Archive for the 'Last Planner' Category

As 2007 came to a close, lean design and construction got some well-deserved press. The manufacturing community shares their successes and learning about lean through Association for Manufacturing Excellence (AME) and their "Target Magazine". Most lean manufacturers operate in buildings that were neither designed or built lean. That can change. Karen Wilhelm, writing for Target, spent quite some time investigating the lean construction movement. She shares what she learned in a cover story, Collaboration Makes Construction Lean.

"The culture of heroes works against the smooth flow of work."

I won't spoil the article for you by summarizing it. Not only does Karen write well, she shares a vision of what we can be doing in the built environment. I will offer one teaser… Read the rest of this entry ¶

It's that time of year again. I'm attending the Lean Construction Congress in San Francisco. This is the 9th annual event. As usual, the focus is on companies who have adopted lean approaches for delivering AEC projects. The morning presentations have been great. Company presenters are doing a fine job speaking about the benefits they are getting and how the lean approaches and principles cause that to happen.

Becoming lean and being evermore lean is fundamentally about learning, not about lean.

It's a little early in the two days to be saying this, but what the heck… Herrero Contractors, not yet three years into their lean transformation, is the most advanced lean contractor in the US.¹ Herrero understands that becoming lean and being evermore lean is fundamentally about learning, not about lean. They seem to be learning everywhere and everyday.

Read the rest of this entry ¶

1. Full disclosure, they used to be our client. A year ago they hired away one of our staff members to be their Director of Learning…not Director of Lean. [ ⇑ back ]

Another great day of work. We got through the Daily Scrum in 13 minutes (without standing). I asked for a weekly retrospective to examine what we are learning and what needs our attention. In short, team members assessed they were learning and accomplishing far more than they expected. Let's see if we can keep this going. There's a lot for us to accomplish in the coming vacation week.

There's nothing like learning-in-action.¹. We just finished our planning session for our development project. I was surprised by how much time we spent defining what it meant to be done. In the LPS world we call that establishing conditions of satisfaction. But we struggle to get team members to stay in that conversation. "Just tell me what you want!" The ScrumMaster wouldn't let us move on 'til he confirmed that the whole team understood what would satisfy the Product Owner.

I'm looking forward to comprehending!

Towards the end of today's session, I noticed that our ScrumMaster frequently said, "We'll inspect and adapt." (He said it before we started the planning. I just hadn't noticed.) "Of course," I thought. The future is uncertain and unknowable. That's just what we do on (LPS) projects. But I also know it's not what is usually done on CPM-style projects. Conventional wisdom (and scheduling software) guides people to put a plan in place and stick to it. The result is project managers often try to get reality to match their plan. Doesn't work. Never did.

Read the rest of this entry ¶

1. Chris Argyris claims it's the primary way we learn. See his book Knowledge for Action. [ ⇑ back ]

It's my pleasure to speak again at a meeting of the Puget Sound PMI Chapter. Two years ago I gave a rather long and complicated presentation on obsolete theory, Fayol, Flores, and what can be learned from construction project management. This time I'll be attempting a much shorter and less complicated talk. Originally I titled it "An Update on Obsolete Theory", but I've reconsidered. Read the rest of this entry ¶

Glen Alleman took me to task for yesterday's posting Misunderstanding Project Planning as Anticipation. He wrote a rather comprehensive rebuttal to my claim that the general understanding of planning is as anticipating a future. Glen makes a good case that best practice — at least in DoD projects — doesn't misunderstand planning. Since I've only worked at one defense contractor, I won't contradict him. I will say that my experience of the everyday practice of planning is as I described. Project managers/planners usually take an approach that limits alternatives concluding with "the plan". The plan is then represented as a CPM schedule. I don't argue with Glen that this is inadequate, nor am I saying that some people know better AND do something different. I am saying that the usual practice is to have a smart experienced person create a plan that is then represented as a schedule for others to follow. That is a practice that must change if we want better project performance. Read the rest of this entry ¶

I read the following quote from Walter Bagehot in Time Magazine's end-of-year farewell to John Kenneth Galbraith.

"One of the greatest pains to human nature is the pain of a new idea."

The quote reminds me of the theory-trap we are in with projects. So with this posting I am updating my Notes on the Underlying Theory of Project Management is Obsolete.

While our tools are ever more sophisticated and there is more project management training, our project results languish. The new idea — projects are conducted in an unfolding network of commitments — challenges the very nature of what people do today in the project setting. The PMI is going to great lengths to teach people the old ideas.¹ In essence saying, "Just get good at doing what we've been telling you to do all along and your projects will come out just fine." Following that teaching with certification is producing a world-wide paradigm that is having the affect of blinding practitioners to alternative ideas (theories). In the face of that, the agilists are dealing with the pain of their new ideas; so are those adopting lean construction. Read the rest of this entry ¶

1. The PMI is succeeding. Membership has swelled from under 100,000 in 2002 to over 300,000 going into 2007. Attendance at conferences is at an all time high. And a cottage industry including top universities has grown to prepare project managers for the certification, CPM®. [ ⇑ back ]

Previous in series

Some people think that construction safety is a matter of establishing safety as a value. If people value safety, those people argue, then workers will work safely. While that might be true, we don't have time for that. It can take years to establish a value for anything. The task of producing the value for safety becomes more difficult with new people always being introduced to the construction environment. We need to improve safety immediately. And we can.

