Lean Construction Irelandleanconstructionireland.ie/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/... ·...

ANNUAL BOOK OF CASES 2019

www.leanconstructionireland.ie

Lean Construction Ireland

1LEAN CONSTRUCTION IRELAND ANNUAL BOOK OF CASES 2019

Contents

ContentsEditor Profile, Darrin Taylor – Waterford Institute of Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

Foreword by Richard Fitzpatrick – Chairperson of Lean Construction Ireland . . . . . . . .3

Chapter 1Target Value Delivery by Glenn Ballard – University of California Berkeley . . . . . . . . . . . . .5-9

Chapter 2Company Case Studies

DPS Group (Cork Operations) . . . . . . . . .Pages 12-15GRAHAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pages 16-18CField Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pages 19-21Jones Engineering Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pages 22-24Ardmac . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pages 25-27Kirby Group Engineering (1) . . . . . . . . . . .Pages 28-30

SISK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pages 31-33Exyte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pages 34-36Roadbridge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pages 37-39Collen Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pages 40-42Sheahan & Collins Construction . . . . . . . .Pages 43-46Clancy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pages 47-49Alucraft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pages 50-53DPS Advanced Technology Group . . . . . . .Pages 54-57Suir Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pages 58-60Mercury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pages 61-63Kirby Group Engineering (2) . . . . . . . . . . .Pages 64-67PM Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pages 68-71BAM Ireland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pages 72-74Jacobs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pages 75-77

Sponsor Pages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .80-81

Chapter 3Glossary of Terms & Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . .83-88

Managing Director: Ronan McGladeProduction: Susan DoyleProduction: Paula Dempsey

Sales & Marketing: John McNamee

Lean Construction Ireland Annual Book of Cases is published by BoxMedia and its Directors.616, Edenderry Business Campus, Edenderry, Co.Offaly

Tel: + 353 46 9773434BoxMedia and its Directors can accept no responsibility for the accuracy of contributors’ articles or statements appearing in this publication.

Any views or opinions expressed are not necessarily those of BoxMedia and its Directors. No responsibility for loss or distress occasioned to anyperson acting or refraining from acting as a result of the material in this publication can be accepted by the authors, contributors, editor and

publisher. A reader should access separate advice when acting on specific editorial in this publication.

Design, Origination and Separations by Fullpoint Design (057) 8680873 / (086) 1573510Printed by GPS Colour Graphics.

(BoxMedia is a Premier Business Media Ltd. Company)

To cite this book: Lean Construction Ireland (2019), Annual Book of Cases 2019, Ed. Darrin Taylor, Edenderry, Ireland: Box Media.

2 LEAN CONSTRUCTION IRELAND ANNUAL BOOK OF CASES 2019

Editor Profile

Editor

Darrin Taylor, Waterford Institute of Technology

Darrin is a Lecturer in Management at Waterford Institute of Technology(WIT) Business School. He is Principal Lead of the Academy of Lean

Enterprise Excellence at the RIKON Centre in WIT Business School,and Joint Programme Director of the WIT Lean & OperationalExcellence portfolio of executive/practitioner programmes.

Prior to his academic career, Darrin worked as an operationsmanager, in addition to management consultancy, for over a decade in

the private sector. He joined WIT in 2004 where he lectures Lean andOperational Excellence modules on the Master of Business in Lean

Enterprise Excellence, the Executive MBA, the MSc in Construction ProjectManagement, and the Diploma in Lean Fundamentals. Darrin supervises postgraduateresearch on Lean Management, Lean Construction, Operational Excellence, and SupplyChain Management. Additionally, Darrin coordinates the Annual WIT Lean EnterpriseExcellence Forum and the Annual WIT Lean Practitioner Seminar Series – both popular andleading national and regional knowledge-exchange events built on Industry-Academia-State engagement and collaboration.

Darrin continues to work extensively with industry, encompassing public and privateorganisations across all services and manufacturing sectors. He is a founding member ofLean Business Ireland and a Steering Committee member. He is Co-Chair of the SouthEast Lean Network, and assisted in the establishment of the other Regional LeanNetworks throughout Ireland. He has worked with Lean Construction Ireland (LCi) since2015, and is a Special Advisor to the LCi Board of Directors. Darrin researches andpublishes in the Lean space, and regularly speaks at Lean and Operational Excellenceconferences and events.

[email protected]

www.wit.ie/lean

www.witleanforum.com


Foreword

Foreword

by Richard Fitzpatrick, Chairperson of Lean Construction Ireland

On behalf of the Board of Lean Construction Ireland (LCi), it is mygreat pleasure to welcome you to the second publication of the Lean

Construction Ireland Annual Book of Cases which is the key LeanConstruction reference publication for the Irish construction sector –from Clients and Owners, to Contractors, Sub-Contractors,Consultants, and Suppliers.

This second Book of Cases demonstrates the Irish constructionsector is beginning to recognise that embedding Lean thinking and

practices into the project delivery process is the most appropriatemechanism by which value-add can be realised for all project

stakeholders. The success of the inaugural Book of Cases in 2018 reaffirmsthe LCi’s principle that the open exchange of knowledge, information, and experiencesaround good Lean practices, delivered through our website, our national conference, ourwebinars, regional network events, and this Book of Cases, are critical enablers for the Irishconstruction sector to understand the value and benefits of Lean.

The Board of LCi is delighted to have Professor Glenn Ballard from the University ofCalifornia at Berkeley contribute the Book’s opening chapter on Target Value Design(TVD). Professor Ballard is co-founder of the Lean Construction Institute (USA), theInternational Group for Lean Construction (IGLC), and Lean in the Public Sector(LIPS), and is a leading international Lean practitioner who is a co-architect of the LastPlanner® System and the Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) model for Lean delivery ofcapital projects. This chapter on TVD highlights the integral role clients and owners havein the adoption of Lean thinking and practices, and it should be a prompt for Irish clientsand owners to think about how they can deliver greater value through their capitalprogrammes.

I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge all involved in the publication ofthis second Book of Cases. Firstly, I would like to thank those companies that havecontributed cases for the Book and for their collaboration and generosity in sharing theirLean journeys with the wider construction sector. Secondly, I would like to thank ourpublishers, Box Media, as well as those sponsor organisations that have supported thepublication of the book. Finally, I would like to thank Darrin Taylor from WaterfordInstitute of Technology for his invaluable input as Editor and in coordinating andcompiling this excellent publication.

I hope this second Book of Cases from Lean Construction Ireland continues to inspireyou and your companies to adopt Lean thinking and practices and to workcollaboratively to deliver projects better, faster, together.

Sincerely,

Richard FitzpatrickChairperson of Lean Construction Ireland


Chapter 1

Chapter 1

Target Value Delivery


Chapter 1 – Target Value Delivery

Target Value Delivery (TVD) is a process for delivering valueto public and private clients/owners, as well as other projectstakeholders, within their economic, social andenvironmental conditions of satisfaction.

TVD was adapted from manufacturing’s Lean ProductDevelopment. When a manufacturer wants to add a newproduct to its portfolio, they decide what benefits they expectfrom the product over its lifetime, then decide what is themost they are willing and able to spend to get those benefits,namely, the allowable cost. This cost/benefit ratio isillustrated in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Costs and BenefitsThe data for constructing this figure came from a study

undertaken for the UK’s National Health Service (NHS).“Healthcare outcomes” on the right lists some of the benefitsexpected from the use of the building to deliver healthcare.Some benefits, such as increased public awareness orprojecting a desired image, may not be easily measured inEuros but may nonetheless be valuable to a client/owner. Thecosts of acquiring those benefits are the sum of capital costs(Design and Construction) and use costs (Operation andMaintenance plus Business) over 20 years. The unit of cost isConstruction at 1.0; Capital costs are 1.1 units; and Use costsare 46.3 units. The value of benefits to the clients/ownersmust be greater than the sum of whole-life costs in order forthe project to proceed. In other words, the area of the bigcircle on the right must be greater than the sum of the fourcost circles.

Cost figures in this diagram are intended to represent therelationship between cost elements. By far the biggest costsare those for business use of the hospital (mainly staffingcosts) and for operating and maintaining the physical facility.

Engaging these users in designing how healthcare will bedelivered in the hospital, and how the hospital will be shapedto facilitate both healthcare delivery and operations andmaintenance, is strongly advisable. Otherwise, the risk isgreat that the cost of using the building for its intendedpurpose will push lifecycle costs beyond the allowable – orworse yet, the cost is controlled but benefits are not delivered.

Figure 2. Early TVD Project ExampleThe Project in Figure 2 – Sutter Health’s Fairfield Medical

Office Building Project – had an estimated cost ofUS$22Million based on what Sutter Health and other healthcarecompanies in California had spent on similar facilities. Thetarget cost for the project was set at US$18.9Million based on adesired return on investment from use of the building throughits design life, and the actual cost at completion wasUS$17.9Million. The cost to design and construct the buildingwas reduced as a result of a combination of factors, chief ofwhich were integrating builders into the design team, providingrapid cost feedback on design alternatives, and shared risk andreward by the key design and construction firms involved in theproject. As illustrated in Figure 2, cost at completion was 5.2%below target and 18.6% below market. The success of this earlyproject, completed in 2006, persuaded Sutter Health to useTVD to deliver all of its acute care hospitals.

Key Points1.Most clients are multi-faceted. They include the business

owner, those who use the constructed asset for its intendedpurpose, and those who maintain and operate the physicalfacility. These are the primary clients. Additional customers

Target ValueDeliveryby Glenn Ballard,Project Production Systems Laboratory at University of California Berkeley


include the neighbors, regulators, lenders and ‘patients’, thecustomers of the client. Meeting the different needs of theseclients and customers is a challenge every project faces. Even adeveloper that produces buildings “on spec”, meaning that theyhaven’t sold it beforehand, consider Use costs because thatimpacts sales/lease price.

2.Design to targets for net benefits in use – what is wanted andthe allowable cost for what is wanted. Don’t design and thencost.

How is TVD different?Many, if not most, construction projects are launched with toolittle certainty about the challenges they will face and theresources needed to meet those challenges. Unlike TVD projects,it is common for the estimated cost to increase as the designbecomes more detailed. Far from establishing a maximumamount that clients/owners might pay, the sum of bids forconstruction packages is actually the least a client/owner will pay.Better methods for setting and steering to project targets areneeded.

Setting Targets and Deciding what Project to BuildThe process for setting targets for what is wanted, and forconditions of satisfaction on the delivery of what is wanted, isoutlined in Figure 3. Note that allowable cost is what theclient/owner is both willing and able to spend to get what theywant (benefits in use). Note also that these two (what is wantedand allowable cost) are two sides of one coin. A change in eithershould always trigger recalculation of the other. If the expectedcost of what is wanted cannot be reduced to fit within theallowable cost, what is wanted must be changed. If what iswanted changes, the allowable cost must be recalculated

Figure 3. Project Definition Process (adapted from Ballard &Pennanen, 2013)

Both possibilities are illustrated in Figure 3. Once what iswanted and its allowable cost are determined, the next step isto compare allowable cost with expected cost. Commonmethods for estimating expected cost are unit pricing (cost persquare metre, cost per hospital bed) and benchmarkingagainst similar facilities. Unit pricing can be plus or minus40% from cost at completion. Benchmarking can be closer tocost at completion, but how close depends on both theabilities of the estimator and the quality of data that can beused. A third method for conceptual estimating (estimating

cost at completion prior to design, from programmatic data)is to first model the building and then cost it. More commonon industrial projects than in building projects, this method,based on engineering logic, is used by Haahtela, a Finnishproject and cost management consulting firm based inHelsinki (www.haahtela.fi) in its management of buildingprojects. The average difference between conceptual estimateand cost at completion for Haahtela’s most recent 32 projectsis -1.0%, with a standard deviation of 5%.

Regardless of the cost estimating method used, decisionsabout keeping a project moving forward have to be made withlimited information and some degree of uncertainty. That is abit like trying to decide if to “hold’em or fold’em” in biddinggames. If the difference between allowable and expected costis so great that it seems unlikely that the gap can be closed,what is wanted must be revised. If there is reason to hope thatthe gap can be closed, the next step is to fund a feasibilitystudy.

In the private sector, failure to align businessrequirements and allowable cost can even result inprojects being abandoned. That can also happen in thepublic sector but can be more challenging becauseprojects are initiated to deliver service value to thepublic as well as wider social and economic benefits –and may do so even when project scope must besacrificed.

Feasibility studies can be done by client/owner personnel,by appointed external professionals, or by the key players thatwill deliver the project if funding is secured. The feasibilitystudy consists of producing a plan for project execution, thentesting that plan against potential risks and opportunities.What counts as acceptable risk is always the primary client’sdecision.

Three factors drive the superior performance of TVDprojects:1. The Lean Construction philosophy and methods.2. Organisational integration – downstream players participate in upstream processes and vice-versa.3. Shared risk and reward.They are listed here in order of importance. Thephilosophy is absolutely necessary. Organisationalintegration is highly advisable. The ‘one team’ attitudecan be promoted by shared incentives and byreminders that commercial success of each player isdependent on how others perform, not only their ownperformance. While collaborative contracts such asProject Alliancing and Integrated Project Delivery(IPD) undoubtedly help, other contractual structures,especially those that allow early contractorinvolvement, can fit with TVD. Such contractualarrangements can also be put in place for public sectorcontracts too.

The feasibility study may recommend funding or revisingthe project. If funded, targets will have been set for both whatis wanted (functions to be performed, capacities needed for theirperformance, facility performance specifications) and conditionsof satisfaction (cost, time, social impacts, environmental impacts).


In situations of high uncertainty, a client may choose tofund design to the point when it is apparent either that thegap between allowable and expected cost can be closed, or thatthe gap cannot be closed.

Another key decision to be made by the clients/owners iswhat instructions to give regarding the design phase. Is theproject team to limit their search to designs that: a) delivertargeted net benefits within a fixed cost; or b) increase netbenefits even if that increases cost? For this latter alternative,the clients/owners must be able to carry a contingency forfunding such opportunities. For example, injuries to nursescould be reduced by installing patient lifting devices, orrevenues from performing particular types of surgery could beincreased by enabling such surgeries to be performed in lesstime, but at an increased cost for support services.

Key Points• Decisions about moving projects forward are made with

uncertain information.• Different methods of conceptual estimating have different

levels of uncertainty.• Targets for net benefits in use can be either fixed or variable.

If fixed, then the allowable cost is also fixed. If the target fornet benefits is variable, the allowable cost is fixed relative tothe net benefits target.

How to Enforce TargetsOnce targets are set, the next step is to steer each phase of theproject toward project targets. Doing that works best when itis in the interest of the design and construction firms to meettargets. That can be done through positive or negativeincentives, or some combination of the two.

A client/owner may engage a construction manager ordesign-build firm to deliver a TVD project where those firmsbear the cost risk. However, the greater the uncertainty andcomplexity of the project, the more premium the client/ownerwill be charged in order to offset that cost risk. If the cost riskis too great to shift completely, the client/owner will have totake on some or all cost risk. The benefit of doing so is two-fold, avoidance of premiums for taking on risk and theincreased control clients/owners have over project delivery.

Capital projects at the University of California San Franciscotypically employ rewards to all design and construction firmson each project for hitting specific targets, for example,schedule milestones. Their success inspired the Board ofRegents that govern the 10 campus University of Californiasystem to demand that all campuses follow San Francisco’sexample.

When BAA undertook the Terminal 5 Project at HeathrowAirport, the project’s expected cost was fully 80% of BAA’s networth, and it was entirely possible that the complexity of theproject would result in cost increases that would have pushedBAA into bankruptcy. Faced with this situation, BAA decidedto take on all cost risk. By doing so, they could avoid payingthe premiums that come with risk shifting, and equally ormore important, they were able to deliver the project usingLean management methods, including TVD, to increase theprobability of getting what they wanted within an acceptablecost. Framework suppliers (design and construction) hadpositive incentives through shared cost savings. The projectwas completed successfully. Given the positive achievementsattained with the T5 delivery model, BAA is re-embracing theT5 approach on its new high-risk runway project which will

provide greater certainty and control of cost through theadoption of Lean management methods.

Sutter Health’s recently completed US$1.5Billion hospital inSan Francisco was undertaken using a form of IPD in which atarget cost for the project was set. Sutter Health bore the riskof paying costs in excess of that target cost. Some design andconstruction firms were engaged on fixed price contracts, butkey designers and builders were reimbursed for their cost ofwork and had the risk of receiving reduced or zero profit. Ifproject cost exceeded the target, that excess reduced the profitpool. The project was completed successfully for all parties.

Steering Design to TargetsTo decide if to fund a project, the only estimate of cost neededis for the capital cost of the project and for the cost to use theconstructed asset over its life. However, design decisions aremade system by system and component by component.Hence, in order to steer design to cost targets, the cost must bebroken down into the systems and components of the asset tobe designed. Otherwise, there is no way to know what systemsand components should cost, and hence no basis for providingfeedback to designers. Table 1 provides an example of the levelof detail in cost targets used to steer design and construction.

“Steering” design is done through feedback, both prior toand after the production of design alternatives. Designers cansee from the cost model what funds are allocated for differentparts of the asset to be constructed, and alternatives can beassessed for their conformance to those allocations. Designersare not told how to design, but are rather provided feedbackabout those designs meeting targets. Generally speaking, if asolution is not found that meets the allocated cost for a specificfunction or component, the cost overrun must be made upthrough cost underruns elsewhere.Table 1. Target Costs for a Healthcare Project (courtesy ofThe Boldt Companies)

Key Points


• Only the primary client can change targets.• There are a number of ways to structure commercial terms

and to allocate risks and rewards that enable enforcingtargets.

Steering Construction to TargetsDesign provides the recipe, but construction prepares themeal – steering is still much needed until the constructedasset is delivered to the client/owner. Typically, constructionis executed through contracts of one sort or another withfirms that are capable of performing each type of work. Usinga building as an example, these types of work vary with theconstruction phases: substructure, superstructure, envelope,interior framing, mechanical, electrical, fire protection, etc.Steering is done by comparing allocated costs to prospectivecosts for each type of work or work package, and acting toreduce any negative differences. Actions can be taken inawarding contracts, in purchasing materials and equipment,and in installation and testing. When needed, overruns onone work package can be offset by underruns on another –depending, of course, on commercial terms.

Key Tools for TVDTVD can be understood as a big tool that includes smallertools for performing specific functions. TVD produces betteroutcomes using methods such as Set-Based ConcurrentEngineering, Choosing by Advantages, A3 reports, and theLast Planner System.

Set-Based Concurrent Engineering (SCBE) originated inLean Product Development. ‘Concurrency’ refers to the factthat everyone who touches a product over its life is involvedin its design. ‘Set Based’ involves aligning stakeholderrequirements before designing, then generating multipledesign alternatives for each system and component of theproduct (Kennedy et al., 2014).

Choosing By Advantages (CBA) was created by Jim Suhr ofthe U.S. Forest Service as a method for evaluating andselecting from alternatives against multiple must-have criteria(requirements) and nice-to-have criteria (preferences), andwas first applied to the domain of construction projects byJohn Koga of The Boldt Companies. CBA differs from othersuch methods by not weighting requirements, by firstagreeing on how well each alternative meets requirements,and by deferring consideration of cost until the totalimportance of advantages of each alternative have beenagreed (Suhr, 1999).

A3 reports are used to record proposals and agreementsabout choosing from alternatives so the knowledge is not lost.‘A3’ is the metric size of paper to which the report is limited.The standard structure of these reports facilitates a process ofreaching consensus among different stakeholders in thedecision or action (Shook, 2008).

Last Planner® System (LPS) is a method for coordinatingaction; for planning and controlling. Once targets are set,planning how to achieve them is needed, then proactivesteering to targets in sometimes stormy seas. LPS providesorganisational alignment but also promotes flexibility inproject teams to develop new pathways to existing targets oreven to new targets. Its principles include:• Plan in greater detail as the start date for planned tasks

approaches.• Produce plans collaboratively with those who are to do the

work being planned.• Reveal and remove constraints on planned tasks as a team.• Don’t start tasks that you should not or cannot complete.

Commit to perform only those tasks that are properlydefined, sound, sequenced and properly sized.

• Make and secure reliable promises, and speak upimmediately should you lose confidence that you can keepyour promises (as opposed to waiting as long as possibleand hoping someone else speaks up first).

• Learn from breakdowns (unintended consequences ofactions taken).

• Underload resources to increase reliability of work release.

Key Points• Steering design and construction to targets continues by the

project team until turnover, then becomes the responsibilityof users throughout the life of the product.

• Steering construction requires cost allocations to serve asprovisional cost targets for work packages.

ConclusionIt is hoped that Clients/Owners reading this will see the valuethat TVD provides and look to adopt TVD on their projects.Here are a few things to keep in mind:• Be aware that TVD (and Lean generally) is not magic. Even

if properly executed, TVD and Lean projects can go wrongfor reasons outside the project’s control. Improperexecution includes failing to follow the recommendedprocess and, even more important, leaders’ failure to adoptand live the Lean philosophy.

• Be prepared to play new roles. Clients/Owners will be moredirectly involved in project execution, and must have theneeded competencies and capacity. Builders must learn howto add value in design. Designers must learn how to designfor net benefits in use over the life of the constructed asset.

• Don’t neglect the importance of selecting the right projectteam members. Some form of best value selection is neededin order to assure that low price doesn’t conceal neededattitudes and willingness to learn.

• There is a lot written on TVD (see recommended readingsbelow), and much that can be learned, but organisationsshould also learn from those who have implemented TVDand Lean before. Reach out to peers (client-to-client,designer-to-designer, builder-to-builder). They will be gladto share their experiences.

ReferencesBallard, G. and Pennanen, A. (2013) ‘Conceptual estimating and targetcosting’, In Proceedings of the 21st Annual Conference of the InternationalGroup for Lean Construction (IGLC), Fortaleza, Brazil, 31 July-2 August,pp. 217-226.

Kennedy, B.M., Sobek, D.K., and Kennedy, M.N. (2014) ‘Reducingrework by applying set? based practices early in the systems engineeringprocess’, Systems Engineering, Vol.17, No.3, pp.278-296.

Shook, J. (2008) Managing to Learn: Using the A3 Management Process toSolve Problems, Gain Agreement, Mentor and Lead, Cambridge, MA: LeanEnterprise Institute.

Suhr, J. (1999) The Choosing by Advantages Decisionmaking System,Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group.

Further ReadingBallard, G. (2011) ‘Target Value Design: Current Benchmark (1.0)’, LeanConstruction Journal, pp.79-84. [Available at www.leanconstructionjournal.org]

Ballard, G. and Reiser, P. (2004) ‘The St. Olaf College FieldhouseProject: A Case Study in Designing to Target Cost’, In Proceedings of the


12th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction(IGLC), Helsingor, Denmark, August 3-5, pp.234-249. [Available atwww.iglc.net]

Ballard, G. and Tommelein, I. (2016) ‘Current Process Benchmark forthe Last Planner System’, Lean Construction Journal, pp.57-89. [Available

at www.leanconstructionjournal.org]Zimina, D., Ballard, G., and Pasquire, C. (2012) ‘Target value design:

using collaboration and a lean approach to reduce construction cost’,Construction Management and Economics, Vol.30, No.5, pp.383-398.

Glenn Ballard is a Research Associate at theProject Production Systems Laboratory,University of California Berkeley. Glennentered the construction industry as apipefitter’s helper, transitioned toconstruction engineering, and in 1980 wasnamed Manager of ProductivityImprovement for a construction division ofBrown and Root. He subsequently becamean internal management consultant withBechtel Petroleum, working on all aspects ofproject delivery, and supporting projects inother Bechtel divisions such as the SouthTexas Nuclear Plant. He began amanagement consulting business in 1987.In parallel, he began lecturing onproductivity and quality improvement at theUniversity of California Berkeley in 1989,and completed the transition from industryto academia in 2005 when he was namedResearch Director for the University’s ProjectProduction Systems Laboratory. He co-founded the International Group for LeanConstruction (IGLC) in 1993, the LeanConstruction Institute (LCI) in 1997, the

Project Production Systems Laboratory in2005, and Lean in the Public Sector (LIPS)in 2007. Glenn retired from his position asResearch Director in 2019, but continues ina support role as a Research Associate for theProject Production Systems Laboratory.With lots of help from others, Glenndeveloped the Last Planner® System (LPS)and Target Value Delivery (TVD) – two keyLean Construction methods, both of whichhe continues to improve. A new CurrentProcess Benchmark for the Last Planner Systemis due to be published by the end of 2019,and Glenn is now leading research groups todevelop better methods for use in TargetValue Delivery, namely, conceptualestimating (estimating cost at completionprior to design) and using trade-off curves inaligning potentially conflicting stakeholderrequirements. These will be incorporated ina future update of the Current ProcessBenchmark for Target Value Delivery. Glennhas a long list of publications (see GoogleScholar), many of which are available at thewebsite of the IGLC (www.iglc.net).

Bio

Project: Academic Hub and Library, Grangegorman.Image: © O’Donnell + Tuomey


Chapter 2

Chapter 2

Case Studies


Case 1 – DPS Group (Cork Operations)

DPS Group is a global consulting,engineering and constructionmanagement company, serving high-techindustries around the world. DPS hassector experts in key locations in Europe,the US, Asia, and the Middle East,bringing world-class resources and thelatest innovative technologies to everyproject. DPS delivers Full ServiceEngineering with a ‘client first’ mentality

and personal touch across a range ofdisciplines: Project and ProgrammeManagement, Procurement, Design,Construction Management, Health &Safety Management, Commissioning,Qualification, and Start-up. DPSemploy more than 1300 peopleworldwide, including 250 in its DPSGroup Cork Operations where this casestudy is based.

C O M P A N Y W E B S I T E

OVERVIEW & BACKGROUND TO THE LEAN INITIATIVEDPS Group modestly prides itself asbeing an early adopter of Lean thinkingand practices in both Irish andInternational construction sectors. Thecompany invests heavily in staff subjectmatter experts, Lean education andtraining, and in internal processimprovement initiatives. The companyattributes, in no small part, increasedcompetitiveness and recent projectsuccess to that investment in itscapability development. DPS supportlocal and national Lean Construction(LC) conferences and events and bringInternational LC experts to its offices toshare best practices and research withits own staff and clients. DPS alsocontribute to the LC body ofknowledge presenting latest researchfindings at global, national, and localLC conferences and events.

A common concept in construction isthat there are three legs to a project:Schedule, Cost, and Quality. Typically,a client is advised to pick any two at theexpense of the third, for example, youcan have cost and schedule but not thequality you want; or you may get the

quality and schedule that you want butnot within your budget. Thistraditional approach was unacceptableto both the Client and the Engineering,Procurement, Construction Manage-ment, & Validation (EPCMV) provideron this case study project – instead, thefast-track nature of the assignmentcalled for proactive management of allthree legs of cost, schedule, and budget.The client in this case study is a globalpharmaceutical company with severalfacilities located in Ireland.

Initial thoughts were to use aproactive methodology that woulddrive cost downward from the start toavoid commencing with an excessiveestimate laden with contingency. DPSwas familiar with using Last Planner®System (LPS) in design, construction,and commissioning and had also usedanother Lean Construction approach,namely Target Value Design (TVD), ona previous project. The concept andprinciples of TVD were presented tothe client and it was agreed to use theprocess on this project.

LEAN INITIATIVE UNDERTAKEN – LEAN THINKING,TOOLS, TECHNIQUES

www.dpsgroupglobal.com

AUTHORS

William Power

Target Value DesignAccording to Glenn Ballard, a pioneer of Lean inConstruction, Target Value Design (TVD) is amanagement practice that drives the design [andconstruction] to deliver customer values within projectconstraints, and it is an application of Taiichi Ohno’spractice of self-imposing necessity as a means forcontinuous improvement.

The primary concept of TVD is to drive down the cost –or maintain cost and increase value – of a project throughthe design and delivery phases without reducing the qualityprovided or the schedule for completion (see Figure 1).TVD is a proven and effective process to ensure the ownerreceives all three legs of schedule, cost, and quality.

Figure 1. Driving Force of TVD (Source: Target Value Delivery:Practitioner Guidebook to Implementation Current State, 2016)

COMPANY OVERVIEW

Aidan Mullin


The Lean Construction Institute (LCI USA) assert that“TVD is a very different model from the traditional, large-batch process of design, estimate cost, and value engineering— a process replete with waste. Clients do not value theprocess of rework and loss of quality that comes from thistraditional “value engineering” process. The driving force ofTVD is to increase value while decreasing cost for all teammembers”.

In his 2011 publication ‘Target Value Design: CurrentBenchmark’ Ballard notes that “In the building sector, it hasbeen customary for architects to work with customers tounderstand what they want, then produce facility designsintended to deliver what’s wanted. The cost of those designshas then been estimated, and too often, found to be greaterthan the customer is willing or able to bear, requiring designsto be revised, then re-costed, and so on. This cycle of design-estimate-rework is wasteful and reduces the value customersget for their money. Cost has been an outcome of design”.

TVD, therefore, is a design strategy and process that offersdesigners an opportunity to engage in the design conversationconcurrently with those people who will procure services andexecute the design. It focuses on designing based on theproject values, which become design criteria rather than mereaspirations. Using TVD, the design and construction issteered towards the target cost. A continuous and proactivevalue engineering process is utilised during the design phaseto quickly evaluate the cost implications of design options.Cost is a constraint (one of many) rather than an output ofthe design process.

Benefits of TVD include:• Proactive rather than reactive problem-solving.• Less fighting and more collaboration.• Better value delivered for the money.• More satisfied clients - designs that fit stakeholder values.• Better work-life balance for contractors and architects.• Continuous improvement and kaizen within projects and

between projects.

Implementation on the Case ProjectIn assessing a cost budget for this project, previousexperience would have pointed towards a figure of€100Million (± 50%) for the project. The project leadershipteam would then use TVD principles to steer and direct thedesign teams’ efforts towards achieving this cost target. Theprinciples of TVD were introduced at design concept stagebecause if a budget is not in place for concept design thenthe project could emerge with a figure that is unacceptablyhigh and causing further investigation to remove scope toachieve a cost figure agreeable to the client. Using TVD pre-empted this on this project and avoided the non-valuerework tasks of shrinking the scope back – such outcomestraditionally emerged from initial over-design or over-specification. Therefore, the concept design stagecommenced with a predetermined target budget in mind.However, towards concept completion it could emerge thatthe budget target figure was insufficient to accommodate allproject scope and specifications, thus requiring re-examination of the budget. For example, at pre-concept theclient would have had a figure of €100Million in mind, butpost-concept this could have crept up to €105Million after

addition and removal of various elements of scope. Adecision must then be made regarding the ‘value’ that is beingadded by the additional €5Million. This analysis and decisionon the cost target must be made and agreed beforeproceeding to the next stage of design development, namely“Basis of Design” (BOD).

At this point, an increased level of detailed designcommences and some initial purchase orders (PO) are placedfor specialised equipment, but everyone is directed by theoverall agreed TVD figure. The team was mindful that BODphase carried a contingency estimate of ± 25% that, after 4months of engineering the estimate, can then be tightenedand fixed at 10% contingency. At this point the originalTVD figure of €105Million could have reduced to€95Million or increased to €110Million. This figure nowbecomes the agreed project TVD sum. The client may,having assessed the confidence level of the TVD figure,consider reducing the contingency element of the TVD sum.The team has at this stage been working with the concept ofTVD for over 6 months and from concept through detaileddesign have been working towards a target project cost figure,thus enabling confidence in a reduced contingency. Thisaligns with recent research on TVD, as illustrated in figure 2.

Figure 2. TVD Project Forces (Source: Do et al., 2014)Figure 2 illustrates the breakdown of a project’s costs. Thetotal project cost includes the cost of work, contingency, andprofit. The cost of work can be further broken down intodirect and indirect cost – it is the sum of all the participants’costs of work. Compared to projects that do not use TVD,less contingency was required using TVD here because theentire project contingency was pooled together instead ofbeing carried individually by each participant. By pooling thecontingency together, the project team needed to allocate lesscontingency to cover the same amount of uncertainty in theproject.

