As-Builts Final Gate Review March 11 2013
description
Transcript of As-Builts Final Gate Review March 11 2013
1
As-Builts Final Gate Review
March 11 2013
Define
Measure
Analyze
Improve
Control
CreateProject
DefinitionMap the process
Capture customer
requirements
Validate Measurement
System for output Y
Collect data
EstablishBaseline
Capability
Identify potential sources of
variation and Waste
Analyse root causes
Establish potential process
improvements
Prioritise key X’s - process inputs
Implement control plan
DocumentProcess.
ImplementControls
Determine FinalProcess
Capability
D M A I C Roadmap
IdentifySolution
Plan Improvements
Validate Solution
ImplementImprovements
Gat
e re
view
Gat
e re
view
Gat
e re
view
31 July
18 June
15 Oct
Monitor Project Performance
Over Time
11 March
As–Builts Project Team.• Project Sponsor : Mike Maunsell • Business Sponsor : Steve Tobin • Process Owner: Kevin Normanton • Draughting Manager: Shane Ballantyne.• Project Leader : Rod Pedersen • Team members:
– Build Manager : Michael Walding – Draughting Technician : Truby Morgan – Change Management: Katherine Faire – Senior Draughtsperson Paul Dickons
DEFINE
Voice of the customer
• Shane Ballantyne– I want my team to complete their work without having to deal with
poor quality as – builts – Steady delivery of accurate records to draughting team in a timely
manner. – Consistent reliable as-built information to free up our time.
• Kevin Normanton – As-Builts ,right first time every time from the sub-contractors and
better visibility of progress in the field. • Mike Maunsell.
– The as-builts are crucial in enabling us to invoice chorus and reduce our WIP.
– This project has been identified from our strategy weekend as being high priority and needs a consensus approach to deliver real improvement in bottom line results.
DEFINE
Problem and Objective What is an As-Built ?
– A field recording, documenting actual build location and specifications of all plant installed on the project (BAU or UFB).
What is the problem : – Tracking of as-built records is not visible. There is a general lack of accountability
for doing as-builts to the right standard and quality. Also poor understanding and accuracy affects the timely completion of As-builts to the Draughting team.
Project Objective– To improve the quality and accuracy of the as- builts.– To Improve the tracking and visibility of as- builts – To reduce the time taken to complete the as-builts and deliver the as-builts to
the draughting team within the required timeframe.
Project metrics include:– # of rejections from the draughting team. – # of As-builts delivered daily to draughting team – Time taken to produce as-builts (mhrs) and lead time.– WIP figure waiting for as-builts – Visibility and tracking metrics (daily management of process )
DEFINE
Data: As-Builts. Quality and time
Summary: The average quality of the as-builts delivered to the records team is 6.3.
The average time taken to submit as-builts to records team is 14 days after cabinet completion
Average Quality score = 6.3
87654
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
avg all areas
Freq
uenc
y
Mean 6.272StDev 1.118N 59
Histogram of avg all areasNormal
2824201612840
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
days afterFr
eque
ncy
Mean 13.74StDev 6.848N 27
Normal average days as-builts received after cabinet completion
Average time as-builts are delivered after cabinet completion= 14 days
The quality target is 9.
The delivery target is 2 days
28 days after is a
problem.
Measure / Analyse
“You can’t improve a process if you can’t measure it.”Deming
Data: As-Builts Quality
9
8
7
6
5
4scor
e 1-
10 o
n qu
ality
of a
s bu
ilts
ASH
MAS
NAPWGTN
DND
PLM
ASH
MAS
NAP
WGTNDND
PLM
ASH
MAS
NAPWGTN
DND
PLM
ASH
MASNAP
WGTN
DND
PLM
ASH
MASNAP
WGTN
DND
PLM
ASH MAS
NAP
WGTN
DND
PLM
ASH
NAP
WGTN
DNDPLM
ASH MAS
NAPWGTN
DND
PLMASH
MAS
NAP
WGTN
DND
PLM
ASH
MAS
NAP
WGTNDND
PLM
as-builts deliverables v regions
Summary: Average score of 6.3 /10.
Focus areas for improvement are :
•By Area: Dunedin, Ashburton and Wellington.