While most planning approaches define what should be done that is insufficient to assure work will be done.

In the previous post in this series I said we need to follow the rule to only do work that is in a condition to be started and finished. But how do we do that without impacting productivity? Working to the safety rule is supported by a process for making work ready.

Making work ready — including all aspects for working safely — is an aspect of the planning system. While most planning approaches define what should be done that is insufficient to assure work will be done. Read the rest of this entry ¶

Previous in series

Turner Construction is doing $100s millions of healthcare construction for Sutter Health and others. They have some early projects where they developed their capability using the Last Planner System® (LPS). Here's their report:

What We've Learned

"LPS is a scheduler's dream come true!"

• It is better for individuals doing the work to help make the plan
• Takes persistence to get subs to use the system
• Project team has a better understanding of end-users' needs
• Reverse phase scheduling produces better results (than plans produce by specialists)
• 6 week look-ahead schedule sets priorities
• You must get buy-in and commitments from all parties
• LPS is a scheduler's dream come true! The role of a senior scheduler has changed. I'm now a planning facilitator. The people who will do the work become planners.
• The project needs a single information coordinator/gatekeeper
• The beautiful thing about LPS is it encourages participation at all levels.
• Look-ahead planning identifies key requirements for success
• Become proactive with problem-solving
• See potential issues early enough to take preventive action
• LPS reduces the impacts of delays
• Meetings are collaborative and interactive
• Facilitates coordination — everyone really is on the same page

What's in it for me?

"Projects are safer."

• Work is a lot more enjoyable
• Subs and peers had a more positive outlook
• There's less fire-fighting
• Safer projects
• Happier clients

Herrero Contractors is on a full-fledged company-wide lean journey. Mark Herrero, CEO, kicked off the presentation describing what lean is at Herrero. Their approach starts with the Last Planner System® (LPS) and includes Project kaizen and 5S. Mark spoke enthusiastically about lean, particularly his intention to run all projects as networks of commitments. He then handed the presentation to one of his superintendents, Tom Guardino.

Tom is the general superintendent for the CPMC Davies Medical Center capital program. It's over $100 million of renovations and new construction…over 20 projects curing in a 24/7 functioning hospital. His team includes 4 superintendents, 4 Herrero project managers, 6 architects from 2 firms, and 4 client project managers.

Tom is an evangelist for lean construction. He spoke candidly, "Implementing LPS was really tough for me. I didn't know what I was signing up for." Tom went on to elaborate on what they are doing and the results they are getting. Reliability has trended upwards for 15 months with current PPC at over 80%.

One of the most telling signs of the commitment of Herrero is they changed their company logo. Above the capital letter "H" is the phrase "Lean Works™". I can't capture the enthusiasm and expertise Tom conveyed. Listen to the MP3 on the Lean Construction website.

Thursday morning continued with more reports from lean construction efforts around the world with the first report on Brazil. The Last Planner System® (LPS) is a common approach on large projects in Brazil. Projects have high reliability (PPC) with the median at 77% for over 150 projects tracked by the universities. Carlos Formosa has been the leading researcher in the world connecting safety to lean practices.

Glenn Ballard reported on the safety experience of adopting LPS at MT Hojgaard, Denmark's largest construction company, the have extended lean construction throughout the firm. Early projects were 70% safer than other like projects in the company. As LPS was adopted throughout the firm, other business units had a similar experience. As a firm, safety incidents have fallen by 70%.

One of the founding organizations of LCI DK was the trade union.

Greg Howell shared some of the possible explanations for the improvement in safety. LPS makes work ready. When doing ready work there are fewer trips up and down ladders, in and out of trenches, and general exposure to risks. He added that lean projects have material on site when needed, not before it is needed. Consequently, material is not moved around as much. Moving material is a significant source of injuries.

Next up was a report on Denmark's Lean Construction activities. The Danes have their own Lean Construction DK, originally started as a branch of LCI and now a fully functioning body with its own board of directors. Membership has been growing. The members have been very active both locally and internationally. One of the founding organizations of LCI DK was the trade union.

Read the rest of this entry ¶

Peru, like many Central and South American countries is doing lean construction. COINSA is a real estate developer building for its own account and for 3rd parties. They've become a leader in their market and the Developer of the Year in 2005. The historical market was based on price. Projects were over schedule. Construction was viewed as a commodity. Firms routinely went bankrupt. COINSA decided to do lean construction to distinguish themselves from their competitors. After almost 5 years of doing lean construction they can tell others about it. They see three phases:

1. Early applications
2. Stabilizing workflow, applying Last Planner System®
3. Culture Change: Lean as a company way of work

Their first attempts focussed on workflow and constructibility. They introduced the idea of a "work train" (production line) for repetitive work.

Eventually the "old school" has converted to the "new school".