Examples of Decisions & ImpactAt concept stage, the TVD figure and process are managed bythe leadership team. At detailed design (DD) stage there maybe up to 10 design teams inputting to the project. Theproject leadership team will initially sit with each team, forexample, process, electrical, mechanical, HVAC, civil –structural – architectural (CSA), and collaboratively validatetheir assigned pool of money for the design deliverables. Thedesigner must consider each decision they make in relation toachievement of the quality goal and assess whether thisdecision will add or subtract or will not change the TVDfigure. An example is where the designer proposed a type 1surface finish cladding solution to the building and the client


is now requesting a more expensive type 2 cladding with ahigh gloss finish. In the traditional costing model, thisdesign change would have been added to the drawing andthe extra cost would not have been recognised until theprice was returned from the contractor. Whereas with theTVD method, the designer immediately advises the clientthat the client’s decision will negatively affect the TVDfund. The cost increase can be assessed and advised, andthe client can promptly adjudicate on the cost versus valuebenefit of the request. While awaiting the client’s decision,the ?50k increased cost figure is added to the weekly TVDreporting tracker as a ‘potential’ increase and the impact isimmediately visible to all on the tracker dashboard.

It was important at this point to also assess potentialadded value offered by the specification and cost increase,and the decision-making could not rest on cost alone. Inthis instance, the designer advised that the €50k costincrease was mitigated by a €25k material and labour-install saving as the type 2 cladding incorporated a built-inweathering trim, resulting in an overall net uplift of €25kto the TVD figure. This discussion occurred weekly withthe design leads to ensure visibility and clarity of theimpacts of each request and decision on the TVD fund. Byimplementing this element of weekly standard work, aculture of ownership for awareness of the cost impact ofdecisions in design was developed and a realisation that anydeviation from the agreed specification and scope wouldgenerate a cost impact became embedded within theproject team. The responsibility, therefore, was to recognisethe impact, either positive or negative, and report this tothe client immediately for review of acceptance of thefinancial impact. The client may respond by stating thatthe request is a critical value-add element that has beenapproved at board level and therefore the TVD figure canbe increased with no impact to other scope elements. Theclient may also decide not to increase the TVD figure andinsist on a review of the scope, either within this disciplineor across disciplines, to achieve savings and align with theTVD figure. This required certain behavioural norms andchanges to traditional thinking across design disciplines, asthe process piping dept may find themselves looking forsavings within their design scope to allow the €25k upliftfor the type 2 cladding. In this instance CSA proposedchanging the brick paving footpaths and other landscapingfeatures to more cost-effective alternatives which wereacceptable to the client – this balanced the uplift to allowthe type 2 cladding be specified.

Cultural ChangeOn previous projects the design engineers wouldn’t havehad a culture of owning that budget. “We considered thisto be the role of the cost department and not of adesigner.” noted a design lead, adding “After BOD wewould have listened to client feedback and incorporatedthis into the DD. Costs would have increased but thatwouldn’t have been a concern of ours as the quantitysurveyors dealt with all cost related issues with the client”.An example from this project related to a client request toadd five lifting beams to new locations, in addition to the10 beams already in the design. Traditionally the designerwould have complied with the client’s request and added

five beams to the drawing. However, with the newawareness around the concept and culture of working withTVD, the designer advised the client of the cost impactand together both client and designer examined thelocation and purpose of the original 10 beams to ascertainif all were required, especially with five more being added.This exercise led to a reduction of three beams, and thus anet increase of only two beams and with a qualified valueincrease to the functionality of the facility. The principlesof TVD compelled the assessment of the need for eachbeam. One was found to be required once every threeyears, and it was decided to use a mobile lifting solution inthat case. The traditional mindset and thinking of ‘put it injust in case it will be required’ is challenged by theprinciples of TVD and a much deeper consideration of thevalue versus cost argument is advocated.

The culture around a new way of working was critical assome disciplines had to surrender some of their fund tofinance a client request for extra scope in anotherdiscipline. A success on the project was the early designand tender of the CSA element, resulting in early visibilityof the contractor’s costs for that work. This tender was10% under budget allowing a portion of this saving to bereallocated to the process kit as this was trending towards10% over target, thus creating a balance on the overallTVD trend.

Value AspectTVD can also drive up cost; however, if this exposesopportunity for increased lifecycle value to the project thenthe client may be satisfied to increase the fund. An exampleof this occurred on this project when the existing roof onthe building to be refurbished was found to be fit-for-purpose but would need remediation work within 5 years.This prompted an extensive survey to be carried out,resulting in a finding that investment of €200k would berequired in a piecemeal fashion over the next 20 years tomaintain the roof integrity. However, it was alsoestablished that an initial investment as part of this projectwould get the work completed for €75k as the roof wasclear and accessible without plant, cable trays, orpenetrations. The client decided to spend the €75k upfrontto save on the €200k spend over the 20-year lifecycle costplan. This emphasised the “Value” element of TVD byconsidering the lifecycle maintenance investment costs atthe DD stage.

Tracking TVDEach discipline had its own tab on the TVD tracker andeach design occurrence was recorded live as it happened onthe cloud-based system. The relevant QS received anotification if the tracker had been updated, whichprompted the need to review any cost impact noted by thedesign engineer. DPS project leadership team reviewed thedashboard with the engineering leads at the weeklygovernance meeting. An important part of this inter-discipline meeting was the collaborative evaluation of theimpact of changes in one department on work and costs inother design departments. Referring again to the extralifting beam example, other disciplines’ design elementswere impacted as lighting, fire protection, and ducting air


LEAN INITIATIVE IMPROVEMENTS & IMPACT The TVD process was consistently developed over the courseof the project and has since been brought forward ontocurrent and future projects with this client. The culturesurrounding TVD is also developing, ensuring designers arebecoming more aware of the impact of their decisions on thecost fund. Designers have become more vocal in declaringchange and assessing its financial impact. This is of hugebenefit to the Project Managers as there is less reactive workin seeking financial approvals for client changes in designpackages that have already been delivered.

Probably the greatest benefit of TVD was the challengeposed by the necessity to differentiate a business “need” froma “want”. Business case needs are the project team’s primedelivery objective and should be captured in the projectbaseline concept report. Business wants or “nice to haves”must be challenged through strong project change controland by offsetting of other items and maintaining focus onachieving the target value through relentless pursuit ofalternatives and resisting scope creep is a criticalaccomplishment of TVD.

Care is needed around reporting everything as being anextra cost. Effort must be made towards mitigating theimpact of the change by examining the request to assess ifalternatives exist that will still provide the client with theoutcome or value required, but without necessitating majorextra investment. The client testified to the increasedvisibility and improved financial reporting and could alsoassess the broader financial impact of a change request in amuch timelier manner than with the traditional costreporting mechanisms.

The value and impact of TVD is captured by the client’sProject Manager who noted that:

“The ongoing value of the TVD process exists in itbeing a leading indicator of change to come on theproject. It creates an environment of sharedresponsibility of costs between engineering disciplines,for example, a small change within one disciplinedriving a large saving or cost increase being flagged anddiscussed in real-time is valuable to schedule and costcontrol.”

flows would have required modification, thus necessitatingextra design hours to address compliance and quality of thecompleted product. This review meeting then raised newitems on the tracker as the impact on the lighting, fireprotection (extra sprinkler head), and ducting had to beadded, resulting in a more accurate and complete impactassessment to carry forward to the client. The weekly TVDreview meeting with the client examined the TVD trendand compared planned with actual to ensure visibility ofany need for further attention. A critical aspect of themeeting was the importance of visiting each individual costincrease as any creep, despite being within the trendparameters, still had to be challenged and not blindlyaccepted. Figure 3 illustrates the cost analysis performancewithin the overall process discipline as discussed in theweekly governance meeting.

Figure 3. Process Department TVD Cost Tracking (Source:DPS Group)


Case 2 – GRAHAM

The company works on building, civilengineering, and fit-out projects forboth public and private sector clientsacross the UK and Ireland and iscurrently delivering more than 100projects. GRAHAM has offices inDublin, Belfast, London, Edinburgh,Glasgow, Manchester, Leeds,Birmingham, Hillsborough, Aberdeen,Dumfries, Durham, Cambridge, StAlbans, and Bristol. To align with ourguiding principle of “delivering lasting

impact”, along with our culture offinding a better way we are focused onimproving productivity, reducing errorand embracing modern methods ofconstruction to create a business whichhas a positive influence on the planet.We have delivered a number of iconicprojects in Ireland including theSamuel Beckett bridge over the RiverLiffey in Dublin. GRAHAM currentlyemploy over 2000 employees across thebusiness.


OVERVIEW & BACKGROUND TO THE LEAN INITIATIVEGRAHAM’s Travis Brow Link Roadproject has been described by TimLawton, TCAP Project Director, as“probably the single most importantnew strategic highways connection inStockport”. Awarded through HighwaysEngland’s Collaborative DeliveryFramework, this GBP£8Million projecthas delivered a new 400-metre long linkroad including retaining wallssupporting the Grade II listed StockportViaduct dating back to the 1840s thatcarries the West Coast railway line.

Figure 1. Project SchemeThe project received the CIHT

(Chartered Institution of Highways andTransportation) Northwest Project of the

Year Award which stood out due toGRAHAM’s intelligent design solutionenabling a two-lane dual-carriageway tobe formed through a single arch, andsignificantly improved access to andaround Stockport, to the M60, therailway station, and to key sites withinthe town centre. It includes a series ofhighway improvement works alongTravis Brow, George’s Road, andWellington Road North. This Project’smajor works included road cutting up to12m deep with various geotechnicalstructures including soil nailed 1V:1Hslopes, concrete gravity retaining walls,cantilevered and anchored contiguouspiled walls to 8m in height, and pre-stressed rock anchors.

The soil nailing became a critical pathactivity due to dependencies on othercontractors’ ability to mobilise and startwork on time or early within theirretrospective sections. Lean work studieswere conducted to improve theproductivity of soil nailing whichprojected the programme and providedfurther efficiencies.


www.graham.co.uk

AUTHORS

Katie Jones

Soil nailing is an efficient construction solution to preventhorizontal movement in unstable soil slopes and retain earththat will steepened. The technique utilises hollow bars whichare drilled and grouted simultaneously by the use of asacrificial drill bit and by pumping grout down the hollowbar as drilling progresses.

Equipment UsedThe equipment used was a drilling rig excavator mountedfeedbeam and telehandler used to deliver the soil nails to theworks area. The Travis Brow soil nailing design consists of555 soil nails varying from 3m to 7m in length. Themaximum height from ground level is 6m.

Lean MethodologyThe Lean soil nailing work study followed the DMAIC

COMPANY OVERVIEW

Luke Kolakowski

Figure 2. Drawing of Soil Nailing Requirements


(Define, Measure, Analyse, Improve, Control)methodology in Lean.

Define – The define stage of DMAIC establishedopportunities for improvement, current problems, andthe main aims and objectives of the process. We definedthat, at a critical phase in the scheme programme, thesoil nailing was affecting other contractors mobilisingand starting work on their respective works. The goalwas to improve production from original plannedaverage of 23 soil nails per day to an average of 30 soilnails per day to deliver programme benefits for otherwork activities.• Stakeholders & Benefits – The customers of the process

included the principal contractor, sub-contractor, andclient. For Lean to be successful, all parties need to seethe value and benefit of the initiative. As principalcontractor, GRAHAM sought to improve theprogramme that allows the next dependencies to startearlier, protecting the programme, promoting success,and enhancing the reputation of the project.Additionally, the Sub-Contractor, Aarsleff, had theopportunity to develop a more efficient process toreplicate on other schemes. Due to their sub-contractbeing a lumpsum, financial incentives were negotiatedfor delivering a certain rate of productivity. Removingwaste from repetitive work also allowed Aarsleff tomove on to the next project much sooner. Finally, theclient gained confidence that the programme would bedelivered on time or earlier.

• Deliverables – The deliverables of the project were: livefootage of the process in action; data collection sheets;KPIs; a new best practice process and standardoperating procedure for the sub-contractor.

• Measures of Success – The Lean Team measured theirsuccess by reducing planned programme, maintainingzero incidents, and developing increased sub-contractor engagement from both management andoperatives.Measure – The measure phase entailed data collecting

to provide real evidence of production and performance.• Data Collection – Data collection sheets were

developed for the gangs to collect the respective outputrates.

Figure 3. Data Collection Sheet for Production RatesFrom these data collection sheets, the ‘as is’ data was

collected for week 1 to understand planned versus actualoutput rated of the soil nailing activity (see Table 1).

Table 1. Production Rates Prior to Lean Analysis

• Gemba – This is the Japanese word, made popular byToyota, for visiting the place of work and productivity.During the Gemba visit the process was documented,photographs were taken, and the activity was filmed.During the go-look-and-see activity, a typical working daywas documented as follows:

o 07:30 – 08:00: Arrive on site & briefingo 08:00 – 08:30: Set up plant, prime lines, load out

materialso 08:30 – 09:30: Installing soil nailso 09:30 – 09:45: Wash out grout plant ready for breako 10:00 – 10:30: Breako 10:30 – 11:00: Set up plant, prime lines, load out

materialso 11:00 – 12:30: Installing soil nailso 12:30 – 12:45: Wash out grout plant ready for luncho 13:00 – 13:30: Luncho Repeat above until finish at 16:00o Week 1 average installation = 23 nails per day

Figure 4. Soil Nailing Tracker Week 1Analyse – During the analyse phase, a number of graphs

were produced. The below shows the cumulative actual versusplanned. We knew from calculating the process efficiencythat we were more often than not losing 10% on wastefulactivity. It was found that 1 cycle was 5-minutes 23-secondsand that there were no real improvements within the cycleother than Mobile Elevating Work Platform (MEWP) wasinitially overloaded which could have saved approx. 40-seconds. This meant the slow productivity for the day waselsewhere outside the actual value adding activity, that is thedrilling installation. In order to understand where the missingproductivity had gone, the team looked to understand theroot causes of the waste. It was found that the root cause ofdelays included:• Soil Nailing Materials were stored approximately 300m

away from work area.


• Access to the work area was single traffic only which meantother activities working nearby delayed material delivery.

• Gangs were not working together, the MEWP operator un-

wrapped plastic around soil nails and placed the nails in thebasket himself. This sometimes took as long as 10-minutesto load whilst the drilling rig was idle waiting.

LEAN INITIATIVE IMPROVEMENTS & IMPACT Improve – An improvement workshop was held and anumber of improvement ideas were suggested, including:• GRAHAM could assist loading out material at the end of

each shift by staying later so the sub-contractor wasprepped in the morning.

• Other less critical activities were stopped and moved toother sections of the site to remove delays duringmaterial deliveries.

• The washing out of grout plant at break times wasstopped and moved to only lunch and end of shift.

• Telehandler driver assisted with loading MEWP andplaced nails closer to working area so less carrying byhand.The improvements were implemented and tracked using

a continuation of data collection recording planned versusactual output rates. This enabled the team to understandand control the effects of the improvements.

Control – From direct observations followingimplementation of improvements, there were two nightswhere the grout plant broke down due to not being washedout correctly which resulted in the gang only installing 10nails in 2 days. The drilling could have been completedmuch quicker. The findings, once the improvements wereimplemented and reviewed, were an improvement from 23nail installations per day during week one to an average of34 installations per day in weeks 2-4. Figure 5 illustratesthe gradual increase in improvement, with the maximumnumber achieved being 50 soil nails per day. The averagewas 34 per day, which meant that this programmeprovided a significant improvement.

Figure 5. Soil Nailing Progress Tracker

Benefits from Lean DeploymentThe deployment of Lean on the project resulted in manybenefits, including improved engagement and collaborationamongst the team. This enabled smoother and more efficientworking towards an aligned goal which was to beat the existingprogramme. The benefits from deployment of Lean included:• There were zero incidents during this project.• The client was delighted with the programme improvements.• The Lean initiative contributed to winning the CIHT

Northwest Project of the Year Award – a great achievementand recognition for the whole project team.

• GRAHAM has benefitted reputationally with this success,thus contributing to winning more work.

• The sub-contractor exceeded targets and was rewardedthrough financial incentives and now has a new best practiceprocess to work towards on its next projects.


Case 3 – CField Construction

CField Construction is a Building &Civil Engineering contractor withoperations in Ireland and the UK. Wehave extensive experience in a widerange of sectors, includingPharmaceutical, Residential, Healthcare,Leisure, and Commercial. Since ourformation in 2011, the Company hasexperienced significant growth withturnover reaching approximately€80Million 2018. Our goal is to deliverall projects to the highest quality, in a

safe, cost-effective and timely manner.We aim to form lasting relationshipswith clients by delivering excellence in afriendly, engaging and professionalmanner and see this as a key measure ofthe success of our business. Our teamhas a diverse range of skills and iscommitted to working closely with ourclients, professional teams and supplychain to develop pragmatic, innovativeand cost-effective solutions to achievemaximum value on each project.


OVERVIEW & BACKGROUND TO THE LEAN INITIATIVEIn late 2017, CField Constructionrecognised that a new approach to howCField managed its sites was needed inorder to increase productivity, reducecosts, reduce waste, and maximiseprofitability – and so began CField’sjourney into Lean Constructioninitiatives.

Our initial Lean initiative was basedon a large-scale residential housingscheme in Cork. The project consistedof the construction of over 130 semi-detached and detached 3 & 4 bedhouses, as well as all associated site civilworks, including road ways, storm/foulattenuation tanks, etc. The overall


www.CField.ie

AUTHOR

Eolann Sheehan

In order to fully grasp the scale of the project, the site teamlooked at the entire process as a starting point. The teamcompleted Lean training, which provided an overview of aLean approach, including the 8 Wastes, Value to theCustomer, impact of variability, and Lean Process Mapping.

Figure 1. Lean Training In ActionOn completion of training, the process was mapped duringan interactive session involving all the site management,purchasing department, accounts department, a selection ofsite operatives and facilitator. Visual “swim lanes” wereutilised to identify each step and the decisions made duringeach step. The decision makers were identified as per Figure 2(mapping the current state process from the moment material

is ‘out of stock’ on site to the moment new material isunloaded and/or used on site).

Figure 2. Mapping the Current State ProcessFrom mapping the process and analysing it in relation to the8 wastes of Lean (“TIMWOODS”), it was clear that therewere four key areas which would form the starting point forthe Lean initiatives and improvement: i) Material Ordering;ii) Material Delivery; iii) Material Handling & Storage; and

COMPANY OVERVIEW

project value was €31Million, on a verytight programme with multiplehandover dates as the scheme progresses.Interestingly, the project team did notstart off with a Lean approach and thiswas only introduced approximately 60%into the project timeline.

While in discussion with seniormanagement and the site managementteam, the following four areas wereidentified that could benefit from aLean approach:i. Material ordering.ii. Procurement.iii. Storage, handling, and end use on site.iv. Improved communications.


iv) Improving Communications.

Material OrderingThen – Traditionally the onus was on the site team tomonitor stocks of each material, anticipate therequirements of various trades for the coming weeks,consider the lead times for each material, and place orders.Site management would often be notified the eveningbefore that a particular trade was running low or out ofmaterial for tasks the following day, or that materialcouldn’t be found in a particular location. Time was lostsearching for materials before an order was placed.

Now – When ordering materials, each subcontractor isnow responsible for their own ordering or notifying the siteteam when a material is running low in stock. This is doneusing a formal material order sheet which is available in thesite office. Each day at 15:00 the orders are placed, andsubcontractors know that there is a 5-day lead time fromthe date ordered. Kanban (similar to the method used inLean Manufacturing) was utilised in the storage areaswhere clearly marked storage containers weremanufactured to trigger an order when a certain materialwas running low – thus eliminating time wasted lookingfor materials.

From the original mapping exercise, the site team wasunder the impression that a 3-day turnaround time fromthe day the material was ordered to delivery was achievable.However, when mapped with purchasing and accountspresent it became apparent that a 5-day lead time was morerealistic. We have also developed a list of commonmaterials and lead times which do not fall into the 5-daywindow, such as materials sourced from the manufacturer,etc. Once the order form is complete, an order requisitionis generated and sent to purchasing, who in turn relay anexpected delivery date to the site management team.

Material DeliveryThen – Material ordered was sent out for best priceanalysis, and once a price was agreed with the chosensupplier it would be dispatched to site. There were regularissues with deliveries coming in part loads, incorrectmaterials arriving and being unloaded, deliveries duringpeak times, or deliveries not arriving at all. Once on site,materials would be placed into designated areas that wouldoften be congested due to excessive materials being orderedor lack of loadall time to keep the area in good order.Delivery dockets would be lost after delivery or not signed,leading to significant delays in accounts payable.

Now – When the material is ordered, an expecteddelivery date is relayed to the site team and this is thenplaced on a white board in the main site office for loadalldrivers and subcontractors to see (Figure 3). Each morninga quick huddle with loadall drivers happens during whichwe review deliveries from the day before (crossing them offthe whiteboard if delivered) and discuss the deliveries forthe day as well as important tasks to be completed.Delivery dockets are returned each morning and a box isalso available in the site office for operatives to hand indockets. It is interesting to note that following theinitiation of the Lean project, operatives suggested that alldeliveries which require on site lifts be deferred until 10:30

each day thus allowing trades full access to loadalls firstthing in the morning.

Figure 3. Daily Delivery Tracker

Material Handling & StorageThen – Materials would arrive in large quantities (Over-Production) and be unloaded in no particular order.Materials were often taken from the set down areas in largequantities and brought to the work area, only for themajority of the material to be either returned to the setdown area or left behind by trades people, leading toexcessive handling and damage – all of which was creatingsignificant cost increases and time delays for bothsubcontractors and the main contractor.

Now – Each element of the project has been scrutinisedto eliminate waste materials as far as reasonably possible.The site team went to the place of work (Gemba) toobserve how the materials were handled, how many timesthey were moved, etc. The site team and subcontractors areaware of exactly how much of each material is required perhouse and how many houses will be completed each week(using a given material) and so we are able to order just intime (JIT) materials meaning that more can be delivered tothe door of the house. For example, all internal slabs(measure to minimalise waste) arrive two days before theroof is installed and are lifted in before the roof is lifted on– eliminating issues of storage, double handling, andensuring the material is in a dry environment eliminatingwaste.

House kits have been developed, meaning suppliers kitmaterials for a specific house – a very worthwhile exampleis the second fix joinery. A bulk order has been placed forthis material and the quantity for each house is known.When the house is ready for these materials, they are calleddown, arrive on site within 24 hours, and are deliveredstraight to the house. This has also been done for secondfix mechanical and electrical materials, paint, tiles, paving,etc.

Improving CommunicationsComparisons can be draw between a manufacturing facilityand a residential housing scheme – for the most part eachhouse is the same with little change to standard details.With this in mind, applying Lean techniques and solutions


is quite achievable in a residential environment. Keyelements of Lean are the visualisation of the work by boththe site team and the subcontractors, collaboration, and thedevelopment of your subcontractors as partners and keystakeholders in the process. Taking this into account, thesite team introduced weekly meetings with all stakeholders(subcontractors) present to review the previous week’s workand look ahead to the following week, and briefly touch onthe month ahead (see Figure 4). This in turn greatlyimproved work flow, allowing materials to be ordered in atimely manner when work can be mapped out by thepeople doing the work. Figure 4. Weekly Coordination Meeting in Progress

LEAN INITIATIVE IMPROVEMENTS & IMPACT From analysing processes at the chosen residential site underthe four main headings and applying Lean principles to thegiven situations, we have noted that significant improvementshave been made not only on that particular site but on othersites that have taken onboard the learning, in addition toother departments within CField.

Some specific examples from the initial residential siteanalysed are illustrated in Table 1.

Table 1. Residential Site Improvements

Further Work – Achieving Sustainability“Best is the enemy of Better” – a key element of Lean isthe Plan, Do, Check, Act (PDCA) method. CField

Construction has now taken these Lean solutions andapplied them to other residential projects in our portfolio.It also has to be noted that not all of the above work foreach project – it is all about finding what works for eachproject.

For example, another large-scale residential project(circa 150 dwellings) has adapted the Material Orderingelement and developed it one step further. The projectteam took the time to measure as many bulk ordermaterials as possible before the project commenced –setting up bulk orders not only for concrete, stone,blocks, etc., but also for drainage material, first fix joinery,etc., as a fixed price with a fixed supplier for 12 months.This allows the site team to deal directly with the supplier,eliminating the need for time consuming paperwork anddelays in having to find the best price for each and everyorder.

CField Construction has also used the aforementionedproject as the start point for a number of other Leaninitiatives looking at eliminating rework due to snags,improving the programme and increasing stakeholder(subcontractor) engagement in the project planningprocess.

CField Construction Senior Management Team hascompleted a Lean Training workshop. As a result of theunderstanding of Lean concepts gained during thisworkshop and the practical benefits yielded to date fromthe initiatives listed above, the Senior Management Teamhas committed to have 50% of all CField Constructionemployees Yellow Belt trained by the end of 2019.


Case 4 – Jones Engineering Group

Jones Engineering has been in operationfor nearly 130 years. Its core servicesinclude Mechanical, HVAC, ProcessPiping, Electrical, Instrumentation &Controls, and Fire Protection across allsectors. Additional services includeMaintenance, Bio-Energy, TechnicalSupport Services, Geo-Surveying,Specialist Lift Division, FabricationFacilities and Comp-Ex Training,(competency in the selection,

installation, inspection and maintenanceof Ex apparatus in potentially explosiveatmospheres). Working in 14 countriesacross Europe and the Middle East, JonesEngineering employ over 3500 peopleand has an annual turnover in excess of€650Million. Jones Engineering iscommitted to the implementation ofLean Construction thinking andpractices across all elements of itsoperation and supply chain.


OVERVIEW & BACKGROUND TO THE LEAN INITIATIVEWhilst Jones Engineering began fromhumble beginnings, it has now growninto one of the largest M&E contractorsin the country with over 3500 staff.Along with this size of company comesthe huge amount of plant andequipment required to carry out thelarge-scale projects the companyundertakes. Jones Engineering currentlyhas several million-euro worth of plantand equipment available to its projectteams.

Before Jones Engineering adoptedLean Thinking, there was little or norecord or control of the massive amountof plant and equipment in its arsenal –in fact, the company didn’t accuratelyknow how much plant and equipmentit actually owned. Crews would carrygear from project to project or requestmore on an ad hoc basis. A plantmanagement system was required tocontrol the vast amount of equipmentthe company owned.


www.joneseng.com

AUTHORS

Ray Curley

The Group’s objective is to deliver quality work throughquality people. Each of the operating divisions of JonesEngineering is certified to the International Quality standard,IS EN ISO 9001:2015, and is accredited with “Safe TCertification”.

With an operation this size, a massive amount of plant andequipment is required to keep each project flowing. Untilrecently, there was no proper record of plant throughout theGroup, and an Excel file was used that had to be manuallyupdated and was dependent on information being passedfrom sites. Transfers from project to project were seldomrecorded. This led to a lot of errors on the manual systemwith several items of plant being entered more than once onthe log during site audits. It was virtually impossible to put avalue on the amount of plant and equipment the companyowned. Crews on projects were often hoarding tools, plant,etc., in job boxes and stores waiting for the next project tostart. There is an urban myth in the company that during anaudit on one of the sustaining projects more than 70individual 9” angle grinders were discovered on a site thathad only 28 employees. A lot of employees had the notionthat when they were given a new drill, welding plant, etc., itwas theirs to keep and not to be made available to otherproject teams when a project was complete. Another issuethat arose out of this situation was that calibration andcertification dates were missed as the company wasdependent on the user to inform it when these tests were due.

In 2014, Jones Engineering’s Lean Department was setup. This new method of thinking and learning led to thecompany looking at all of its different systems of work,

including Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) andQuality System Procedures (QSPs). One of the QSPs (QSP12) related to the control of plant. With the then currentstate of plant control, this was one of the first areas thatneeded to be addressed. The Lean Department began bylooking at how Toyota became the largest and most efficientcar manufacturer in the world due largely by its drive toachieve zero downtime on production. This was achievedby combining technologies with programs that focused onequipment performance combined with asset management.

Lean principles eliminate waste by reorganizing the plant intolines, or value streams, where work cells and assets performcertain tasks. This approach removes non-value-addingactivities from the system, leading to more efficient processes”.

COMPANY OVERVIEW

Simon Watson

Figure 1. Strategic Asset Management Unlocks AssetPerformance & Raises Achievements


Several methods of recording plant were trialled by theteam over the following 12 to 18 months ranging frommetal tags with barcodes on them to labels with QR codes.Problems arose with the QR codes as they wouldn’t scan ifdamaged. There was also the problem of scanning itself.Handheld scanners were not always practical or evenpossible to use in the field. Working closely with their ITdepartment, the project team investigated different systemswith the goal of developing their own internal system ofplant tracking. But the time delay here was a major issue.

Hilti, one of the largest manufacturers and suppliers ofpower tools, anchors, fasteners, etc., had recently launched its"On!Track" asset management system for the constructionindustry. In its promo, Hilti state that “At the touch of ascreen or the click of a mouse, ON!Track tells you exactlywhat equipment you have, where it is and who is using it.When items need maintenance or calibration it alerts you.Our Bluetooth enabled smart tags offer a fast inventory checkand tells you which equipment is nearby. When it’s time torenew training or certification it tells you in advance. Withthis critical information at your fingertips, it’s simple to keepyour work on track, profitable and fully compliant”. They goon to tell us how it works: “Rugged barcode tags on yourequipment communicate with cloud-based asset managementsoftware that runs on mobile or desktop devices – meaningyou can find your assets in an instant”.

This new system seemed to fit the requirements JonesEngineering was looking for. Armed with 200 Hilti tags,trials were run on several sites around the country. Theresults and feedback were positive and a decision to roll thissystem out across the whole group was made. In June 2017,a new Group Plant Department was set up with theresponsibility of controlling plant and equipment in allcompanies across the Jones Engineering Group. Thisconsisted of a Plant Manager and several PlantAdministrators.

The Plant Department began systematically visiting everyjob site, project, and workshop/stores that Jones Engineeringhad a presence on. Every piece of plant and equipment had abarcode tag fitted and the following information wasrecorded on the database:• Barcode Number (Scan Code).• Alternate Number (Jones Engineering Plant Number).• Serial Number (Manufacturers Unique Number).• Product Template.• Asset Group (Drills, grinders, Saw, Welding Plants, Site

Vehicles, etc.).• Status (On site or In Transit).• State (Operational, Broken, Stolen, Retired, Lost).• Description (Ladder-Podium, Ladder-Straight, Ladder-A-

Frame, Ladder-Platform)• Model.• Manufacturer.• Managed (Owned or on hire).• Current Location.• Default Location (Company in the Group).• Responsible Employee (Person to whom an asset is

assigned).• Owner (Location Manager).

This proved to be a massive undertaking with over 190 liveprojects and 9473 pieces of plant and equipment beingtagged and logged on the new plant management system.Over 300 members of staff were trained up on the use of thesystem and the Plant Department even travelled to theMiddle East to set up the system and train the personnel outthere. This new system proved an immediate success as allthat was needed to use it was a smart phone. Tags could bescanned using an app and no handheld scanners wererequired. The Plant Department put together a shortPowerPoint presentation showing users of the system how toadd and transfer assets using the mobile phone app.

The new plant management system gave full visibility ofwhat was on every project and who was responsible for it. Ithad the ability to set alerts for calibration and certification ofplant. It also enabled the company to put an accurate valueof its assets on any site at any given time by systematic auditsbeing carried out using the app.

