W6_Hamed_A Study to Determine Feasible Options for Conducting Site Inspections

By Anonymous -
Problem Statement:

The Project Implementation Department is conducting monthly site visits to monitor projects that are being constructed. Because OPWP is only the buyer of utilities (power and water) and these projects are being financed fully from the private sector, it is a great challenge to monitor the physical progress of the projects to ensure safety and reliability. More frequent and surprised inspections tend to reveal the real status of the project. Because the inspection activities are independent of the owner’s scope, this blog examines the possible ways of monitoring the construction activities by the client.

Feasible Alternative:

The following feasible options can be utilized in monitoring current and future construction activities by OPWP:
 1) Having permanent presence on site by a full-time engineer from the team.
 2) Having Weekly site visits.
 3) Having monthly site visits (This option is currently being used).
 4) Hiring a consultant to be permanently present on site.

Outcomes of the Alternatives:
The feasible alternatives will be compared between each other based on a few attributes. It is important to note that cost is a big factor as the more frequent site visits, the higher the cost. This blog aims to optimize between benefits of having frequent of more site visits against the costs associated with doing so.

Acceptance Criteria:
The acceptance criteria between the alternatives are as following:
     Table 1: Selection criteria of the feasible options of monitoring construction projects
- Cost: How much it costs to send a representative to the site (weekly, monthly, permanent)
- Quality of Work: The quality of information being collected every time interval (Reports, observations, meetings …etc)
- Availability of the engineer for office-related tasks: Balancing between site visits and office work.
- Travel Frequency: Frequency of traveling between office and site
  
Acceptance Criteria against the Feasible Alternatives

The feasible alternatives will be compared against each acceptance criteria as following:
Attribute /Alternatives
Full-time Engineer (A)
Weekly Visits   (B)
Monthly Visits    ( C )
Permanent Consultant (D)
Cost
(RO 500/month) Medium
Low ( RO 300/month )
Low Low ( RO 100/month)
High ( RO 2000/month)
Quality
High
Medium
Low
High
Availability at Office
Low Low
Medium
High
High
Travel Frequency
Low
High
Low
Low


Non-compensatory model: Lexicography Approach.

Using the Lexicography Approach in evaluating different alternatives and based on the ordinal ranking of the attributes, the following conclusion can be achieved:
Attribute
Rank
Relative Ranking of Alternatives (from the best option )
Cost
3
C > B > A > D
Quality
4
A= D > B > C
Availability at Office
2
C = D > B > A
Travel Frequency
1
A = C = D > B

From the above, it’s concluded that, based on Lexicography Approach, bidder A and C captured most of the attributes/ criteria of the evaluation. But this approach does not tell how much these two options are better than the others.

Compensatory approach: Additive Weighting Technique. ( with ranks from 1 (Low) to 3 (High))

Attributes
Relative Rank
Normalized Weight (X)
 Option A
 (X*A)      
  Option B                   (X*B)
Option C                   (X*C)
Option D                   (X*D)
Quality
4
0.4
3
1.2
2
0.8
1
0.4
3
1.3
Cost
3
0.3
3
0.9
3
0.9
3
0.9
1
0.3
Availability at Office

2
0.2
2
0.4
1
0.2
3
0.6
3
0.6
Travel Frequency
1
0.1
1
0.1
1
0.1
3
0.3
3
0.3










Sum
10


2.6

2

2.2

2.5

Benefit to Cost analysis:
Option
A
B
C
D
Cost
RO 500/month
RO 300/month
RO 200/month
RO 2000/month
Score
2.6
2
2.2
2.5
Benefit to Cost Ratio
2.6/0.5 = 5.2
2/0.3 = 6.6
2.2/0.2 = 11
2.5/2 = 1.25

Comparing the Outcomes and Selection of the Best Alternatives

The additive weighting technique from the compensatory approach tells us how much each option is differing from the other by providing quantitative comparison. We can see that there is no a big difference between option B and C (2.2 vs. 2.2) which they suggest to either have a weekly or a monthly site visit (in this case, the more visits, the higher the quality of information higher costs). While options A and D scores higher (2.6 vs 2.5), which they suggest having a permanent presence on site. In this case stud, option A seems to be the best in terms of score. However, option C has the highest value for money ratio but to ensure high quality is being preserved, the best option will be B since it has the second highest value for money ration.

