Week 5_ Ejeh Udoka_ Lost man-hours

Week 5_ Ejeh Udoka_ Lost man-hours

At the fabrication site, it is observed that personnel leave for break at about 11:30hrs and return at about 13:30hrs against 12:00hrs – 13:00hrs regular break period. The problem identified is that a total of about one (1) project hour is lost.

Possible causes

Root cause analysis carried out explained that because the fabrication yard is sited about two km from commercial areas, the personnel have to drive or book a cab to and fro.

Possible solution/alternative

-suggestions have been made to the management to set up a mini-canteen/restaurant within the complex. This will mean initiating a building project and possibly a catering project if not outsourced.

-another suggestion is to encourage overtime for at least one hour. This will work well but may not be very efficient as fatigue may set in.

-adopting the company’s transport vehicles to convey workers to and from lunch.

Comparing alternatives

All suggested solutions are worth experimenting. Setting up a mini restaurant seems like a permanent solution but may be capital intensive. It seems to be another avenue for income.

Making up for the lost time with overtime is a good practice but that depends on how much the company is willing to path with. Otherwise stated, the cost of production will increase. This can serve as a temporary or ad-hoc measure.

Using the company’s transport vehicles sounds easy but the challenge of not wanting to leave people behind may request time lag.

Summary

It is possible to finger out big picture problems and neglecting smaller ones that seem irrelevant. If these irrelevant problems are not attended to, they will continue to accumulate and constitute bigger problems. “A little drop of water makes a mighty ocean”.

Week 4_ Ejeh Udoka_ End of year safety report

Week 4_ Ejeh Udoka_ End of year safety report

The end of year safety report recorded five incidents which failed to fall within the year’s tolerable performance criteria which allow maximum of two incidents.

Possible causes

-investigation revealed that most of the personnel involved in the incidents, had poor record of safety meeting or JSA (job safety analyses) attendance.

-on one account, job description procedure was not adequately followed.

-following the investigation involving the malfunctioning of a 30 ton crane, it was noticed that the equipment was not pre-mobilized/ pre-qualified for the job.

-poor handling of power tools was identified.

-a majority of the artisans at the fabrication site are not learned and are unable to read instructions.

Possible solutions

-recording absence from work for those who fail to attend safety and JSA meetings may improve compliance.

-more training on tools and equipment handling should be incorporated.

-pairing up artisans in the combination of learned and unlearned will minimize errors.

-prohibiting personnel isolation will minimize events that are unexplainable.

-increase safety awareness among personnel.

-explaining to all project personnel, the project performance indicators and their role in achieving better result.

Summary

-Leading Indicators

Management walkthrough

House keeping

PPE compliance

Quality of JSA

Welding/cutting operation

Hand/power tools handling

-Trailing indicators

Near miss incidents

First aid cases

Medical treatment cases (MTC)

Lost time incident (LTI)

Fatality

This reveals that an improvement in the leading indicators will considerably narrow out events of trailing indicators. For example, regular house keeping will check cases of trip-and-fall incident which may be a near miss, or result to a first aid case.

Increase in the trailing indicators may considerably deter project progress. For example, an increased record of near misses may eventual a first aid case or an MTC resulting to LTI. This may add to the cost of the project or possibly cause slippage.

W3_Agbato Busayo_Engineering Design Rework

Problem Recognition, definition and evaluation
In engineering design, deliverables (drawings and documents) are generated and approved for construction by the client. When such deliverables are accepted by client, it is often assumed that the project is completed. But in practice, this is not so, because during construction (which could be some years after designs were completed) there are usually issues that manifests, that will require re-engineering / correction. At this stage, there is always a problem between client and design contractor because client will want contractor to effect these corrections, which at times are substantial, at no cost and the contractor will want client to pay the service.

Development of feasible Alternatives / Solutions (Alternatives)
These alternatives were considered in solving the problem.

Alternative 1: Client should always ensure that deliverables are thoroughly corrected, before approving for construction and acceptance from design engineering contractor.

Alternative 2: Client should make contractor to sign an undertaking that any design rework during Construction will be borne by contractor.

Alternative 3: Client should make available fund provision for construction support by design engineering contractor.

Alternative 4: Client should include in their design engineering contracts rework incentives.

Development of outcomes and cost implication

Alternative 1: Client ensuring that deliverables are thoroughly correct is the right thing to do but in practice it is not always so. Some issues are still not detected until during construction, and this could be critical such that engineering design rework could be required and the construction contractor may not be able to resolve it or cost more for if the construction contractor should do it, and also may take time for him to do especially if it involves modeling, calculations etc. Also the design contractor may want to charge for this correction claiming that it is the responsibility of theirs and the client and there by passing bucks to the detriment of the project.