Figure 3. Plant Management System Showing Service AlertsDueFigure 2. Tools Displaying Barcode Tags

LEAN INITIATIVE IMPROVEMENTS & IMPACT Following the transition onto the new plant managementsystem and some initial teething problems, the majority ofusers are now fully conversant with its various functions andoperations. The system has given the company improvedaccuracy and accountability with each plant item assigned toan individual supervisor/user. That accountability has two

specific benefits:1.Plant items are returned promptly when not in use.2.Each item logged against an individual commands better

attention and a heightened focus on security.Complete visibility across the entire organisation is also a

big plus. In the past, if a supervisor needed a piece of plant

they could check with the central plant stores to see if one wasavailable, and failing that, they had to make a phone call tothe person who managed the original plant list to see howmany of those items we owned, where they were last recorded,and then start making phone calls – not an efficient process.Now, they simply open the application on their mobile phoneand at a glance can see which project the items are located on.With a little knowledge of how busy each site is, an individualcan track down an available piece of equipment very quicklyand arrange for it to be transferred to them without delay.

Transferring a piece of plant is vastly simplified through useof the app and built-in scanner on each individual’s phone torecord the identifying plant number by pointing and clickingat the bar code on the tag. The simple operation of the appmeans the company now has a much higher compliance rateamong plant users. The previous system of writing down thenumber, then having to enter it into an email, and forwardingit to someone else to complete the transfer was double-handling at its best.

Scanning the equipment tag avoids potential typos whichused to involve frantic phone calls or emails for plant numbersto be rechecked as they did not match items on the database.The company is also seeing less downtime among the crews inthe field due to locating or waiting for plant, and also lessmoney wasted hiring or purchasing additional plant as a resultof the visibility. Previously, if a supervisor could not locate aplant item easily it was safer to either hire or buy a new one asopposed to having his team held up.

Statistically, the company found that across the 13 mostfrequently used plant categories, there were almost 4000 assetsand more than 3000 transfers in the twelve months of 2018.Based on the purchase price of new assets, if people did nothave the visibility of plant locations and went ahead andbought new items instead of transfers, they would have spentin excess of €7Million. This highlights the scale of potentialsavings possible due to an increase in plant transfers.

Another benefit that Jones Engineering sees with the newdatabase is that it now receives automatic notifications whenequipment calibrations are due. Based on the expiry date, areminder email is sent automatically to the plant manager andalso the person the asset is assigned to. This gives them timeto arrange re-calibration and removes the human element ofsomeone having to run reports manually or constantly checkthe database to keep up to date.

An unintended consequence here has been the developmentof an internal local calibration capability for the weldingequipment. The company now has a dedicated maintenanceteam of direct employees who have received specificcalibration training and are certified as approved to carry outthis work to calibrate both orbital and manual welding plant.

This may not seem like a big win, but when you considerthat across all operations the company has in excess of 400welding plants spread across more than 100 domestic projectsas well as 50 sites overseas, having control of this internallygives the company more flexibility through use of in-houseexpertise. A small amount of initial investment was requiredto purchase specific test meters and load banks etc., but thishas given the company the ability to be self-sufficient and

minimise potential delays as they are not tied to availability ofthird-party calibration expertise.

Other improvements have become apparent since the processbegan and one of these has been with the PA Testing process.

The team noticed that this process could be improved bypurchasing some new label printers where a variety of labelcolours were available as standard. JEG only had one labelcolour with its previous label printer. By using a differentcolour label for each three-month period, the new colouredlabels now provide a good visual indicator that equipment iswithin its three-month calibration period even without havingto check the tag for the calibration expiry date.

Again, some minor investment was required, but thecompany’s existing printers were nearing end of life anyway asthe vendor had phased out this particular model, so changingto more modern equipment was more economical and efficient.

Figure 4. Percentage of Corded Versus Cordless Drills in JEGAnalysis of this data is really powerful and is giving JEG

insights into other areas where efficiencies can be made. Forexample, Figure 4 shows the comparison between corded andcordless drills across the group. Improving cordless numbersmeans time savings on site, no trailing leads, reduced PATesting, etc.

Figure 5. TIMWOODS Plant & Equipment Waste ReductionsIn summary, implementation of the new plant database has

improved overall efficiency in all areas where plant andequipment are used within Jones Engineering, and utilisingthe TIMWOODS model has reduced waste in each of theeight waste categories.



Case 5 – Ardmac

Ardmac is an internationalconstruction specialist deliveringcomplex high-value workspaces andtechnical environments. Head-quartered in Dublin, and with officesin Manchester, Craigavon, Cork andBrussels, Ardmac employ over 300people and provide specialistconstruction services to thecommercial fit-out, life sciences and

data centre sectors. Ardmac’s vision isto be “the contractor of choice forclients and the workplace of choice forgreat people”. Ardmac’s mission is “toconsistently provide the ultimatesolution for high-value workingenvironments through continuousinvestment in the best people,technology and processes”.C O M P A N Y W E B S I T E

OVERVIEW & BACKGROUND TO THE LEAN INITIATIVEArdmac’s Lean journey started in 2015with the implementation of the LastPlanner® System (LPS) on a pharmacleanroom project. From the benefitsof this pilot project in the areas of ontime delivery, budget, quality, andsafety, leadership at Ardmac furthereducated themselves in the area ofLean through Yellow Belt training andconferences. This provided leadershipwith an understanding whereby Leangoes beyond Lean tools, and that itslong-term benefits involve theintegration of leadership behaviours,full enterprise alignment, and aprocess-based approach to manage thebusiness.

As a result, leadership were fullycommitted to the deployment of Leanto deliver its 2022 Strategy Goals.Leadership engaged the organisation todevelop a shared Vision and GuidingPrinciples. The next step involvedcreating a Lean Business Strategy thatwould align critical business processes

that would support the delivery ofArdmac’s strategic goals across Ireland,the UK, and Europe. Figure 1 outlinesArdmac’s Lean journey to date, andthis case study will focus on specificelements, including:i. Set up of the Lean Governance

Team.ii. Leadership Development Program

and Constructive Conversations.iii. Continuous Improvement through

the Do Your BIT program.iv. Visual Management.v. Digital Project Management

Program.

Figure 1. Timeline for Lean


www.ardmac.com

AUTHOR

Jason Casey

Lean Strategy and Governance TeamTo transition from a Lean tools-based approach to astrategic approach of Lean Deployment, Ardmac set up aLean Governance team in early-2018. This team iscomposed of key sectoral leaders of the business. Thepurpose of the process is to:1. Align current business strategies into one business

strategy to deliver strategic goals.2. Identify and manage key Lean programs.3. Assign ownership of Lean programs across the business.4. Support program leaders when they provide an overview

of their programs.5. Engage employees in Lean deployment.6. Support Lean training requirements to support the

delivery of Ardmac’s strategic goals.Figure 2 provides an overview of the alignment of key

business strategies that will enable the business strategy.

Figure 2. Alignment Across the BusinessThe Lean Governance team meet monthly and review thestatus of each program. Program leaders rotate monthly andpresent an update of their individual program. In the eventthat any program requires support and/or continuousimprovement, the governance team provide direction andsupport when required. It is also an opportunity for theGovernance team to recognise the positive improvements that

COMPANY OVERVIEW


project leaders contribute to the business.

Leadership Development ProgramA critical element of Lean deployment centres around theconsistent behaviours of leaders in the business. Alignment ofconsistent behaviours support the business both internallyand externally. From a client perspective, and regardless ofwho is managing the project, the client will experience astandardised approach to managing a project. As a teammember within Ardmac, consistent behaviours internally willalso drive consistent behaviours within each team, therebysupporting our vision to be “the contractor of choice forclients and the workplace of choice for great people”.

To ensure that Lean will be successful in the future, Ardmachas supported 17 leaders in undertaking a leadershipdevelopment program at Trinity College Dublin. Theprogram focuses on a number of areas including OperationalExcellence, Strategy, Design Thinking, People Management,Integrated Project Management, and Benchmarking visits.The outcome of the program is the delivery of five strategicprojects that will support the delivery of Ardmac’s strategicgoals. Each member of the Lean Governance team hascompleted this program, which provides a deeper knowledgeand understanding of Ardmac’s Lean journey.

Figure 3. Graduates from the Ardmac “Building BetterLeaders” Program 2019

Constructive Conversations ProgramTo further support leaders as people managers, Ardmac hasalso launched a “constructive conversations” program. Thisprogram has trained leaders to perform 2-way constructiveconversations with employees, thus transitioning managersfrom a directive to a coaching and mentoring role.

Do Your BIT ProgramLean involves a transition to all employees thinking aboutcontinuous improvement. To support this continuousimprovement mindset, Ardmac has developed and deployedthe “Do Your BIT” (“Building Ideas Together”) program. Thepurpose of this program is to support employees to have avoice in continuous improvement. Employees are supportedin submitting ideas for review and execution. The Do YourBIT team review ideas submitted monthly and then provideemployees with feedback on their suggestions. The programconsiders all ideas, from a 10-minute small improvement tolarge-scale capital investment ideas. Ideas can be submittedelectronically or can be managed via the Visual ManagementBoards or during Toolbox Talks. On site in particular, the

daily huddle boards are a good opportunity to ensure thatcraft can participate in the program. This approach not onlypromotes continuous improvement, but also engagesemployees in our Lean journey and provides leadership withan opportunity to recognise an employee’s innovation thatthey may not otherwise be exposed to in the business.

Visual ManagementA key aspect to Lean deployment is the management ofmetrics. From 2018, Ardmac has engaged craft withinprojects through the application of Visual ManagementBoards to manage the metrics that matter daily. Each of ourprojects across Ireland, the UK, and Europe utilise, as part ofour daily huddles, a review of key metrics including Safety,Quality, and Schedule. This Visual Management boardcomplements the LPS to ensure that the metrics that matterare reviewed and managed daily. The review of the visualboards involves the entire team, thereby ensuring thateveryone is aware and accountable to the metrics that matter.Figure 4 outlines an example of a visual management boardin action, including the Daily Huddle and our SafetyProgram. The Visual Management process in Figure 4 isreplicated across all our projects in Ireland, the UK, andEurope. The key to the success is the involvement of the rightpeople in this short stand up review (15-minutes max) asthese are the people that can constructively action the statusof each metric.

Figure 4. Visual Management at Project Level

Project Management PlatformFrom an analysis of the workload of site management in2018, up to 20% of site management time was absorbedaround data collection and reporting. This time includedactivities such as printing forms, filling in by hand, scanning,and emailing results or typing results in spreadsheets. Therewere also large amounts of time spent walking between thesite office and the work zone collecting drawings and thelatest information. A project was set up to identify a solutionto minimise this non-value-added (NVA) time. A number ofsoftware solutions were identified to manage documentationin a Lean manner.

In early 2019, a software solution named “Procore” wasselected and implemented to streamline project process onany mobile device. A significant project plan was developedto manage the integration of Procore into the business,starting with a pilot and identifying lessons learned aroundthe program before full deployment. To support deployment,a significant training plan was developed and executed tominimise impact of change from a paper based system to an


electronic solution. Figure 5 outlines an example from thissystem.

Figure 5. Procore Software Solution for ManagingDocuments Electronically

Integrated Project Delivery (IPD)IPD is a project delivery system that seeks to align andintegrate all project team members’ interests and objectives.The team includes the client, the main contractor, andsubcontractors. IPD integrates people, systems, businessstructures and practices into a process that collaborativelyharnesses the talents and insights of all participants tooptimise efficiency and handover to client. Two projectswere managed within Ardmac using an IPD method. Forone project, Ardmac was the subcontractor. Thecollaborative IPD approach provided a specific focus oneach contractor to utilise LPS to deliver a very aggressiveschedule, with eight subcontractors working with thisprocess throughout the lifetime of the project. Whereconstraints were identified, each sub-contractor realised theimplications of owning and removing constraints for othersubcontractors to ensure work would flow. LPS metricswere critical to the success of the project as the rightmetrics focused on flow and drove the right behaviours toensure work could flow throughout the lifecycle of theproject.

LEAN INITIATIVE IMPROVEMENTS & IMPACT Ardmac has adopted a Lean strategy, going beyond theimplementation of Lean Tools and adopting an integratedapproach where engaged employees, supported by their LeanLeaders, continue to deliver the strategic business objectives.The Lean framework was oultined in Figure 2 and a numberof elements from the Lean strategy are presented in this casestudy. Benefits from these examples include both qualitativeand quantitative benefits. From a cultural perspective,through the development of Lean Leaders, management ofthe business is transitioning from a direct managementapproach to a leadership approach. With such an approach,leaders are enabling their teams to deliver businessperformance using their own initiative and the role of theleader is to provide direction and support.

Constructive conversations are resulting in positiveimprovements in behaviour, aligned to our guidingprinciples, where previously team members may not be awareof the impact of their behaviours. As a result of constructiveconversations, this brings Ardmac’s Guiding Principles to life.

From the various Lean initiatives undertaken as part of theLean Strategy, which is managed by the Governance team,the following benefits were identified:• Business Process in place to manage the Lean Strategy as a

mechanism to deliver our business goals and objectives.• Utilisation of IPD and LPS has delivered an aggressive

project timeline of 1.5 years from the original estimate of 2years.

• Engaged continuous improvement mindset across the

business through the identification of 30 improvementideas managed through the Do Your BIT program.

• Increase in collaboration, consideration of activities,highlighting residual issues, and improvedcommunication/engagement through the Do Your BITprogram.

• 25% reduction of site management NVA time.

Next Steps for ArdmacArdmac is fully committed to Lean and the long-termbenefits that it delivers, and we will continue to manage andmonitor our Lean strategy and key business metrics throughthe Lean Governance team.

Over the coming year, the following activities are plannedas part of our Lean Strategy:• Improving the efficiency and management of LPS metrics

through the application of KPI software across thebusiness.

• Engaging Lean in Offices through the deployment of theLean Housekeeping Program.

• Initiate a Lean Transform with Enterprise Ireland toimprove value stream performance through the furtherapplication of Lean thinking.

• Cost savings and avoidance of just under €1Million.• Improve connectivity across the business processes.• Engage the next iteration of leaders through the leadership

development program.


Case 6 – Kirby Group Engineering

Founded in 1964, Kirby is amechanical and electrical engineeringcontractor. The company operates inIreland, the UK and Northern Europe,and directly employs over 850 highly-skilled employees. Kirby provides fullmechanical and electrical contractingservices as well as specialist high voltage(HV) and medium voltage (MV)design and construction services toclients across a number of differentsectors including Data Centres, LifeSciences, Industrial Manufacturing,Substations and Renewables, PowerGeneration, Petrochemical andCommercial. After 55 years in business,

Kirby has earned a reputation,supported by client references, forexcellence in high-value mechanicaland electrical engineering contractingservices. This reputation is built onearly engagement, finding innovativecost-effective solutions for complexbuild challenges and anuncompromising approach to safety,quality and delivery. Kirby has strongcapabilities in prefabrication,modularisation and digitalconstruction, along with a Leanapproach to project delivery, whichensures excellence and value for itsclients.


OVERVIEW & BACKGROUND TO THE LEAN INITIATIVE

A mindset change regarding qualitycan be seen since the publishing ofISO 9001:2015 standard inSeptember 2016 and even prior tothat with the Q-Mark standardapplied from 2012. A duty was placedupon companies to now deliverquality from the top down to all levelsof the industry. This can beparticularly seen within section 5 ofISO 9001:2015 – Leadership alongwith Section 1.0 of Q-MarkLeadership & Commitment. Itemphasised the need for seniormanagement to demonstrateleadership and commitment withrespect to the quality system by takingaccountability for the effectiveness ofthe quality management system. Italso stresses the importance of senior

management demonstratingleadership and commitment withrespect to customer focus and addingvalue to the customer needs.

With this ISO update, along withthe Q-Mark standard, Kirby felt thatthere was an opportunity to show trueleadership from the seniormanagement as part of the company’sLean initiative. As part of Leanthinking and utilising Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA), the use ofGemba walks would be seen as apositive continuous improvement toKirby work practices. This was anopportunity for the Senior OperationsTeam to go to the Gemba andhighlight positives, reduce wastes(Muda) and promote value to thecustomer, where going to the Gembameant going to the actual place wherethe work was being undertaken andthe place where value is created(namely the construction site).

The Gemba walk, much likeManagement By Walking Around(MBWA), is an activity that takesmanagement to the front lines tolook for waste (Muda) andopportunities. Gemba, a term firstused by Toyota, which means going

to the real place where the action is.In the 1980s, ‘In Search ofExcellence’ author Tom Peterspopularised the concept when hetalked about management bywandering around (MBWA). LikeMBWA, Gemba walks takemanagement to the front lines to seedaily happenings. Gemba, however, ismore focussed.The Gemba processwas to be delivered in three phases:• Kaizen to determine requirement

and content of Gemba Form.• October 2016 – December 2016

trial of process at 2 projects tofinalise process

• Beginning January 2017 – roll-outof process and inclusion intocompany metrics and KPIs.This Gemba process is now part of

the Lean Construction way ofthinking at Kirby and has been sinceJanuary 2017 with over 45 visitstaking place per year. As is it is alsopart of our continuous improvementprocess, we are now on revision 7 ofthe Gemba form to illustrate that oncewe have a behavioural change withinthe organisation we can emphasise theimportance of something else, ascontinual improvements are realised.


www.kirbygroup.com

AUTHORS

Martin Searson

New quality standards and continuous improvement withinthe construction industry determined that seniormanagement of companies needed to be present on projects.Progress needs to be driven from the top and senior

management must be seen as promotors of innovation. Leanwas the innovation moving forward for Kirby, and Gembawalks would be the tool to promote this and drive itforward.

COMPANY OVERVIEW

Kevin Wall


Figure 1. Structure of the ISO 9001:2015 Standard in thePDCA cycle

ISO 9001:2015 highlights the importance of the PDCAcycle in that it can be applied to all processes and to thequality management system as a whole. Kirby utilised thiscycle as a way to bring its vision and values to every project itdelivers. Kirby’s values are Safety, Quality, Delivery, andValue. The aspect of value is where Kirby can create and sharevalue through collaboration, innovation, and operationalexcellence.

Through this methodology, a Kaizen event was held withthe senior management team to determine how best todeliver this value to the clients while also encapsulating theother values and vision it has moving forward. In 2016 whenthis was happening, Lean thinking was still being developedwithin Kirby, and there was a need to educate the workforce.The best way forward to deliver on the new standards, delivervalue to the client, reduce wastes (Muda) in the processes,and educate Lean Construction within the company wasthrough Gemba walks by the senior management team. Astandard QEHS Senior Tour form was created to measureagainst aspects of TIMWOODS while also including EHS(Environment, Health & Safety) and Quality needs. Now asenior manager can go to a project, walk a site, and identifyand eliminate wastes on the project. The wastes highlightedcan fall under all aspects of TIMWOODS: Transportation,Inventory, Motion, Waiting, Over-Production, Over-Processing, Defects, and Skills. The site visit can result inimprovements to all these aspects as they are noted. Site staffcan then be educated in Lean thinking and adding value tothe next customer in the cycle.

Three important elements of this Gemba walk included:• Go and See – to get the senior managers to visit the sites

and see the work activities.• Ask Why – to explore what is adding value to the clients and

what wastes can be removed.• Respect – it is not a blame culture, collaborating with teams

and problem solving together will enhance productivityand uptake in Lean thinking.From a base level of 0 in 2015, to move to trial during the

last quarter of 2016, and to roll-out in 2017 resulted in alarge change of thought within the company strategy. A totalof 48 Gemba walks were completed in 2017, and thenrepeated in 2018, and in quarter 1&2 of 2019 there were 42completed – the largest number for the first two quarters.

Figure 2. QEHS Senior Manager Tours (Gemba Walks)completed – 2017 to 2019

Some of the elements that the senior management broughtto these Gemba walks included:• Promoting the use of the process approach and risk based

thinking.• Ensuring that the necessary resources needed for the tasks

are available.• Communicating the importance of effective quality

management.• Promoting continuous improvement and providing

leadership support.• Educating Lean thinking to site staff.• Highlighting the Kirby Values of Safety, Quality, Delivery

and Value (i.e. Kirby Project KPIs).Additional Lean practices were brought to site through this

new initiative. The use of 5S was key, and it makes theworkplace safer and more pleasant, improves work efficiency,reduces defects and leads to better customer satisfaction andhigher productivity:• 1S – Sort: Remove what is not needed and keep what is

needed. The workplace becomes easier, quicker, and moreefficient.

• 2S – Set in Order: Arrange essential items in order for easyaccess. This includes identifying and labelling them andkeeping surfaces and walkways clear.

• 3S – Shine: Keep things clean and tidy. Regularly removedirt: Damage/Defects are easier to see; safety issues are lesslikely to occur, and plant and tools work more efficiently.

• 4S – Standardise: Establish standards and guidelines tomaintain the first three S.

• 5S – Sustain: Make 5S a habit. The benefits of 5S will onlytruly be seen if it is maintained in the long-term.Another key Lean tool that became part of the routing of

Gemba walks is Visual Management which enhances the smoothflow of information by using visual and audio signals instead oftexts or other written instructions. It makes operationalstandards visible so that people can follow them more easily. Thistechnique exposes waste (Muda) so that it can be prevented andeliminated. It can be used to identify or communicate easily:• What’s right, wrong, done, left to be done, delayed.• Resources Tools & Equipment, Materials, etc.• Norms, Methods, etc.

These became part of the Kirby Management KPIs that arenow being recorded and promoted on every project withinevery Gemba walk. Good practices were promoted andshared, and wastes could now be eliminated.


Figure 3. Kirby Senior Management QEHS Senior Tour(Gemba Walk) Register 2017

Figure 4. Sample of a completed QEHS Senior Tour (GembaWalk) Form

LEAN INITIATIVE IMPROVEMENTS & IMPACT The improvements seen through the Gemba walk process areclearly shown through Kirby’s continued growth within theconstruction industry. As part of our Q-Mark assessment in2018, we scored 192 out of a possible 200 points forLeadership; and we continue to score highly within ISO9001:2015 audits for Leadership. We are able to showthrough these project walks that Kirby Senior Managementaspires to have Kirby be the most trusted provider of high-value engineering and construction services. There has beenan increase in focus for adding value to clients. In a Gembawalk in Co. Kerry with an Associate Director, our client andend client were also invited to take part in the Gemba walk.They found the experience invaluable and are nowpromoting the practice within their own organisations. Thisis not an isolated case and we have found such collaborationto be a fundamental prerequisite of this practice.

From the site point of view, and collaborating with the sitestaff, we have found a multitude of positives, including:• A clean/safe workplace.• Positive, inclusive culture.• High Employee engagement – high morale.• Reductions in over-processing.• Takt time improvements.• Right first-time mentality.• Positive Lean Thinking.

Figure 5. PDCA Cycle of Continuous ImprovementAs part of our continuous improvement mind-set,

though applying the Plan-Do-Check-Act approach, we arenow analysing the data gathered and findings raised duringthese Gemba walks completed over the past two-and-a-halfyears, to further realise benefits from this where value isbeing created on our projects. We are gaining new data anda fresh perspective, in Lean thinking, as we strive towardsoperational excellence on our projects. Value flowshorizontally across our organisation to our customers. It isthese Gemba walks which help our senior managers seeand reconcile the horizontal with the verticalcommunication and feedback loops provided so as torealise further benefits and opportunities. This helpsfurther embed Lean Construction as a part of our values inimproving our deliver and value add, for our clients andstakeholders.


Case 7 – SISK

John Sisk & Son Ltd. (“SISK”) is aninnovative international engineering andconstruction company employing over1300 people across its operations inIreland, the UK, and Europe. Sisk hasthe track record, scale, and capacity tosuccessfully undertake large, complex,multi-disciplinary programmes, and isrecognised by our global customers asworld leaders in safe delivery. Operatingsince 1859, Sisk is a progressive businesswith long-term vision and is Ireland’sNo.1 ranked provider of constructionservices.

Sisk’s strategy is to create value forcustomers, partners, and people throughtechnical knowledge, ability, and

experience:• We collaborate with our customers

and supply chain to provide technicaland delivery solutions in an open andcan-do way to meet aligned objectives.

• We offer a full range of solutionswhere safety, innovation, quality,efficiency, and value are integral toeverything we do.

• We deliver projects and programmesin key sectors such as Data andTechnology, Pharmaceutical and LifeSciences, Infrastructure, Trans-portation, Healthcare, Commercial,Residential, Retail, Industrial, Leisure,Education, Water, and Energy.C O M P A N Y W E B S I T E

OVERVIEW & BACKGROUND TO THE LEAN INITIATIVEThis project was a large-scale leisuredevelopment in Ireland involving thedesign and construction ofaccommodation and ancillary facilitiesto a new Holiday Village located withinmixed species woodland of approx.400acres. The project comprised 466accommodation units ranging from 2-bed units of 80m2 up to exclusive 4-bed detached units of 190m2 floor area.The overall programme period for theproject was 68 weeks.

Figure 1. Overview of the Project SiteThe project involved a fast-track

schedule on an extremely large site.Due to its location within thewoodland environment, the site wasextremely restricted with only 4-metresof working space around each cluster oflodges. Owing to the scale of the

project (if the units were constructed ina single terrace it would be over 4.2kmlong) there was an enormous volume ofmaterials to manage, including:• 300km of cladding panel.• 600000 roof tiles.• 4500 Doors.• 3500 Windows.• 160000m2 of timber frame wall

panel.• 466 Kitchens.

The following parameters werecritical to the project:• Exemplary safety record.• Highest quality standards with zero

or minimum rework.• On or ahead of schedule.• On or under budget.• Visibly demonstrating respect for all

involved in the project.• Delivering job satisfaction.• Ensuring material availability at all

times to the site craft.• Equalising outputs across all trades to

ensure production continuity.• Ensuring a common understanding

of project status through accurate,visually clear, and fully sharedreporting.


www.johnsiskandson.com

AUTHOR

Cormac Fitzpatrick

It was clear from the outset that in order to ensure continuityand flow of work through the various trades, we wouldrequire a collaborative workshop-type approach toscheduling, sequencing and handoffs. “People andcollaboration” rather than “systems and schedules” were goingto deliver this project. The confined working environmentover such an extensive area would also require a bespoke

streamlined approach to logistics and materials management.Finally, the repetitive nature of much of the works demandeda Lean Programme.

From the outset, we committed with the client, designteam and supply chain to collaboratively deliver the project.The following initiatives subsequently formed the basis of theLean Programme for the project. Some were strategically

COMPANY OVERVIEW


planned from the outset, and others were established ordeveloped “opportunistically”.

Understand what Value Means to Our CustomerDuring the procurement and pre-construction phase of theproject, the Sisk team invested significant time in defining,understanding, and communicating precisely what “value”meant to our client. We carried out numerous visits toexisting facilities both in operation and under construction.We also engaged with the existing client supply chain tounderstand exactly how the previous projects wereconstructed, what challenges were encountered, and whatworked best. We also gained an understanding of the level ofdetail and expected quality of the finished lodges. We in turnwere able to convey these standards to the entire supply chainso as that the entire team had full alignment when the projectmoved to the construction stage. This initial phase of theproject proved invaluable. One of the most beneficialoutcomes was the relationships that developed as wetransitioned from a “client -contractor” relationship into a“single delivery team”. We were very conscious during thisprocurement phase to ensure that we selected contractors thatwould buy into our vision of success and actively partake inthis “one team” approach.

Figure 2. Customer Defined Value

Constructability EnhancementFollowing the site visits to similar projects which had beendelivered for the same customer, we undertook a series ofworkshops both internally and with our design and supplychain partners in order to streamline the actualconstruction process compared with previous projects. Theteam continually challenged and tweaked the design,detailing and construction sequence to find the optimumsolution both from an installation sequence perspectiveand finished product quality. During this phase we workedwith the supply chain to develop the best sequences bothfor an individual lodge and for the entire project. Allparties bought into the process and were prepared to makesome sacrifices for the greater good of the project – inorder for the project to succeed, the team had toacknowledge that we were all dependent on each other andwould either succeed or fail together. We alsoacknowledged that for each contractor to be efficient weneeded to ensure that outputs were equalised across alltrades each day. We could not have a scenario where therewas a need for peaks and troughs in the labourrequirement.

Establish Pull and FlowWe actively engaged oursubcontractors to set outthe optimum constructionprocess from their point ofview, and devised a worksequence and materialsbreakdown to minimise theextent of material handlingand wastage on site. Theaim of this exercise was tolimit the steps in theconstruction processallowing us to fully defineexactly what task should becarried out by eachtradesperson every time

they entered a work zone. This in turn allowed us to defineexactly what materials were required to carry out each step.With this information, we were in a position to develop arobust construction programme that set out to equalise theoutputs across all trades to ensure there was continuity ofwork for each trade in a production line type process. We setthe required output at three lodges per day – this meant thatevery step in the construction process must complete threeunits every day, from timber frame roof trusses to siliconesealing in bathrooms, every trade must complete three perday. By adopting this approach, every trades person wasguaranteed that the trade both in front and behind themwere producing the same quantity and therefore they wereguaranteed a productive day’s work every day.

Pursuing PerfectionWith the large workforce on site and the numerous customerstakeholders, we needed to develop a procedure to consistentlydeliver a product to the required quality standard. Reworkresulting from inconsistent installation and defects was seen as amajor risk to the project due to the high volume of smallconstruction units – one unchecked mistake in every lodgewould result in 450 mistakes. To mitigate against this risk, weagreed with all parties at the outset to construct 4 units tovarious stages in the construction process, this allowed us toagree with all stakeholders exactly what detailing and qualitywas required at all stages of the process, not just the finishedproduct. Each task in the construction process was carried outby a dedicated work crew who knew exactly what standard wasrequired of them – this also allowed us to identify and eliminateany residual defects due to damage to installed works.

Activity SamplingAs each crew was accountable for each element of the works, wehad complete transparency on exactly what outputs were beingachieved daily and exactly what task every person was carryingout. Activity sampling and productivity tracking enabled us toimprove efficiency at every step in the construction process. Wequickly identified a number of areas where we were expendingexcessive effort to achieve our required outputs. Obviously overthe scale of a project like this, we could not afford to expendthis additional effort and so we had to devise a means toidentify where exactly the issues were and minimise them. Webegan to employ a method of activity sampling, or directobservation, to try to understand where the issues lay. Thisinvolved monitoring works ongoing for predefined periods oftime over the course of a day or week. From this monitoring we

Figure 3. Pre-Assembled Stove


could understand where large quantities of time were beingspent on non-value-add (NVA) activities, that is, where there isnothing being produced. Armed with this data we were able totarget and eliminate the primary areas of waste. Examplesincluded adjusting gang sizes, how we managed materials andaccessories, and revising both construction details and evenproducts used.

Figure 4. Work Sampling

Materials Control, Standardisation and Off-Site FabricationAll opportunities were explored to maximise off-site fabricationfrom timber frame panelling and roof trusses to metal framepartitioning for chimney breasts. Materials management wasidentified as a key item due to the vast quantities required. Theproject actively set out to eliminate waste both in transport and

inventory management at every opportunity. The layout andspace restrictions on the site required site material storage to beminimised whilst ensuring that adequate supply was availablefor installation. Control of materials was achieved by varioustechniques including standardisation of materials required andbatching of bulk materials by our suppliers for delivery to thecorrect locations in the correct quantity at the right time toeliminate double handling. We batched smaller and high-valueitems in purpose-built warehouses onsite, and M&E items,sanitary-ware, windows, doors, and patio paving were batched“per lodge”.

Figure 5. Materials Control & Standardisation

LEAN INITIATIVE IMPROVEMENTS & IMPACT This project was a success for our customer, for Sisk, and for thesupply chain, as evidenced both by the metrics provided and inthe outline of the various aspects of the project, safety, quality,and respect. Schedule control was delivered firstly byconstructability improvements, secondly by early engagementwith the client and key specialist trades, and thirdly by intensivechallenge and improvement of the process. Intensiveengagement at field level allowed us to hold these gains.

The intentional application of a Lean Programme was ahighly significant contributor to the success of this project. Weset out to strip back waste, to stop taking unnecessary steps, tospend less time in meetings, and to eliminate NVAcorrespondence. We also set out to do a highly efficient projectby providing a shared infrastructure, logistics, a 3D model, anda common data environment for all project information. All ofthese achieved solid improvements.

