Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Northwest Construction
Consumer Council
Chatt Smith
Manager of Project Controls -
Jacobs
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
Critical Success Factors
y Structured Work Process - JSTEPSsm
− Best in Class FEL
− Best Practices/JVEPS
y Integrated Aligned Team
− Business, Operations, Maintenance, Engineering,
Projects
y Project Metrics
− Safety, Cost, Schedule, Operability
− Value Creation
y Disciplined Implementation of Change
Management
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
sm
JSTEPS
What is JSTEPSsm?
y Staged Gate Process
y Plan the Work, Work the Plan
y The “Plan” is defined during FEL
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
sm
JSTEPS - Objectives
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
FEL Plus VIP’s Enable
Better Cost Performance
1.3
(Industry Average = 1.0)
1.2
Relative Capital Cost
Industry
1 Average
Cost
0.9 FEL Improvement Plus
Value Improving
Practices
0.8
Best Practical Good Fair Poor Screening
FEL Rating
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
JSTEPSSM Summary Map
PASSGATES
End of FEL
Internal / External Stage gates
Prelim. Detailed
Feasibility Conceptual Engrg. Design & Construction Start-up Close-out
(FEL) Procure
Ongoing Activities: VEP’s, Performance Measurements, Quality Audits, Alliance Satisfaction Surveys, Progress
Reporting, Cost and Schedule Control, Total Value Added
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
sm
JSTEPS – Project Phases
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
SM
JSTEPS - Application
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
Jacobs Value Enhancing Practices
(JVEPs ) SM
Definition:
y Best Practices, Identified by CII and IPA, that
when used consistently Significantly Increase the
Value of the Project
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
JVEPs SM
Definition:
y Best Practices, Identified by CII and IPA, that when
used consistently Significantly Increase the Value of
the Project
V-1 Client Expectations V-12 Total Value Added
V-2 Client Surveys V-13 Class of Plant Quality*
V-3 Constructability* V-14 Customized Standards/Specs*
V-4 Design to Capacity* V-15 Energy Optimization*
V-5 Execution Planning V-16 Reliability Planning*
V-6 Interactive Planning V-17 Process Reliability Modeling*
V-7 Lessons Learned V-18 Process Simplification*
V-8 Team Alignment V-19 Technology Selection*
V-9 PDRI V-20 Waste Minimization*
V-10 Project Objectives V-21 Integrated CAE*
V-11 Value Engineering* V-22 Change Management
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
CII Best Practices
•Zero Accident • HazAsmtSafActPln
•Pre-Project Planning •JSTEPSsm- Phases 1-3
•Constructability •JVEPsm V3
•Change Management •JVEPsm – Proj Cntrls
•Team Building •JVEPsm V8
•Alignment during PPP •JVEPsm V8
•Materials Management •JVEPsm V5, V6
•Quality Management •Surveys, Audits
•Partnering •Relationship Co., Client
Surveys, Alliances
•Design Effectiveness
•Dispute Resolution
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
IPA VIPs
•Technology Selection
•Class of Plant
•Design to Capacity
•Process Simplification
•Process Reliability Modelling
•Predictive Maintenance
•Value Engineering
•Customized Standards and Specs
•Constructability
•Energy Optimization
•Waste Minimization
•3D CADD
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
JVEPsSM need to be done at the right time…
or they become lost opportunities
Interactive
Design to Capacity
Planning
Customized Stds. & Specs
Value Plus
Constructability
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
Integrated Aligned Teams
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
Interactive Planning Session
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
Potential Metrics
y Safety
y Cost vs. FEL estimate (AFE / AFC)
y Schedule performance
y Work process compliance
y Change management
y Workhours
y IPA results (FEL score)
y Customer survey
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
Change Management
$1,500 125
TIC Value (Thousand $s)
$1,200 100
Number of CO's
$900 75
$600 50
$300 25
$0 0
Aug- Sep- Oct-03 Nov- Dec- Jan-04 Feb-04 Mar-04 Apr-04 May- Jun-04 Jul-04 Aug- Sep- Oct-04 Nov- Dec-
03 03 03 03 04 04 04 04 04
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
“Leading” metrics lay the groundwork for
project success - BEFORE
COMPLIANCE BY PROJECT
Pre-Flight Conditions Staffing/Resources In-Flight Gauges
Constructability Rvw
Quality Process (BP)
Known Expectations
Project Fully Funded
On or Under Budget
PM/Team Relevant
Document Control
Defined & Do-able
No 3rd Party Proj.
