CII Performance Assessment 10-10 System Benchmarking and ... · •Provide the Industry with...

CII Performance Assessment 10-10 System

Benchmarking and Productivity

1

July 18, 2016 Singapore

The Singapore Chemical Industry Council (SCIC) and the Association of Process Industry (ASPRI)

Productivity Council’s Productivity Improvement Workshop

Welcome

2

CII Singapore Project

3

CII Embarks on Ambitious Research Project to Improve

Construction and Maintenance Productivity in Singapore

https://www.construction-institute.org/news/singapore_story.cfm?section=pa

CII Previous Work

4

1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s

General

Program

1999 Safety

Survey

2011 Productivity

Benchmarking Report

2016 CII Singapore

System

Pharma

Program

Continuous Improvement

Implement

Best Practices

Measure

Results

Identify Opportunities

to Improve

Select

Implementation

Tools

Conduct

Training

Compare to

Norms

CII Singapore – Performance Assessment Objectives

• Provide the Industry with Performance Norms

6

CII Singapore – Performance Assessment Objectives


– Safety survey

7

CII Singapore – Performance Assessment ObjectivesCII


– % Overtime by Industry Sector

8

6.5 16.6412.82 11.98

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Building (n=19) Infrastructure(n=11)

Heavy Industrial(n=96)

Light Industrial(n=223)

% O

vert

ime

4th Quartile

3rd Quartile

2nd Quartile

1st Quartile

Average

CII Benchmarking Objectives


– 1703 projects

9

34

39

40

52

58

58

63

83

85

235

366

Pharmaceutical…

Foods

Natural Gas Processing

Metals…

Automotive Manufacturing

Environmental

Consumer Products…

Electrical Generating

Pulp and Paper

Oil Refining

Chemical Manufacturing

Project Type (Top 11)

Contractors, 776, 46%Owners, 927, 54%

Respondent



• Provide Singapore Companies Tools for Self-analysis

10




• Quantify the Value of Best Practices

11

-1.2%

6.3%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

High(N=29)

Low(N=24)

Co

st

Gro

wth

Planning Best Practice Index

Value of Practices - Owner Planning

• Front End Planning

• Alignment for FEP

• Planning for Start-up

=standard error of mean (90% confidence interval)

7.5% Absolute Difference

Value of Practices - Contractor Execution

-3.0%

9.2%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

High(N=12)

Low(N=13)

Co

st

Gro

wth

Execution Best Practice Index

• Constructability

• Project Risk Assessment

• Change Management

=standard error of mean (90% confidence interval)

12.2% Absolute Difference





• Benchmark Construction and Maintenance

Productivity

14

Piping Construction Productivity

Construction Productivity: Gulf Coast vs. Other Locations

• Productivity analysis

between Gulf Coast and

other U.S. locations


Concrete

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35O

n-G

rad

e (

CY

)

Ele

va

ted

Sla

bs/O

nD

eck (

CY

)

Are

a P

avin

g (

CY

)

To

tal S

lab

s (

CY

)

< 5

cu

bic

ya

rds

5-2

0 c

ub

ic y

ard

s

21

-50

cu

bic

ya

rds

> 5

0 c

ub

ic y

ard

s

To

tal F

ou

nd

atio

ns

(CY

)

Co

ncre

teS

tru

ctu

res (

CY

)

To

tal C

on

cre

te(C

Y)

Co

nc

rete

Co

ns

tru

cti

on

Pro

du

cti

vit

y

(wh

/CY

)

Gulf Coast - Median Other Locations - Median

Gulf Coast 19 9 18 28 21 24 22 18 36 18 40

Other

Locations15 10 8 24 6 8 6 11 24 10 41


Piping

Gulf Coast 33 23 5 5 38 31 26 5 8 38

Other Locations 10 10 2 2 17 14 15 2 2 28

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0C

arb

on

Ste

el (L

F)

Sta

inle

ss S

tee

l(L

F)