In their 2nd phase they started by making a strategic decision to adopt lean construction. They used their project office and a lean champion to launch the effort. On their first project they produced 550 apartment units in one year at significant cost reductions. Their next project was bigger. People were able to move into apartments while others were still under construction. Their own crews achieved 100% PPC on their tasks. Subs had lower PPC with an overall average of about 85%.

The culture change phase started with company-wide training. They encountered "old school" thinking. They provided incentives and opportunities to those people who had the best performance with lean construction. Read the rest of this entry ¶

Fred Friedl, Sundt senior project manager, shared their experience with their pilot implementation of the Last Planner System® (LPS). The project is for the Apollo Group, parent company of the University of Phoenix. It's the first project Apollo has constructed in Phoenix. All their other projects are leases. The project is on 40 acres. Three buildings cover 9 acres.

Sundt measures subcontractor performance and publishes that for everyone to see.

The beauty of LPS is you don't need all the subs on board in every session…just the ones who are doing work to complete that milestone. They've done 7 pull phase plans for the work to date.

The Sundt team uses SureTrack to manage their look-ahead plans and the constraints removal process. The team does well, but they noticed they were in a rut. They began doing Plus-Delta reviews. Those reviews have led to changes in how they've adopted LPS and how they conduct themselves during planning sessions.

Sundt's pilot implementation is a good by-the-book example of what can be accomplished with LPS. Their early reliability (PPC) was erratic. Once they understood they needed to place their attention on the coming week — free of constraints — PPC began to rise. Later their performance dipped again. They found that prerequisite work not being completed was the most frequent cause of others missing their work. They measure subcontractor performance and publish that for everyone to see.

Read the rest of this entry ¶

This is the year of the language action perspective for project management. IGLC researchers have been exploring underlying theory of projects seriously for the last 7 years. The discussion appeared to be reaching a conclusion earlier this year with Glenn Ballard's and Lauri Koskela's paper, "Should project management be based on theories of economics or production?" for Building Research and Information. Greg Howell and I concluded that project management (in general) shouldn't be based on either. We wrote our paper to answer what should it be based on. Then, I invited Fernando Flores to speak to the IGLC. As it turned out, Greg ceded our time for presenting our paper to Fernando so he could speak longer. Our paper was not presented. I'll do my best to present it here.

What Should Project Management Be Based On?

I have to start any discussion off by saying how we understand projects.

Projects are unique undertakings of a group of people convened to fulfill a promise made by one person to a customer.

Construction projects are like software projects and class reunions when understood from the above definition. Those three types of projects are dissimilar, as well. But it is the similarity that guided our look at projects to allow us to reach our conclusions on the theory base for projects. Read the rest of this entry ¶

Precast productivity in one construction setting already was improved from 28 man-hours/cubic meter to 21 man-hours/cubic meter due to prior improvement initiatives. But the plant suffered from product variation. The LPS was introduced to address it.

Stabilization and Standardization of a Precast Production Process

Carlos Antonio Samaniego Gallardo, et al

Carlos started by introducing a Production Status Andon¹. They started with a blackboard in the production area. The workers developed the approach further and in three weeks had a more sophisticated approach. They were investigating in an empirical way what process steps provided a rhythm to the process. The Last Planner® was introduced to bring reliability to the process.

Stabilize production activities with andons.

PPC improved from 25% to 75% in about three months. During the same time productivity was further improved to 16 man-hours/cubic meter. They attribute their results to:

• Adopting an analysis-implementation-evaluation cycle that also increased participation
• Adopting basic lean approaches including standardized work and value stream mapping
• Bringing organization with a daily task schedule

Fabrication operations offer great potential for adopting lean approaches. As key parts of the supply chain on construction projects getting lean upstream can have some downstream positive outcomes from higher quality and reliability of completions.

1. Andon is the Japanese word for "signal" or to bring attention to something. Andons are used to alert others to come for help. [ ⇑ back ]

The Last Planner System® (LPS) has been used in Brazil since early 1990s. The researchers have data on over 130 projects representing many aspects of the construction industry.

Quantitative Analysis of Data Collected from LPS in Brazil

Rodrigo Bortolazza and Carlos Formoso

The researchers examined PPC results, recorded causes for variances, and

"Lengthening the look-ahead planning horizon improves plan reliability."

They had three surprising conclusions:

• Projects which didn't conduct constraints analysis had better performance than those that did constraints analysis.
• Standardized process control in quality management contributed to plan reliability
• When researchers were on site PPC was lower.

Based on those surprises they developed a constraints removal index: constraints removed divided by constraints identified. When this index was applied retrospectively for one company the index was about 35%. When the firm started using the index for measuring the effectiveness of the team the index jumped to about 70%. PPC consequently rose.

A good look-ahead process with constraints analysis and removal makes a large contribution to the reliability of project. There was a high correlation between a high number of "unknown" causes of plan variance and low PPC. Also, the largest proportion of reasons for plan variance had to do factors in the control of the people on the project.

I'll come back to this paper in a future posting to share more of the conclusions and implications of their investigations.