Project Close-Out
Scope Adherence
APL Can Support
Kick-Off Meeting
Budget/Estimate
Infrastructure in
Status Meetings
1 = Status is Acce p table
Good Schedule
Jacobs is Lead
On or Ahead of
PGM Review in
0 = Status War r an ts M o nito r in g o r is No t Ide al
APL Project
Evaluation
Value Plus
w/Liability
Schedule
-1 = Status is Unacce p tab le
Staffing
Project
w/PGM
& AFC
Scope
Team
Place
Good
Exp.
(BP)
(BP)
COMPLIANCE BY PRACTICE N/A 23% 75% 77% 41% 69% 70% 86% 94% 95% 52% 86% 75% 80% 94% 52% 84% 84% 95% 95% 50% 95% 50% 50% 50% 68%
58-P977 PIPE LINES 50%
58P97601 Project A AO 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 86%
58-P975 LOCATION A
58P97502 Project B BL 1 -1 1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 66%
58-P974 LOCATION B
58P97405 Project C PC 1 -1 1 1 -1 1 -1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 68%
58P97407 Project D PC 1 0 1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 64%
58P97408 Project E PC 1 -1 1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 64%
58-P978 MARINE TERMINALS
58P97801 Project F SWMT 1 -1 0 -1 -1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 -1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 54%
58P97802 Project G SWMT 1 -1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 72%
58P97803 Project H SWMT 1 -1 -1 0 -1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 -1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 66%
58P97804 Project I SWMT 1 -1 1 1 -1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 78%
58P97805 Project J SWMT 1 -1 0 0 -1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 74%
58P97824 Project K SWMT 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 82%
58P97825 Project L SWMT 1 -1 1 0 -1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 76%
58P97827 Project M SWMT 1 -1 0 0 -1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 66%
58P97830 Project N SWMT 1 -1 0 0 -1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 66%
58P97831 Project P SWMT 1 0 1 1 -1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 78%
58P97833 Project Q SWMT 1 -1 1 1 -1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 70%
58P97834 Project R SWMT 1 0 0 0 -1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 66%
58P97840 Project S SWMT 1 0 0 0 -1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 70%
58-P978 PIPE LINES
58P97701 Project T SWPL 1 -1 1 1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 78%
58P97702 Project U SWPL 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 84%
58P97811 Project V SWPL 1 -1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 82%
58P97812 Project W SWPL 1 -1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 82%
58P97813 Project X SWPL 1 -1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 82%
58P97814 Project Y SWPL 1 -1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 82%
58P97832 Project Z SWPL 1 -1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 76%
58P97835 Project AA SWPL 1 0 0 0 0 ? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50%
58P97836 Project AB SWPL 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 72%
58P97837 Project AC SWPL 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 80%
58P97838 Project AD SWPL 1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 84%
58P97839 Project AE SWPL 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 84%
58P97841 Project AF SWPL 1 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50%
58-P979 LAND TERMINALS ML
1 = Status is Acceptable
0 = Status Warrants Monitoring or is Not Ideal
-1 = Status is Unacceptable
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
“Leading” metrics lay the groundwork for
project success - AFTER
On or Under Budget
No Third Party Proj.