The greatest benefit to the project accrued, however, in amanner which we did not clearly foresee – it manifested itself inthe collaborative mindset that developed, the lack of conflict,the minimalist approach to correspondence of any kind, theabsolute ownership of the project, and in the co-operation andcamaraderie received from and amongst the client and tradeswho have collectively delivered first-class safety and first-classquality.

Some initiative outcomes include:

• Safety – 270000 man-hours worked accident-free.• Schedule – 466 units delivered on schedule.• Cost – Project delivered within budget.• Cost – Zero claims from contractors and supply chain.• Cost & Quality – Less than 1% rework.• Quality – Each unit handed over snag-free.• Efficiency – Actual labour approx. 15% below planned.• Satisfaction and Engagement – Two of the most senior supply

chain supervisors on the project summarise the impact asfollows:“At FastHouse, we are all delighted to have had the opportunity

to be a part of this exceptional project. Great work was carried outby the FastHouse teams. Early client engagement and collaborationwere essential in accomplishing the project within budget andschedule – and, as such, our collaborative relationship with JohnSisk & Son played a key role in the overall delivery of this large-scale timber frame package.” (Sean Fox, Sales Director atFastHouse)

“We at Treysta knew from an early stage with a project on thescale of Centre Parcs, that preplanning and collaboration wereessential in order to streamline the sequence of each trade in thelodges. SISK’s approach was very refreshing to this challenge whichensured Lean Construction targets were exceeded by havingconstructive design and construction workshops.” (Kevin Kelly,Managing Director, Treysta)


Case 8 – Exyte

Exyte is a global award-winningturnkey project delivery companyspecialising in the engineering, design,and construction of complex facilities.Exyte is a recognised project partner forclients with challenging projectrequirements and Exyte operate in thefollowing business segments:• Advanced Technologies• Life Sciences & Chemicals• Food & Nutrition• High-Tech Infrastructure• Cleanroom Technologies &

Controlled EnvironmentsOperating since 1912, Exyte employ

over 6000 people who together delivera global turnover of over €3Billion perannum. Exyte provide clients with fullturnkey project delivery of newfacilities and the conversion andextension of existing facilities. Exyte

has a strong, mobile, global talent poolto call upon, which is furthersupported by robust internal ITplatforms that simplify projectmanagement and information sharing.With its scale, it offers inter-regionaltechnology management, subjectmatter expertise, and consultingservices.

Midlands Projects Management(MPM) Ltd. is a UK-based projectscontrols consultancy assisting Exyte inapplying Lean Constructionmethodologies and enhancing itsinternal knowledge base. MPMspecialise in project support anddelivering assistance to clients and Tier1 GC level projects on a global basis,and are currently deployed on projectcontrols and Lean initiative projects inEurope, the USA, and the Middle East.



In fast-paced construction projects, it isnot possible to manage the projectthrough the conventional methods. Ithas been observed many times thatdepleting productivity in constructionleads to rework and produces manywastages, including over-production,unnecessary transportation, workerdisplacement, unused employeecreativity, loss of focus and drive.Therefore, practical ideas andtechniques need to be used inconstruction that will help project teamsto deal with waste in construction with

the use of optimum resources, and thiscan be achieved by using LeanConstruction principles and techniques.

Exyte and MPM endeavoured toimprove the utilisation of projectresources on two separate Data Centreprojects in the Nordic region (thelocations and clients are not discloseddue to the confidential nature of theprojects).

Figure 1. Exyte Data Centre ProjectThe specific initiative sought to allow

for an overlapping of lessons learnedfrom the primary DC building, whichwas nearing energisation andcommissioning, with the initiation of

MEP installation on the second project.This challenged our ability to managetwo large-scale projects set in a toughenvironment, with one experiencedteam coming to a finish and anothernew project requiring an immediatestart.

Specifically, we were trying to changethe mindset of stakeholders that if weeducated the teams in Lean principlesand methodologies of execution therewould be a greater benefit to all. Wewould potentially be able to utilise thesame expertise on the second projectand reduce time and effort trying to on-board that skillset. The latter couldtherefore be phased in rather thanmobilise one project and then within12/24 weeks demobilise the previousproject when the skillset and expertiserequired would be almost identical. Wedeveloped a better understanding ofLast Planner® System (LPS) and of theimpacts and variables on downstreamperformance.


www.exyte.net

AUTHORS

Arfan Mirza

COMPANY OVERVIEW

Tom Griffin

Exyte, assisted by MPM, is already heavily involved in LeanConstruction methods including utilising LPS and vPlanner,for example, on a daily basis.

One of the key concerns for any large-scale project deliveryorganisation would be the ability to secure long-termexpertise and knowledge to ensure a level of consistency andcohesiveness is present amongst a team that has workedtogether on more than one project.

Exyte, whilst based at a large-scale DC project in theNordic region, and whilst working in new territory and arelatively new business stream, managed to secure a secondlarge-scale Data Centre project located in the same countrywith what seemed a perfect “dovetail scenario” of allowingExyte and MPM, plus selected subcontractors, to move to thenew site in a methodical manner.

Previous behaviours and traditional mobilisation methods


were already being actioned by regional and central offices toget teams mobilised. The focus quickly turned to a logisticalconcern, and one that needed to be managed by easingresources from one project to another whilst maintainingmomentum on closeout for the existing project and whilstallowing the right expertise to be made available for thetimely ramp-up of the new project.

A quick comparison was carried out and an agreed LeanLogistics Strategy was pencilled out in draft. Lean logistics, inthe simplest terms, refers to the method of identifying andeliminating wasteful activities from the supply chain. In thiscase, we treated our EPCM functions as components of theproject supply chain and adopted a Just In Time (JIT)approach which would enable Exyte and MPM to cut downon wasted/repeated efforts of recruiting additional orspecialised project resources in a recognised and notoriouslybusy industry and marketplace.

Figure 2. Exyte Data Centre Server Bank

The Lean Logistics Strategy Developed & DeployedStep 1 – Detailed list of activities to be executed in short,medium and long-term from the EPCM phases of the newproject. In parallel, the impact of scope creep and executing atimely closeout on the current project was carried out.

Step 2 – Traditional methods of mobilising projectresources were challenged through Kaizen cycles to see howthe process could be improved. Following on from thoseexercises, MPM proposed to Exyte that Pull and JITtechniques should be implemented, and these became thepillars of our Demobilising/Mobilising strategy.

Pull System – The concept of a pull system is afundamental pillar in a Lean approach. At a strategic level,

pull identifies the real need to deliver the product andresources to the client along with an “absolute need date”.The traditional construction process pushes the client into anoften protracted development process where risk anduncertainties are prevalent. The principle of pull involves thedecision-making ability to define quickly what the clientneeds from each phase of the project in relation to theirbusiness, and subsequently customising and delivering thoseneeds more predictably when the client requires them.

JIT – This is classified as amongst the most developed LeanConstruction tools designed to eliminate non-value-added(NVA) activities and to reduce process variability. The JITphilosophy is based on the concept that stocks/resources thatdo not bring added value to the customer before the time theyare required (internal or external) should be considered assources of wastes. So, the resource must be available onlywhen it is necessary and not sooner so as to provide comfortto the client that we would be mobilising a full team at thestart of the project.

Step 3 – A CPM schedule was created alongside a LastPlanner Pull session for the Engineering and Procurementphases, 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 theongoing project as well as the new project. Detailed forecasting,derived from detailed knowledge about resources and when bestto utilise them, had to mature from being merely speculativefigures. A simple yet effective approach for this is was tomeasure our capacity (for instance, the hours our Engineers canput in) against the demand we could see based onPDCA/Kaizen cycles and Last Planner lessons learned from thecurrent project versus the number of hours upcoming projectsrequired. That way, we confidently calculated whether we hadmore people than we had a need to mobilise or vice versa.

Step 5 – Comparisons were drawn between cycle times andcapacity utilisation of the specific members of theEngineering team from Exyte and MPM. We planned ourresources to high levels of utilisation, and theoretically had amore efficient team and system with less wasted money onpotentially unused capacity. The variables we were looking todirectly 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 parallel to implementing these Lean initiatives,management were engaged in ongoing contractual talks,estimation completion, and prioritising equipment purchases.Then, the Project Management Team (PMT) arrived at thepoint of “potentially too late to implement” the JIT approachas the initial kick-off phase of the project was prolonging andgaining little momentum in a physical sense. In an assessmentof the new project’s estimation and engineering phase, itbecame apparent that stakeholders that could influenceExyte’s ability to deliver to the proven Lean logisticstechniques of Pull and JIT sat outside Exyte’s and MPM’sremit of responsibility. Thus, our focus, and one of the mostsignificant impacts, related to collaborative engagement andonboarding 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 projectresources whilst remaining focused on client needs andproject timescale.

2)Creating a smooth workflow and eliminating the waste ofleaving potential key members of the new project in a roleserving the current clients need for comfort and stability,but once again obtaining this whilst maintainingmomentum on the existing projects close-out activities.Having the ability to engage internal resources, controlling

Exyte’s Lean processes, better planning, and visualisation allgave us better predictability and better understanding amongthe workforce about the challenges we faced and how theprocess would need to be managed across all levels of the


project organisational chart. The economic impacts fromLean Construction on sustainability are mainly related tobetter planning and involvement – with involvement leadingto better planning. The more we engaged with the relevantengineers, the ownership and appetite to participateincreased. Involvement and constant interaction led tominimised use of resources and a greater focus on quality andproductivity. This in turn led to less errors and changes,which directly led to lower costs, shorter lead time, andhigher profitability. Not to mention that the JIT techniquemeant we had the right skillset lined up to transfer across atthe time of needs rather than the client’s time of want.

Figure 3. Exyte Lean Practitioners in Harmony

Whilst the process of skillset/resource transfer wasbeginning to gather momentum, and a somewhat successfuloutcome mobilisation costs and workflow disruption wasoccurring for Exyte on the new project, we did encounter anunforeseen issue which was the human factor of the team thatremained at the existing project on the verge of close-out.This was overcome by a series of onsite discussions and townhall type meetings to explain the Lean strategy and reinforceto all project staff the importance of sustainable resourcemanagement rather than the need to adhere to traditionalknee-jerk resource allocations. The process and techniques ofthe Lean strategy were explained and a simulated roll out ofthe JIT technique was demonstrated to the project team.Exyte and MPM then took the process further by seeking tounderstand how better to learn from the impacts of currentproject staff and ensure a reduction of the found impacts wasimplemented and monitored. The most frequentlymentioned impacts were related to reduced stress and sickleave, increased productivity, more efficient use of resources,and improved quality.

By encouraging a harmony and understanding of asustainable Lean resource pool, Exyte was able to benefitfrom increased ownership, responsibility, involvement,visualisation, and improved planning. Lean Construction hasan evident impact on sustainability, but sustainability canimprove Lean Construction delivery tremendously also.


Case 9 – Roadbridge

Roadbridge has been in operation since1967, and is a Limerick-based globalcivil engineering contractor specialisingin the international delivery ofcomplete infrastructure projects acrossall sectors and for a broad range ofclients and contract conditions. Wehave built our reputation on workingcollaboratively with our clients,

offering them a quality service andproduct with genuine added value.Roadbridge is a fully resourcedcontractor. We have the experience,capability and a proven track record indelivering major projects safely, ontime, and within budget. We employover 700 people worldwide and areknown as a great employer.


OVERVIEW & BACKGROUND TO THE LEAN INITIATIVEAs part of its continuous improvementprogramme, Roadbridge introduced theconcept of Lean across the organisationthrough the “Our Lean Path” initiative.As part of this endeavour, we engagedwith LBSPartners and severalprogrammes were undertaken throughour Limerick Head Office as a startingpoint.

This case study examines the analysisundertaken in our Estimating andPurchasing Departments that we feltcould lead to less time wasted in thetendering and estimating process andmake our entire process more efficient.It was discovered that the estimating

process was being hampered by verymanual processes, leading to a lot oftime spent waiting for quotations to bereceived from suppliers. Thisinformation should be easily availablethrough our “EVision” ERP System,which is populated by the siteadministration staff across our projects.

When the ERP was analysed, it wasdiscovered that the pertinentinformation from orders on projectswas not being entered fully, and thusinformation was being lost that couldotherwise provide a valuable resource tothe estimating team.


www.roadbridge.ie

AUTHORS

Peter Byrne

In order to arrive at solutions to this problem, we decidedto use the A3 Problem Solving Method for thisundertaking.

Current ConditionAs a starting point, we looked at the current conditionsaround a typical large tender being carried out at our HeadOffice. In conjunction with the estimators involved in theprocess, a round-table discussion took place, where wedeveloped a process map of the programme. Next, thatprocess map was converted into a form of value stream mapso that it could be determined where the delays were cominginto each tender. Then, from the value stream map of theprocess, we found that on a typical 88-day large tenderprocess up to 23 days (i.e. 26% of the time) were spentwaiting on information to be received from our supply chain

in order to correctly price the project. This result came as asurprise to all involved, even the personnel closest to theprocess, as it highlighted just how much time was wasted.This result helped to develop a sense of urgency within theteam to make a change.

When investigating why the estimating team had not beenusing the ERP to source this information from our liveprojects, particularly for repetitive standard constructionmaterials, it was discovered that the estimators were havingissues logging onto the system initially, which led to thepractice of using manual excel spreadsheets in isolation ratherthan a collective system. Those who were using the ERPcomplained that the information was neither accurate nordetailed enough, and thus they got into the habit of not usingthe system. At all times throughout this process, it wasstressed to those involved that this analysis was going to becarried out in a blameless and collaborative fashion, whichencouraged open and frank discourse. This was an interestingpart of the process, as it was a major paradigm shift from ourmore traditional siloed approach to working.

An analysis of the information being inputted was carriedout so as to determine the extent of the issue within the ERP.During 2018, we conducted a Pareto Analysis on thenumbers of order entries by item type. The item type is a pre-populated items library for the user to utilise to enterinformation in a standardised format. Once we had createdthe Pareto, we then determined the 80/20 rule to see wherethe largest numbers of orders were arising.

COMPANY OVERVIEW

Joe Gilmartin

Figure 1. Large Tender High-Level Process Map


Figure 2. Pareto Analysis of Order Entries by Item TypeThe Pareto showed us that there were four types of order

entries making up the top 80% of orders during 2018.

Table 1. Findings from the Pareto Analysis of Order Entriesby Item Type

The entries for concrete and stone make perfect sense asthey are a prime constituent of any civil engineering project,but the MATR00001 entries warranted further analysis,particularly as it accounted for 12.19% of entries. It was thendiscovered that this item type had begun to be used as amiscellaneous item, and, rather than entering the correctdetail for purchase orders line-by-line, the information wasbeing added in one line, as MATR00001, which told theperson looking at the order nothing unless they could see theattached invoice from the supplier. The accounts team atHead Office would only add the invoice later, and so it wasnot always available.

A further Pareto Analysis was conducted on the projectswhere the ‘MATR00001’ item type was being used the most,to see which projects were the worst offenders and where ourefforts to provide a solution would need to be focused. ThisPareto highlighted that there were six projects thatcontributed to 80% of the orders being incorrectly added tothe system.

Figure 3. Pareto Analysis of MATR Cost Code Per Project

Goals/TargetsOnce the extent of the issue was established, it allowed theteam to develop a Gantt Chart for the implementation of asolution and for the setting of targets. The targets that wereset for the programme were as follows:• To reduce wasted estimating time over an 88-day tender by

15 days.• To reduce the use of the MATR00001 item type code to

5% from 12.19% by February 2019.• To increase confidence in the data being produced by

the ERP and utilise this information in a tendersubmission.

Root Cause AnalysisIn consultation with the estimators at Head Office and withseveral site administrators, a Root Cause Analysis and a Cause& Effect Analysis were undertaken. This was carried out as ateam event at Head Office, and again it was stressed that allviews could be discussed openly and honestly in a blamelessenvironment.

Figure 4 highlights the results of the Five Whys Root CauseAnalysis, showing that the root cause in this case wasinsufficient site administration staff in place on these busyprojects.

Figure 4. Five Why Analysis on Estimators Not Using theSystem

Cause & Effect AnalysisAs an added exercise, and to determine if the same root causewould surface, the group also carried out a Cause & EffectAnalysis, followed by Cause Screening, and this analysisflagged the same issues.

Figure 5. Cause & Effect Analysis


CountermeasuresWith several key issues identified, we could make plans forimplementation of action plans to solve the problems. Theteam, in consultation with the estimators and siteadministrators, developed a countermeasure sheet andassigned actions and action dates. Some of the suggestedactions were ultimately rejected as ideal solutions; however,the process of opening communication was a valuableexercise in and of itself.

One of the first actions was to generate a live report fromthe ERP in an excel format that the estimators could use,rather than navigating the system. This meant that they coulddo an initial analysis of the costs within the system forparticular materials quickly and see if they had sufficientinformation to proceed. The estimators favourably received

this solution. The team then met every two weeks to ensurethat action occurred in line with the programme and thatprogress occurred towards achievement of the aims of theexercise.

By bringing together the site administrators, head officeaccounts team, and estimators, we could follow through theentire process of raising orders at site level and demonstratehow that information flowed through to provide importantinformation for the estimators. It gave all parties involved abetter overview of how their actions became a vital part of thedata chain and a better understanding of one another’s roles.Several even commented on the fact that they had worked foryears in the same office with others in the team, yet they hadlittle or no appreciation for the actual roles played by theircolleagues.

LEAN INITIATIVE IMPROVEMENTS & IMPACT Some of the quick wins and achievements included:• The countermeasure sheet highlighted a deficiency in the

number of available licences for the system, so personnelwere getting frustrated at not being able to login. This ledto an automatic log-out of a user if they were idle for aperiod.

• To ensure that the numbers of concurrent users was not anissue, the ERP system licencing was split into UK andIreland licences.

• The Head Office Finance team provided additionaltraining on the use of the items library to all siteadministrators.

• System user training manuals were developed and madeavailable through use of a cloud-based system.

• Extra administration staff are now hired for new projects asthe initial mobilisation is one of the busiest periods forcreation of purchase orders.However, the biggest improvements were noted during a

follow-up analysis of a value stream map for a tender. Bybeing able to utilise the system effectively, the target ofreducing estimating time by 15-days was well and trulybeaten as it was discovered that up to 33-days could now besaved as a result.

Using this information, we calculated that this could leadto a saving in associated cost of €11,000 per estimator over atender. There are four estimators at Head Office and three

more in our regional offices, meaning a potential saving of€231,000 per year in time if each estimator were engaged inthree large tenders per year. Ultimately, this also means thatthe team can tender for more work as they have extra timeavailable, potentially leading to extra projects won in a typicalyear. This more than covers the cost of hiring one to two newsite administrators who ultimately end up adding value to thesystem themselves. The site administration staff are nowaware of the part they play in the wider organisation and howthe information they input can flow through to assist in thewinning of future work.

During 2018, a decision was made by the Board to move toa new ERP system during 2019, and, by highlighting theincorrect usage of the system during 2018, it means thatinefficient information will not be transferred over to thatnew system.

Overall, this continuous improvement process hashighlighted to us the need to challenge our actions and thehabits we fall into constantly. It was a great exercise toundertake and showed how data can be analysed effectively toreduce waste and increase efficiency. It also highlighted theneed to include those working at the actual Gemba of theparticular process being examined, and that priority has to begiven to making the process improvement meaningful forthem.


Case 10 – Collen Construction

Established in 1810, and trading as“Collen Bros” until 1984, CollenConstruction is one of the leadingconstruction firms in Ireland, and weare extremely proud of our history andreputation for building quality andexcellence. The company offers a fullrange of construction services,including management contracting,design and build, jointventure/partnering, and turnkeycontracts. We have experience in avariety of project types, including

residential, commercial, educational,retail, leisure, health, pharmaceutical,industrial, and conservation, andranging in value from under €1Millionto in excess of €300Million. We havelongstanding relationships withnumerous Clients and Consultantsbuilt up over the years, ensuring thecompany has remained at the forefrontof Irish construction for two centuries.Our Client list is testament to theexcellent service the company provideson every project.


OVERVIEW & BACKGROUND TO THE LEAN INITIATIVECollen Construction has in the pasttrialled Lean on a small scale but hassince moved strategically to a fullyintegrated Lean approach on allprojects from design stage through topractical completion. This case projectfocused on pull planning with earlycollaboration between our Client,Design Team, and Subcontractors. Theoverall outcome was extremelysuccessful with critical issues beingidentified and rectified prior to thembecoming an issue for our operationsteam.

Collen had previously adopted theLast Planner® System (LPS) on apharmaceutical project and observedpositive outcomes. Collen engaged witha new client on a fast-track data centre

in a design and built capacity, andviewed it as the perfect opportunity tofully embrace the pull planning processand engage with key stakeholders atdesign stage to gain the best possibleoutcome at operations stage.

The project chosen was a€160Million fast-track data centreproject with Collen appointed as MainContractor responsible for design andbuild. Initially we started with themaster programme with the Key andTag Milestone dates for each majorelement of works plus the equipmentinstallation. Micro Schedules from theVendors with key activities andrequirements for their supplyingEquipment were integrated into themaster programme.


www.collen.com

AUTHOR

Rebecca Reilly

Once Collen made the commitment to embrace a Leanway of thinking, there was one clear objective at theforefront, namely to create greater value for the consumerwhile using fewer resources. Collen adopted Leanprinciples to eliminate waste through all processes andincrease operational efficiency.

Collen found the Lean concept to be an excellent fitwith our company that encourages planning, change andinnovation in an ever-changing sector. In 2014, weengaged a Lean Specialist to come into the company andtrain our senior managers, both onsite and in the office,on LPS, with 20 members of staff receiving full 5-daytraining on LPS. The training was very successful as itencompassed all the elements that are standard practice toCollen and formalised these elements into a usabletemplate.

Collen’s greatest strength is one that has been forged overdecades “To foster a collaborative one team approach andbuild lasting relationships with loyalty at the core”. Withthis already well embedded in the company, the shift to

Lean and Pull Planning at project level was well received.

Figure 1. LPS Planning at Collen Construction

Common Data EnvironmentThe first element reviewed was information flow. Historicallyin the construction sector, the greatest barrier is the flow and

COMPANY OVERVIEW


approval of information at early stages. With lead-in timesonsite being reduced, there is not always time to put thenecessary controls in place to ensure information is correct bythe time it gets to the construction phase. This was anelement Collen were keen to get right from the start.

The Collen team are very familiar with cloud-basedplatforms for integrated document control and transmission.The software Collen employ is “Viewpoint” (formerly“4Projects”) which is similar to several other software systemson the market in recent years. This platform facilitated full andcoherent collaboration with all key stakeholders in the process.It encouraged transparency towards critical project deliverablesfor all stakeholders, and, as a highly configurable platform, wasamended to meet specific project demands, requirements, andconstraints. The platform promoted efficiency with correctinformation retrieval, succession, and validation. It also droveconsistency in quality protocols and standards. Ultimately,Viewpoint removed duplication and created transparency rightthrough the project from feasibility through to commissioningand validation.

The most difficult barrier was to onboard all key stakeholdersto trust the system and share information through it ratherthan reverting to traditional outlook emails for sharing ofinformation. Our Design Manager on the project, along withthe entire Collen team, consistently encouraged the use ofViewpoint and assisted any stakeholder who was unsure of howto use the system.

Figure 2. Collaboration Makes the Difference at CollenConstruction

Full training was carried out with each stakeholder by ourDocument Controller on the file structure, namely, how toretrieve, upload, and amend information on the platform. Asthe majority of our subcontractors work across all projects, thistraining proved invaluable and increased usage of Viewpointwas witnessed across all projects.

Once we had all stakeholders on board, the naturalprogression was to integrate our Pre-Construction Services withthe Lean approach in mind and examine how we couldmaximise value whilst minimising waste.

CommunicationCommunication is key to the success of Lean Construction.From the design stage, Collen ensured open lines ofcommunication between all stakeholders, ensuring issues weremitigated prior to them arising onsite. Weekly Lean/DesignTeam meetings were held onsite, and, once the design wasdeveloped enough, our first LPS session was held onsite. Thisinvolved all key stakeholders and was one of the most beneficialmeetings on our project schedule. Key milestones were setwhich allowed Collen and all other stakeholders to clearly

identify critical times onsite and mitigate and plan for anyissues that may arise. The session also gave ownership to allstakeholders of their key dates and commitments.

BIMAs part of the Lean initiative, Collen has fully embraced theBIM process and embedded it into every aspect of our dailyactivities. At a pre-planning/design stage, we have found BIMto be the last word from a visualisation perspective to clashdetection. It is imperative that subcontractors are engaged froman early stage to ensure they are fully BIM-compliant andunderstand the importance of the process. Our trusted list ofBIM-compliant subcontractors is paramount to the success offull BIM implementation on any project.

Figure 3. BIM at the Gemba Coalface

Housekeeping & 5SCollen Construction prides itself on its strong approach tohousekeeping onsite, and all materials must be stored correctly.This in turn avoids incidents, materials being damaged, andloss of control of materials onsite. It has also assisted Collen inreducing slips, trip, and falls onsite, and improved Safetyacross all projects. The 5S approach has brought housekeepingto the next level onsite and assisted our operations team greatlywith the standardised approach it offers.

Preplanning/ForecastingWeekly design team meetings were held to allow allstakeholders to review current works onsite and compile 4, 8,and 12 week lookahead to identify and mitigate against anyissues and solve them before they affected the programme. Amonthly pull planning session was held to review previouslookahead and plan for the next 4, 8 and 12 weeks. Thissystem proved invaluable as subcontractors felt there was moretransparency and ownership of the project than under thetraditional siloed approach.

Eliminate WasteThe key objective was to eliminate waste in processes, materials,and time from pre-construction through to practical completion.All stages of construction were fully designed in BIM prior tothe build commencing onsite. All models were coordinated andfederated by the inhouse Collen BIM team. Weekly BIMcoordination/design meetings were held onsite where all partieswould interrogate the models to ensure they were advanced. TheLogistics Manager attended all meetings to ensure the logisticsschedule aligned with the 4, 8 and 12 week lookahead.Lookahead lead-in items were highlighted early, and progressupdates were reported monthly at the pull planning meetings.


LEAN INITIATIVE IMPROVEMENTS & IMPACT The overall implementation of a Lean approach to our DataCentre Project proved to be critical as we moved towardspractical completion. The most notable improvement wasthrough the utilisation of our Common Data Environment. Tohave a single source for all information from pre-constructionthrough to practical completion was invaluable when it came tocarrying out due diligence on our Handover/Safety File.

The compilation of the handover file documentation provedseamless through the Lean approach to doing it right first time(RFT). Traditionally, information given at Design stage throughdesign team specifications, and requested at Tender stage fromthe Quantity Surveyors, was requested again at Submittals stagethrough our operations team onsite, and again at PracticalCompletion stage by our Digital Safety Provider. Using Leantechniques, we were able to direct our digital safety file providerstraight to Viewpoint where they could retrieve approvedinformation for each element of the project. This informationhad been previously approved by the design team through thesubmittals and verified through the Quality Assurance systemonsite. This one change alone eliminated hours of recheckingdocumentation that had already been verified by Collen, theDesign Team, and Subcontractors.

Figure 4. Collen Construction Factory Witness TestingAnother major benefit of the collaborative Lean approach was

the increased participation and communication between ourdesign team and subcontractors. Collen witnessed much greatercollaboration and ownership from subcontractors through theutilisation of the pull planning method. Traditionally, dates slipand milestones are not met, but through the monthly pullplanning lookaheads subcontractors felt more accountable toother trades as they had a greater understanding of how theirdelays impacted other trades. Through working togethertowards a common objective, stakeholders did not just focus ontheir own objectives but rather on the project objectives as awhole. When issues were identified, all stakeholders cametogether to find a solution rather than all stakeholders workingin silo with minimal effect. Alone we can do so little, buttogether we can achieve so much.

The final most measurable impact of the Lean approach wasthe full utilisation of BIM, and BIM collaboration seamlesslyoccurred across all disciplines within the project. Our inhouseBIM coordinator federated all models to ensure clashes were

identified early and mitigation measures put in place. Cloudaccess also allowed project teams to take the office to the field,with access to a live 3D model onsite.

By using BIM, our design team could plan and visualise theentire project during preconstruction and before a shovel hit theground. These visualisations also allowed clients to experiencewhat the space would look like, offering the ability to makechanges before construction started. By having a greateroverview from the beginning, it minimised expensive and time-consuming changes in the construction stage of the project.

Elimination of waste was realised through improvedcommunication and the integration of standard operatingprocedures (SOPs). By challenging the traditional approachthrough the integration of new technology into SOPs, wastagein the processes were identified and removed. Closercollaboration with contractors led to fewer overall variations andfewer opportunities for claims as information was correct goingout to tender packages. Improved overview of the project beforecommencing onsite allowed for increased time forprefabrication and reduced waste on unused materials onsite.

Modular prefabricated elements were utilised to their fullpotential on this project, and they greatly improved the qualityof the finished project and safety onsite as they were fabricatedin a factory environment rather than the traditionalconstruction site environment. BIM data greatly assisted in themodularisation process, and it was used to instantly generateproduction drawings for manufacturing purposes, allowing forincreased use of prefabrication and modular constructiontechnology. By designing, detailing, and building offsite in acontrolled environment, waste was diminished, efficiencyincreased, and labour and material costs reduced.

In the same way that many of these benefits save money, theysaved time by reducing the time of project cycles andeliminating construction schedule setbacks. BIM allowed designand documentation to be done at the same time, and fordocumentation to be easily changed to adapt to newinformation such as site conditions. Schedules were plannedmore accurately and communicated exactly, and the improvedcoordination assisted the project by completing on time or early.

Overall, we could not recommend the Lean approach highlyenough. Whilst some of our team were sceptical to start with,and they viewed Lean as a manufacturing-based tool, they soonrealised it was a vital tool required for the ever-changing worldof construction.

Figure 5. Collen Construction Lean Practitioners


Case 11 – Sheahan & Collins Construction

Sheahan & Collins Construction (S&C)is a young construction companyoffering Main Contracting, Fit-out/Refurbishment, Pre-Construction,and Project Supervisor ConstructionStage (PSCS) services operating in thebroader commercial sector, includinghotels, nursing homes, multi-unitaccommodation developments, andoffice buildings. S&C is driven to offer

innovative, solutions-based methods toits projects in the safest possible manner.Motivated by ‘building better throughcollaboration’ S&C place emphasis onan inclusive non-silo approach toproject delivery and is dedicated toapplying Lean Construction principlesand methods in-house and across itssupply chain.


OVERVIEW & BACKGROUND TO THE LEAN INITIATIVEThe initiative for Lean was two-fold.Firstly, as a young company, theopportunity presented itself to ‘start aswe intend to go on’ and commence thecompany’s Lean journey during thecompany’s infancy, building systemswith Lean Construction in mind andincorporating Lean methods into ourmanagement systems. Secondly, duringthe early stages of the Dublin Cityproject which is the focus of this casestudy, the need to apply a differentapproach to project delivery wasrecognised in order to successfully handover the project to the client ahead ofthe new academic year in September2018.

This was based on the obviouschallenges such a project presented,plus experience – the same approach toproject delivery typically led to similaroutcomes, thereby highlighting the

need for a different approach to effectthe required outcome. The projectconsisted of a Design & Build (D&B)purpose-built student accommodation(PBSA) development in Dublin Citycomprising a 6-storey over-basementbuilding delivering 128 bed spaces andancillary spaces in a very compact siteand with much of the layouts governedby existing planning permission. Thedevelopment also utilised the entirefootprint of the site, which only leftpublic spaces remaining for stagingconstruction works. Apart from thenormal logistical challenges of such aninner-city site, including being on amain thoroughfare adjacent to a largeschool plus a significantly largerconstruction site next door, thebuilding’s four separate blocks andcores added to the significant challengeof making everything fit.


www.sheahancollinsconstruction.com

AUTHORS

Eoin Curham

The building design and internal floor layouts went througha number of iterations to optimise the cluster apartmentarrangements so as to ensure rooms were adequately sizedwith efficient layouts, and also to address the limited floor-to-ceiling height for services routes and installations (the site wasacquired with planning and thus increasing the building orfloor-to-ceiling heights was not an option).