•By Type: Civils and Hauling As-Builts .
avg Dunavg ashavg masavg napieravg wgtnavg palmerston
9
8
7
6
5
4
scor
e 1-
10 a
gain
st d
eliv
erab
les
fixed fog
tube test
tube allocat
duct tee
hauling
man civil
rib-jointslaterals
duct civilcab civil
fixed fog
tube test
tube allocat
duct tee
hauling
man civil
rib-joints
laterals
duct civilcab civil
fixed fog
tube test
tube allocat
duct tee
hauling
man civil
rib-joints
lateralsduct civil
cab civil
fixed fogtube test
tube allocat
hauling
man civil
rib-joints
lateralsduct civil
cab civil
fixed fog
tube test
tube allocat
duct tee
haulingman civil
rib-joints
laterals
duct civilcab civil
fixed fog
tube test tube allocat
duct tee
hauling
man civilrib-joints
laterals
duct civil
cab civil
Quality survey of as-builts accross regions and deliverables
Measure/Analyse
As-builts delivered on time
and to the right standard
Subcontractors (includes Downer) Policies
Environment People
Process
Format/style
Page 1
“As- Builts” Cause and Effect diagram.Purpose: to prioritise the key input factors.
Backfilled before As-builts done or checked
Contractual obligations For as-builts
No clearly defined processFor submitting as-builts
#of rejections of as-builts
UFB As-builts recording document
Payments based on As-builts completion
QA for as-builts)
As-builts std documents
NCRs issued by records team ?
# of as-builts deliverables= lots of variation
Progressive completion of as-builts after work done
Not sure they care that much Or realise the importance
Time needed to do as-builts Not regarded as value add
# of contractors in cabinet areaNot clear about whats reqd
Or by when
Backlog of work for each recording Draughtsman
Resources being moved aroundLack of continuity
Motivation levels low
Clear defined roles /accountabilities
Field recording specialist /draughtman
Training . Skill levels
Supervision of cabinet build
Leadership of as-builts process. Cultural norms
Distance of boundaries
Weather (rains on page )
Topography
Geographic location of cabinet
Variation in stds
Handwritten recording on graph paper
Hard copies not kept just scanned
Pen or pencil recording
Field book+ toolsEg GPS technology
Computer drawn -visioVariation of as-builts standards
Size of page A4-A3
Design package Handed over to SM
Design Changes Delivery process
To records
Tracking of as-builts(scalable solution for UFB )
Cabinet type ABF/FAT
Cabinet Completion date
Dble handlingAs-builts
drawn twice
Feedback process For as-builts
Lack of ITPs for as-builts upstream quality
Lost as-builts. No defined process
From sub-cons to SM
Multiple contractorsShifting responsibilities
Top 9 “causes” from fishbone diagram.
1. Design changes
2. No defined delivery process
3. Tracking of as-builts
4. Multiple contractors shifting responsibilities.
5. The number of contractors in the cabinet area
6. The number of rejections due to poor quality
7. Lack of training or skills required to do as-builts
8. Not enough field recording draughties to do QA in the field
9. As-Builts SOPs not readily available or confusing
Measure/Analyse
Precisely how many As-Builts are delivered late ? And what is the
cost ?
By cabinet Location
By tracking and recording
process
By Subcontractor
By Recording Method
# of late as-builts from Recording draughtsman (Downer)
# of late as-builts from hand drawn in field
# of late as-builts from surveyors
# of late as-builts by type eg drillers/jointers
# of late as-builts by skills / capability
# of late as-builts by contract payments
# of Late As-builts from wgtn
# of Late As -builts from Sth Island
# of late As-builts from LNI
# of late as-builts by Wellington.
# of late as-builts rest of UFB
Single PDFs scanned and compiled by one person for
multiple cabinets
Complete as-builts dossier scanned to senior
draughtsman and checked
Measurement System Analysis -Audit is Red There is not enough confidence in the As-Builts measurement system to be sure we will make
a measurable difference in the delivery time to recording team.
# of late as-builts by changes in
programme plan
Recommendation Fix the As-Builts measurement system before implementing any changes.
