Use of Lean Metrics event held in Swansea University

1. The use of Lean Metrics to drive project success
APM 17th Feb 2016
Angela Ellis
Capital Projects Team Manager
Natural Resources Wales

2. Contents
• About me
• Introduction to ‘Lean’
• Continuous Improvement Project - Capital Project
Management of flood defence projects in NRW
- CI techniques used
- Improvements demonstrated
• Lessons learnt from using Lean Metrics

3. Angela Ellis: About me
Team Leader for Capital Projects Delivery team
at Natural Resources Wales
• Team of 16
• 45-55 projects per year, total value £12m-17m
• Client role for appraisal, design and construction of flood
defences and water resources assets
• Budgets allocated from Welsh Government annually
• Qualified continuous improvement practitioner
• PRINCE2 practitioner
• Leading process improvements across NRW for programme
and project management
http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/angela-ellis/34/960/480

4. Introduction to Lean
1910’s 1930’s
• Started in manufacturing
• Now adapted to logistics and distribution, services, retail,
healthcare, construction, maintenance, and government.
• Lean consciousness and methods are beginning to take
root among senior managers and leaders in all sectors

7. FRM Capital Projects Process (EA legacy)
GW0 Project Handover to PD
↓
GW1 Business Case approval
↓
GW2 Detailed Design
↓
GW3 Contract Award
↓
GW 4 Readiness for Service
↓
GW 5 Contract Completion
↓
GW 6 Project Closure
Appraisal
Design, Planning
Permission
Construction
Post Construction

8. Continuous Improvement Project
AIM: Analyse the causes of delay which have resulted in
missing FRM project milestones . Make improvements to
reduce delay.
PROBLEM: “The number of times milestones are not met
results in failing to start construction on the planned date”
The Voice of the Customer: “I think it is not progressing the work
fast enough, which I then think is a question of resource
allocation, perhaps internally and I think also from our suppliers?”

9. Qualitative root cause analysis
See fishbone diagram for analysis
• Too long on sign off or approvals
• FSoD sign off
• Flood Defence Consent
• Protected Sites Consent
• External consultation
• Procurement of suppliers
• Modelling impacts on solution

10. Pareto chart 80-20 principle
22 milestones missed, with 186 weeks delay
Apr 12 – June 14: 80 milestones measured, 73% met or bettered
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
No. Wks delay by cause excluding exceptional causes
Count Cumulative Percentage
Approvals Supplier Procurement FSoD Scope Workload Other

11. Run Chart analysis
This chart statistically shows that the process altered around
April 2013 with the mean deviation from target changing from
-0.4 to +10.2 weeks!
28/07/201429/04/201410/01/201430/06/201310/04/201317/09/201218/04/201205/02/201228/02/201122/10/201010/07/2007
100
50
0
-50
Forecast
IndividualValue
_
X=-0.4
_
X=10.2
UCL=56.2
LCL=-6.9
LCL=-35.9
10/07/2007 10/04/2013
UCL=6.1
1
222
1
2
11
I-MR Chart of +/- by Forecast

12. Analysis – What changed in the process?
1. In April 2013 changed procurement framework
2. In April 2013 NRW was formed, changes to :
> Approvals process and FSoD
> Move from serviced teams to self-service
3. Request for fast-tracking from 3yr to 2yr programme
Note: The voice of the customer - needed
metrics to show the causes and demonstrate
process capability

13. Deciding on improvements
Impact matrix
NB. Can also
use criteria of
within control/
outside of control

14. Making the changes April-June 2014
Top delay cause 1: Approvals
• Meetings to raise awareness of issue (internal and
external)
• Raised issue with NRW Transformation
Programme Board (Change Programme)
Top delay cause 2: Suppliers
• Further analysis showed queries over scope as a
key issue. Action taken: Improve supplier scope
• Tighten clauses in contracts
• Improve PM training on contracts management
and include as target in their performance review
• Held Supplier Review meeting

15. June 2015 data review following improvements
Stage 1: EAW
Stage 2: NRW
Stage 3: NRW + Projects Delivery improvements
= Reduction of mean and reduction in variation

16. Results June 2015
Approvals still the biggest cause of delay
Top delay cause 2: Suppliers
June 2013 - June 2014 24wks delay
June 2014 - June 2015 5 weeks delay
Note: weeks of delay is a cumulative count across
all 50-55 projects.

17. What else could be done? Lean Behaviour
PD forecast milestones – so be sure of the target
Issues came with more pressure to deliver in <3 years
Behaviour: Use the metrics gathered to improve our
forecasting i.e. historic time from GW0 to GW1 etc,
know the causes of likely delay and how long
Improvements:
• Risk to Programme software - Time risk forecasting
at 50 percentile and 95 percentile
• Justifying say no to unachievable programmes
imposed
• MS Project training for PMs
• Standards for supplier programmes and SMFs

18. Control mechanisms built into the process
• Risk to Programme report introduced,
standing monthly agenda item with client
• Review meetings scheduled 6 monthly with
NRW CI team
But… not the end of story
Further CI work:
“Effective Programme and Project Management”
will address approvals issue

19. • Follow DMAIC
• Consider if the process has the capability to meet KPI’s/
targets
• Consider whether qualitative and/or quantitative analysis is
necessary.
• Use your metrics as evidence to influence change
Lessons to learn
Any Questions?