How to utilize the best approach in the procurement process

Depending on the assigned project and budget and to ensure that the best option is being selected, the Project Implementation Department may have to adopt the compensatory approach when evaluating the different options to get quantitative measures of how each option is differing from another.   
Based on the above analysis, is concluded that having weekly site visits does not only ensure high quality of work being presented to the management, but also represent a good investment.

Reference:

1) Guild of Project Controls Compendium and Reference (CaR). (2015). Retrieved             fromhttp://www.planningplanet.com/guild/gpccar/managing-change-the-owners-perspective
2) Construction Site Inspection. (June 2017). Design Building Wiki. Retrieved from
            https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Construction_site_inspection

3) The 10 Pros and Cons of Construction Site Inspections. (August 2017). GenieBelt. Retrieved from


`           https://geniebelt.com/blog/10-pros-and-cons-construction-site-inspections

Comments

  1. Dr. PDGDecember 18, 2017 at 4:29 PM

    Great case study and analysis, Hamed!!! Cannot see anything you've missed here.....

    Keep up the good work!!!

    BR,
    Dr. PDG, Jakarta

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

W1_Thuraiya_Leadership Styles analysis Using Tuckman model

By -
Image
1-       Problem Recognition:          OPWP PMP team are currently at the stage of distance learning in the PMP course. The     team consist of 13 members and has started course from 29 th Oct and we’re aiming to be certified no later than 25 th Mar . During the current stage, every individual must submit a weekly blog related to a real work issue faced in the organization to determine the causes and the solutions. In  first blog Dr. Paul has requested  to measure the team development and behavior using   Tuckman’s Model. To insure the success of every project the  members must  understand the goals and the roles of each one to collaborate to achieve their goals. Further the team leader must understand his team behavior to know the most optimum leadership style must be adopted while managing the project.  2-      Identify the Feasible Alternative Tuckman model was established 5 decades ago. The model is dividing team behaviors into 4 stages the figure below
Read more
By -
Image
W1__Hamda__Tuckman Analysis Assignment__ 1-        Problem Definition After completion the first stage in PMP course which was conducted in Muscat from 29 th of October 2017 to 2 nd of November 2017 which was Face to Face stage, and following the formation of the OPWP-PMP team during this stage, the team is starting the second stage in this program which is the Distance Learning. Weekly Blog is one of the tasks in this stage. The first topic of the first weekly blog is suggested by Dr.Paul which is using Tuckman’s Model to know in which phase of this model the team is operated in and which style of leadership should be adopted in order to develop the team to achieve its goals. 2-        Identify the Feasible Alternative The Forming, Storming, Norming, and Performing model of group development was first proposed by Bruce Tuckman in 1965 who maintained that these phases are all necessary in order to develop the team, to face up any challenges, to find the suitable
Read more

W1_MA_Tuckman Analysis Assignment

By -
Image
Problem Definition Bruce Tuckman model used to identify the team status and the development phase of the project team. As the team go through these phases, different strategies should be implemented by the team leader and managers. This assessment will provide enough information for the team leader and even for the team members that would give a good understand the team performance.   Identify the Feasible Alternative There were 4 stages model of "forming, storming, norming, and performing" introduced by Bruce Tuckman in 1965. However, a fifth stage was added “adjourning” which describe the phase that the team go through after the achievement of project tasks and completion of the project. Figure 1 , development stages [2] In each phase, the leadership style should be in alignment with that specific phase which enhance the development of the team and improve the performance of the team as well. There are different styles that could be used by the team le
Read more