# of late As-Builts > 48hrs after cabinet
completion
#of late as-builts by delay in drawing them after work completed
Estimated financial cost If delivery of As-Builts averages 14 days after cabinet completion and if one production day is lost on average due to As-Builts. This equates to approx $3300 per cab. x 150 cabinets to date = $495,000.00
20%
15%
5%
60% of late delivery is due to sub-contractor
Change Management Strategy
As-Builts Change
management
Change management
resources
Communication
Sponsors
Training Coaching
Plan
Develop sponsor roadmap
Develop support presentations and
collateral
Change management
strategy
Schedule “intro to change mgmt and ADKAR” training
Rod and Katherine
Allocate responsibilities
ADKAR
Prosci methodology
CM best Practise
Complete Organisational
attributes assessment
Complete change characteristics
assesment
Conduct stakeholder assessment
Identify areas of risk
Develop risk mitigation plan
Understand nature of change
Develop delivery
mechanism
Develop content
People
Process
Technology
Roles
New Design
Systems changes
As-builders
Sub-contractors
Project Mgrs
Site managers
Site supervisors
Sub-contractors
Weekly updates
Downer edition
Downer sponsors /stakeholders
Site managers and supervisors
Early successes
Fit 4 business programme
Key messages
Updates and progress reports
Identify key issues
Incorporate findings into
plan
Posters / notice boards
sub-contractors/as-builders PR+SR 300 6.25 31sub-contractors are keen to help with this project and if we aprtner with them and explain very clearly the goals we are trying to achieve we should get good resuts
downer as-builts coordinators IT+SP 4 5.85 35
The as-builts coordinators within downer are a group that do not have a defined role apart from managing quality as best they can. Defining a new way of doing things may be a challenge even though they will benefit from lower
Build teams sm+ss KN 20 2.50 51
The build teams will struggle the most with the proposed changes as they are effectively the front line for all issues and have repeated requests to improve performance across many fronts. The team is mostly new or have been
draughtys /records team SB 50 4.70 44
draughtys and records team bear the brunt of the poor quality delivered to them and the attempts to get as-builts correct result in frustration.they have a very defined view of the quality they need so it may be difficult to reach a
downer telco backhaul teams EP 20 NA 52
don’t know much about this group but suspect they will have quite a lot to say about asbuilts. The challenge will be getting them on side and in agreeance with any changes. Backhaul is a problem which they are involved in
UFB project managers RBJS 3 5.00 44
UFB project managers are the process owners for as-builts but lack the authority to enable process changes to be effective. They are managing lots of competeing priorities so only have a small amount of time to spend on
design team SBd 50 3.50 35 design group is not impacted significantly by this change.
0 ST 0 6.85 0 0
Mike Maunsell
Shane Ballantyne
Chris Ely
Kevin N
Rob j and Jason S
Shayne Bird
Katherine Faire
CJ
AL C
Downer as-built coordinators
Steve Tobin
Wellington build teams
LNI build teams
SouthIsland build teams
As-builts project team
Mike Walding Mike Kemp
Paul Dickons
Sub-contractor Group
From Mike to his DRS CM powerpoint and sound bites 1 pager. ADKAR and get his DRs into supporting the change efforts Change management is a process.Leadership/sponsorship
Draughty team
L2 to their DRsProject details WIIFMADKAR Leadership thru the process
3/6/2013
Sponsor assessment diagram and communications plan for As-Builts project
Measure/Analyse
Change messages from the sponsor
Measure/analyse
• Steve Tobin has my full delegated authority. If there is doubt or conflict, Steve has the final say.
• EVERYONE has a role to play in making the project successful -
whether that is active participation or support of the processes.
• As-builts are one of our top priority projects. We all agreed this at the May strategy session.
• I’m committed to this path for the as-builts and I need your
support. • This is a new approach for the project, for Downer and for most of
us personally. It’s our first time using the continuous improvement methodology of Lean Six Sigma.
• This is a fantastic opportunity for all of us to build a better as-built process and to learn about continuous improvement.
As-Builts list of Potential Process Improvements To do Impact
1 Create the delivery process to records. For each cabinet include start and finish dates.
Easy
High
2 Provide faster feedback for poor quality as-builts. (QA at point of delivery ) Easy
High
3 NCRs raised and registered for poor quality as builts Easy
High
4 Communicate end to end as-builts process for cabinet build to all sub-contractors
Easy
Med
5 Develop Comms plan to as-builders to lift awareness and enforce compliance Easy
Med
6 All sub-cons to have contracts with Downer that specifically include as-builts Easy
Low
7 Improve design to reduce changes in the field Easy
Low
8 Include as-built stds in job pack issued to sub-cons Med Med 9 PMs to own the performance relationship with sub-cons and provide 1:1
feedback Med Med
10 Develop a new tracking /measuring system for as-builts Hard
High
11 Define as-builts stds and check sub-con skills /capability against the stds Hard
High
12 Clear consequences for poor quality as-builts performance and reward good quality
Hard
High
13 Develop a list of approved as-builders that are trained and qualified. We will only accept as-builts from approved as-builders
Hard
High
14 Develop leadership capability to ensure problems are not passed on particularly for as-builts.
Hard
High
Improve/ Control
Improvements Implemented
1. UFB recording guidelines rewritten / simplified 25 pages to 16.
2. New guidelines flipchart checklist designed and printed (120copies )
3. Nominated as-builders trained and mentored. (Wgtn and LNI )
4. A3 base plan layouts defined and implemented.
5. Progressive checking by build zone for each cabinet (cover sheet)
6. Build manager accountability + improved capability.
7. Frixion black Erasable ink pens used to draw as-builts on base plans.
8. New process map9. Status report from Draughting
team.10.Photo of cabinet installation with
each as-built.
