Measuring the Impacts of Advanced Work
Packaging (AWP) and WorkFace Planning (WFP)
on Work Package and Project Performance
Aminah Robinson Fayek Ph.D., P.Eng.
Yonas Halala, MSc student
Nima Gerami Seresht, PhD candidate
Tannis Liviniuk, Bentley
Ryan Posnikoff, Bentley
Workshop
outline
• Workshop objectives
• Background
• Research objectives
• Data collection forms
• Next steps in study
• Research ethics
• Acknowledgements
2
3
Objectives of this workshop
• To summarize work done to date on AWP
• To discuss the need to quantify the costs and benefits of
implementing AWP
• To present an approach to measure all factors impacting
costs and benefits of AWP
• To obtain your feedback on proposed approach and future
needs
• To solicit your participation in data collection
• To provide you with a tool to assess the maturity of AWP
practices on your projects
Changes in Oil Price
4
64%
Cost
Overruns
73%
Schedule
Overruns
33%
Time on
Tools
Data:
Ernst and Young, 2015
CII, 2013
The Reality of Projects Today
5
The Reality of Projects Today
6
The Reality of Projects Today
7
Cost and Schedule Planning: Integrated planning methods
8
Work package methods
Building information modelling
(BIM) methods
Activity-based job costing
methods
Lean construction-based
methods
Database framework method
AWP
Have a
plan
Utilize a
control
system to
manage
the plan
AIM
Finish
projects on
time and
within
budget
Integrated
planning
What is Advanced Work Packaging (AWP)?
9
AWP
• Term coined by the Construction Industry Institute (CII)
• Developed in the context of large industrial projects and
megaprojects
• Defined as the overall process flow of all the detailed work
packages (EWP, CWP, IWP)
• Provides a disciplined approach to project planning and
execution
Relationship between AWP and WFP
(Workface Planning)
10
WorkFace Planning (WFP) is a subset of Advanced Work Packaging (AWP)
and relates to installation work packages (IWP).
CII, 2013
The Process of Planning AWP
Deliverables
11
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
Define CWAsCWA boundary
definition within the
plot plan
Path of ConstructionSequencing of the
Construction Work Areas
that have been defined
EWP Release PlanPlanned sequence of
EWP development to
support constructionIWP Release PlanSequence of IWP
development to support
planned crew activities
Measure PerformancePerformance measurement for
each hierarchical level of the
work package breakdown
(CWA, CWP, IWP)
CWP Release PlanPlanned sequence of
CWP development to
support construction
Evaluation of project
data to determine
benefits of AWP as
well as maturity traits.
Also included focus groups.
Enabled the team to analyze
specific processes and
complete maturity level
ratings.
Case Studies Expert Interviews
Survey of conference
attendees to validate
the benefits of AWP.
Survey
Previous Research Methodology
12
AWP Maturity Stages
13
AWP Maturity Stages
14
AWP Maturity Stages
15
• High predictability in cost and schedule observed
• Enhanced quality with reduced rework observed
• 13 projects met deadline, 6 were ahead of schedule
• Zero lost time in 25 million construction hours
• Savings between 5-10 % of TIC (Total Installed Cost)
• An average 25% increase
Benefits of AWP
16
Quality
Productivity
Cost
Safety
Schedule
Predictability
The following benefits of AWP were observed by CII, based on 20 case studies.
Need for further AWP Research
17
Lack of sufficient quantitative data to verify
benefits of AWP.
Cost of implementing AWP is not quantified and
compared to benefits in order to determine ROI.
Impact of crew, foreman, and workface planners
on AWP implementation has not been addressed.
18
Assess maturity of AWP Practices
Determine additional indirect
costs of AWP implementation
Identify impact of crew, foreman,
workface planner characteristics
Develop metrics to measure impact
of AWP on project performance
Develop a framework for systematic
data collection
Develop a data analysis method
Report on findings and help to
update COAA’s AWP Audit Tool
Advanced Work Packaging and WorkFace
Planning: Research objectives
19
Advanced Work Packaging and WorkFace
Planning:Data collection forms
Many forms are based on criteria established by CII and COAA.