PM/Team Relevant
Document Control
Scope Adherence
Project Close-Out
Current Phase of
Kick-Off Meeting
Safety is Job # 1
Infrastructure in
Status Meetings
Defined and Do-
Constructability
Quality Process
Change Control
Good Schedule
Jacobs is Lead
On or Ahead of
PGM Review in
1 = Statu s is Acce p tab le
Good Budget
Can Support
Project Fully
Review (BP)
0 = Statu s War r an ts M o n ito r in g o r is No t Id e al
able Scope
Evaluation
Value Plus
w/Liability
Schedule
-1 = Statu s is Un acce p tab le
Staffing
Project
Funded
Project
Project
w/PGM
Known
Place
Exp.
(BP)
(BP)
(BP)
(BP)
COMPLIANCE BY PRACTICE N/A 69% 90% 88% 87% 81% 85% 79% 98% #### 96% 96% 68% 95% 95% 87% 84% 84% 95% 71% 63% #### 71% 71% 55% 84%
PROJ. NO. CHANGE FROM PRIOR MONTH G G G G H G G G G G G G G G G G G H G H G G G H G
PIPE LINES
02Q50725 Project A CN 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 92% F
NOTE: 1. For projects with status CE or PE, only pre-flight conditions and staffing/resources Project Phases: Compliance Percentages:
should be filled out. CE = conceptual engineering
CN = construction 80 - 100% Green
2. For projects with status DE or CN, pre-flight conditions should be frozen, and staffing/ PE = preliminary engineering
CO = close out 50 - 80% Yellow
resources and in-flight gauges should be updated. DE = detail engineering 0 - 50% Red
3 For projects with status CO, all conditions are frozen except Project close-out (last column).
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
Authorized Funding
0
100
120
140
160
20
40
60
80
Proj. #1- APR
Upper Limit
Proj. #6- SEP
Authorized Funding
Proj. #18- FEB
Jacobs Alliance
RALL PROGRAM
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
Individual and team recognition help
change behaviors and improve results
JE VALUE PLUS
NPV
IMPROVEMENT 100 %
GOAL 98%
$ 60,000 M
75%
50%
25%
VALUE ADDED
$ 58,310.1 M 0%
UPDATED: 7-10- 01
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
Jacobs Project Cost Control System
Engineering Material Cost
Estimate
Budgets “Original Changes Commitments
Budget” Material Field Mtl
IHOCS Mgmt, P.O./Reqs
Changes H.O. Cost /
Progress System PO
System
Equipment Equipment
P.O.’s
JACS Report
H.O. Cost to Jacobs Commitments
JACS Automated Accounts Vendor
Cost System Payable Invoice
Actuals
Material /
Equipment
Field Labor
Sub- Material Invoice
contract Bid thru Prepared
Award Mgmt. by Acctg Field Staff and
Inquiry System Subcontract
Sub-P.O.
Field Labor
Subcontract Analysis Direct Construction
Cost Changes Actual/ Cost
Forecast
Reports
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
Change Management
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
Challenges
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
Stimulating “What are you trying to accomplish?”
behaviour delivers the “Quantum Leap” change
When one of three chillers operating in parallel at Chemical
Co’s site failed, operations immediately opted for
replacement. Our team, guided by our work process...
• analyzed the system
• provided alternate recommendations to improve operation
• optimized energy savings
• avoided capital spending
• saved over $1MM.
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
Stimulating “What are you trying to accomplish?”
behaviour delivers the “quantum leap” change
Plastics Company
Using our FEL process, combined with
intentional innovation, we maintained the
project objectives while reducing overall
project cost from $220MM to $185MM.
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
BP Cherry Point Project
Early End
Phase 3 Phase 3 Forecast Recommended
Leading Indicators
FEL 7 4.25 <5
PDRI 131 <175
VIPs 64% 64% >50%
Team Development Good Good >Good
Lagging Indicators
Execution Index 0.95 0.90 0.90
Cost Index 1.08 0.92 0.90 <0.95
JSTEPSclient1.ppt
Questions
JSTEPSclient1.ppt