Improve/control
As-builts process map. Future state
Pre-build Day 1-3 Day 3-5 Up to day 7 -8
Bui
ld t
eam
s T
elc
o(S
ite F
ore
ma
n)
Bu
ild t
eam
s C
ivil
(Site
For
em
an)
As-
build
er
Dra
ugh
ty/r
ecor
ds
tea
m
Site
Ma
nag
er
Pre-start Check all
elements of As-builts process is in
place
Organise and hold 1:1 meetings with
approved as-builders setting
expectations and goals
Civil Work physically starts on
the cabinet
Telco Work
physically starts on
the cabinet
As-builts Deliverables (Civil) Hauling (back+dist)Cabinet Manhole Ducting
As-Builts Deliverables (Telco) Laterals/ Duct tees Ribbonet Joint Tube allocation Tube test data Fixed Fibre FOG plan BH/ Fibre Jointing /splicing OFDF data Exchange rack face Cabinet internals layout
Sketch as-built as required no later than 8 hrs after work completed
Receives sketches from Build teams
at end of each day(by hand)
Sketch as-built as required no later than 8 hrs after work completed
Pass all sketchesTo approved as -builders
at end of each day (by Hand)
Pass all sketches to approved as-builders each day (by hand)
QC check 1 (verbal)
Contact as-builder each day and
confirm they are receiving as-built
sketches
Provides a verbal confirmation to site manager
regarding as-built sketches
Takes sketches and draughts up into the approved as-built format and
style
Takes a hard copy of as-built and
also scans a copy to his own File
Cabinet #Date /Time
At the end of the week submits the original draughted
as-builts to the Site Manager by
hand with a cover sheet
Receives As-Builts from approved as-builders by hand
Signs cover sheet as receiving
QC Check 2Checks qty and
quality of submitted as-builts against the
deliverables and standard
Accept or reject within 24 hrs of
receiving
Receives rejected as-builts from site manager within 24 hrs of submitting
as a pack
Rejected as-builts
Stamps /signs Accepted week 1 as-builts and files into control board
Passes rejected as-builts back to as-builder as a
pack
QC check 3 Nominated
Draughty goes to board and
removes as-builts folder and QC
checks the received as-builts
Accept or reject as-builts within 24 hrs
Marks up as-builts red lining any
discrepancies and red stickering the
cover page.
Draughty accepts the as-builts and signs the cover
sheet
Draughty Returns as-built folder to
the as -builts control board
Reject
Accept
Site manager checks as-builts
control board every 2nd day for red stickered as -
builts
Removes any rejected as-builts from the board
and passes back to as-builder as a pack (puts control card into slot on
board)
Receives rejected as-builts from site manager within 24 hrs after rejection from draughting
team
Corrects as-builts and passes back to site manager
within 24 hrs
Corrects as-builts and passes back to site manager
within 24 hrs
QC Check 4 If week 1 as-builts are not received and accepted by
Wednesday of the following week
Remedy by instructing contractor to stop work .
Site manager to raise NCR against
contractor
Process repeats
Results potential and actual • Good levels of engagement from the sub-contractor, build and
draughting teams. • 25% reduction in draughty processing time (40hrs per cabinet )
– 40 x 350 cabinets = 14000.00 mhrs x 33 per hr $462,000.00 • Reduction in amount of rework. Avg of 3.8 queries per cabinet.
– 80 mhrs per week reduced collating and fixing as-builts in the wgtn Build teams. = 4160.00 mhrs per year = $137,280.00 x 3 areas = $411,840.00.
• Total estimated hard savings from this project will be $873,840.00 (conservative)
• Improved quality and delivery. Reduced volume of as-builts from average of 70 sheets to 14. (standard format)
• As-builts submitted on average 2.25 days after build complete date (8 cabinets measured) compared to average of 14 days.