It was recognised early in the process that the project wouldtherefore present certain challenges from both design andconstruction perspectives as noted above, as well as dealingwith day-to-day construction operations and activities. S&Cidentified the opportunity to implement certain LeanConstruction processes and tools to address or assist with theabove. While some members of the project team were awareof or had prior experience in Lean, the majority of the team,including key trade partners, were not familiar with orexperienced in Lean. The project commenced in 2017 andS&C quickly followed with the procurement of key tradepartners (structure, envelope works, M&E servicesinstallations, lifts, interior fit-out), and with theseappointments the Lean initiative commenced in earnest.

The main tools and techniques implemented were:

1.Early engagement of key trade partners.2.Structured M&E design coordination meetings (design

consulting engineers, specialist contractors, and maincontractor in attendance to negate working in silos).

3.Implementation of Last Planner® System (LPS) forschedule management.

Early Engagement of Key Trade PartnersThis led to overall improvement of project team performanceover the course of the project. It also fostered a real culture ofa project team which was evident to newcomers to the team.As trades joined the Project, evidence of an integratedapproach rather than a siloed or segregated approach wasconfirmed.

The main parties were aligned to the client and projectgoals from the outset, leading to a more united effort inachieving this. Key players – the parties who ultimatelyinfluence the outcome of the project and hold responsibilityfor its delivery – understanding the project goals and client’scritical success factors earlier than normal enhanced thelikelihood of those success factors being achieved.

There was expert input into design of critical items at the

COMPANY OVERVIEW

Conan Doyle


beginning of the design process, which led to improveddesign through enhanced coordination. Adopting theapproach of ‘the answer is in the room’, all parties playedtheir part in developing a workable design at the early stagesof the project.

There was better coordination of design, leading toimproved construction (safety, time, budget), reduced re-work, and less waste. Buildability and coordination challengeswere dealt with via optioneering on exploring budgets,current technologies, materials and systems, service routes,and so on. All of this led to safer construction, improvedproductivity, and less waste.

It helped establish a more collaborative environment for theproject with less confrontation and a greater willingness toaddress the issues via collective effort. This helped foster theteam environment where there was genuine interest andunderstanding of each other’s work and scope. The impact ofeach on the other became clearer with improved effort tomake it all work.

It enabled key trade partners to engage with their respectivesupply chains earlier and in focusing on procurement,material, and equipment options, thus resulting in bettervalue for the project.

Structured M&E Design Coordination MeetingsWhile detailed M&E services coordination meetings are astandard process on construction projects, S&C and the teamidentified this as an area that required particular attention.Given the aforementioned challenges presented by thebuilding structure (floor-to-floor height, block and corearrangement), the sizing and routing of M&E servicesthroughout the floors and in the main plant rooms located inthe basement required significant effort from all parties tomake the M&E systems work.

The architects and structural engineers used BIM for thebuilding design, and this model was then shared with theM&E consultants and contractors for their systems to beinputted. This allowed sizing and routing of key services tobe determined accurately, as well as locating key equipmentin limited spaces. Front-end design and constructionplanning meetings were held by the project team whereM&E services designs were worked through the project BIMmodel, with issues and clash detection worked through toavoid issues on site during the build.

When the M&E contractors commenced on site, weeklyteam meetings were held on site to maintain the collectiveeffort though design development and to also facilitateGemba Walks to review and address any design, spatial, orbuildability issues that presented. Whilst not unique inhaving these meetings on site, the starting of the process asearly as possible, and continuing on throughout the project,created and fostered the integrated approach with sharedresponsibility for addressing any issues and finding workablesolutions promptly.

Implementation of Last Planner System® (LPS) for ScheduleManagementS&C engaged a Lean Construction Ireland (LCi)commended consultant for introductory training on LeanConstruction and LPS with the key trade partners on site.This was aimed at firstly giving background to Lean

Construction to help the project team get an understandingof Lean thinking and processes, and secondly to put in placea structure and process to assist in the management ofschedule and project delivery.

Figure 1. Project Team Trained on Lean Construction andLPS

The focus on LPS came from a combination of research onits implementation, traction within the local sector on its useand reported success, and a clear understanding by S&C thattraditional Critical Path Method (CPM) scheduling methodsare limited due to the following:• Inadequate of input or buy-in by trade supervisors.• Lack of understanding of the project plan as presented on

Gantt charts, etc.• Absence of clear tracking of progress on day-to-day or

week-to-week as work is detached from the CPM schedule.S&C understood and implemented the following five

elements of LPS:1. Master scheduling – setting milestones and identification of long lead items (what should be done).2. Pull Planning – specifies work handoffs and identifiesconflicts that will impact work (what can be done).3. Make Work Ready Planning – utilising lookaheadplanning to confirm work is ready for installation (whatwill be done).4. Weekly Work Plan (WWP) – team makescommitments to perform defined work in a specificmanner (what the team will do).5. Learning – measuring percent plan complete (PPC) andconducting root cause analysis of failure, and conductinglessons learned for future improvements.

Figure 2. Pull Plan for Mock-Up SuiteWith considerable effort over the course of the project, the

team realised the benefit of LPS with the process providing


ongoing opportunity for rich learning. The commitmentsmade in WWPs as a result of a collaborative process becamemore honest and meaningful, with genuine efforts to

identify/remove constraints, and a keenness to have honestconversations when planned tasks were not completed forlearning opportunities.

LEAN INITIATIVE IMPROVEMENTS & IMPACT The project was completed on time and within budget, withPractical Completion achieved July 2018 in advance of thestart of the new academic year, thereby allowing the clientrequisite time to hire and train key staff ahead of a busyopening period.

Schedule ImprovementsPractical Completion was achieved in 42 weeks fromcompletion of the ground floor slab (completion of 6-storeystructure, envelope, internal fit-out of 128 bedrooms,ancillary spaces) and this could not have been achieved inthat timeframe if LPS had not been used. LPS negated earlierproject delays on site and facilitated project completionthrough primarily normal working hours, withoutsignificantly increasing crew sizes.

Lessons LearnedA Lessons Learned session held with key members of theproject team (client, design consultants, key trade partners,main contractor) yielded some valuable findings along withoverwhelming endorsement of the Lean initiativeundertaken. The highlights regarding improvements andimpact were the improved quality and safety, collaborativeapproach to teamwork, the use of LPS, the resultant changein people’s mindset, and an improved project team feelingoverall.

Last Planner® SystemWith LPS, the Villego® simulation training was a seminalmoment in people realising the positive impact of effectivecommunication and working together. This contributedsignificantly to the change in mindset on the project, and ithad optimal impact as it occurred at the outset of the Leanjourney.

Figure 3. Villego® Training with Key Trade PartnersAlso, the introduction of Pull Planning led to improved

and consistent flow of work, enabling confidence to growamongst the trades with regard to schedule commitmentsbeing made. Trades were also able to maintain smaller crewsizes as a result of the improved flow.

Figure 4. Pull Plan for Part of the Works

Safety and Quality ImprovementsThe benefit of improved flow area-to-area and floor-to-floorresulted in work being carried out much more safely. Whilepressure remained to deliver, it was in a controlled fashiondue to reliable commitments on productivity being made andachieved. This also improved quality with a ‘right first time’approach being encouraged throughout and achieved for themost part. Re-work rates were reduced, again improving flowand also reducing costs and waste throughout.

Early Engagement BenefitsAs noted above, the goals of early engagement of the projectteam were evidenced in the integrated and collaborativeapproach. Improved daily and weekly communication was assignificant as it was simple – people talked and tradessupervisors engaged effectively on a daily basis. Morninghuddles were anticipated and attended consistently in largenumbers as their benefit quickly became apparent to all.Questions were asked of each other to gain an understandingof what the other needed and how they could be assisted intheir work.

Integrated/Non-Silo WorkingThe electrical contractor’s project manager noted it was thefirst project he worked on in a non-silo environment. As aresult, he now approaches work with a different mindset.This was echoed by the mechanical contractor, who remarkedit was the best project he had experienced from a sitecommunication perspective. This is not to say there were notproblems, delays or site issues, but rather that the differenceon this project was the approach to dealing with each of theseissues as and when they arose. People offered help, expertise,solutions, support, ideas – a problem became a team problemand a solution came from the team for the team.


Long-Lasting Impact and the Future of Lean at S&CThe impact of the Lean initiative was immediate on theproject with enthusiasm and buy-in evident from the initialtraining. It should be noted that to maintain the initialimpetus, a significant and concerted effort by the projectteam was required. Again, it should be noted that this wasnot without challenge and periodic ‘recalibration’ of theeffort was required – stock taken, opinions and ideas given,processes tweaked, and so on.

Long-term impact has materialised in the form of S&Cnow deploying Lean as one of its core management systems.It has recently been successfully deployed on a hotelrefurbishment project with some of the same project teammembers, and is becoming embedded within the group andsome of our key trade partners. Also, a culture oforganisational continuous improvement has evolved on theback of the Lean initiative, with everyone in the groupencouraged to contribute to the enhancement of theprocesses. The target future state is that S&C is recognisedfor Lean project delivery with a solid core set of processesdeployed on each project, and we become a contractor ofchoice for our clients based on track record, and for key trade

partners based on an integrated and collaborative teamapproach to project delivery.Key Benefits and OutcomesSome key benefits and outcomes arising from the Leaninitiative are:• Understanding and appreciation of the what Lean is and

how it can be applied to have positive impact on aconstruction project.

• Positive change in mindset of project participants –integrated, non-silo approach, while having an awareness ofwaste.

• Active participation in collaborative planning and problemsolving.

• Buy-in to daily collaboration (morning huddles) andweekly LPS meetings based on evidential benefits to themanagement of the project.

• Key trade partners have embraced the learning and thetools used on the project, and are implementing on newprojects.

• Key trade partners are adopting Lean principles withintheir own organisations as a result of their experience onthe project.


Case 12 – Clancy

Founded by Mr. John Clancy in 1947,Clancy is an indigenous Irish companythat enjoys three generations ofcontinual development. Today thecompany has developed into a strongand innovative organisation, with vastexperience in all sectors of theconstruction industry throughoutIreland. Safety is paramount to all work

we engage in and we are proud to beSafe T Certified. Investment andimplementation in areas such as BIMand Lean Construction have propelledClancy forward, and have given thecompany the platform to become oneof the leading contractors in thecountry.C O M P A N Y W E B S I T E

OVERVIEW & BACKGROUND TO THE LEAN INITIATIVEClancy has been in the constructionbusiness since 1947 and has constantlyevolved over the years. Lean thinking,tools and techniques have beenintroduced to the Clancy team since2014. This transformation happenedgradually at first and it has nowexpanded to the point where it isgenerating its own momentum. LeanConstruction is now a core part of howwe approach each project.

Part of our mission is to continuouslyimprove and adapt to the newestindustry standards and technologies

available to the construction industry.This is driven by the young andenergetic team within the company andguided by the excellent resourcesprovided by Lean Construction Ireland.

Change can be hard to implementsuccessfully and at Clancy the changemanagement focusses on three keyelements: People, Process, andTechnology (PPT). We recognise thatfocus needs to be put on these threeareas in order to continuously improveour processes.


https://clancy.ie/

AUTHORS

Aidan Maher

Over the past number of years, Clancy has been looking forways to reduce waste across all its construction sites toimprove overall project outcomes. Recent Lean initiativesinclude:

People• Creation of the Continuous Improvement Committee• Introduction of BIM, Lean and Last Planner Champions

throughout the company

Process• Overhaul of the Content Management System• Improved internal auditing of processes, improved “lessons

learned” procedures• Improved visual communication

Technology• Rollout of new software systems, including: “BIM 360”,

“Conquest”, “Bluebeam” Hilti “On!Track”• Additional hardware including robotic total stations, and

mobile devices.All of these initiatives are designed to improve collaboration

and minimise waste, thus allowing us to deliver projectsbetter, faster, together.

The Current IssueWhile many improvements have been made in recent years,internal research from the Continuous ImprovementCommittee showed that programme over-runs remained a

significant contributory factor to poor project performance.In particular, the committee zoned in on some keyperformance indicators (KPIs) across the projects, namely:• Project Type• Project Value• Project Planned PC date• Project Actual PC date• Requests for Further Information (RFIs) generated per

project quartile• Number of defects identified by the project architect

The committee analysed these KPIs, wastes, and the variousroot causes across multiple projects and concluded that theexisting forward planning techniques were no longersufficient to meet performance targets.

Traditionally, projects had been managed using a top-dohierarchical approach to resource allocation and planning.The project manager on each site would create a fortnightlylook-ahead programme outlining what each subcontractorwas to deliver in a given period. This meant that resourcesweren’t always allocated appropriately, and milestones weren’talways met on time. If a subcontractor didn’t achieve theirtargets it often led to waiting and rework waste.

The traditional template used did not encourage theplanner to review the resources required or to confirm whatpercentage of the overall task was to be complete at any giventime. The template also failed to prompt the question for“Make Ready Needs” which is fundamental to any plannedtask being completed. While this is a simple question, it isone that may be overlooked amidst the many tasks that a

COMPANY OVERVIEW

Aidan Clancy

Following the company wide rollout of LPS, research wasundertaken to quantify the impacts on project outcomes andthe specific impact on programme and defect performance.The research covers data from the 15 most recent projectscompleted.

These projects vary in scope, size, and location, but whenaggregated, allow us to assess the impact of LPS under anumber of headings. Each construction project has its ownunique challenges but by controlling for project value we canmake meaningful comparisons across different projects. Fourof these were completed using LPS and the remainder werecompleted using traditional project management techniques.

The analysis shows that LPS contributed to:• 27% reduction in programme over runs; and• 32% reduction in defects.

RFIsOne of the benefits of LPS is that all stakeholders areinvolved. This allows the right people to raise queries at theearliest possible time. To assess the impact of this, we dividedeach project into quartiles. This allowed us to understandwhat stages queries were generated on site and if LPS wasleading to earlier answers. The results are shown in Figure 1.

Analysis of the data shows that the actual quantum of RFIsgenerated has increased on the four LPS projects. The criticalfinding here though is not the volume of RFIs, but thetiming of them. There is a clear shift towards submittingmore RFIs and submitting them earlier in the project cycle.

This graph is evidence of a clear shift in the mindset of theconstruction teams. By increasing the forward planning inthe earlier stages of a project, more resources are freed up to

focus on programme and quality as the project reachesconclusion. This is also very positive for design teams andclients 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, reworkand over-processing. The impact of this is further seen in thefollowing results.

ProgrammeProgramme was analysed by comparing the planned PracticalCompletion (PC) date to the actual PC date. Figure 2 showsthat the introduction of LPS contributed to a 27% reductionin programme delays across all projects.


project manager must carry out on any given day. Thetemplate also lacked an adequate review function, where aproject manager must “look back” and assess if plannedworks were completed on time.

Another area identified for improvement was the timelyissuing of RFIs to the design team. The traditional projectmanagement techniques generated waiting waste and poorworkflow.

The ProposalThis analysis, combined with recent successful trials of theLast Planner System (LPS), lead to the committeerecommending the roll out of LPS on all sites. LPS is analternative to the traditional method of project planning.Traditional methods of construction were driven onproductivity versus time where critical path tasks weremonitored closely and stakeholders working on the projectworked in silos.

LPS takes a holistic approach to a project wherestakeholders are asked to work in collaboration to ensureworkflow and better transitions between each trade. Wordssuch as Plan, Do, Check, and Act are used to describe aprocess within the LPS system where these actions arerequired on a continuous basis during the project duration.

Planning refers to a review of the master programme, a sixweek look-ahead programme, pull planning sessions, andfinally the fortnightly programme. Once these are in place,

the requirement to complete the works as planned can takeplace and agreed milestones can be met. It is critical to reviewthe plan to ensure compliance and close out any incompleteworks.

Constant review of future works allows project teams lookahead and identify potential stumbling blocks in time toaddress them. By issuing RFIs early in the project cycle,waiting and reworking can be minimised. When this reviewprocess is in place it allows design teams and clients to keepahead of the construction works. It also fosters a betterworking relationship between the design team and contractor,which in turn allows a project run smoother.

ImplementationThe LPS system has now been rolled out across all Clancysites. LPS training was completed by several senior managerswho now act as champions within the company. A standardwish list to implement the Clancy LPS system was created tosimplify the set-up stage for each project. New templates suchas the fortnightly programme and daily white board meetingswere created, and site teams have been trained to use thesesuccessfully.

The LPS system has been backed by Clancy seniormanagement and its significance for the overall functioningof the company has been highlighted during companymanagement meetings. This has been another effectiveelement for the implementation process.

LEAN INITIATIVE IMPROVEMENTS & IMPACT

Figure 1. Impact of LPS on RFI Timing


Figure 2. Impact of LPS on ProgrammeWhile there are still delays, it is clear that there has been a

significant improvement within the projects using LPS. Itshould also be stated that no continuous improvementproject occurs in isolation, so one would expect that thisimprovement is also generated in part by improvedprocedures and systems generally, particularly increased use ofBIM360 by project teams.

DefectsThe final metric examined was the number of defects, in theform of snags, identified by the lead architect. This is a wide-ranging metric that helps us understand how well a projectwas managed throughout. Commitment to getting a taskdone right first time (RFT) is a key element in minimisingwaste in any project.

Figure 3 demonstrates a 32% reduction in defects across allprojects. As with the programme impact, this cannot be saidto be solely due to LPS, however, it is undoubtedly a

significant contributory factor. BIM360 has been used on allLPS projects and this also helps to more efficiently identifyactions and close-out on quality issues as early as possible.This, in conjunction with the fortnightly programme, hashad a huge impact on defects. Site teams must report onpercentage complete and make ready needs which ensuresthat ongoing works are only removed from the programmewhen they are 100% complete. These reports are reviewed bysenior managers within the company to track each site’sprogress.

Figure 3. Impact of LPS on Defects

ConclusionThe metrics and outcomes presented show a clearjustification for the continued use of LPS within thecompany. As more contractors embrace the system, and asmore subcontractors become familiar with it, there is scopefor ongoing gains for all stakeholders.


Case 13 – Alucraft

Alucraft has a longstanding history ofdelivering exceptional architecturalglazed façades in both Ireland and theUK. We work in tandem withvisionaries in architecture andconstruction from the conception stagethrough to project handover, providingcost plans, design, engineering,manufacturing, installation andmaintenance of our façade systems tomeet the aspirations of our client’s

design intent and quality finish.Operating since 1975, and with aturnover of circa €44Million in 2018,we currently employ over 180 acrossIreland, the UK, Poland and thePhilippines. Our systems includeUnitised and Stick Curtain Walling,Roof-Glazing, Point-Fixed andStructural Glazing, Windows, Doors,and Cladding Solutions.C O M P A N Y W E B S I T E

OVERVIEW & BACKGROUND TO THE LEAN INITIATIVEThis case study outlines the Leanjourney within Alucraft Ireland.Alucraft’s vision is “to be the specialistfaçade contractor and employer ofchoice in Ireland and the UnitedKingdom”. Having experienced a hugegrowth spurt in the last two years, itwas imperative that we reviewed thefoundations on which our company’ssuccess is founded. We thereforedecided to apply Lean thinking as werecognised areas within our businessthat would benefit from itsimplementation along with the value-add to our clients.

Our Lean journey commenced whenwe engaged with BPI Services to focusmanagement on their aspirations forAlucraft. This involved revaluating theMission, Vision and Values, and fromthere strategic goals were developed. Wefocused on three key areas which are

paramount to our vision; People,Growth, and Delivery. We identifiedkey projects, and from there a MasterContinuous Improvement (CI) Planwas set out for 2018/2019. We appliedthe DMAIC methodology across all theidentified projects: Define, Measure,Analyse, Improve, Control.

Projects implemented and achieved in2018 include:• Skills Matrix Development• Streamlining Flow of Information and

Processes from Design Stage toManufacturing

• Implementing a Graduate Programme• Investment in 3D Software• Review of Annual Leave• Standardised Estimating Practices• Review of Residential Market

Opportunities• Alucraft CWCT Tested Rainscreen

System


www.alucraftgroup.com

AUTHORS

Áine Hargadon

Skills Matrix Development As the headcount in Alucraft has almost doubled in the last2-3 years, it had become harder to keep track of the requiredskills, existing skills, and skill gaps in our company. At thebeginning of 2018 we had no standardised method foranalysing skills, and this left us with the possibility ofemployee skills being under-utilised and a number ofdepartments with skill gaps. Our goal for this project was todevelop a process to identify the gaps and to develop a visualskills matrix graphic. An internal team was set up withmembers from an initial three departments which were totrial the matrix: Production, Design, and Site. OurProduction Manager commenced mapping his team with rolespecific skills and populated a matrix. From there the projectmoved to our Design team with the same skills matrixtemplate utilised under new headings, and finally our Sitedepartment was reviewed. The project ran smoothly until wereviewed sub-contractor skills – feedback was populated for anumber of sites but was difficult when the sub-contracted

employees on a site changed frequently. As such, it wasdecided to modify the scope of the project and remove sub-contractors, focusing solely on direct site employees. Theproject resulted in a visual aid where gaps are easily identified,it is easy to assess what level an employee is currently at, andit highlights areas where further training and education areneeded. This paved the way for a personal trainingdevelopment plan to be implemented for each employee.

Streamlining Flow of Information and Processes from DesignStage to ManufacturingThis project involved a cross-functional group fromProduction and Design working together to, firstly, gain anunderstanding of the unitised project they were embarkingupon. Secondly, this team needed to develop a suitable wayto track the progress of information and process from thestart to project completion. This team used a unique “Post-it”planning process to assist this, hosting weekly meetings onthe unitised project to gain a status. This mechanism allowed

COMPANY OVERVIEW

Susan Clancy


the team to work really well collaboratively, and like manyother teams they went through the stages of teamdevelopment, Forming, Storming, Norming to reach anincredible Performing stage. This visual tracking system notonly allowed the team to communicate more, understandeach other’s roles and support one another, but it also allowedthe team to meet, and in some cases, exceed their deliverytimeframes and meet their invoice target each month. Theteam have adopted this approach so much that they decidedto extend this methodology to all their projects goingforward.

Figure 2. Streamlining Flow of Information and Processes CITeam

Implementing a Graduate ProgrammeAs a specialist sub-contractor, we face challenges in attractingyoung emerging talent to our company with stiff competitionfrom main contractors and leading consulting firms. Due tothe recession, many potential employees emigrated or leftconstruction related careers. This left a void and affected ourability to recruit new and emerging talent, in particular forour Design Office. To tackle this problem, we initially set upa team to brainstorm how we would attract graduates to ourcompany. From our brainstorm we developed an action plan.

The project involved relationship building with specificcolleges in Ireland where prospective employees are currentlyin education. We reached out to specific departments and

organised presentations with second- and third-year studentswith the aim of recruiting two summer interns for 2018 andtwo graduates for September 2019. We also attended careerdays and graduate fairs to expand the recruitment net and tobuild brand recognition within the third level sphere. A keymeasure of success was the number of applicants we receivedwhich grew from 9 for our 2018 Summer Internship to 90for our 2019 Graduate Programme, an increase of 900%.

Figure 3. Alucraft Stand at Grad Ireland 2018

Investment in 3D SoftwareWe commenced this project when we recognised thepotential value-add for our clients. In this ever-evolvingmarket, our clients were focusing more and more on 3Dmodelling and visualisation, and we wanted to deliver aseamless mechanism to bring our clients through our façadedesign. The project commenced with a design capabilitiesanalysis where our current software was reviewed, and a costand capabilities comparison was carried out for potential 3Dsoftware. We had to determine if the 3D software could beintegrated across the three design stages within thedepartment – Design for Architecture (DFA), Design forProduction (DFP), and Design for Pressings (DFPP) – andtherefore trialled it on complex parts of the façade on aproject. We ran this trial in conjunction with the leadarchitects on a specific project, and on the back of its successwe rolled out our 3D modelling to other ongoing projects.The project had dual benefits:• internally it meant we invested heavily in our employees;

and• externally we are meeting and exceeding the expectations of

our clients. We now have over 50% of our design office fully

operational on BIM 3D software. Our strategy is to have a‘cradle to grave’ suite of 3D software that will satisfy theneeds of our clients.

Review of Annual Leave Historically, all Alucraft employees followed the holidayschedule set out by the Construction Industry Federation(CIF) which meant that the company shut down for thetwo set weeks during summer. Listening to the voices ofour employees, a request was submitted to review thispractice and a CI committee was set up. The committeecomprised of individuals from each department across the

Figure 1. Master CIP Tracker


company and they were tasked with the objective ofdeveloping an annual leave policy which met the needs ofthe individual and the business. As part of the analysis andbenchmarking activity, the CIF and other companies ofsimilar size within the industry were contacted to get anunderstanding of annual leave practices elsewhere. A costcomparison analysis was then carried out and a mock annualleave schedule was set up for a specific department to showthe feasibility of flexibility of annual leave. The proposal wascreated and presented to management for approvalincorporating a number of guidelines for the change ofpolicy. Management agreed to a year trial for 2019.

Standardised Estimating PracticesWhile carrying out a Gemba walk of a project lifecycle, weidentified the handover process from the estimatingdepartment as being an area where significant value couldbe added. The current handover system did not cover allthe requirements of the individual departments that reliedon this process to fully set out their scope of works. Therewas also a need to reduce post-handover queries.

The project commenced with a review of eachdepartment’s requirements. Brainstorming sessions wereheld and requirements were defined and prioritised. Thetendering procedure was also reviewed in order tostreamline information for the handover document. Whenthe various feedback was collated, the resulting newhandover document was trailed on a medium-sized project.Further tweaks were made to the layout and information,and a final handover document was rolled out for a large-scale project. Feedback from the brainstorming team hasbeen very positive and post-handover queries havesignificantly reduced by 70%.

Review of Residential Market OpportunitiesWe identified this project as being business critical duringthe CI process as we recognised the need to have a morebalanced business portfolio of residential and commercial

projects. The following steps were carried out:1.The project commenced with a review of the market

growth and also required a better understanding of boththe Irish and UK market, suppliers and their offering.

2.We defined a specific number of screens that would bemost likely used on high-end to mid-range residentialand industrial projects.

3.From there we chose several system suppliers who werequested to complete a questionnaire based on aperformance matrix. The evaluation criteria includedboth technical and commercial criteria along with theaccompanied support provision from the suppliers. On analysing the residential market, we identified:

• the differentials associated with this sector comparedwith commercial projects; and

• site requirements, installation timeline, contractmanagement, approval processes and legislationdifferences between Ireland and the UK. We are now in a position where we know the exact type

of project we want to tender for in the residential marketand our preferred supplier network.

Alucraft CWTC (Centre for Window and CladdingTechnology) Tested Rainscreen SystemWhile process mapping the manufacturing stage of aproject’s lifecycle, we identified the outsourcing ofrainscreen cladding to be disadvantageous to our businessin terms of cost, control, and the time it consumed interms of procurement and contract management. Wetherefore began the process of designing and completingour own tested rainscreen system which would meet allCWCT, relevant standards, and performancespecifications. This involved the design and engineering ofprelim calculations and detailed drawings of the systemwhich was then manufactured in our facility and sent toBuilding Envelope Technologies (BET) for testing. Therainscreen system successfully passed testing and we arecurrently working on increasing the range.

LEAN INITIATIVE IMPROVEMENTS & IMPACT This programme brought the entire leadership of the AlucraftGroup through a programme that has been trulytransformational. It helped them understand how to analyseand improve their system performance. It gave them the aidsto be in a position to behave as Lean Leaders in providingdirection, driving performance and developing people.

Throughout the workshops, the Senior Leadership Teamexperienced a diverse number of Strategy, Lean, and ChangeManagement tools, and in the latter workshops facilitated anumber of breakouts with the extended leadership team usingsome of those tools. The programme challenged their currentthinking and delivered a clear leadership accountability todeliver CI initiatives and a cascaded set of metrics and targetsthat tells them whether they are winning or losing.

The CI process brought together representatives from eachof the departments around the company who identified theroadblocks in the way of delivering on our key pillars:People, Growth, and Delivery. This collaborative methodmeant that Lean thinking was implemented into eachdepartment in a holistic manner. The tactical improvement

plan which grew from this meeting of minds aligned to ourbusiness strategy and ensured that we were focused on thecorrect projects.

The onboarding of Lean thinking within Alucraft began in2017 and the following outcomes were delivered: • Vision Statement that generates excitement and aligns the

organisation around a common future state was reviewedand confirmed.

• A 2-year Strategy Roadmap was developed with the inputof the organisation so that there is a commonunderstanding of the critical issues facing the organisationand what needs to be done about them.

• Tangible Tactical Plan that translates strategy intomeasurable and meaningful projects that can be deliveredon the ground.

• Prioritisation and sequencing of improvement projects thatensure the organisation does not become overwhelmed bythe pace of change

• Clear leadership accountability to deliver improvementinitiatives.


Figure 4. Senior Management Team Vision and MissionBrainstorm Output

Benefits of CI Programme• As part of our CI programme, the senior management team

reviewed and updated the Vision and Mission Statementsfor the company. This was an important step for our teamin defining, both internally and externally, what Alucraft doand to set a long-term goal for the future. We wanted totake the next step which involved setting new GuidingPrinciples (GP) for the Alucraft Group and defining whatthose values will mean to all individuals within ourorganisation. These GP will form the backbone of ourorganisation and, when implemented and demonstrated byeach individual, will underpin the success of our vision forthe future.

• Brainstorming and the use of Post-its have become a regularexercise in meetings throughout the company outside ofthe CI identified projects as Lean thinking and its benefitshas been adopted and embedded throughout the company.

• While the primary objective of implementing Lean intoour business is to see benefits to the bottom line, wenoticed a massive culture shift within the company. The CIprogramme breathed a collaborative life into the business.Departments work together in greater harmony than theyhave done previously. Projects have had a knock-on effectas they have highlighted areas that need attention and havebeen added to the programme for 2019/2020.

• We currently have 10 people within the companyundergoing Green Belt training who will become part-timeLean Six Sigma programme members able to lead a cross-functional project team using a range of Lean Six Sigma

project management, problem solving, and statisticalanalysis tools.

• We have a CI board in the main thoroughfare of thebuilding which houses information on completed, live, andupcoming projects. The board also houses the live projects’A3s where the status of the project is easily identifiable withthe use of visual aids. The visual aid selected was a simpletraffic light system to indicate the current status againstpre-set milestone dates. Regular CI briefings happen whereproject sponsors are accountable for updating boardinformation and reporting the status of ongoing projects.These weekly briefings hold the team accountable andensure that completion dates are met and that programmesare kept on track.

Future of Lean in AlucraftThe future of Lean looks bright in the Alucraft organisation:• We continuously engage more staff in the programme.• We are developing a number of Green Belts to carry the

torch for Lean thinking in their departments and cross-functionally across the company.

• Our UK office has set up its own CI programme and takenlearnings from the Dublin office.

• Our sister company, Williaam Cox, has also set up a CIprogramme, with many projects currently live and one ofwhich is aimed at making the company paperless bySeptember 2019.