Ch

rom

e (

LF

)

Oth

er

Allo

ys (

LF

)

To

tal S

ma

ll B

ore

(LF

)

Ca

rbo

n S

tee

l (L

F)

Sta

inle

ss S

tee

l(L

F)

Ch

rom

e (

LF

)

Oth

er

Allo

ys (

LF

)

To

tal L

arg

e B

ore

(IS

BL

) (L

F)Pip

ing

Co

ns

tru

cti

on

Pro

du

cti

vit

y(w

h/L

F)

Gulf Coast - Median Other Locations - Median





• Benchmark Construction and Maintenance Productivity

… An Impartial Confidential Venue for the Transfer of

Knowledge within the industry

19

CII Confidentiality Policy - Summary of Key Features

• Company data are considered confidential.

• Data can be used to support CII benchmarking, research, and related academic

activities only if the confidentiality of companies submitting the data is protected.

• Access to data is limited to CII staff and authorized researchers only.

• All persons with access to CII data must sign confidentiality agreements and abide by

CII confidentiality policies.

• When data are provided in support of research activities, all confidential identifiers will

be removed and only essential subsets of data will be provided.

• All data published and/or presented must reflect the aggregate of at least 8 projects

from 3 separate companies.

• Reports and data files containing only individual project or company data are

considered confidential will not be published or provided to researchers.

• In cases where a disproportionate amount of data are provided by a single company,

CII will suppress publication of results until the data set is sufficiently large to mitigate

confidentiality or bias concerns.

20

CII Model

21

Levels of Use of Benchmarking

22

Improve Efficiency Of A Business Unit

Improve Performance Of A Single Project Or A Group Of Projects

Improve Selected Performance Metrics (e.g. Productivity)

Benchmarking Lessons Learned

23

• Senior management buy-in is vital to success

• A company champion/coordinator is essential

The Value of Benchmarking

• Improves project and company performance when used

as an ongoing practice

• Establishes improvement goals based on

external/competitive benchmarks

• Facilitates “best in class” performance

24

Cost

Capacity

P90

P50

P10

CII 10-10 System Overview

• Performance Assessment System with simple and important

metrics

– 10 Input Metrics (Leading Indicators)

– 10 Output Metrics (Trailing indicators)

• Three survey types: New Projects, Maintenance, Turnaround

• Assesses project performance

• Provides actionable information

• Assesses productivity performance

• Research based

2

5

Leading Indicators

• Planning

• Organizing

• Leading

• Controlling

• Human Resources

• Quality

• Sustainability

• Supply Chain

• Safety/EHS

• Design Efficiency (New Project Only)

• Maintenance Strategy (Maintenance Only)

• Interface Management (Turnaround Only)

• Information Management (Turnaround Only)

2

6

Input Metrics

2

7

SC

Input Metrics: Assessing Practices and Working Relationships

Input Metrics

2

8


Input Metrics

2

9


10-10 Questionnaires

• Questions are

– Yes/No

– 5-point scales (strongly agree - strongly disagree)

– Multiple choice questions

• Questions are mapped to input metrics

10-10 Leading Indictor Reporting

3

1

Output Metrics – New Project

• Forecasted Project Cost Efficiency

• Construction Cost Efficiency

• Forecasted Project Schedule Efficiency

• Construction Schedule Efficiency

• Construction Cost Growth

• Construction Schedule Growth

• Construction Phase Burn Rate

• Project Management Team Size / Total Project Cost

• Craft Work Force / Construction Phase Cost

• Total Cost of Equipment / Total Quantity of Major Equipment

• TRIR

• DART

3

2

The 10-10 Singapore System

3

3

SC

Output Metrics: Assessing Project Outcomes

Estimated Construction Cost

Actual Construction Cost

The 10-10 Singapore System

3

4

Output Metrics: Assessing Project Outcomes

Matching similar projects:

Start with all Projects: 1,800

• Survey Type [New Project]: 1,200

• Respondent [Owner]: 1,000

• Type [Refining]: 400

• Capacity Unit [BPD]:

60

Output Metrics

3

5

Metric Description Maintenance STO

Maintenance Cost as a Percentage of ARV (owner)

Materials Service Level (owner)

Unplanned Downtime Percentage (owner)

Rework Percentage

TRIR

Planned and Scheduled Maintenance Percentage

Percentage of Preventive Maintenance Work

Overtime Percentage

Hours Spent on Training / Total Work Hours

Direct Work Percentage

Cost Growth

Feed Out/In Schedule Growth

Maintenance Craft Productivity

Productivity Metrics – New Project

• Concrete

• Structural Steel

• Instrumentation

• Painting

• Piping

• Scaffolding

• Site-work

• Insulation

• Electrical

• Major Equipment

– Pressure Vessels

– Atmospheric Tanks – Shop

Fabricated

– Atmospheric Tanks – Field

Fabricated

– Heat Transfer Equipment

– Boiler & Fired Heaters

– Rotating Equipment (w/drivers)

– Material Handling Equipment

(w/drivers)

– Power Generation Equipment

– Other Process Equipment

3

6

𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑡𝑦 =𝑊𝑜𝑟𝑘 𝐻𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠

𝑈𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑂𝑢𝑡𝑝𝑢𝑡

Productivity Metrics – Maintenance / Turnaround

• Static Equipment

– Tanks

– Vessels

– Heat Exchangers, Coolers and

Fin-Fans

– Boiler/Furnace/Heater

– Valves and Piping Fittings

• Piping

– Small Bore (smaller than 3-inch)

– Large Bore (3-inch and larger)

• Rotating Equipment

– Compressors

– Pumps

– Gas and Steam Turbines

– Blowers and Fans

• Instrumentation – I/O Loops

• Electrical

– Motor Control Center

– Conduit and Wire

– Electrical Repair in Equipment

• Services – Scaffolding

• Insulation

– Piping

– Equipment

• Cleaning / Blasting and Painting

– Piping

– Tanks and Vessels

– Equipment including Exchangers

3

7

Correlating Inputs and Outputs

3

8

Project OutcomesPractices and working

Relationships

Correlating Inputs and Outputs

3

9

y = -0.0762x + 0.4181

-80%

-40%

0%

40%

80%

120%

0 1 2 3 4 5

Co

nstr

uctio

n C

ost

Gro

wth

Alignment Score N = 81; R2 = 4.9%; p = 0.012

• The interfaces between project stakeholders were well managed.

• Key project team members understood the owner's goals and objectives of this project.

• Plan and progress including changes were communicated clearly and frequently amongst stakeholders

• Project leaders recognized and rewarded outstanding personnel and results.

• The key stakeholders (owner, design, and vendors) were fully aligned during Construction.

Timeline

• July 2016:

– System Launch

– Hands-on training on July 20

• August – December 2016

– Collect New Project, Maintenance and Turnaround Data

• December

– Launch Maintenance and Turnaround Reporting

4

0

Call to Action

• Participating companies should provide a list of projects

and surveys that can potentially be submitted in 2016

• Both owner and contractors are to participate

• This will provide CII an estimate of how many surveys

should be expected by December 2016

• CII’s goal is a collect a minimum of 30 maintenance

surveys and 30 turnaround surveys in the first round

4

1

Questions?

Daniel P. Oliveira, Ph.D.

Research Associate, CII

[email protected]

+1.512.232.3050

4

For more information, please visit www.10-10program.org

Bob Ritter

Associate Director, CII

[email protected]

+1.512.232.3008

Construction Industry Institute

3925 W. Braker Lane (R4500)

Austin, TX 78759-5316 USA

https://www.construction-institute.org

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

CII Performance Assessment 10-10 System Benchmarking and ... · •Provide the Industry with...

Documents

Transcript of CII Performance Assessment 10-10 System Benchmarking and ... · •Provide the Industry with...