Alternative 2: Making design contractor to sign an agreement of liability may be difficult and if is done, the contractor will build into his estimates allowances for this liability unknown to the client, thus increasing the initial design cost of the project.

Alternative 3: Making fund available for design engineer’s construction support will make it easier for any correction to design during construction to be absorbed by client and design engineering contractor, with each taking up some responsibilities. And if there is no need for any post construction support apart from rework, there will be fund also for the client to handle such unknowns.


Alternative 4: Client can include in their engineering services contract agreement provision for low engineering design rework Index incentives. This could motivate engineering design contractor to ensure thorough design output, but will not properly cater for construction support by design engineering contractor which in practice are inevitable.

Selection Criteria
1) Reduction in cost of project
2) Ease of solution to problems in project
3) Cordiality of team work relationship in project
4) Project execution on schedule.

Analysis and Comparison of the Alternative
Alternative 1: may not lead to additional design engineering cost, but may lead to difficulty in proffering solution to problems of engineering during construction, it can strain business relationship, negatively impact schedule because of back passing between client and design contractor.

Alternative 2: will lead to increase in initial cost of engineering, negatively impact schedule, because design contractor may delay in effecting correction buy not making the rework an important thing to do and it also can lead to client - contractor skepticism.

Alternative 3: will lead to reduction in overall cost of project, brings about quick solution to design engineering problem, encourage cordial relationship and make project to be complete on schedule relatively.

Alternative 4: Though could ensure thorough design engineering deliverables, may not take into consideration provisions for design engineering contractor’s construction support.

Selection of Preferred Alternative
From these analyses and criteria above, alternative 3 will be the preferred alternative. It has adequate allowance to accommodated all engineering design rework risks and gives adequate support during construction.

Performance Monitoring / Post Evaluation
All challenges associated with design correction during construction will be mitigated by:
i. ensuring engineering design are thorough enough to eliminate rework
ii. Construction support fund should be budgeted, and used only when necessary.

References
1. Sullivan, W. G., Wick, E. M., & Koelling, C. P. (2009) Engineering Economy 14th Edition.
2. www.engr.orst.edu/~rogged

W2_Agbato Busayo_Blog Recovery Plan

Problem Recognition
“A Blog (contraption of the term “web log” is defined as “a type of website, usually maintained by an individual with regular entries of commentaries, description of events, or other material such as graphics or video. These entries are commonly displayed in reverse-chronological order”2, is one of the deliverables toward preparation for enhancing success in AACE exams related problems. I am grossly behind schedule in this deliverable hence the need to recover, so as to ensure the fulfillment of the blog deliverables and success in the exams.

Feasible Alternatives
Alternative 1: To commence writing one blog a week
Alternative 2: To write two blogs a week until I catch up with the schedule
Alternative 3: Write at once all outstanding seven blogs
Alternative 4: Note write blog and quit the programme

Development of outcomes and cost implication
Alternative 1: means that I will not be able to record 100% in blog posting, which will affect my personal score and that of the team. Hence loss of hour and money estimated for the deliverable.

Alternative 2: implies that by week 14, I will be able to catch up with the schedule, have time for other deliverables and be able to write quality blog. The work and cost estimated will be recovered thus achieving 100% in blog.

Alternative 3: is very difficult, if not out rightly impossible, it may result in low quality blog posting and does not guarantee quality blog postings in future. Though 100% is achieved by the quality of work will be low.

Alternative 4: though this will relieve the seeming pressure, but will not justify the objectives of sponsor guarantee personal success in Cost engineering. The loss here is total.

Selection Criteria
1) Achieve 100% in blog posting
2) Guarantee quality blog posting
3) Ensure the objective of sponsor is achieved
4) Guarantee cost engineering skill of candidate

Analysis and Comparison of the Alternative
Alternatives 1, 3, and 4 do not meet all the selection criteria.
Alternative 2 satisfy relatively all the selection criteria

Selection of Preferred Alternative
My preferred alternative is alternative 2, this give room for quality blogging and ensures recovery before end of project

Post Evaluation
The initial problem of blogging has been overcome hence ease of blogging. Discipline to write two blogs each week until recovery is achieved to be ensured.

References
1. Sullivan, W. G., Wick, E. M., & Koelling, C. P. (2009) Engineering Economy 14th Edition.
2. www.wikipedia.org/wiki/blog

W1_Agbato Busayo_Tuckman's Team Assessment Survey

Problem Recognition
Team members’ evaluation of their leadership activities involve the assessment of leadership style with a view of correcting and/or developing a new team if there are serious gaps that calls for it.

Alternative Team Assessment Models
Alternative Team assessment models includes:

1. Tuckman forming storming norming performing model

2. Hersey & Blanchard's situational leadership model

3. Tannenbaum & Schmidt Continuum

Selected Model
I’m using the Tuckman forming storming norming performing model for this posting because of its global recognition. Tuckman informs that teams normally go through five stages of growth: Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing and Adjourning. He explained that as team develops in both ability and maturity, they established relationship and this begets the style of leadership, i.e. leadership style changes from directing style to coaching, then participating, finishing delegating and almost detached.