Figure 5. Williaam Cox CI Team


Case 14 – DPS Advanced Technology Group

DPS Engineering is a global ProjectManagement and Engineeringcompany providing project andprogramme management, pro-curement, design, constructionmanagement, health and safetymanagement, commissioning,qualification and start-up. Our sectorexpertise spans many markets including

Biotechnology, Pharmaceutical,Medical Technologies, Oil and Gas,Advanced Technology, Food &Beverage, Energy, Science &Education. DPS has more than 1600employees globally, with 14 officeslocated in Europe, Middle East, Asia,and the USA.C O M P A N Y W E B S I T E

OVERVIEW & BACKGROUND TO THE LEAN INITIATIVEThis case study examines how Leanprinciples and tools can be utilised toimprove construction projects schedulesand costs via the identification andmitigation of delays. The goals of thisproject were to determine how LastPlanner® System (LPS) constraint datacould be utilised to identify activities tocomplete a Lean intervention on one ofDPS’s ongoing construction projects,and if an improvement roadmap could

be generated. To establish a baseline forcomparison, DPS completed aliterature review of construction delayson international projects. DPS thenused delay data generated by the LPS ofschedule management from a project inflight to identify opportunities forimprovement in a Kaizen event. Leantools and processes were then utilisedduring the Kaizen to identify solutionsand implement the improvements.



AUTHOR

Richard Casey

The project was completed in three phases:i. Phase 1 – DPS determined common causes of delays on

construction projects by developing a ranking table ofconstruction delays for comparison with existing DPSconstruction projects.

ii. Phase 2 – DPS then determined the most common causeson delays on construction projects currently being managedby DPS ATG by researching six weeks of data from LPSvariance information; collating and analysing the variancesinto a Pareto of opportunities; using Pareto data to identifyactivities for investigation; and utilising direct observationto determine the current status of labour productivity andthe main causes of delays on construction projects.

iii.Phase 3 – DPS made targeted improvements on anongoing construction project by facilitating a Kaizen eventand utilising Lean tools to identify and makeimprovements.

ImplementationA project steering team was formed consisting of five projectmanagers from DPS ATG. Four of the project managers weredirectly responsible for the construction managementactivities on the projects, and the fifth manager was utilised asan independent observer for the data gathering and progressof the team. The agreed goal was “to determine if Lean toolscould be utilised to identify projects that could reduce theoverall construction execution schedule by >10% andcorresponding costs by >10% by the reduction of delaysidentified by analysis of LPS information”. The case studywas completed in four stages.

Stage 1 – Data GatheringLevel 1 data analysis – LPS variance. The team gathered 6

weeks of variance (delay) date from the LPS constraint dataand collated and characterised into a Pareto.

Figure 1. Most Common Delays in Construction Executionon DPS ATG Projects

On review of the findings with the project steering team, itwas agreed to focus on determining the causes of prerequisiteworks and incorrect time estimates. The agreed goal wasrestated as being “to determine if Lean tools could be utilisedto identify projects that could reduce the overall constructionexecution schedule by >10% and corresponding costs by>10% via the reduction of delays during prerequisite worksand improving incorrect time estimates”.

Level 2 data analysis – LPS Percentage Plan Complete(PPC). DPS completed a deeper analysis of the PPCperformance to identify what project activities caused themost prerequisite and incorrect time estimate delays. Thefollowing activities were identified as low PPC performing(avg. <70%):• Containment Installation

COMPANY OVERVIEW


• Pipe-fitting and Welding• Raised Ceiling Installation

To facilitate an additional level of detail, and to identify thespecific areas of investigation, a direct observation exercisewas completed on each activity.

Level 3 data analysis – Gemba and Direct Observation. In amanufacturing environment, Overall EquipmentEffectiveness (OEE) provides a mechanism to identifyuntapped capacity by identifying and eliminating impacts toequipment availability, speed, and quality. In a constructionenvironment where the trade resource is the equivalent ofequipment, the use of direct observation utilising OEEprinciples can be utilised to determine the main causes ofimpacts to Trade Labour Productivity. The DPS ProductivityManager completed a direct observation exercise with thecrews completing the top three identified activities over afive-day period to establish the average productivity of thetrades during that period, as well as the main causes for non-value-added (NVA) activities. The impact to the trades’productivity was categorised into twelve impact areas(excluding safety).

Figure 2. Construction Labour Productivity pre-KaizenProject Implementation

The average trade productivity was measured at 17% forthe project. This indicated that 83% of a trade’s day wasspent on activities other than what they were being paid todo. At this stage, DPS deemed that enough data had beengathered to move to the Kaizen phase of the project.

Stage 2 – Kaizen PreparationDPS presented the data to the onsite constructionmanagement team and outlined the reasons why the Kaizenwas to focus on prerequisite works delays and incorrect timeestimates. The timeframe for the Kaizen was agreed as oneweek, but the continuous improvement duration was agreedas five weeks incorporating one week for the Kaizen event;three weeks to implement findings; and one week tocomplete a recheck to see if the desired improvements weremade. As the concept of Lean was new to the constructionteam, it was agreed that tactile and demonstrable tools wouldbe used that could be replicated by the trade companies onother projects and sites.

Stage 3 – Kaizen EventDPS facilitated training on the basics of Lean, including Leanprinciples, the 8 wastes, the infinity matrix process, theconcepts of value-add (VA), necessary non-value-add(NNVA), and NVA, and the direct observation process. The

research data was then presented to the Kaizen teammembers, and the Kaizen team agreed to focus on four majoractivities during the Kaizen:i. Waste walks post-training to identify sources of waste.ii. Brainstorm session using an Infinity Matrix to identify Just

Do It (JDI) improvements on any delays.iii.Targeted reductions in Motion during ceiling tile

installation using direct observation.iv. Targeted improvements in Materials Management onsite

using a 5S exercise.The Kaizen goals were agreed as a >10% reduction in delay

causing activities and a >10% reduction in project costs dueto the reduction of NVA activities.

Brainstorm Session – Infinity Matrix – A brainstormingsession was completed to identify a list of JDI improvementswhich were changes to be made that were within the controlof the project team and required negligible cost and effort.An Infinity Matrix was used so as to help the constructionteam determine what activities could be improved.

Table 1. Infinity Matrix post-Brainstorm Session

Motion Improvement – There were multipleobservations of excessive moving but the Kaizen teamdecided to focus on the movement associated withinstalling ceiling tiles. A direct observation was completed,and the use of the Spaghetti diagram showed the crew howthe practice of placing the pallet of ceiling tiles in onelocation increased their walking distance as the day wenton. The proposal from the team was to put the materialpallet on wheels and move the pallet with the team as theymoved across the construction area.

5S Improvement – For retrieving materials, the teamidentified two areas for improvement: walking distance tothe material shed; and materials not stored correctly. As aJDI improvement, it was proposed to move the materialshed closer to the work place and a 5S activity was plannedfor the Materials storage areas. One shed was audited anda full 5S was completed to reorder all materials. Bins wereto install bins to sort parts into their required positions. Areorder Kanban system and set minimum stock levels forre-ordering. Finally, cable rolls were installed to easeidentification and cutting of cable lengths. The teamagreed to proliferate the 5S activity to the other materialssheds onsite.


Report-out – The Kaizen team had identified 12 specificimprovements to implement over the remainder of theproject which was appreciated by the client and was agreedto be implemented over the following 30 days.

Identified Potential Schedule Savings – Schedule savingswere calculated based on full elimination of the NVAactivity. While it was recognised that this would not beachievable, the Kaizen team wished to proceed with thattarget. To this point, a 16% reduction in schedule impactswas proposed by the Kaizen team.

Table 2. Schedule Reduction Duration Calculation

Identified Potential Cost Savings – Cost savings werecalculated based on an average cost per hour rate of€32.50 for each hour saved due to full elimination of theNVA activity. To this point, a potential cost saving of€88,822 was proposed by the Kaizen team as being

achievable via productivity improvements from areduction in delays.

Stage 4: Implementation PlanThe improvements identified were broken into threephases (per Table 3), and the 30-day roadmap waspublished to the onsite construction team withagreement that a 4-week check-in would becompleted.

Table 3. Three-Phase Improvements

LEAN INITIATIVE IMPROVEMENTS & IMPACT The project was closed out at the start of March 2018with a review of the project results with the team. Theproject was deemed successful as a total of twelveimprovement projects were identified with a targetedincrease in labour productivity of 63%, a targetedreduction in schedule of 16%, and a target of €88,822 incost savings.

Result 1 – Labour Productivity IncreaseAverage labour productivity for the three main activitiesmeasured was shown to have increased by 64%. Theimprovement was driven primarily by a reduction inmoving, rework, measuring, and retrieving materials whichwas all driven by the implementation of the Kaizenimprovement activities.

Figure 3. Construction Labour Productivity Improvementpost-Kaizen Project Implementation

Result 2 – Kaizen Measured Cost ReductionOverall cost reduction on the project was calculated at€41,190 versus a goal of €88,822 which equated to a46% achievement of the goal set by the Kaizen event.While still a great achievement the loss of €46,642 insavings was attributed to the late implementation ofimprovements.

Figure 4. Construction Cost Improvement post-KaizenProject

Result 3 – Kaizen Measured Schedule ReductionOverall schedule reduction on the project was calculatedat 905 hours versus a goal of 2733 hours, which equatedto a 33% achievement of the goal set by the Kaizenevent. While still a great achievement, the loss of 1827hours in savings was again attributed to the late


implementation of improvements.

Improvement SummaryThe implementation of the project proved that Lean toolsand principles could be applied to the constructionindustry and that delays in construction can be measured,quantified and improved. While Lean principles could beused, as construction is a tangible industry it was necessaryto use tools that could be quickly applied to theconstruction activities and the tools had to be thoughtfullyselected for the construction audience. The use of the 8wastes, the infinity matrix, direct observation and the 5Sprovided tangible and observable improvements for thetrades. This helped significantly to encourage theirparticipation.Figure 5. Construction Schedule Improvement post-

Kaizen Project

Since 2015, Suir Engineering hascontinuously increased its investment inits strategic and company-wideimprovement initiative entitled “SuirWay” (see Figure 1). In 2015, Suirpartnered with Lean ConstructionIreland (LCi) to sponsor and organise anLCi Community Event entitled “Lean asIdeology & The Ability to Change”. In2016, a number of employees weresupported on higher educationprogrammes to Black Belt levelcompetency in Lean management.Between 2017 and early 2018, Suir

secured approval to undertake a “LeanTransform” project supported byEnterprise Ireland. Since April 2018,Suir has been rolling out a new processfor managing the entire organisation.This has necessitated a significantamount of both off-site and on-sitetraining, and the company is now seeingsome large step-change improvementson how we manage our projects. Thiscase study presents an overview of thisnew management system and some ofthe benefits realised as a result.

Figure 1. Suir Engineering’s LeanJourney to date

The construction sector hassignificant productivity issues, with

several reports identifying substantialnon-value-add (NVA) or “waste” in itsprocesses. Suir Engineering, along withthe wider construction sector, iscurrently facing the challenge ofdelivering projects on ever-tighterschedules and budgets. Clients, whothemselves are increasingly familiar withLean thinking and practices, aredemanding that their contractors followsuit in the pursuit of waste reduction.Whilst concerns about the levels ofwaste in construction are nothing new,the destructive impact of the recentprolonged recession has made it clearthat, even as the economy recovers andconstruction activity increases, businessas usual can no longer be accepted inconstruction. Lean Construction offersopportunities that allow companies tothrive in any economic conditions, andSuir Engineering has made a strategiccommitment to the adoption andimplementation of Lean thinking andpractices internally and on its capitalprojects.


Case 15 – Suir Engineering

Established in Ireland in 1984, SuirEngineering is a Mechanical &Electrical services provider and part ofEDF Energy Services group ofcompanies. Suir Engineering has officesin Dublin, Waterford, Denmark,London and across the UK. Suir

Engineering has 1000 directlyemployed staff.



Build-up to Rollout of the Suir WayIn 2017, Suir Engineering Senior Management recognised thatour way of working needed to be improved in order for thecompany to grow. We realised the need for change and toenhance the company performance. Direct Labour accounts for42% of our cost base and we needed to improve on and becomemore efficient with this cost. Quality resources across the sectorwere difficult to find and thus we needed to change ourmethods, optimise our internal expertise, and grow from withinthrough learning across the business. Where Lean tools wereadopted on other projects, outcomes were quantifiablyimproved. The Suir Way would ensure the company had morerobust systems, aligned processes, and personnel equipped withthe right tools and skills to deliver future growth. If we didn’tchange, we would fall behind our competitors. This case studybroadly details the main elements of our initiative to create androll out the Suir Way.

Lean Management System• Visual controls – daily measurement boards, at all levels of

the organisation.• Standard accountability – built into our visual boards.• Leader Standard Work – including senior management

conducting Gemba Walks to monitor the health of themanagement system.

Lean Tools• 5S.• KPIs.• Mapping – processes and value streams.• Standard Work.• PDCA.• A3 Reports.• Pull Planning using Last Planner® System.

www.suireng.ie

AUTHOR

Andrew Norris

COMPANY OVERVIEW



Lean BehavioursWe identified the following as our ideal behaviours:Authenticity; Curiosity; Respect; Patience; Perfectionism; andHumility.

Our case entry in the 2018 LCi Book of Cases detailed thesubstantial quantitative improvements made on one of ourconstruction projects using Lean tools. However, a Leanecosystem needs more than just the use of tools. As wasevidenced in our main learning takeaways of this case study, it isvery difficult to sustain focus on improvement activity withoutchanging our management system. At the time, we knew that weneeded to invest a lot more resources into education, Leantraining, and the development of a Lean culture and systems toensure that our level of improvements wouldn’t plateau orregress. We knew that our strategy was lacking and that if wedidn’t change something we would never achieve a sustainableand “True-Lean” trajectory (see Figure 2).

Figure 2. “Kaizen Blitz” Approach Versus “True Lean” ApproachIn the subsequent months, we engaged with external

consultants who completed an extensive “Lean MaturityAssessment”. As part of that assessment, external expertsinterviewed in excess of 40 Suir employees, one-to-one, getting across-section from across the entire organisation. The positionsof those interviewed included departmental managers, supportstaff, project management teams, tradesmen, general operatives,and all the company’s directors. This “deep dive” into Suir’sinternal business processes informed the consultants andcompany as to where investment of resources would be mostfruitful – namely on the three core elements of a LeanManagement System (LMS) (see Figure 3):i. Visual controls – daily measurement boards, at all levels of the

organisation.ii. Standard accountability – built into our visual boards.iii.Leader Standard Work – including senior management

conducting Gemba Walks to monitor the health of themanagement system.

A team was created to design visual control boards whichwould subsequently be trialled on a number of our project sites(see Figure 3). The theory behind using measurements and visualcontrol boards is that we keep our finger on the pulse withregards to our performance. This enables us to quickly identify adrop in performance and other problems. It can be equated tothe scoreboard and statistics in a match. Are we winning orlosing? Did our actual results equal what was expected? Are ourprocesses healthy or breaking down and laden with waste? And ifour processes are compromised, what do we need to do about it?

Once we decide that we are doing something, the next elementof the LMS ensures that we act in a timely manner. We want toeliminate conditions that enable the paying of lip-service over adrawn-out period of time, eventually fading away without

meaningful improvement. Every relevant problem, opportunity,or action needs to be logged (with specifics) and assigned to anindividual with a corresponding date of completion. Thisensures that it will be followed up on. It is essential that theseboards are appropriate for their particular area and meaningfulfor the people using them. Figure 4 shows the structure of theTiered system, some of whose principles include:• The Tier system is designed to involve everyone and get them

engaged in the success of the business.• Clear and aligned goals at every level of the business, tying

into the overall organisational strategy.• Everyone understands their personal contribution to site goals

and expected behaviours.• Any problems or issues can be managed locally or escalated to

the next tier for support.• There is a standard work approach to all tier meetings across

the site.• There is clear escalation and feedback pathways between tiers.

Figure 4. The Suir Way’s Lean Management System StructureAs stated previously, for a large-scale improvement initiative to

be sustained, education of the workforce is critically important.Therefore, in addition to creating and trialling the visual controlboards, we also conducted extensive amounts of training of ourstaff. We recognised that, apart from a few isolated instances,there were very low levels of Lean competencies in the business.We therefore needed to deliver a number of training courses thatwould improve the knowledge, skills, and attitudes of ourworkforce. Some of our training courses included Leanawareness, Problem solving, Workplace organisation (5S), LMSTiered Management System, A3 problem solving report writing,and Behavioural and Gemba training for senior management.

Figure 3. The Suir Way Lean Management System in Operation

Figure 5. Lean Training for Suir Engineering’s MD, MichaelKennedy, and Senior Managers

At the time of writing, we are rolling out the training andmanagement system to 18 of our project teams at different

locations throughout Ireland with another 9 already picked outfor later in 2019. The rollout typically starts with several off-siteclassroom-style training days, followed by a Suir Lean Championvisiting and supporting the site team to help embed the newprocesses, systems, attitudes, behaviours and audits. Integral tothis is training not only on the Lean tools, but the conceptsbehind the tools – the “How-To” knowledge of tool deployment.Additionally, there is particular focus placed on the criticality ofteamwork:• teams with divergent knowledge and expertise can outperform

homogeneous teams – when they share and integrate theirknowledge.

• divergent goals can broaden the scope of a team’saccomplishments – if value-claiming behaviour doesn’t crowdout value-creating behaviour.


The benefits of the LMS are that it enables us to:• Align everyone in the organisation through our tiered

management process.• Identify issues, roadblocks, and impact for our business and

people.• Give everyone a voice.• Improve communication at all levels of the business.• Deliver on our critical success factors (CSF).• Enhance company performance, efficiency, and profitability.• Have a safer and more engaged workforce.• Build brand profile.• Continuously improve and learn.• Improve on client engagement.

Our 5S system helps us create standard working methodswhereby we set up the workplace in a more organised manner.Bringing material and equipment closer to the workface, usinghigher quality and standardised tools, and putting controls inplace to ensure they are maintained result in the elimination ofmany of the 8 Wastes. This practice allows workers to be moreefficient with less trips to stores for materials, and makes up-to-date information and drawings available locally.

One of the major changes is in our data collection methods.We would have always collected data from our sites in term ofproductivity, but now we also track and record waste andDOWNTIME. Tracking of the productivity and wastes allowsus to have a clearer picture of where we need to focus ourimprovement efforts. We mapped and improved many of ourprocesses as a direct result of investing in improvement activity,with many of our improvement projects delivering monetarysavings ranging from ?5k to ?20k. A 20-year ConstructionManager put the improvement as simply as this: “The way I’veseen it help me the most… I used to get about 40 phone callsduring the day from our guys, now it is only 20. The guys allknow what’s going on”.

Broad Accomplishments• Improved planning of works by supervision.• Over 400 trained in Lean Awareness to date – remainder being

trained in 2019.

• Reduced reworks on site which improves customer satisfactionand productivity.

• Minimised site material shortages and improved workplaceorganisation.

• Improved workforce engagement.• DOWNTIME quantified and addressed at source.• 5 Lean Champions actively trying to make change happen.• Reduced requisitions to procurement resulting in increased

buying power and maximising supply chain performance.• We completed the first paperless handover of a capital project

in Ireland through our EIDA System which ensures we are atthe forefront of new ways of working through technology.

• Lean Office roll-out training commenced March 2019.• 23 sites rolled-out up to April 2019.

Lessons Learned• Change is hard – the education route is slower and expensive,

but it is critical.• Group Think – a diversity of perspectives and resources is

needed for a finely-tuned Lean system to run smoothly andrecover from interruptions.

• Psychological Safety:o Fear in the industry – What vs Who – Troublemaker

(subtle fear of ridicule).o Empower your team – Lead by example – Leadership

theory.• People being defensive when hearing about a problem in their

area – feeling that they need to have the answer.• PDCA – universal to everything we do – use your 5-step

check.• Measure what you want to improve:

o Removes a lot of waste and problems from our processes.

o Helps us plan better.o Enables better communications.

• More knowledge sharing.• Important to leverage from experts – can save you time and

from going down the wrong rabbit holes.



Case 16 – Mercury

Mercury is an Irish-based Europeancontractor. We build and managecomplex engineering projects thatreimagine how people work and live inthe built environment. We believe thatreal innovation happens if you’re willingto be brave. Our determination andsharp focus enable us to deliver leading-edge construction solutions across a

range of key sectors including DataCentres, Healthcare, Life Sciences &Technology, Fire Protection, BuildingServices, and Technical Support Services,taking our clients to new territories theynever thought possible. Mercuryemploys 2000 employees across Ireland,the UK and Europe and had an annualturnover of €770Million in 2018.


OVERVIEW & BACKGROUND TO THE LEAN INITIATIVEMercury has long been an advocate ofLean and has been implementing itsprinciples into work practices for manyyears. Lean has always been somethingwe strive for and our default position isif there’s an activity or a task that we’regoing to perform for our client, safely,we’re always trying to make it happenbetter, faster, or smarter. We have aLean programme at Mercury called“Leaders in Lean” where once a week agreat idea from a construction site isshared across all our staff which

comprises 2000 people spread out over10 countries. Additionally, we’verecently re-commenced our Yellow Beltprogramme and are currently in theprocess of implementing a Green Beltprogramme as part of our drive towardsKaizen or continuous improvement ofour employees so as to ensure themaximum value is added within eachand every one of our projects.Approximately one third of our peoplehave been trained to date to eitherYellow or Green Belt level.


www.mercuryeng.com

AUTHORS

Shay Lacey

Value-added (VA) is the key phrase in this case study. We areaware that every day our objective is to complete our workwith as much VA time as possible. For our trade operativeswork crews, our goal is to add the maximum value to eachproject every day. Construction crews require a wide varietyof different resources such as tools, machinery, etc., on a dailybasis to execute works. If these resources can be identifiedand made available to trades at the start of each day, thelikelihood is that non-value-added (NVA) time in the firsthour of the working day can be greatly reduced. It has beenmeasured within the industry that the first hour of theworking day is by far the most likely to contain the greatestamount of NVA time.

The objective of this case study was to create a company-wide Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) that would helpsupervisors and foremen to plan the crews’ works and therequired resources ahead of time to ensure that Mercurywould achieve more VA works within the first 15-minutes ofevery working day. This SOP aimed to result in an additional4% of VA time to the working day. An additional 4% of VAtime simply converts to an additional 4% profit on directlabour projects which naturally reinforces the business casefor implementing this new process Group-wide acrossMercury. Poor planning leads to poor performance, andnaturally it is assumed that better planning will result in abetter performance in terms of safety and quality, but alsocontribute to increased VA time across projects.

Running an efficient project should always make use ofLean Construction to reduce waste. Using the mnemonic"TIMWOOD" helps to identify waste. Identifying wasteallows us to reduce our costs, increase profits, improve lead

times and boost customer satisfaction. The easiest way toremember the seven wastes is to ask every day on site "Who isTIMWOOD?".

TIMWOOD:• Transport: It was discovered that trades were spending too

much time everyday walking to retrieve materials.• Inventory: Pipe storage racks were loaded with materials that

trades did not require on a given day, wasting valuable space.• Motion: As per transport, there was too much time spent

walking from work areas to retrieve information ordrawings.

• Over-Production: Our off-site facility was delivering excessmaterials to what we needed for a given period.

• Over-Processing: Employees were spending too much timeon getting information required from drawings – werequired more clear and concise information for trades.

• Defects: Staff were having to re-work elements of worksdue to them not being done right first time (this can beattributed to the lack of required information mentionedpreviously in Over-Processing).Using TIMWOOD, our team was able to identify the

waste and inefficiencies that we needed to address to increaseVA time. In addition to using TIMWOOD to identify waste,Mercury has implemented a variety of Lean projectmanagement tools in order to increase efficiency and improveVA time across projects, including DMAIC, PDCA, LPS,and 5S.

The PDCA Cycle (Plan, Do, Check, Act)This PDCA cycle gave our supervisors the appropriate

COMPANY OVERVIEW

Jason Toomey


structure to address the issues noted from their directobservations:• Plan: Day 1 – Supervisor spends one hour each evening

planning the works for their crew.• Do: Day 2 – Supervisor utilises their general operatives to

obtain the resources required by trades to complete theirdaily tasks.

• Check: Day 2 – Supervisor completes ‘Daily Huddle’ toinform crew of planned works for next day and check thatall the required information and resources are available.

• Act: Day 3 – Crew complete works with VA time within15-minutes of start.

Last Planner® System (LPS)The foreman and supervisor complete a 10-minute huddle atthe end of each working day to discuss:• What their team needs to plan to complete tomorrow.• Establish what resources are pre-planned and available.• What was completed that day.

5SThe foremen worked with their general operatives to properlysort the pipe spools that were required for trades to install theplanned works on the next day. Pipe racks were labelled withshelf numbers, for example Pipe X is now stored on PipeRack Shelf No.1. All waste pipe or materials (if any) wereremoved from the pipe rack and work area. This processbecame standardised within the work crew and was thensubsequently shared with other crews. The process became ahabit and now continues to be utilised on a daily basis. Theprocess was initially piloted with one supervisor/foreman,with the supervisor then educating their team on the processand keeping them updating on its ongoing benefits. Tradesstaff noted the benefits to supervisors at daily huddles as theyfound it easier to execute their works. The process was thenrolled out to the other supervisors/foreman in the group whoagain took their trades through the learning process andbenefits. As the new processes were introduced to othergroups, more supervisors/foremen and trades becomeinvolved.

The team involved in this case study who planned, refined,and implemented the project comprised the:• Project Manager.

• Site Supervisor.• Site Foremen.• Site Trades.

Define, Measure, Analyse, Improve, Control (DMAIC)This project identified that every trade on the constructionsite could be losing 30-minutes of VA time at the start ofeach working day (at a conservative estimate). Due to thedaily start up nature of the works, it had never previouslybeen considered that the entire time could be recovered. WithVA within the first 15-minutes being the target, and inmaking allowances for the time spent by foremen and generaloperatives’ pre-planning works, the target set an additional4% VA time per day per crew member.

The existing process was measured using data from theongoing Direct Observations (DO). Figure 1 shows a typicalexample of a measured activity. The VA time across the daywas extremely low with a total 9% VA time (equalling onlyabout 5.4-minutes of actual productivity within the firsthour). Upon further investigation, we discovered thatretrieval of materials, set-up, consulting diagrams, andmoving totalled 43% of the time and as such wereparticularly applicable with regard to the first hour of dailyactivity.

Figure 1. Direct Observations A

LEAN INITIATIVE IMPROVEMENTS & IMPACT The process was piloted in one group (“Group 1”) whichconsisted of approximately one third of the overall project. Theprocess was developed and refined with one specific supervisorwho had bought-in to the process from the outset. Thesupervisor added to the process by implementing 5S principleswith regard to the sorting and labelling of resources (in this casePipe Racks) to enable trades to become more efficient. Withsome work and weekly reviewing of direct observation data toemphasise wins, we implemented the process with the othersupervision members in Group 1. Supervisors bought into theprocess, and with this we had achieved our first major win.

The Project Director noted the results that were achievedfrom the process and focused on the DO results. Afterreviewing the DO results for Group 2 (see the keyobservations below), the Project Director insisted that theprocess now be implemented for Group 2. Figure 2. Direct Observations B


Group 2’s Key Observations of the Working Day• 14% of the time (2-hours 26-minutes) was spent moving at

the start of shifts, breaks and mid-shifts between the sub-work area and the main work area to rework themaintenance panel, retrieve labels, and fabricate a spool inthe sub-work area (1-hour 50-minutes). Moving around thespool in the work area under the floor and in the adjoiningchase to measure/assess (22-minutes). Remainder of movingdue to moving with tools, moving to stores, and BIM.

• 10% of the time (1-hour 43-minutes) was spent reworkingto remove the gauges and conduct fitting from themaintenance panel and refitting of the same incorrect orderas well as the drilling two holes in the maintenance panel.This time also includes leaving the main work area tocomplete this in the other level.

• 10% of the time was spent labelling the spools under thefloor in the work area. Again, this factors in leaving thework area in order to retrieve labels and writing the specificlines from LSP to ID labels upon return to the work area.

• 7% of the time (1-hour 8-minutes) was spent measuring.This time was spent checking and verifying HP pipes forthe exact location and alignment, checking and verifyingthe work was completed and also measuring for theinstallation of the maintenance panel.

• 8% of the time (45-minutes) was spent retrieving materials.This consisted of retrieving spools and ID selection fromthe rack (14-minutes). The remainder of time retravelmaterials was due to retrieving fittings, cushie clamps,clutters and facing tools.

• 6% set up (1-hour) due to assisting the welder to set uppurge lines from workplace level (47-minutes). Theremainder was due to removing tape from spools (10-minutes).

• VA time (13%) – HP SS Pipe installed & maintenancepanel on the pillar.

Recommendations• 10% rework on bought in items – need to investigate why

gauges and fittings need to be altered on this and if all toolrequirements are different.

• Moving between different levels for labels and reworks –

consider if the labels could be kitted for the crew and left inthe pass-through to avoid having to leave the work area.The DO in Figure 2 illustrates a poor VA at 13%, and

highlights the areas that were addressed throughout this casestudy. Group 2 will implement the process over the nextperiod, and despite some early scepticism there is overallconfidence that the process will result in a performanceimprovement. We are now intending to move the process toGroup 3, and we intend to move the process to a new projectthat has just began using direct labour trades. It is imperativethat Senior Management buy into the process before thishappens and for it to be documented as a Supervision SOP.Once written formally as an SOP, it will make the processmuch easier to implement on future projects.

The team involved learned and demonstrated theirlearnings from the project initiation to completion. We soonlearned that if a productivity problem exists, it cannot befixed by simply brainstorming and implementing the fix via“who shouts the loudest”. The DMAIC process proved to beeffective in systematically working through any processes toimprove the current situation. We also now have the learningof a kaizen approach and how we can implement this processwith regard to any future challenges we may face.

In the construction industry generally, and particularlyduring this case study, we have found that if we can removethe obstacles and waste to allow trades to have good cellularflow (trades often speak about having a “good run at thework”), productivity will see significant improvements. Thefact that supervisors along with much of our trades had beenintroduced to Lean Construction through a Yellow Beltprocess was beneficial as they gained an understanding ofwhat VA or NVA work actually was and why there was a needfor Mercury to address it.

Moving forward, we need to continue to utilise the toolsand processes we have learned. The smaller and relativelysimpler elements such as the 5S process is now embeddedinto our company-wide site procedures and will be of majorbenefit in the long-term. From a management point of view,we now have a process for evaluating, diagnosing, andimproving those project productivity items that have acommercial impact on project success.


Case 17 – Kirby Group Engineering

Founded in 1964, Kirby is amechanical and electrical engineeringcontractor. The company operates inIreland, the UK and Northern Europe,and directly employs over 850 highly-skilled employees. Kirby provides fullmechanical and electrical contractingservices as well as specialist high voltage(HV) and medium voltage (MV)design and construction services toclients across a number of differentsectors including Data Centres, LifeSciences, Industrial Manufacturing,Substations and Renewables, PowerGeneration, Petrochemical andCommercial. After 55 years in business,

Kirby has earned a reputation,supported by client references, forexcellence in high-value mechanicaland electrical engineering contractingservices. This reputation is built onearly engagement, finding innovativecost-effective solutions for complexbuild challenges and anuncompromising approach to safety,quality and delivery. Kirby has strongcapabilities in prefabrication,modularisation and digitalconstruction, along with a Leanapproach to project delivery, whichensures excellence and value for itsclients.


OVERVIEW & BACKGROUND TO THE LEAN INITIATIVEKirby’s strong capability inprefabrication, modularisation anddigital construction, along with a Leanapproach to project delivery, ensuresexcellence and value for our clients. Asearly as 2012, Kirby started followingan EFQM (European Foundation forQuality Management) frameworkapproach to quality which included aphilosophy of continuousimprovement. Lean and value becamemore and more prevalent to ourstrategy moving forward.

As the construction industry’s valuemoved more towards Lean, includingstandardisation and consistency ofoutputs, the requirement for this isbeing realised ever more on projectsthrough Quality Assurance (QA)Benchmarking, First of Kinds (FOKs)and/or sample Mock-Ups. Thesemethodologies help establish aconsistency and standard workapproach, by ensuring a right first time

(RFT) approach to the first installationof a service, equipment or system froma Mechanical and Electrical (M&E)perspective or from a Civil, Structural& Architectural (CSA) perspective fordesigned and/or construction buildingelements or building fabric finishes.This was a major change to theindustry and Kirby had to move withthe industry or fall behind thestandards being set and expected byclients.

