1 / 12

CII Benchmarking and Metrics Aker Kvaerner Data

CII Benchmarking and Metrics Aker Kvaerner Data. Name of presenter: M. Coy Campbell, P.E. Date: 10 June 03. Benchmarking and Use of CII Data. Presentation Agenda Overview of Aker Kvaerner Participation Review of Some of our Performance Data Our Interpretations Usefulness of CII Database

justus
Download Presentation

CII Benchmarking and Metrics Aker Kvaerner Data

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CII Benchmarking and MetricsAker Kvaerner Data Name of presenter: M. Coy Campbell, P.E. Date: 10 June 03

  2. Benchmarking and Use of CII Data Presentation Agenda • Overview of Aker Kvaerner Participation • Review of Some of our Performance Data • Our Interpretations • Usefulness of CII Database • Cause & Effect –Best Practice vs. Performance • Input Quality Control of Projects Aker Kvaerner

  3. Performance Metrics Cost Schedule Safety Changes Rework CII Best Practice Use: Safety (Zero Accidents) Team Building Constructability Pre-Project Planning Design/Information Technology Project Change Management Materials Management Planning for Start-up Quality Management Strategic Alliances CII Performance Metrics Aker Kvaerner

  4. 1997: H95130 - Evalca (add-on) 1998: H94136 - Methanex (addition) H94156 - Agrevo (BW) (grass roots) H95021 - Akzo Nobel (grass roots) H95055 - Air Products (addition) H96019 - BASF-2EHA (BW) (addition) H96145 - Arco EB-1 (modernization) H97084 - TransCanada (addition) 1999: H9811300Bayer TDI (add-on) 2000: H96198.91 - Bayer PU (grass roots) H96232 - Bayer Chlor-Alkali (grass roots) 2001: H98109.04 - Lyondell Polyols (add-on) H99121 - Conoco Syria (grass roots) H00052.10 - Distrigas (add-on) 2002: H97072 - Optimal H99129 - BP GTL H99171 - Dow Freeport H01118 - Chevron Sanha AK Submitted Projects Red Projects submitted by NJ office Aker Kvaerner

  5. AK Implementation of CII Best Practices Use • Comparatively Good In Safety • Upward trending in Teambuilding & Change Management 1997-2000 • 2001 saw decrease in most Best Practice Implementation • What was the effect on Performance? Aker Kvaerner

  6. AK Performance - Project Budget and Schedule Project Budget Factor = Actual Total Project Cost Initial Predicted Project Cost + Approved Changes Project Schedule Factor = Actual Total Project Duration Initial Predicted Project Duration + Approved Changes Quick Review • “Degradation” in Performance in 2000 -2001 • Significant change in schedule factor in 2001 Aker Kvaerner

  7. AK Performance – Analysis of Budget/Schedule Factor - Individual Projects B’water B’water • Further Investigation • Two projects real outliers • H96232 entered in 2000 • H0052.10 entered in 2001 TIME Aker Kvaerner

  8. AK Performance - Project Cost Growth vs. Competition Quartile Factor Project Cost Growth Factor = Actual Project Cost - Initial Predicted Project Cost Initial Predicted Project Cost • Quick Conclusion • Consistent 1997-1999 • Investigation on 2000 & 2001 • Outliers adversely impacted result • Small sample size in 2000 (2 projects) & 2001 (3 projects) 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Aker Kvaerner

  9. Cost Growth Factor - Individual Projects TIME • Three Projects adversely affect outcome for Cost Growth Aker Kvaerner

  10. AK Performance - Recordable Incident Rate Quartile RIR Recordable Incident Rate = Total Recordable Cases x 200,000 Total Craft Workhours Review – Relatively Good performance until 2001 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Aker Kvaerner

  11. Interpretations of Benchmarking Database Use • Best Practice Implementation “score” corresponds with the company quartile performance • Limited number of projects in the database skews data – outliers have too great effect • Our outlier was a project for a client that performs Capital Projects infrequently (and not a member of CII). Very poor project definition. • Some “good” projects looked bad by analysis • Of course, varying definition of successful projects • AK investigated process for inputting projects and found very inconsistent – again skewing our outputs • Previously - Project questionnaires filled by project teams • Now – filled out by trained Benchmark Associate Aker Kvaerner

  12. Recommendations & Conclusions • Ensure Consistency of project input. • Use your trained Benchmarking Associate • Add Filtering Mechanism to the database “queries”. • Sometimes Outliers need to be seen but not heard • The more projects entered, the better the trend analysis (Statistics 101!) • The database is consistent in its evaluation (Best Practice Implementation vs. company Quartile) • But….Trend analysis of Best Practice Implementation & a successful project really is a soft, interpretive process Aker Kvaerner

More Related