Results
The result of the performance test using the Tuckman forming storming norming performing model are, survey score of 25 for forming, 21 for storming, shows that the team is in the forming stage. This result can be substantiated by the following observations from team attitudes:

Ø Team members did not understand the full import of CFH emphasis on how tough the programme will be.

Ø Team members still want to do things their own way whereas a common agreement binds team members.

Ø Team members are still trying to put together all resources required for the tasks

Ø Team members are yet to understand each other.

Conclusion & Recommendation
Since the team is still in the forming stage, there is high dependence on leadership for guidance and direction. Leaders are answering a lot of questions and processes are often ignored. For this forming stage, the leadership style based on Tuckman model should be directing.

References
http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/leader/teamsuv.html
http://www.businessballs.com/tuckmanformingstormingnormingperforming.htm

W5_Abiola Ojo_Selecting a Cost Estimating Methodology for a School Building Project

Problem Statement

On my proposed school building project, I desire to carry out a cost estimate of the project to enable me predict the final cost of the project. The cost estimate will assist me in making sound investment decision and cash-flow projection. This estimate will also form the basis for my budgets, progress measurement, trending, forecasting, and change management. The school project is just at the conceptual stage and I need to make an investment decision within two months. Before I can proceed with the cost estimation however, I need to decide on the estimating methodology that will best meet my objectives knowing well that several estimating methodologies exist.  

Alternatives

In choosing the best cost estimating methodology for the project, three cost estimating methodologies were evaluated:

Alternative 1: Order-of-magnitude estimate

Alternative 2: Budget or semi-detailed estimate

Alternative 3: Definitive or detailed estimate

Outcome of the Alternatives

Alternative 1: Order-of-magnitude estimate

This method involves the use of historical data from similar projects to estimate the cost of the project by modifying those data for changes in inflation or deflation, activity level, location, productivity, cost of labour, dimensions, and other factors.   

    Estimate Accuracy: -30/+50%

Cost of Estimation + Pre-work: $1,000

Estimate Timeline + Pre-work: 2 week

Alternative 2: Semi-detailed estimate

This method will require some preliminary engineering and details and will require the services of a professional. This is usually a factored estimate based on major equipment costs.

    Estimate Accuracy: -15/+30%

Cost of Estimation + Pre-work: $2,500

Estimate Timeline + Pre-work: 4 weeks

Alternative 3: Detailed Estimate

This is a very detailed method of cost estimating and requires breaking down the project into small, manageable units. These unit costs are rolled up into the overall cost estimate. The method requires a high level of project definition including specifications, drawings, site surveys, and vendor quotations and will usually require a professional team to carry it out.

    Estimate Accuracy: -5/+15%

Cost of Estimation + Pre-work: $6,000

Estimate Timeline + Pre-work: 8 weeks 

Selection Criteria

S/N	Criteria	Weight
1	Estimate Accuracy	1
2	Cost of Estimation + Pre-work	3
3	Estimate Timeline + Pre-work	2

Analysis of Alternatives

Alternative	Estimate Accuracy	Cost of Estimation	Timeline	Ranking
	Weight
	1	3	2
Alternative 1	1	3	3	15
Alternative 2	2	2	2	12
Alternative 3	3	1	1	8

Key: Best - 3, Fair - 2, Worst - 1

Alternative Selected

Based on the above analysis, Alternative 1 which is “Order-of-magnitude estimate” had the highest ranking is therefore the selected alternative at this stage of the project.

Performance Monitoring

Actual cost of estimation and schedule will be tracked against budget in order to evaluate performance. Performance based payment (Earned Value Methodology) will be used for paying the contractor.

References

Engineering Economy, 14th Edition. Chapter 1, Page 27 & Chapter 3, Page 91-102 William G. Sullivan, Elin M. Wicks, C. Patrick Koelling

Week 9_ SeeGod Meregini_ Choosing the right procedure in making decisions.

Problem Recognition/Evaluation

Decision making is often not an easy task to do especially when it would have a great impact to people, environment to mention a few. A friend of mine recently ask me to advise on how he would determine the right choice on important matters concerning big decisions he was faced with. Being in an environment where decisions are made every time, I was faced with a problem of correctly advising my friend on the right way to make major decisions.

Development of Feasible Alternatives/Solutions

I decided to solve this problem by evaluating 3 possible methods.

Alternative 1- Hunches.

 This type of method operates under the belief that “guts” feelings and intuition works best.

Alternative 2 – Engineering Economic Analysis Procedure

Here decisions are made using six to seven steps structured procedure in generating results.