This process is still being rolled outthroughout the industry and certainclients have not requestedBenchmarking, FOKs or Mock-Ups, asyet. Where it is requested, Kirby hasestablished a process flow to follow toensure completion and archiving isstandard. A new form (MF6.27 – QABenchmarking Inspection) was createdfor completion and to be signed off andstored electronically, including photos,as standardised work.


www.kirbygroup.com

AUTHORS

Martin Searson

A philosophy of continuous improvement within theconstruction industry determined that standard work wouldbecome the norm, where possible, to add value to customersand meet legal regulations. This resulted in the developmentof Quality and Lean tools including Benchmarking, FOKs,and Mock-Ups. Construction contractors could either utilisethese tools or get left behind. In addition, this provides astandardised reference standard for trades and professionalpersonnel to benchmark the installation requirements versusthe project specifications, i.e. design criteria, for consistencyand replication, site wide. Previous to this, there was wastethrough defects, rework, rectification, change management,

over-production, over-processing, and underutilised skills.This impacted the bottom line of any project, and also hadan impact on schedule and reputation. Designing and gettingapproval of FOKs aimed to reduce all these wastes, and, aseach component would be still used as the first installation, itremoved these wastes from arising.

Mock-Ups and First of Kinds (FOKs)Typically, the specialist installation company provide aschedule of Mock-Ups and FOKs of Capital Equipment andField installation works within the first two to six weeks ofstarting a contract. The specialist installer and their qualified

COMPANY OVERVIEW

Kevin Wall


trades personnel will construct Mock-Ups (or FOKs in situ onsite) as required to demonstrate the quality of finished work,for approval. The Construction Management Team (CMT)and the Client then perform inspections of these Mock-Upsand provide feedback, review comments on any deficiencies,engineering updates or changes required versus the projectspecifications and standards and/or regulatory requirements toset the benchmark standard. Once the Mock-Up (or FOK)has been agreed as meeting the requirements andspecifications by both CMT and Client, it is then recordedusing photographs where necessary and logged through thesubmittal process accompanied by the relevant QABenchmark or FOK form, as a receipt/acceptance of thespecialist installer’s FOK/Mock-Ups.

This then serves as a benchmark agreed between the partiesfor quality of materials and workmanship for the full scope,as contracted. Future work will be compared to thebenchmark in order to establish whether it meets therequirements and project specifications, i.e. engineeringmatching. Mock-Ups must not be removed or covered overwithout the prior permission of the CMT. Where agreed withthe CMT, the specialist installer may utilise the first sampleor portion (FOKs) of the permanent works as the benchmarkor Mock-Up. The CMT will examine the first 5% to 10% ofthe permanent works in stages, where appropriate, inaccordance with the project approved Inspection & Test Plan(ITP) and provide feedback to the specialist installer on thequality of the works and workmanship, provided thereafter,in accordance with the contract and customer requirements.The matrix in Table 1 summarises the provision and use ofsamples across the various construction disciplines.

Table 1. Discipline Field Installation Sample Matrix

Submittals, samples, Mock-Ups, and FOKs would inthe first instance be presented or submitted to the CMTwho then refer to the Design Engineer, Client, End User’sOperational team and others as appropriate forcomment/approval before responding to the specialistinstaller. No work would be undertaken prior toobtaining and incorporating as required the comments ofCMT, Client, and nominated others. Typically, thefollowing status codes would be used by the CMT whenreturning comments on drawings, calculations, methodstatements, submittals or any other submitteddocuments, i.e. QA Benchmarks or FOKs. The standardquality assurance forms used by Kirby GroupEngineering are:• MF6.26 QA Benchmark Register template R0• MF6.27 QA Benchmark Inspection form R0

Figure 2. MF6.26 QA Benchmark Register Sample

Figure 3. MF6.27 QA Benchmark Inspection form R0This results in a standardised work approach on sites.

The benefits of standardised work includes documentationof the current process for all changes made, shifts,reductions in variability, easier training of new operators,reductions in injuries and strain, and a baseline forimprovement activities. This standard work approach canbe considered an RFT approach bringing quality to thesource.

Advantages of the RFT approach include:

Figure 1. PDCA (Plan-Do-Check-Act) Approach


• Reduction in waste (material, time, manpower, rework).• Improvement in productivity.• Better understanding of the production issues and

process variation.• Empowerment of employees in achieving the desired

quality.• Awareness of the importance of the quality throughout

the organisation.Through the creation and approval of a standard, it

can be considered mistake proofing (known as “poka-yoke”). A poka-yoke is any mechanism in any processthat helps a construction worker to avoid (“yokeru”)mistakes (“poka”). Its purpose is to eliminate productand material defects by preventing, correcting, ordrawing attention to human errors as they occur. It is acase of taking over repetitive tasks or actions thatdepend on vigilance or memory, and it can freeworkers’ time and minds to pursue more value-addedactivities. In addition, it reduces variability in processesand installation methods, as employed, during tovarying trade crews working on site and across theproject.


The improvements seen since 2012 with the introduction ofQA Benchmarking, FOKs, and Mock-Ups are highlighted bythe growth of Kirby Group within the construction industry.It has resulted in a much more competitive service with ahigh reputation of delivering quality and on time. Thusadding value for our clients and stakeholders, thoughconsistency and standardised work.

This new process was initially rolled out on a number ofhigh priority projects, but has now become more and moreclient driven as they have seen the value in this process. Kirbymanagement have also increased the scale of this process tonow reach as many new projects as possible within the M&Escope of works.

Defect (snag) elimination has become a major focus withinKirby operations and our approach to quality management(as shown in the previous Kirby Case Study in 2018).Through the application of QA Benchmarking/FOK/Mock-Ups, this complements additional defect reduction (oreffective elimination) on a construction project, though asystematic approach to minimising rework activities arising.Thus given further time and cost savings back to the client,to the elimination of duplicate activities or rectification.

The concept of implementing an improved and automateddefect management, i.e. ‘snagging’, process was proventhrough the following tangible benefits:• A cost saving of 45.16% was made per processing of one

snag.• The number of snags per €1Million project value was

significantly reduced, predominantly due to removal ofduplication.

• Improved snag categorisation – proper allocation ofcategories that allowed effective action, with “Other”category snags decreasing from 33% to 9%. (This provesthe concept that the improved and automated SnaggingProcess brings significant savings to the business, as well as

competitive advantage.)

Figure 5. Site First of Kind (FOK) Visual ManagementBoard In Use

Visual management boards were created within the siteoffice to highlight this new process and where the team couldgo to check the QA Benchmarks. All new site staff wereinstructed to these new processes as part of their induction.This helped, and, continues to help, bring about a furtherbehavioural change with site staff on the benefits of Lean andtheir future involvement in additional Lean improvements aspart of our continuous improvement strategy.

Benefits of visual management:• It gives a chance to an operator (trades person/engineer) to

see and correct a mistake before it becomes a big problem.• It gives a chance to an individual to see and correct

standards if there is any deviation from set standards or

Figure 4. Site First of Kind (FOK) Example (signed off )


specifications.• It is set of 6S tools that enables a working environment

where everyone feels safe and facilitated.• It helps avoid workplace injuries.• It gives a chance to see non-compliance of any set standards

immediately.• It helps operators to see how we are performing and allow

them to improve their score in case the low output from setstandards and/or any negative variance present.

Why visual management is so important?• One of the most important reasons to implement the visual

management system is to place/introduce a problem-solving culture, adopt an improvement-drivenapproach/mindset, eliminate response time, and prepareteams to continuously work on eliminating waste andimproving quality issues highlighted through visuals.

• They are a tool that provide a lot of information at a glancewith just visuals and limited text.

• It helps to improve communication within a team.As part of the continuous improvement mentality within

Kirby that includes Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA), we areconstantly trying to have positive behavioural changes for sitestaff. By educating to Lean Thinking, it is no longer thenorm to ask the same questions all the time. Hence, we havealso revised the register and QA benchmark form a numberof times, and we will continue to review it as clients continueto engage with us.

It is now a case where Lean Construction has become partof the values of Kirby and staff are now engaged within allregions where Kirby operates. It is clear that there is now agreater focus on high standards, adding value to the clients,and reducing and removing wastes. This will allow us tocontinue to grow and aspire to be the most trusted providerof high-value engineering and construction services. Kirbyconsistently wins national and international awards in areasof Quality and Environment, Health and Safety (QEHS),reflected in our 10th consecutive RoSPA and 7th consecutiveNational Quality Award nominations. We credit this to ourstrong performance culture, our outstanding Kirby team, andour reputation for quality and service delivery.


Case 18 – PM Group

PM Group is an international projectdelivery company operating acrossEurope, the USA and Asia. We have a45-year track record in projectmanagement, process design, facilitydesign and construction managementfor leading multinational companies.We are world leaders in thePharmaceutical, Food, Mission Critical,Medtech, Advanced Manufacturingand Energy sectors. Our reputation is

built on great people with a flexible“can-do” attitude who consistentlydeliver successful projects safely for ourclients. We pride ourselves on ourtechnical expertise and work closelywith our clients to develop innovativesolutions for complex projects. We haveover 2600 highly skilled employeesworldwide. While headquartered inIreland, we have offices based in 17countries worldwide.


OVERVIEW & BACKGROUND TO THE LEAN INITIATIVEThis case study details the Last

Planner® System (LPS) processesapplied to the fast track delivery of theconstruction of a biopharmaceuticalfacility in Dublin, Ireland. LPS wasadopted to help implement leanpractices and enable high level project-wide coordination. The owner wasconverting an existing facility inSwords, North County, Dublin to ahigh-tech biopharmaceutical manu-facturing facility. PM Group wasretained by the owner to partake in thedesign and construction managementof the Biotech Project. The author is aproject engineer employed by PMGroup, and is coordinating theimplementation of LPS on the BiotechProject.

Construction and turnover isscheduled to be completed by July2020 and, to support delivery of thisambitious fast track timeframe, detaileddesign had to be completed by July2019. In order to achieve this scheduleon time, systems turnover began whenthe project was about 35%construction complete. Conventionally,system turnover usually beginssomewhere between 55-65%construction complete. This earlier

turnover start drives a much greateroverlap between construction anddetailed design phases, which forcesgreater emphasis on coordination in thefield.

The project comprises 5 buildingswith 11 manufacturing suites and ahigh level of GMP finishes and fit-outon a constrained site in a suburbansetting.

Biotech Buildings1.Bulk Drug Substance Building (BDS)2.Warehouse3.CUB4.QC & MS&T Labs5.Offices & Other

Figure 1. Site Layout Plan


www.pmgroup-global.com

AUTHOR

Conor Sych

This case study focuses on the construction of the BulkManufacturing Building (BDS). Interfaces can range fromphysical connection boundaries between buildingcomponents to contractual work package scopes. Interfacemanagement is a key project delivery risk. There arenumerous common and constantly changing interfacesbetween 15 trade contractors. By limiting and clearlydefining interfaces, communicative action can take placewhich will resolve a lot of the issues in construction.Updating IT application to interface management, and

using it extensively, can reduce project CAPEX costs by2% and delivery duration. Instead of the traditionalapproach of contractors and EPCM firms relying on 14-30-90 day schedules, and placing heavy emphasis on themby pressurising crews to meet deadlines, LPS addressesthese issues by recognising interfaces and tackles them byengaging all stakeholders to the level of contractorforemen and supervisors to create a micro-schedule. These micro-schedules look oneweek and six weeks ahead, breaking down

COMPANY OVERVIEW


activities daily and weekly. Inherently, now the people inthe field are actively driving the schedule, and they aremaking an honest commitment to deliver within the team.This changes the traditional culture and enables theforemen to think in a Lean way.

Creating a “people first” collaborative environment iskey to achieving high levels of construction progress. LPSpromotes a non-blame culture. LPS meetings take placeonce a week to discuss the next week’s work plan andconstraints. These meetings are chaired by the BDS LPSlead and attended by the BDS Construction Manager andother members of the BDS Construction Management(CM) team. In addition, they are attended by at least onedesign project manager and designated contractorrepresentatives, typically a CM or supervisor. The weeklylookahead is broken down and focused on process zonesand rooms. The Weekly Work Plan (WWP) is the outputfrom the weekly LPS meeting and includes:

i. Work breakdown by Process Zone and Room.ii. Colour coding of responsible

organization/contractor.iii. Resources planned.iv. Percent Planned Complete (PPC).

Each week when the plan for the next week’s lookaheadis discussed, the team highlights constraints that are to beremoved. Constraints vary and include lack of materials,labour, predecessor works, design, field clashes, weather,etc. These items are then logged and dated. The team willthen identify a person who will answer or resolve theconstraint. For example, to install a process pipe run, thecontractor may need a bracket redesigned. They will flagthis in the meeting, and a designer at the meeting willundertake to resolve the constraint; promising a date forthe redesign to be done. This approach differs from thetraditional means of going through a request forinformation (RFI) process, and improves on it. LPSenables the constraint to be identified to the team andmade clear to the party responsible to remove theconstraint. In this case, the designer on the spot nowknows where the bracket is and that it is on the criticalpath. Eliminating the interface of an RFI and getting adesigner who normally wouldn’t interact with a foremanto be aware of the construction process, helps ensure theworkflow will be completed on time. Separate streams ofmeetings are also arranged to resolve constraints such asdesign delivery, clashes, and sequencing. These are taken“off-line” for resolution by the key parties outside of theLPS meeting.

In addition to identifying future potential constraints,those constraints that have arisen previously are recordedand analysed, and trends are identified so that measurescan be put into place to reduce risk of recurrence. Figure 2illustrates a sample of some of the constraints that havearisen on this BDS Project.

After the weekly meeting, the LPS plan is printed andposted on a wall in the LPS meeting room to be checkedoff daily by the contributing contractor foremen. Thecontractors will check “yes” or “no” based upon theactivity having been completed, and, if not, the reason it

wasn’t completed.The data collected from the contractors’ status update

on the weekly LPS plan is used to create the PPC. ThePPC metric is a measure of the activities actuallycompleted within the weekly plans. The PPC is thendisplayed and this shows how well the weekly plans thatare put together each week are working. PPC is linkedwith constraints and identifies what constraints arehindering construction progress. For instance, if theredesigned bracket did not come as promised, this willprevent the particular activity being completed and soreduce the PPC metric for the week. Over time, PPC datawill compound and show what variances are slowing theprogress down. In summary, the LPS process makes clearthe effect of a break in the delivery chain by any member.This fosters a culture of delivery within the team over ashort period of time.

Figure 3. Percent Planned Complete (PPC)Curve

PPC is tracked weekly and measures how

Figure 2. Extract from BDS Constraints Log


well the team is performing tasks planned versus taskscompleted. An extract from the BDS PPC curve is shownin Figure 3, with the yellow line representing the lowercontrol limit and the orange the upper control target.

A key element of LPS is pull planning. By focusing onthe end milestone and developing a six-week schedule, theconstraints, the interfaces to be managed, and the activitiesto be completed to meet the milestone are clear to theteam. For instance, issued for construction drawings (IFC)were constantly a constraint, and particularly in the earlierstage of the project given the significant overlap betweendesign completion and construction. To overcome this,pull plans gave the design team clear visibility of priorities.For example, focusing early on freezing the architecturalpackage for walls enabled the timely release and install ofthe associated mechanical and electrical services withminimal rework.

The project has its own dedicated LPS meetings whichcreate a strong sense of team and partnership for all partiesinvolved in the BDS Project. The scale of the BDS Projectrequires a large dedicated room to facilitate these meetingswhich is beneficial in adding value to the team. The roomallows for the CM team to present not only the keyproject milestones, but also weekly project data, designconstraints, quality information, etc., in a consistent groupenvironment. Over time, the BDS LPS team has becomefamiliar and responsive to each other’s needs in the bestoverall interests of successful project delivery, namely thecommon goal of the team. Mechanical contractors learnedwhere and what electrical contractors were struggling withor succeeding with and vice versa. By identifying theseissues, plans have become more accurate and collaborativein nature. Dual projection screens allow for general layoutdrawings and aerial photos to be displayed enabling better

understanding of works discussed. Frequently teammembers walk up to the drawing or use a laser pointer tohighlight the works or plans under discussion. Themeeting is on site so team members are able to walk to seeand address any potential challenges immediately after themeeting.”

Figure 4. LPS Weekly Meeting

LEAN INITIATIVE IMPROVEMENTS & IMPACT LPS was challenging to implement on the BDS Projectdue to the scale, fast track schedule, and the largenumber of contractors and interfaces in close quarters. Inthe beginning, it required a significant culture change formany team members used to more traditionalapproaches of construction delivery. Contractorsupervisors are now also focused on scheduledevelopment, and the majority of planning decisions aremade as a team. Initially, the CM team had to constantlywork to overcome negative attitudes, traditionalmethods, and getting contractor management to buyinto the system. However, the impact and improvementsare very visible on site and from the data PPC averagedaround 35-45% from weeks 1-20, and by week 35forward PPC was averaging within the 70-90% range.This meant the team was making dates, milestones, andwas working smartly. Constraints went from an averageof 10 per week to approx. 5 per week – a near 50%reduction. This can be attributed to design being moresubstantially complete, but also to the construction team“thinking ahead” identifying problems and

collaboratively solving them in advance and achievingcritical milestone dates.

The strengthened relationships developed from theLPS process, and founded on collaboration and integrity,have shown great benefits on schedule and project costdelivery. The BDS Project has seen similar benefitsthrough increased collaboration and trust incoordination and action of plans. Contractors fromdifferent trades are interacting amongst themselvesindependent of the CM team’s direction in terms ofcoordinating, completing, and handing over work areas.Frequently, an electrical contractor will raise constraintsclaiming they can’t commence work due to mechanicalworks taking place adjacent or overhead. Now themechanical contractor, due to LPS is enabled as ascheduler to point out where they could start work asanother area might be free. On a fast-track project,traditional ‘parade of trades’ approach is not fast enough.Work needs to be constantly flowing, andLPS has given the team predictableworkflow. Predictable workflow leads to


higher productivity. The BDS team set a goal of snag freeconstruction and this has been realised with a number ofthe first systems having been successfully walked downsnag free. Credit can be given to the team for sequencingworks from a top-down approach to allow for qualityinstalls.

In conclusion, the intangible outcomes that LPS bringsto the project team is where the real benefit lies for theBDS Project. The biggest challenges are developing andmaintaining strong collaborative relationships andovercoming adversarial “turf battles” by dealing pro-actively with interfaces through working togethereffectively. A construction manager and managementteam can strive only so much to create a “teamenvironment” with respective contractors, but completecommitment is needed at every level of the team togenerate and achieve the highest level of safety, progress,and quality. It has been the experience on the projectthat the LPS approach as summarised in this case studyassists greatly in achieving this outcome.

Figure 5. PM Group LPS Flowchart


Case 19 – BAM Ireland

Operating successfully for over 60years, the bedrock of BAM’s success hasalways been an understanding of ourclients’ needs and a willingness todeliver innovative solutions that ensurecost savings and surpass environmentalexpectations. BAM Ireland is the topCivil Engineering company in Ireland,and in the top 2 of the country’s largestconstruction businesses. Operatingacross all construction sectors andthroughout the complete projectlifecycle, our principal activities arebuilding contracting and civilengineering in the public, private, andPPP sectors. Other activities includefacilities management, propertydevelopment, and rail infrastructure.

It is BAM’s mission to buildsustainable environments that enhancepeople’s lives by enabling the rightpeople to capitalise on state-of-the-artknowledge, resources, and digitaltechnologies, whilst also providingsolutions across the total constructionlifecycle for BAM’s clients andgenerating maximum value for itsstakeholders. We are a memberoperating company (OpCo) of RoyalBAM Group of the Netherlands, astock market listed PLC answerable forperformance, which has a turnover of€8Billion and employs approx. 23000people worldwide. At BAM we arebuilding the present while creating asustainable future for all.


OVERVIEW & BACKGROUND TO THE LEAN INITIATIVEThis case study explores how ArtificialIntelligence (AI) deploys Lean cultureto the construction environment. BAMIreland recognises the value ofinnovation and that continuousinnovation and improvement throughtechnology is the path to our success inthe future. Three years ago, BAMIreland was selected as part of the pilotfor a new software from Autodesk ontheir then fledgling “B360 NextGeneration” platform. During thispilot, BAM Ireland’s DigitalConstruction Team worked closely withAutodesk’s developers on theapplication that has now been releasedas “B360 Construction IQ”, Autodesk’sapplication of AI for the construction

industry.AI is becoming more commonplace

in our everyday lives, and it is behindmany of the technologies like predictivetext that we may now take for granted.Construction IQ utilises “MachineLearning” and “Natural LanguageProcessing” across the BIM 360platform to identify high-risk issuesthat impact cost, schedule, quality, andsafety, as well as to identify patternsacross the project portfolio.Identification of patterns within ourprojects has enabled us to more readilyidentify some of the sources of waste inour existing processes and to then act asa tool to monitor any implementedimprovements.


www.bamcontractors.ie

AUTHOR

Simon Tritschler

Lean ThinkingLean thinking at BAM Group is being applied in the moretraditional context of Lean manufacturing. For example,BAM Nuttall in the UK operate a road sign manufacturingdivision that runs the full range of Lean tools for their dailyoperations, including, for example, 5S, Value StreamMapping, Morning meetings, and Kanban. Additionally,there are several internal Six-Sigma experts, Leanhandbooks and working groups. Yet despite our bestefforts, the adoption of Lean within the constructionindustry is still playing catch-up with manufacturing in theadoption of Lean culture.

There is a growing trend toward Design For Manufactureand Assembly (DFMA) – also known as “OffsiteManufacture” – where the construction industry is movingfrom traditional onsite construction to factoryconstruction, logistics, and onsite assembly, along with allthe benefits this will bring. We already utilise offsite

manufacture for modular construction, for example inbathroom pods, and companies such as Ikea and Katerraare currently offering complete finished structures asmodular solutions.

But we are not there just yet – until we have taken thatjourney, the majority of our projects are still traditionallybuilt and this means that not all of the Lean toolsdeveloped for manufacturing are directly applicable toconstruction. The Lean fundamentals of removing wasteand increasing value are, however, completely applicable,and we must start from these fundamentals to ensure thatthe tools we implement develop in line with our needs andthe needs of our customers.

ToolsIn our entry to this publication in 2018, we went throughthe application of BIM as a means to introduce Leanthinking “indirectly” into the construction workplace.

COMPANY OVERVIEW


Through BAM’s 2020 Digital Vision for theimplementation of a digitally enabled workplace, we havebeen able to realise the key tenants of Lean thinking to:• increase the flow of work and information;• reduce the waste of our traditional practices; and• continuously improve our processes and the skillsets of

our staff and wider supply chain.In this case study, we focus on how BAM Ireland is using

cutting-edge AI technology to build on our current digitalexperience, to reinforce the lessons we have learnt to date,and to share these learnings across BAM Group.

Construction IQ – AI PilotConstruction IQ is a web-based application with anaccessible graphical interface that displays projectinformation in the form of graphs and prioritised lists.Transitioning from a traditional paper-based system to adigital system reduces much of the waste of transporting,processing, and communicating the information. Wherepaper checklists for quality and safety were once storedlocally on shelves or boxes, or construction issues were keptin a someone’s head or notebook, all this information isnow instantly accessible and available to the relevant partiesonline and in the cloud.

One of the often-neglected consequences of suchimprovements in the reduction of paper is the massivelyincreased volume of digitized data and information that isnow captured and available to use. Where information waspreviously lost through the cracks of the process, it is nowcaptured, and this creates a new problem for the user –what information in this vast sea of information is mostrelevant to me right now.

This is where AI is the right tool to assist in not onlyfiltering through the data to “Sort” and “Set in Order”, butalso to look for patterns to “Standardise” how theinformation is displayed. While the 5S work very wellwithin manufacturing, the S of sort, shine, and standardiseare the most appropriate for construction from our pilot.

Figure 1. Project Address Issue Data Example

Project AddressStraight “out of the box” Construction IQ highlighted thatwe had not implemented a standard approach when settingup our projects in the B360 environment. We had notbeen diligent in entering the address details (they did notseem relevant at the time), the IQ map locations were

incorrect, and the projects were incorrectly categorised by‘internal BAM department’ or ‘project type’. This becameour first opportunity to shine our data model bybackfilling all this basic information across our projects.

Issues – Impediments to Project DeliveryDuring a construction project there can be thousands ofissues that can affect the delivery of the project, and on adaily basis the management team must prioritise theseissues for resolution and to put in place the bestresolutions.

“Setting in order” this sea of data is achieved through thedark magic of the AI algorithm. Using Natural LanguageProcessing, the algorithm looks through the text that hasbeen entered by the project team. Where the AI sees wordsthat relate to a high-risk issue such as “leak” or “damp”, itassociates this as a water-related risk with the potential ofwater-related damage. It then uses its data model toautomatically “weight” the severity of what it finds usingthe context of the surrounding issue text as a reference andthe status of the issue with reference to its due date.

In addition to the automated assignment of the risk, theuser can fine-tune the response of the AI utilising theirown experience and professional judgment, and from thisthe AI is trained by their input and updates the data modelfor future reference to a similar event. This training of theAI – a form of continual improvement – builds a riskprofile for BAM within the data model. Over time, thisrisk profile “standardises” BAM’s response to similar issuesas they arise and shares the learnings across all of the BAMusers of the platform.

LEAN INITIATIVE IMPROVEMENTS & IMPACT Key to the successful delivery of every project is the resolutionof issues in an efficient manner. Following the initial basichousekeeping improvement within the project set-up,Construction IQ quickly identified that we, BAM, were thegreatest risk to our own success. When we looked at these

projects, the number of unresolved issues was uncomfortablyhigh and represented the key to the high-risk factor to BAM.

Further investigation showed that our site teams weredutifully observing and logging the issues as they occurredwithin the B360 Field site management application.

Figure 2. Open Issue Data Example

Unfortunately, this is where our internal process started to falldown and our existing resolution process had becomeoverwhelmed by the sheer volume of the issues being raised.We were recording the issues and then compounding theproblems by not resolving them in a timely manner. This inturn created a waste cycle where the over-production of theseproblems was taking from our resources to focus on addressingthe most relevant issues.

Figure 3. Quality Risk Factors ImprovedArmed with the Construction IQ overview, we were able torefocus the project teams on closing out the issues, and, as theissues had been sorted, we were able to prioritise clearing thehighest impact issues and bulk closing issues that had beenclosed on site.

Construction IQ Impacts• AI has greatly reduced time spent analysing site data, leading

to more time on site – we have seen a 20% improvement inboth quality and safety issue resolution).

• Removing BAM as the main risk to their own projects byunderstanding the sources of the risk on each project.

• Increasing utilisation of mobile site data capture due tobenefits now visible to site teams.

• Increased likelihood of BAM staff identifying serious issuesthat would adversely impact project delivery.

• Enabling BAM staff to better support the supply chain viafocused issue resolution processes and better understandingby the various subcontractors of the risks to the project.

• Better understanding of risks to the project from poorprocess execution.

• Direct feedback of improvements made to existing process

through reduced risk profile.• Cross-project analysis to ensure that standard processes are

being employed.

Real Waste Reduction• Reduced over-production of information.

o Reinforcing the correct process through additional training to the site teams has reduced the numbers of issues that BAM is responsible for resolving.

• Reducing Inventory & Transport by default.• Reduced defects.

o By improving the resolution cycle of issues and closing them out promptly, the compounding of issues has been greatly reduced or removed.

• Reducing Inventory & Transport by default.• Reduced waiting time as a result of automated reporting.

o High risk issues are automatically flagged directly to the user dashboard.

• Reduced non-utilisation of talent.o Talent is no longer wasted sorting through a

sea of information looking for the key issues.• Reduced motion.

o Issues are no longer resolved by the wrong party.

Future Positive ImpactsBAM Group is currently following on from its 2020 DigitalVision with a program entitled the “Universal ProjectApproach” (UPA). Under UPA, BAM is looking to standardisehow we approach the entire construction lifecycle from designto O&M. Construction IQ, through the Autodesk B360platform, will allow BAM to continuously assess and improvethis approach across all of its operations globally by:• Re-inventing the way BAM capture information, i.e.

reducing the over-production of data captured.• Exponential growth of effective Machine Learning data

model via scaling of Autodesk Forge Platform for theconstruction lifecycle.

• Introduction of a proactive quality and safety culture.• Removing unnecessary and time-consuming ‘after the fact’

reporting.• Upskilling of BAM staff to better understand benefits and

impacts of advanced analytic methodologies.• Upskilling of BAM staff to better evaluate future

technologies and their benefits.


Figure 4. Subcontractor Risk Improved

Figure 5. AI Enabling Our Future Now


Case 20 – Jacobs

Jacobs leads the global professionalservices sector, providing solutions for amore connected, sustainable world.Headquartered in Dallas, Texas, withapproximately US$12Billion in revenueand a talent force of more than 50000,Jacobs provides a full spectrum ofservices including scientific, technical,professional, construction and program

management for business, industrial,commercial, government andinfrastructure sectors. Marking 45 yearsin Ireland, Jacobs established its firstinternational office in Ireland in 1974.Today, the company employs morethan 1100 people across Dublin, Cork,and Belfast and is one of Ireland’slargest firms.


OVERVIEW & BACKGROUND TO THE LEAN INITIATIVEThe CharterJacobs’ offices span several continents,time zones, and different lines ofbusiness (LOB). Traditionally, thismeant that each office and LOBoperated to their own standards using avariety of software systems. However, asthis presented challenges to multi-officeexecution, Jacobs invested a significantamount of time and resources intostandardising these software systems.

This investment required significantupskilling to implement new softwaresystems. As with any standardisationinitiative, a program that initiallypresented challenges has since affordedthe broader group opportunities tomobilise resources from several officesto support large-scale project delivery.

The standardisation of softwaresystems has allowed each office andLOB to also standardise elements ofdesign that were traditionally specific tothem such as “Revit” families, e.g. pipes,lights and equipment, with mastercloud-based libraries used by each LOB.It is on the back of this strategicimprovement across the operation that

Jacobs have been afforded opportunitiesto dramatically change and improvehow we design projects.

As a centre of excellence, the Irishoperation over the past number of yearshas been given a charter to ‘pave theway towards a leaner digitised solutionfor project delivery’. A disruptivemindset across the Irish operation hasenabled this charter, and this approachhas been encouraged and supported byChair and CEO Steve Demetriou andhis senior management team, includingIreland’s management at local level.Without this support and the drive forinnovation, the ask may have been toogreat.

In parallel to project delivery, over thepast number of years the Irish operationhas also focused on this charter byenabling a Digitised Solutions Group(DSG) to focus on areas across ourproject delivery which could beoptimised by digitisation andautomation. This case study is asummary of the areas where we haveoptimised our execution strategy andproject delivery.


www.jacobs.com

AUTHOR

Karl Page

RevitAs the new standardised software across the LOBs, Revitafforded the DSG a platform upon which to build a digitiseddelivery foundation. In comparison to its predecessor“AutoCad”, Revit is a much more advanced system based on a3D environment. As a 3D design tool in its basic form, Revitallows engineers to co-ordinate and gain an appreciation for thescale and complexity of the projects that we deliver.

However, this is just one element of the benefits of using thisAutodesk product. The DSG focused on other capabilitiesavailable and discerned that a much greater focus was needed onthe data entry into the model. It is based on this data entry thatthe Autodesk suite is a truly powerful project delivery tool.Through other software add-ons to Revit, the data can bemanaged, mined, controlled and used as a lean delivery tool,providing quality assurance as a biproduct.

