs
Engineering Produces Bill of Material
PROCUREMENT
PACKAGE (PP)
Eqpt / Mat’l arrives
Purchase Order to Supplier Prior to work starting
SUPPLIER EQPT &/OR
MATERIAL
MOBILIZATION OF CONTRACTOR
FORECAST COMPLETION MOBILIZES RESOURCES
ENGINEERING WORK 8 week lag CONSTRUCTION WORK
PACKAGE (EWP) PACKAGE EXECUTED
USING IWPs
PROCUREMENT
PACKAGE (PP)
SUPPLIER EQPT &/OR
MATERIAL
PLANNED PATH OF CONSTRUCTION PROCESS
Issued IFC Work commences
SQUEEZES LAG CONSTRUCTION WORK
ENGINEERING WORK
PACKAGE EXECUTED
PACKAGE (EP)
USING IWPs
PROCUREMENT
LATE VENDOR
PACKAGE (PP)
DATA
SUPPLIER EQPT &/OR
MATERIAL
PLANNED PATH OF CONSTRUCTION PROCESS
Issued IFC Work commences
SQUEEZES LAG CONSTRUCTION WORK
ENGINEERING WORK
PACKAGE EXECUTED
PACKAGE (EP)
USING IWPs
PROCUREMENT
CONTROL THIS INTERFACE
PACKAGE (PP)
SUPPLIER EQPT &/OR
MATERIAL
IMPROVE EWP DELIVERY PREDICTABILITY
• EWP READINESS REVIEW (TIMELY) – INCLUDE SCM
– CHAMPION DESIGNATED FOR EACH EWP
– ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES FOR EWP
DEVELOPMENT / UTILIZE CHECKLISTS
– ENSURE EQUIPMENT / INSTRUMENTS / MATERIAL
CAN BE TRACKED TO EACH INDIVIDUAL EWP
– VENDOR DATA REQUIREMENTS EMBEDDED IN
CONTRACT
– RULES OF CREDIT
LESSONS LEARNED
• IMPLEMENTATIONS AREN’T EASY
• NEED MANAGEMENT SUPPORT ( Note – plan to use
DTE Energy as Example – from CII 2113 AGM)
• THE RESULTS ARE DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE
EFFORT INVOLVED
IS THIS “THE SILVER BULLET”
• IT NEVER WILL BE UNLESS YOU HAVE THE “GUN” TO
PUT IT INTO ACTION.
Wrap Up / Q&A
• Implementation Resources, more at rest of conference
• Additional discussions thru conference
Maturity Model
Resources
Volume I:
Recommended Volume II:
Implementation Volume III:
Process Case Studies
Guidance
and Expert
CII/COAA AWP Implementation Resource IR 272-2 Interviews
400 pages of guidance, tools, and templates