AWP maturity
assessment
AWP indirect
costs
WorkFace
planner
qualification
characterization
Crew
characterization
Foreman
characterization
Performance
metrics
Data
collection
forms
20
AWP Indirect Costs
AWP indirect
costs
Costs from
AWP-exclusive
tasks
AWP salaried
employees
AWP training costs
AWP-related costs
Owner costs
e.g., Appointing AWP
manager
PM and CM costs
e.g., Aligning AWP
processes
WorkFace planning
manager
WorkFace planners
AWP-specific training
IT
Company systems
adaptation
AWP maturity assessment
Phase I: Planning Phase II: Detailed engineering
1.1 The requirement for AWP is
written into contracts
1.2 A documented AWP strategy is
in place
1.3 Documented AWP protocols
are developed
1.4 A detailed project execution
plan that includes AWP is
developed
1.5 AWP champion/manager is
identified for each stakeholder
2.1 Schedule is developed for all CWPs
and EWPs prior to start of detailed
engineering
2.2 IWP process is well documented in a
written procedure
2.3 Specific, detailed divisions of
responsibility to support AWP
content are in place
2.4 Dedicated IWP planner(s) have been
identified and a written job
description for planners is in place
2.5 All planners are on the distribution list
for all project documentation
3.1 A process for constraint
identification and resolution is in
place
3.2 Work is always packaged in IWPs
3.3 IWPs always identify work to be
completed (as indicated by
technical data, drawings, and
specifications)
3.4 All IWPs identify the general
sequence of work and labour
necessary to complete the work
3.5 All IWPs identify the required
material necessary to complete
the work
Phase III: Construction
21
AWP Maturity Assessment:Sample evaluation criteria
2.6 Detailed constructability reviews are
performed after AWP planners have
been appointed
AWP Maturity Assessment Survey:Maturity measurement scale
22
Maturity Measurement
Scale value Scale description
Not
Applicable Use of the practice is non-existent on this project
Level 1 Use of the practice is not consistently applied on this project
Level 2 A disciplined process exists for the practice on this project
Level 3A disciplined process exists for the practice across the different
projects within the same organization
Level 4Quantitative process control is used across the organization to
proactively manage the execution of the practice on this project
Level 5Continuous process improvement is used across the organization to
optimise the practice on this project
AWP Maturity Assessment Survey:Importance measurement scale
23
Importance Measurement
Scale value Scale description
1 Practice is extremely unimportant to the associated phase
2 Practice is unimportant to the associated phase
3 Practice is neither unimportant or important to the associated phase
4 Practice is important to the associated phase
5 Practice is extremely important to the associated phase
WorkFace Planner Qualification
Characterization
24
WorkFace planner
qualification
characterization
Essential duties
Safety
Project planning
Knowledge required
Skills required
Other desireable characteristics
Self
Evaluation
Supervisor
Evaluation
Importance of competency Agreement of proficiency
WorkFace Planner Qualification
Characterization
25
Essential Duties
No Evaluation criteria
1.1 Ensures that safety, quality and efficiency at the WorkFace are considered
1.2Uses his/her hands-on construction expertise to develop Installation Work
Packages (IWP).
1.3Coordinates with and provides WorkFace construction knowledge to project
schedulers, engineers, superintendents and managers.
Safety
No Evaluation criteria
2.1Knows, understands and communicates the safety regulations (Occupational
Health and Safety Act) and project specific safety policies and procedures.
2.2 Identifies specific risks associated with executing the planned activities.
2.3Provides or arranges for inclusion of safety compliance in IWP to mitigate
specific risks.
WorkFace Planner Qualification
Characterization
26
Project Planning
No Evaluation criteria
3.1Prepares required project IWP, which includes determining required activities,
resources, special conditions, quality control, risk planning, interdependencies
3.2Determines and coordinates resource requirements and works well with
resource coordinators
Knowledge Required
No Evaluation criteria
4.1 Has knowledge of health, safety and environmental programs
4.2 Knows the company and project environment
4.3Has the requisite construction field or technical experience to effectively perform
their duties without step by step instruction from field supervision.