Single Source of TruthTo get an appreciation of the potential to digitise elements ofdesign, the DSG initially focused on data entries and areas ofduplication. Across all the disciplines, we found that Jacobs hada vast amount of data which was duplicated in some format.Different forms of data were recorded on decentralised storagelocations and on a multitude of different software programmes.

This meant that the data had no reference point and was opento inconsistent entries, leading to potential errors across thedata. A further deep dive into the documentation presentedsingle points of failure across the discipline design co-ordination, presenting the potential for errors to occur. Tomitigate this potential issue, Jacobs developed robust qualityprocedures. However, as project schedules become moreaggressive and the complexity and scale of the projects increase,these procedures would be stressed tested. Quality assurance

COMPANY OVERVIEW


became a focal point, and the DSG set about establishing aSingle Source of Truth (SSOT) to mitigate these potentialconcerns.

An SSOT, as the name suggests, is where all supporting datain a design is referencing a master document or database forinformation. Inputting design data is done once, at source, andduplication is removed. This is relatively straightforward for anindividual discipline to manage, however in a multi-disciplinesphere, changes made by one discipline can have acompounding impact on others.

The SSOT focus, therefore, had to be based on leading factorssuch as the equipment lists for process and mechanical, and thatdata being referenced by other disciplines. In its ideal state, theSSOT system has a multitude of layers of truth which need toco-ordinate across the layers. This means that the data entryinputted can be manipulated by the other layers or disciplinedata. For example, changes to room size have an impact on airconditioning, which impacts electrical, which impacts plantrooms sizes. Once an SSOT had been developed, the DSGlooked to areas where digitisation could improve designefficiencies.

Figure 1. Single Source of Truth

Digitised DesignWithout an SSOT, it would not be possible to automateelements of design as multiple sources, and potentially

conflicting data, could exist. Once in place, and inconjunction with Revit and associated add-ons, the DSGwere able to write programming code and scripts to automatedesign functions such as locating electrical services within themodel with the click of a button.

Elements of design that would have previously taken weeks todesign are now being produced within much shortertimeframes. Documents that would have previously beendeveloped manually with limited functionality, have now in-built scripts to mine data from the model to extract reports,such as Material Take-Offs. The data inputted and extractedfrom the model is being managed in a much more efficientmanner.

Separate to Revit, smart functionality has beenprogrammed into a multitude of other deliverables, allreferencing back to the model and the SSOT. This meansthat when changes are made to the SSOT a full suite ofupdates takes place across the design, which leads toprogrammed updates taking place. For the example usedpreviously, when a room changes in size and the airconditioning changes – which leads to an automated updateto the air flow diagrams – then the equipment lists wouldautomatically be updated. This in turn automatically updatesthe electrical load list, which updates the single line diagramsand cable sizes.

Figure 2. Digitised Design

LEAN INITIATIVE IMPROVEMENTS & IMPACT Quality AssuranceThe introduction of the SSOT and Revit has afforded Jacobsthe ability to programme in quality assurance measures suchas error checking and design functions that are incompliance with regulatory standards. The programming ofall the scripts and code has the engineering element built into automate the design in compliance with the regulatorystandards and specifications that we operate to.

A pertinent example of this would be our automation ofthe fire alarm design for the building: code has been writtento locate fire alarm devices in compliance with IS3218 andEN54, with variable elements inbuilt. This means that if aheat detector is used as opposed to a smoke detector, thedesign accommodates to suit inputting said detectors in anunlimited amount of rooms at the click of a button.

This is but one example of how digitised engineering canprovide quality assurance while also reducing the time tocheck a design. Traditionally, quality procedures require all

drawings to be checked and updated, but our robustprogramming functions are providing the opportunity forJacobs to check the code written and trust in the quality ofdeliverable. With the removal of multiple entries, theengineering teams have been afforded more time to focus onthe engineering side of the project.

Figure 3. Quality Assurance


Big DataAs Peter Drucker said, “If you can’t measure it, you can’tmanage it”, and the DSG are focused on data mining themodels and information from past projects to ensure thatJacobs are understanding the metric data. This data isessential not only to winning future projects, but also tobench-mark project delivery against the key performanceindictors which we are judged upon. Programs have beenwritten that automate the extraction of data from the modelin a consistent manner. This makes the overall review of theproject data easy and less time-consuming. Material take-offs, Builders work opes, data sheets and schedules are easilyextracted from the model where traditionally this data wouldhave been hugely time-consuming to generate.

Figure 4. Data Mining

Looking to the FutureJacobs DSG are constantly looking at opportunities toinnovate and improve the systems utilised in the design, witha focus on the future of engineering. Artificial Intelligence(AI), Machine Learning, and Neural Networks are allproviding these opportunities. It means that this is a trulyexciting time to be involved in engineering.

Figure 5. What’s next?


Annual Book of Cases Sponsors

Annual Book ofCases Sponsors


Sponsors

Sponsors



www.alucraftgroup.com.

www.ardmac.com

https://www.bamireland.ie/

www.cfield.ie

www.designergrp.com

http://www.drsbonds.co.uk/

www.expertivity.com

www.exyte.net

www.fluor.com https://www.graham.co.uk/

www.johnpaul.ie


www.jacobs.com

www.rpconsulting.ie

Sponsors

Sponsors


https://smartrfid.ie

www.topconpositioning.ie

www.joneseng.com

www.kdc.ie

www.lbspartners.ie

www.lesirl.ie

www.murphysurveys.ie

www.roadbridge.iewww.sheahancollinsconstruction.com

www.suireng.ie


Chapter 3

Chapter 3

Glossary of Terms& Concepts


Glossary

A3 – This is a one-page report prepared on a single sheet ofpaper that adheres to the discipline of PDCA thinking asapplied to collaborative problem solving, strategydevelopment, or reporting. The A3 includes the background,problem statement, analysis, proposed actions, and theexpected results.

Activity – An identifiable chunk of work with recognisedprerequisite requirements to begin, plus a recognised state ofcompletion or condition of satisfaction. Another way to lookat an activity is to establish the hand-offs for each chunk ofwork, thus defining the activity.

Assignment – A request or offer that has resulted in a reliablepromise and is ready to be placed on the weekly work planfor performance. An assignment must meet the characteristicsfor a quality assignment prior to inclusion on the weeklywork plan.

Buffer – A mechanism for deadening the force of realityunfolding in a manner that is contrary to what wasanticipated in the plan. For example, a capacity buffer iscreated by committing to complete less work than whatwould be achieved according to the planned capacity of theresource. If production falls behind schedule, there is capacityavailable for catching up. Lean production/constructiongenerally prefers capacity buffers to inventory buffers.

Building Information Model/Modelling (BIM) – Theprocess of generating and managing building data during thelife cycle of a building. BIM uses three-dimensional (3D),real-time, dynamic building modelling software. BIMincludes building geometry, spatial relationships, geographicinformation, and quantities and properties of buildingcomponents. BIM can include four-dimensional (4D)simulations to see how part or all of the facility is intended tobe built and 5D capability for model-based estimating. BIMprovides the platform for simultaneous conversations relatedto the design of the "product" and its delivery process.

Capacity – The amount of work that can be produced by anindividual, specialist, or work group in a given period oftime.

Choosing By Advantages (CBA) – This is a tested, effective,and sound decision-making system developed by Jim Suhr(1999) for determining the best decision by looking at theadvantages of each option. CBA has five phases of decision-making: (1) Stage-setting: establish the purpose and contextfor the decision; (2) Innovation: formulate an adequate set ofalternatives; (3) Decision-making: choose the alternative withthe greatest total importance of advantages; (4)Reconsideration: change the decision if it should be changed

or improved on; (5) Implementation: make the decisionhappen, adjust as needed, and evaluate the process andresults.

Commitment-Based Planning – A planning system that isbased on making and securing reliable promises in a teamsetting.

Conditions of Satisfaction (CoS) – An explicit descriptionby a customer of all the actual requirements that must besatisfied by the performer in order for the customer to feelthat he or she received exactly what was wanted.

Constraint – An item or requirement that will prevent anactivity from starting, advancing, or completing as planned.Typical constraints on design tasks are inputs from others,clarity of requirements criteria for what is to be produced orprovided, approvals or releases, and labour or equipmentresources. Typical constraints on construction tasks are thecompletion of design or prerequisite work, or availability ofmaterials, information and directives. Screening tasks forreadiness is assessing the status of their constraints. Removingconstraints is making a task ready to be assigned.

Constraints Log – A list of constraints with identification ofan individual promising to resolve the item by an agreed date.Typically developed during a review of the 6-week look-aheadplan when it is discovered that activities are not constraintfree.

Continuous Improvement (CI) – This is “Kaizen” inJapanese, and it refers to the never-ending cycle ofincremental efforts to improve products, services, andprocesses. Lean is a CI methodology and Lean’s 5th Principleof “Seek Perfection” and “PDCA” speak to CI.

Corrective Action Preventive Action (CAPA) – This is aprocess that investigates and solves problems, identifiescauses, takes corrective action, and prevents recurrence of theroot causes. The ultimate purpose of CAPA is to assure theproblem can never be experienced again.

Cost Modelling – Developing a model of the costcomponents and systems specific to a project and structuringit in a manner that the components and system costs can becontinually updated either via benchmarks, metrics ordetailed estimates to provide the team with a constantly up todate cost model for the project. In the TVD environment,the cost model should allow for projecting ‘what-if ’ scenariosbased on value decisions that have yet to be made.

Critical Path Method (CPM) – The critical path method is astep-by-step project management technique to identify

Glossary of Terms & Concepts


activities on the critical path. It is an approach to projectscheduling that breaks the project into several work tasks,displays them in a flow chart, and then calculates the projectduration based on estimated durations for each task. Itidentifies tasks that are critical, time-wise, in completing theproject.

Critical To Quality (CTQ) – These are the key measurablecharacteristics of a product or process whose performancestandards or specification limits must be met in order tosatisfy the customer. CTQs represent the product or servicecharacteristics as defined by the customer/user.

Current State Map – This is a snapshot of how a process iscurrently done, showing the current methodology of how youproduce products or perform services for your customers. It isa visual method of succinctly recording the key aspects of thecurrent structure and processes in the whole, or any part, of asupply chain.

Customer – The individual engaged in a conversation foraction who will receive the results of performance eitherrequested from, or offered by, the performer. That is, theperson receiving goods/information from a performer.Customers can be internal (for example, a foreman receivinganswers to an RFI; or an architect receiving mechanical loadsfrom an engineer), and external (for example, end users; orclient organisations).

Cycle Time – The time it takes a product or unit of work(e.g. a room, building, quadrant) to go from beginning tocompletion of a production process. That is, the time it iswork-in-process.

Defined Task – A quality task must be "defined". It musthave a beginning and end, and it should be clear to all whenit has been completed.

Dependence – This refers to where two or more tasks aresufficiently related that one cannot be started (or finished)without a certain measure of progress or completion havingbeen achieved by the other. Waiting on release of work.

Direct Observation – Also known as “Observational Study”,this is a method of collecting evaluative information in whichthe evaluator watches the subject in their usual workenvironment without altering that environment.

DMAIC – Define, Measure, Analyse, Improve, and Control.DMAIC is a data-driven improvement cycle used forimproving, optimising, and stabilising business processes anddesigns. The DMAIC improvement cycle is the core toolused to drive Six Sigma projects.

Earned Value (EV) – This is an approach involvingmonitoring the project plan, actual work, and workcompleted value to see if a project is on track. Earned Valueshows how much of the budget and time should have beenspent, considering the amount of work done so far.

Eight Wastes – A framework of eight types of activity that donot add value, that is they are “Waste”. They can besummarised as “DOWNTIME” (Defects, Over-Production,Waiting, Non-utilised resources/talent, Transportation,Inventory, Motion, Excess-Processing), or as “TIMWOODS”(Transportation, Inventory, Motion, Waiting, Over-Production, Over-Processing, Defects, Skills).

Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) – This is the integratedmanagement of core business processes, often in real-time,mediated by software and technology and providing anintegrated and continuously updated view of core businessprocesses using common databases.

Expected Cost – An expression of the team's best estimate atthe conclusion of the Validation Phase of what current bestpractice would produce as a price for the facility reflected inthe accompanying basis of design documents. Typically, theExpected Cost will also be supported by benchmarking orother market data to calibrate the Expected Cost in light ofthe market context.

Fishbone Diagram – This was developed by Ishikawa – oftenreferred to as an “Ishikawa Diagram” – and is a cause-and-effect diagram used in root cause analysis to betterunderstand the factors contributing to a problem.

Five Big Ideas – A set of organising concepts that supportLean Project Delivery. They were developed to explain andorganise the Sutter Health Lean Construction Initiative:Optimize the project not the piece, Collaborate, ReallyCollaborate (originally implied "specialty contractorsinvolved at schematic design"), Projects as Networks ofCommitment, Increase Relatedness, and Tightly CoupleAction and Learning.

Five Core Principles – These are the core principlesunderpinning Lean that were developed by Womack andJones (1996), and include:i. Value – It is defined by your customers who buy

results not products (clean clothes vs. washing machines).We should give the customer what they want rather thanwhat is convenient for us to give them.

ii. Value Stream – The sequence of all processes from rawmaterial to customer.

iii.Flow – Keep value moving; avoid batches and queues;there should be few non-value-adding steps.

iv. Pull – Short-term response to customer’s rate of demandand no overproduction.

v. Perfection – Delivering exactly what a customer wants,when they want it, at a fair price, and defect-free, withminimum waste.

5S – (1) Sort; (2) Set in order; (3) Shine; (4) Standardise; (5)Sustain. This five-step process for workplace efficiency usesvisual controls to eliminate waste, and helps us organise whatwe need and to eliminate what we don't need, thus allowingus to identify problems quickly.

5 Whys – An iterative questioning technique, using cause-and-effect analysis, to get to the root cause of a problem byasking why successively whenever a problem exists in order toget beyond the apparent symptoms. As each answer to thewhy question is documented, an additional inquiry is madeconcerning that response.

Flow – Movement that is smooth and uninterrupted, as inthe "flow of work from one crew to the next" or the flow ofvalue at the pull of the customer.

Future State Map – A vision of the desired future Leansystem that is used as the guide for the change process.

Gemba – The Japanese term for where the actual value is addedor where the actual work takes place. Lean experts encourage


“going to the gemba” to see how things are really done andwhere there is opportunity to eliminate or reduce waste.

Hand-Off – The act of releasing an item or activity to theperson or group performing the next step or operation onthat item or activity, for example, a structural steel design ishanded-off to the steel detailer to complete shop drawings; aroom (or portion) that has been framed is handed-off to thedrywall installer; or all construction on a floor of a hospital iscompleted and handed-off to the hospital personnel to beginstaff-and-stock activities.

Hoshin Kanri – The Japanese term for direction managementor strategy/policy deployment. Ho means direction; Shinmeans Focus; Kan means Alignment; Ri means reason.

Integrated Form of Agreement (IFoA) – A multi-partyagreement that includes the owner, design professional, andconstructor as signatories to the same construction contract.

Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) – A project deliveryapproach that integrates people, systems, business structuresand practices into a process that collaboratively harnesses thetalents and insights of all participants to reduce waste andoptimise efficiency through all phases of the project, fromearly design through project handover. The three contractualcomponents of IPD include: Organization Structure, LeanOperating Systems, and Commercial Terms.

Just In Time (JIT) – A system for producing or deliveringthe right amount of parts or product at the time it is neededfor production.

Kaizen – The Japanese term for incremental continuousimprovement. Kaizen is a structured process to engage thoseclosest to the process to improve both the effectiveness andefficiency of the process. Its goals are to remove waste andadd standardisation. Kaizen has come to mean thephilosophy of continuous improvement.

Kanban – The Japanese term for a signposting mechanismassociated with the demand pull principle. The signal tellsworkers to pull parts or refill material to a certain quantityused in production, they are a signal that a downstream orcustomer process can use to request a specific amount of aspecific part from the upstream, or supply, process.

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) – These are a set ofmeasures designed to benchmark a business’s most importantcharacteristics against a set of strategic targets.

Last Planner – Integral to the LPS, this is the person or groupthat makes assignments to direct workers. Project Architectand Discipline Lead are common names for last planners indesign processes; and Superintendent or Foremen arecommon names for last planners in construction processes.

Last Planner® System (LPS) – This is a system for projectproduction planning and control, aimed at creating aworkflow that achieves reliable execution, that was developedby Glenn Ballard and Greg Howell, with documentation byBallard in 2000. LPS is the collaborative, commitment-basedplanning system that integrates should-can-will-did planning:pull planning, make-ready look-ahead planning withconstraint analysis, weekly work planning based upon reliablepromises, and learning based upon analysis of PPC andReasons for Variance.

Last Responsible Moment (LRM) – The instant in whichthe cost of the delay of a decision surpasses the benefit ofdelay; or the moment when failing to take a decisioneliminates an important alternative.

Lean – The concept that all processes contain waste. Lean isan integrated, value-driven approach to designing andimproving work towards a customer-focused ideal statethrough the engagement of all people aligned to commonprinciples and practices. It is associated with the ability toaccomplish more with less – Lean Enterprises use less humaneffort to perform their work, less material to create theirproducts and services, less time to develop them, and lessenergy and space to produce them. It implies a culture ofrespect and continuous improvement aimed at creating morevalue for the customer while identifying and eliminatingwaste.

Lean Construction – This is a respect-oriented andrelationship-oriented production management-basedapproach to capital project delivery, and it is a new andtransformational way to design and build capital facilities.

Lean Project Delivery System (LPDS) – An organisedimplementation of Lean principles and tools combined toallow a team to operate in unison to create flow.

Lean Thinking – The philosophical foundation, leadershipmindset, and management orientation that enables allindividuals in an organisation understand true Lean; and todesign, develop, implement, manage, and maintain a LeanEnterprise.

Load – The amount of output expected from a productionunit or individual worker within a given time.

Look Ahead Plan – A short interval plan, based on thepull/phase plan, that identifies all the activities to beperformed in the next 6 (or other) weeks. The 6-week look-ahead is updated each week – always identifying newactivities coming 6 weeks out so that the project managementteam can make appropriate arrangements to assure that thework will be ready to be performed in the week indicated.

Look Ahead Planning – The portion of the LPS that focuseson making work ready – assuring that work that should bedone, can be done, by identifying and removing constraintsin advance of need.

Look Ahead Window – The duration associated with lookahead planning. Typically look ahead windows extend from 3to 12 weeks into the future, with 6 weeks preferred on mostprojects.

Make Ready Process – To make ready is to take actionsneeded to remove constraints from assignments to ensure thework can be done as planned.

Master Schedule – A schedule that identifies major events ormilestones in a project (for example, start- up, turn-over toclient, order long delivery components, mobilise in field,complete design, government reviews) and their timing. It isoften the basis for contractual agreements between the ownerand other team members. It is seen as a way to identify longlead items, the feasibility of completing the project ascurrently required, the basis for defining milestones andphases – but not always as a way to control the project.

Milestone – An item on the master schedule that defines theend or beginning of a phase or a contractually required event.

Muda – This is the Japanese word for "Non-Value-Adding"or “Waste”, namely any activity that consumes resources butadds no value. They are a target for reduction or elimination.All Muda is caused by Mura and/or Muri.

Mura – This is the Japanese word for "Unevenness", namelyany activity that has not been levelled out creatingconsequential complexity and cost. They are a target forreduction or elimination.

Muri – This is the Japanese word for "Overburdening",namely any activity that causes excessive demand on a systemthat causes the system to produce beyond its reasonablecapacity. Pushing a machine or person beyond natural limits.Overburdening people results in stress, safety, and qualityproblems. Overburdening equipment causes breakdowns anddefects. They are a target for reduction or elimination.

Necessary Non-Value-Adding (NNVA) – Those supportactivities that are necessary under the present operatingsystem or equipment, but which do not per se add value.One should seek to optimise these.

Network of Commitments – The web of promises necessaryto deliver any project. The role of management is toarticulate and activate the unique network of commitmentsrequired to deliver each project.

Non-Value-Adding (NVA) – Those activities/processes thatdo not directly add/contribute value to customers – namelythose activities the customer would not be happy to pay for.One should seek to reduce and/or remove these.

Optimal Equipment Effectiveness (OEE) – This is ahierarchy of metrics to evaluate how effectively amanufacturing operation is utilised with results stated in ageneric form which allows comparison betweenmanufacturing units in differing industries. It is not anabsolute measure and is best used to identify scope forprocess performance improvement. It is a composite measureof the ability of a machine or process to carry out valueadding activity. OEE = % time machine available * % ofmaximum output achieved * % perfect output. It measuresthe degree to which machines are adding value by not beingwastefully employed due to planned or unplanned downtimeor in producing defects.

Pareto Analysis – Sometimes referred to as the “80:20 rule”,this is the tendency in many business situations for a smallnumber of factors to account for a large proportion of events.For example, 80% of total sales volume might be attributableto 20% of customers and 20% of the product range. In termsof quality, 80% of defects might be attributable to 20% ofcauses. The 20% is sometimes referred to as “the vital few”.

PDCA – Plan, Do, Check, Act/Adjust. This is the cycleintroduced by Walter A. Shewhart and popularised by Dr W.E. Deming as a method for continuous improvement.

Percent Plan Complete (PPC) – A basic measure of howwell the planning system is working – calculated as thenumber of promises/activities completed on the day stateddivided by the total number of promises/activities

made/planned for the week. It measures the percentage ofassignments that are 100% complete as planned.

Performer – The individual engaged in a conversation foraction who agrees to undertake performance either requestedfrom or offered to a customer.

Phase – A period of the project where a specific group ofactivities is scheduled to be accomplished such as buildingdesign, completion of foundations, erection of exterior walls,building dry-in. A phase can be either a time period or agroup of activities leading to the accomplishment of adefined goal/milestone.

Phase Plan – A plan for executing a specific phase of aproject using a pull technique to determine hand-offs. It isprepared by the team actually responsible for doing the workthrough conversation. Work is planned at therequest/demand of a downstream customer.

Plan Reliability – The extent to which a plan is an accurateforecast of future events, it is measured by PPC.

Planning – The act of conversation that leads to well-coordinated action.

Plus/Delta Review – A continuous improvement discussionpreformed at the end of a meeting, project or event used toevaluate the session or activity. Two questions are asked anddiscussed. Plus: What produced value during the session?Delta: What could we change to improve the process oroutcome?

Poka-Yoke – A Japanese term for mistake-proofing methodor device developed by Shigeo Shingo that is used to preventan error or defect from happening or being passed on to thenext operation.

Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) – This is theequipment worn to minimise exposure to serious workplaceinjuries and illnesses.

Process Mapping – A flowchart identifying all the activities,operations, steps and work times for a process.

Promise – The action taken by a performer to commit to acustomer to take some action to produce a mutuallyunderstood result, for example CoS, by a definite time in thefuture.

Pull – A method of advancing work when the next-in-linecustomer is ready to use it. A request/demand from thecustomer signals that the work is needed and it is pulled fromthe performer. Pull releases work when the system is ready touse it.

Push – Push an order from a central authority based on aschedule; advancing work based on central schedule.Releasing materials, information, or directives possiblyaccording to a plan but irrespective of whether or not thedownstream process is ready to process them.

Quality – Conformance to a customer’s valid and agreedupon CoS.

Quality Assignment – Assignment that meets quality criteria


for release to the customer process. The quality criteria are:(1) definition; (2) soundness; (3) sequence; (4) size; and (5)learning.

Reason for Variance – Factors that prevented an assignmentfrom being completed as promised, used by the team topromote learning concerning the failure of the planningsystem to produce predictable workflow. By assigning acategory of variance to each uncompleted task, a team is ableto identify those areas of recurring failure that requireadditional reflection and analysis.

Reliable Promise – A promise made by a performer onlyafter self-assuring that the promisor: (1) is competent or hasaccess to the competence (both skill and wherewithal); (2)has estimated the amount of time the task will take; (3) hasblocked all time needed to perform; (4) is freely committingand is not privately doubting ability to achieve the outcome;and (5) is prepared to accept any upset that may result fromfailure to deliver as promised.

Request – The action taken by a customer to ask a performerto take some action to produce a mutually understood result(CoS) by a definite time in the future.

Right First Time (RFT) – This concept involves making surethat all activities are carried out in the right manner the firsttime and every time. A quality management concept thatdefect prevention is more advantageous and cost effectivethan defect detection and associated rework.

Root Cause Analysis – A systematic method of analysingpossible causes to determine the root cause of a problem.

SCAMPER – The SCAMPER technique is based verysimply on the idea that what is new is actually a modificationof existing old things around us. It is a creative thinking andproblem solving technique developed to address targetedquestions that help solve problems or ignite creativity duringbrainstorming meetings. The name SCAMPER is acronymfor seven techniques: (S) substitute, (C) combine, (A) adapt,(M) modify, (P) put to another use, (E) eliminate, and (R)reverse.

Screening – Determining the status of tasks in the look-ahead window relative to their constraints, and choosing toadvance or retard tasks based on their constraint status andthe probability of removing constraints.

Sequenced – A sequenced assignment should release work toanother performer, and in no case should it hinder anotherassignment or cause other crews to do additional work. Itrefers to quality criterion for selecting assignments amongthose that are sound in priority order and in constructabilityorder.

Set-Based Concurrent Engineering (SBCE) – Thisemanated from the Toyota Motor Corporation’s approach toproduct development. SBCE begins by broadly consideringsets of possible solutions and gradually narrowing the set ofpossibilities to converge on a final solution. A wide net fromthe start, and gradual elimination of weaker solutions, makesfinding the best or better solutions more likely. As a result, acompany/design team may take more time early on to definethe solutions, but can then move more quickly towardconvergence and, ultimately, production than its point-basedcounterparts.

Set-Based Design (SBD) – A design method whereby sets ofalternative solutions to parts of the problem are kept openuntil their LRM, in order to find by means of set intersectionthe best combination that solves the problem as a whole.

Shielding – Preventing the release work to production unitsbecause it does not meet quality criteria; the work is not aquality assignment. It is akin to stopping the assembly line,rather than advancing a defective product. The purpose ofshielding is to reduce uncertainty and variation, therebyproviding production units with greater opportunity to bereliable.

Should-Can-Will-Did – To be effective, productionmanagement systems must tell us what we should do andwhat we can do, so that we can decide what we will do, thencompare with what we did to improve our planning.

SIPOC – Suppliers, Inputs, Process, Outputs, Customers.This is a visual tool to assist in documenting a process frombeginning-to-end.

6S – This is all of the 5S with the addition of Safety as the6th S.

Six Sigma – A method and a set of tools to reduce variationin processes, particularly quality, using mostly statisticaltools.

Sized – Quality criterion for assignments whereby theamount of work included in an assignment is made to matchthe capacity of the production unit that will do the work.The performer should have a very reasonable expectation thatthe assignment can be completed by the number of peopleavailable to do the job.

SMED – Stands for Single Minutes Exchange of Dies. It is aLean production method to enable improved linechangeovers and reduce the waste therein.

Sound – Quality criterion for assignments that tests whetheror not assignments have had all constraints removed. Theperformer of an assignment should know that the materials,tools, staff, and information to complete an assignment areavailable before accepting it.

Standard Work – Integral to Lean, this aims at creatingstandardised processes and procedures that are repeatable,reliable, and capable – this being the basis for continuousimprovement.

Takt – Takt time may be thought of as a measurable beattime, rate time or heartbeat. In Lean, Takt time is the rate atwhich a finished product needs to be completed in order tomeet customer demand. If a company has a takt time of 10minutes, that means every 10 minutes a complete product,assembly, or machine is produced off the line because onaverage a customer is buying a finished product every 10minutes.

Target Cost – The cost goal established by the delivery teamas the target for its design and delivery efforts. The TargetCost should be set at less than best-in-class past performance.The goal is to create a sense of necessity to drive innovationand waste reduction into the design and constructionprocess.


Target Value Delivery (TVD) – This is a disciplinedmanagement practice to be used throughout the project toassure that the facility meets the operational needs and valuesof the users, is delivered within the allowable budget, andpromotes innovation throughout the process to increase valueand eliminate waste (time, money, human effort).

Target Value Design – Encompasses the Target ValueDelivery approaches implemented during the design deliveryphases of the project.

Target Value Production – Encompasses the Target ValueDelivery approaches implemented during the constructiondelivery phases of the project.

Task – An identifiable chunk of work.

Throughput – The output rate of a production process.

Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) – This is a techniquedesigned to optimise the performance, reliability, andproductivity of plant and equipment. Responsibility formaintenance is given to the actual operators.

Under-Loading – Making assignments to a production unit,or a resource within a production unit, that absorbs less than100% of its capacity. Under-loading is necessary toaccommodate variation in processing time or productionrate, in order to assure plan reliability. Under-loading is alsodone to release time for workers to take part in training orlearning, conducting first-run studies, implementing processimprovements, or for equipment to be maintained.

Utilisation – The percentage of a resource’s capacity that isused in actual production.

Value – What the customer wants from the process. Thecustomer defines value.

Value-Adding (VA) – Those activities/processes that directlyadd/contribute value to customers – those activities thecustomer is happy to pay for. One should constantly strive toexpand these.

Value Stream – The sequence of activities required to design,produce, and deliver a good or service to a customer, and itincludes the dual flows of information and material.

Value Stream Mapping (VSM) – The process of mapping outand visually displaying a value stream so that improvementactivity can be effectively planned. VSM is the meta tool thatguides all other Lean tools. When we utilise VSM we visualisethe current state plus desired future state of a process that take aproduct or service from its beginning through to the customer.

Variance – When an assignment is not completed as stated, itis considered a variance from the weekly work plan.

Variance Trend Analysis – This refers to the quantitativeinvestigation of the difference between actual and planned

behaviour. This technique is used for determining the causeand degree of difference between the baseline and actualperformance and to maintain control over a project.

Visual Management – Placing tools, parts, productionactivities, plans, schedules, measures and performanceindicators in plain view. This assures that the status of thesystem can be understood at a glance by everyone involvedand actions taken locally in support of system objectives.

Waste – The opposite of value, these are activities/processesthat do not directly add/contribute value to customers, andthat the customer would not be happy to pay for. The aim ofLean is to reduce and remove waste from processes.

Waste Walks – These are a form of direct observation and aresimply a planned visit to where work is being performed toobserve what's happening and to note the waste. It differsfrom go-see activities in that you are specifically looking forwaste.

Weekly Work Plan (WWP) – The commitment-level (will)planning step of LPS identifying the promised taskcompletions agreed upon by the performers. The WWP isused to determine the success of the planning effort and todetermine what factors limit performance. It is a moredetailed level than the look-ahead and is the basis ofmeasuring PPC.

Weekly Work Planning – The process by which the LastPlanner establishes the plan for the coming period.

Work Flow – The movement of information and materialsthrough networks of interdependent specialists.

Work Structuring – Designing the production system todetermine who does what, when, where and how, usually bybreaking work into pieces, where pieces will likely bedifferent from one production unit to the next. The purposeof work structuring is to promote flow and optimize systemthroughput by focusing on handoffs and opportunities formoving smaller batches of work though the productionsystem.

Workable Backlog – An activity or assignment that is readyto be performed, but is not assigned to be performed duringthe active week in the WWP. If the team agrees thatperformance of this activity will not hinder other work, thenit can be placed on the list of Workable Backlog as part of theWWP. Completion or non-completion of these activities arenot recorded or counted in calculation of PPC.

Work In Process (WIP) – The inventory between the startand end points of a production process.

X-Matrix – Used in Hoshin Planning, the X-Matrix is atemplate used in organisational improvement that conciselyvisualises on one page (A3) the alignment of an organisation’sTrue North, its Aspirations, its Strategies, its Tactics, and itsEvidence.


Editor’s NoteThis glossary has been compiled and adapted from a variety of sources, primarily the LCI (USA) Glossary of Terms and the Waterford Institute of Technology Lean Lexicon.

Photo: Alec Elliott, IAA

Lean Construction Irelandleanconstructionireland.ie/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/... ·...

Documents

Transcript of Lean Construction Irelandleanconstructionireland.ie/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/... ·...