It requires problem recognition, alternatives development, outcome development, criteria selection, analysis of alternative, selection of alternatives and post evaluation. The final results are always based on facts.

Alternative 3- Others  experiences

This alternative utilises the advices, feelings, and experiences of other people in making decisions.

Probable Outcomes of Alternatives / Solutions.

Alternative 1

This is very subjective and prone to making very big mistakes. It could also be used in making a right decision by chance but such “right” decision does not have facts and not easily accepted by others especially when other people are needed as partners to make success.

 Alternative 2

This method incorporates basic principles and involves several steps. Each step contributes information to one another in a related way. Unlike the first alternative, it creates open dialog where other people can make input because more than one person could be involved in making several small choices along the structured steps in order to arrive at a final decision.

Alternative 3

With no intention to debase the help from others, it can be said that without a structured way to collate information from well meaning experiences, advices and feelings of other people, the final choice in making a decision could very well end up in a disaster. This is true given the fact that people advices might come from numerous subjective reasons like sentiments, individual values, to mention a few.

Selection Criteria in determining the solution

1.    Easy sellable to potential partners.

2.    Easily documented for future similar decisions.

Analysis and Comparison of the alternatives

 Alternatives 1 and 3 do not meet both criteria above as “gut feelings” could be forgotten and other people advices could be denied when the outcome becomes bad.

Alternative 2 has been proven to work globally for making big decisions in big economic sectors and could easily be adapted to suit personal life choices.

Selection of Preferred Alternative

Based on the above analysis and criteria, I recommended ALTERNATIVE 2 to my friend and explained how each step worked.

 Performance Monitoring/Post Evaluation

In evaluating post results, I would assess how

·         successful my friend easily utilises alternative 2

·         he gets successful in his endeavoured goals

References

Sullivan, W. G., Wicks, E.M., & Koelling, C.P. (2009). Engineering economy and design process. In M.J. Horton (Ed.), Engineering economy (14^th ed.) (chapter 1.3) (pp. 27). New Jersey, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.

Sullivan, W. G., Wicks, E.M., & Koelling, C.P. (2009). Engineering economy and design process. In M.J. Horton (Ed.), Engineering economy (14^th ed.) (chapter 1.)  New Jersey, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.

Week 8_John Agbo_ Choice of staffing option.

We are about to commence a 500,000 Man hour fast – track Engineering project which will run for 6 months. In line with the Nigerian local content law, the client has insisted that 250,000 Man hour be executed in Nigeria and by Nigerians. 250,000 Man hours will be executed by our technical partners in the UK.

We carried out an analysis to determine the number of Nigerian personnel required assuming all personnel are to work only straight time from Monday to Friday with no overtime.

1 Engineer will work for a maximum of 960 Man hours in 6 months. Therefore, it will take about 261 personnel to execute the project in 6 months on full time basis. With a staff strength of 150 engineers, we decided it was not a good decision to engage all of them on the project as that is not the only project at hand. It was therefore concluded that we would be placing 100 engineers on the project while we source for 161 engineers to complete the number.

We were asked to work out modalities for sourcing the 161 engineers and make recommendations to management. We came up with 3 options:

1. Recruit 161 engineers on a 6 month contract basis.

2. Recruit 161 engineers on full time basis.

3. Second 161 engineers from other engineering companies

Analyzing the options

1. Recruit 161 engineers on a 6 month contract basis – From experience, hiring personnel on short term contract basis is more expensive for the company. Also, it is not very easy getting 161 engineers in this competitive industry that will be willing to be on contract for only 6 months not knowing whether or not the contract will be extended afterwards. My company isn’t sure as well if the contract duration will be extended and so cannot make any commitment to contract staff of a possibility of extension or absorption after the project ends.

2. Recruit 161 engineers on full time basis - The Company may consider this option, hoping that at the end of this project, another project will commence. The chances of another project commencing are 50 – 50. Should another project not be won at the completion of this project, the company runs a risk of being over-staffed and the company may opt for downsizing. It will be unfair to pick personnel out of their “comfort zones” only to later downsize them.

3. Second 161 engineers from other engineering companies – the company may consider seconding personnel from other companies and pay their employers an agreed rate per hour. This may be more expensive for our company but it leaves us with no fears as to what to do with the extra 161 engineers after the project ends.

Conclusion and Recommendation

Based on the above analysis, it can be seen that the 1^st option makes it difficult to source the required personnel as the contract duration is very short. The 2^nd option will put the company under a lot of pressure if there are no other jobs immediately after the current project ends. The 3^rd option releases the company from commitments and risks related to hiring on a short term contract and hiring on full time with fears of projects not coming instantly.

Therefore, we will recommend the 3^rd option to management.

References:

Employee Recruiting Strategy - Your Secret Weapon (online) - http://www.employee-hiring-explained.com/employee-recruiting-strategy.html