JV 64 Wn 104Wn 103Wn101PTN sea 24 PTN sea 23PTN cab 12PTN cab 13
10
5
0
-5
cab id wgtn
Indiv
idual
Value
_X=2.25
UCL=9.09
LCL=-4.59
JV 64 Wn 104Wn 103Wn101PTN sea 24 PTN sea 23PTN cab 12PTN cab 13
8
6
4
2
0
cab id wgtn
Movin
g Ran
ge
__MR=2.571
UCL=8.402
LCL=0
I-MR Chart of No of days after BC
Improve/ Control
Feedback Hi Michael,Feed back for the recordings PRO/AU FFP13:In general, since this is my first recordings from Daniel Renshaw Drainage, I can rate the
recordings 7.5 out of 10 compared to other recordings I have worked with.Cheers, Jesse Respecio Draughtsperson Downer
Hi PaulI have all done with WN/BN 101 As-built. Please tell the drawer of the as built: well done, that’s
the best as built I have ever got.As far as I am concerned, all the things that I ever want to find in an as built, clarity, tidiness,
sufficient dimension, are achieved in this as built.Cheers Mintie
Hi Rod,As discussed yesterday to demonstrate the improvement that the new as-built
process is achieving in the quality of the as-built records I have compared three Petone Year 2 cabinets.
PTN FFP5 as-builts were produced under the old process and resulted in 47 separate queries back to the build team for more detail or information.
PTN FFP24 and FFP14 as-builts were produced using the new ‘base plan supplied’ format and resulted in an average of 12 separate queries back to the build team for more detail or information.
Cabinet FFP5 took 50% more time to complete the records update work than the average of the other two cabinets.
It looks like that the evidence is pointing to what we are hearing anecdotally that the new methodology for producing civil as-builts is improving the quality of the as-builts and reducing the time it is taking for the records team to complete their work. I would suggest that once the new QA component of the process kicks in fully the 12 queries per cabinet on the ‘new process’ cabinets should be able to be reduced significantly.
Hope that helps. Shane
Control Plan Prepared by: Page: of 1
Approved by: Document No:
Location: Approved by: Revision Date:
Area: Approved by: Supercedes:
KPOV KPIV
X
X
X
X
X
residential cabinets
wellington
1Rod Pedersen Process Name:
Int/Ext
As-Builts
Records/draughting team
CI Process Control Plan
Customer
email response all queries every time build manager
as-builts queries time to rectify
emailed query from records to build manager
24 hrs 8hrs as builts cover sheet
as-builder to be called and spoken to TBA
Where Recorded SOP Reference Decision Rule/
Corrective Action
as-builts delivery
submit as-builts to records team
after build complete milestone achieved
48hrs O hrs as-builts tracker all wgtn res cabinets
every cabinet
Records team
HS spreadheet report out each week TBA
as-builts quality
Records team mark as-builts out of ten for quality
each complete as-builts set needs a quality score
10 1 as-builts tracker all cabinets received
every cabinet
Records team
as-builts cover sheet
feedback to each build manager after each cabinet
TBA
all cabinets all build manager
approved as-bulders
each cabinet must have an approved as-builder assigned
competence and training of as-builders
approved as-builder against each cabinet
no as-builder stop contractor work
TBA
as-builts progressively completed and submitted to draughting
as-builts submitted after build zone complete
defined build zone completion dates.
24 hrs 8hrs as-builts cover sheet all cabinets all
cabinet work packet
Sample Size Frequency
build manager
as-builts cover sheet
as-builts not submitted within 24 hrs after each zone complete then stop work notice issued
TBA
as-builts cover sheet
Measurement Method
Who MeasuresSub Process Sub Process
StepSpecification
Characteristic
Specification/ Requirement
USL LSL
CTQ
Lessons learnt / Pitfalls to avoid
• This project has been open to long and should have been closed Dec 2012.(increased speed for next time)
• Take up has been slow outside of Wellington. – Note: for next LSS project wider stakeholder representation
required from other geo areas. • Measurement/tracking system for as-builts still not fully operational as
yet.• Built some capability and trust with the approach and the roadmaps. • Overall results are starting to turn positive.• Needs a push by PMs to carry on the work and bed in the change. • Risk of this project being half implemented in some areas due to
perception that current method is ok .• Dollar savings are there for the taking but are est. at this stage apart
from wellington.
Final Gate Review
Criteria for Go, Cancel, or Recycle decision
For all Gate Reviews Consider People Factors Financial Analysis (Business Case) Risk Assessment/ Management Voice of the Customer (VOC) Project Documentation / Materials Lessons Learned
Key Questions to Consider Have the improvements been
implemented and the targets met? Has the improved process been
accepted by the team? Has the project been transitioned to
the process owner?
Completion of Control phase
Final Gate
Control planVisual controls
Control charts
Target improvements met – process is stable
Control plan in place