WorkFace Planner Qualification
Characterization
27
Skills Required
No Evaluation criteria
5.1 Has good problem solving skills
5.2 Is able to resolve conflicts
5.3 Has strong leadership skills
Other Desirable Characteristics
No Evaluation criteria
6.1 Is willing to accept challenges
6.2 Is willing to learn
6.3 Is responsible and accountable
Crew Characterization
28
Crew
characterization
Crew size
Adequacy of crew size
Crew composition
Crew experience
Crew makeup changes
Crew turnover rate
Crew skill level
Crew motivation
Level of interruptions
Number of languages spoken on crew
Foreman Characterization
29
Foreman
characterization
Foreman experience
Change of foreman (frequency)
Foreman planning skills
Leadership and supervisory skills
Coordination of crews and equipment
Performance Metrics (KPIs)
30
Measured at CWP or IWP levels; if cost estimate at tender stage is available for
individual IWPs, all metrics should be evaluated at IWP level.
Performance metrics
(KPIs)
Cost performance
Schedule performance
Quality performance
Safety performance
Productivity
Predictability
Performance Metrics:CWP cost performance metrics
CWP Cost Performance Metrics
ID KPI Name Formula
1.1 Work package cost growth
1.2 Work package budget factor
1.3Work package indirect cost
factor
1.4Work package direct cost
factor
1.5Work package net variation
over final cost
1.6 Cost per unit at completion
1.7 Cost of defects warranty
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 − 𝐸𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡
𝐸𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡
𝐸𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 + 𝐴𝑝𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑑 𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒𝑠
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡
𝑁𝑒𝑡 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑣𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠
𝐸𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡
𝑄𝑢𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑤𝑜𝑟𝑘
𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑓𝑦𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑑𝑒𝑓𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑠
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡
Performance Metrics:IWP schedule performance metrics
IWP Schedule Performance Metrics
ID KPI Name Formula
2.1Work package schedule
factor
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛
𝐸𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑑𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 + 𝐴𝑝𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑑 𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒𝑠
2.2Work package schedule
growth
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 − 𝐸𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑑𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛
𝐸𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑑𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛
2.3 Time variance𝐼𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑒|𝐷𝑒𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 − 𝐸𝑥𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛
𝐸𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑑𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛
2.4 Time per unit at completion𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛
𝑄𝑢𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑤𝑜𝑟𝑘
32
Performance metrics:IWP productivity performance metrics
IWP Productivity Performance Metrics
ID KPI Name Formula
6.1Construction Production
Factor (Physical Work)
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐷𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑊𝑜𝑟𝑘 𝐻𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐼𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑑 𝑄𝑢𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑡𝑦
6.2Construction Productivity
Factor (Physical Work)
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐷𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑀𝑎𝑛 − 𝐻𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐼𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑑 𝑄𝑢𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑡𝑦
6.3Construction Productivity
Factor (Cost)
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐼𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑑 𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝐷𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑀𝑎𝑛 − 𝐻𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠
6.4Productivity Estimate
Accuracy (Productivity Index)
𝐸𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑒
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑒
6.5 Project Absenteeism Rate𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑀𝑎𝑛 − 𝐻𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠 𝐿𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝑡𝑜 𝐴𝑏𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑒𝑖𝑠𝑚
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝐷𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑀𝑎𝑛 − 𝐻𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠
33
34
Advanced Work Packaging and WorkFace
Planning: Next steps in study
Develop a tool
to assess
maturity of
AWP
Determine
additional
indirect costs of
AWP
Assess
qualifications of
WorkFace
planners
Develop
metrics to
measure
impact of AWP
Develop and
validate data
collection
methodology
Identify the
impact of crew
and foreman
characteristics
Pilot data
collection
methodology
and analyze
data
Update AWP
audit tool
… …
University of Alberta Research Ethics
Protocol
Participants are fully informed of study goals and consent process.
Participation is purely voluntary.
All information is anonymized.
Informed Consent
Voluntary
Anonymous
Only aggregated results are published in academic research and technical reports.
Confidential
35
Would you like to learn more about this study?
36
We are still currently recruiting participants to contribute projects for the
Impacts of Advanced Work Packaging and WorkFace Planning on
Work Package and Project Performance study.
Please let us know if your organization is interested in learning more about this
research, and if you can help us obtain projects for data collection and analysis.
We have a sign-up sheet you can use to record your interest.
Acknowledgements
37
Doug Hill
Tannis Liviniuk Ryan Posnikoff
Stephen Atkinson Andrew Foy
Petra Polster
COAA AWP Subcommittee
Barry Tymchuk
Thank you
Questions
&
Discussion
Dr. Aminah Robinson Fayek
NSERC Industrial Research
Chair in Strategic Construction
Modeling and Delivery
Ph: 780-492-1205
38
www.strategic-construction.ualberta.ca
Top Related