14th Annual PACE Research Seminar

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Product Design & Process Selection-Manufacturing
Advertisements

Air Permitting : Process Improvement Kaizen Event June 4 – 8, 2007 Transforming Government- the challenge and opportunity of the 21st century.
GAVI CSO SC Leadership Team Dhaka, Bangladesh November 2011.
A PROJECT MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW Maritime Place PMI EMERALD COAST FLORIDA CHAPTER JANUARY 21, 2014.
Capital One Lecture Hall Sean C. Ehlers – Construction Management Capital One Lecture Hall McLean, VA Sean C. Ehlers Construction Management Advisor: Dr.
Engineering H193 - Team Project Gateway Engineering Education Coalition P. 1Spring Quarter Project Management Week 2 Day 2.
Value Analysis/ Flow Analysis
Owner Has Idea and Conducts Feasibility Study GoNo Go End of Project Pursue A/E Hire A/E to Design Project Scope of Work Defined Contract Negotiated Go.
-1- Project Name Project Name Weekly Project Report Project Manager : __________________ Date : ___________________.
Resolving Common Construction Disputes By: Bob Bourg Claims and Disputes Manager Washington State Department of Enterprise Services Engineering and Architectural.
Owner Has Idea and Conducts Feasibility Study Go No Go End of Project Pursue A/E/C or Design-Build Team Hire A/E/C to Design and Build Project Scope of.
March 2, 08 1 Ownership Improvement Items Steps User Impact Provider Impact EffortPriority Example Improvement Key Step 1 Key Step 2 H, M, L L =
Measure N Modernization IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS Planning, Bidding, Construction, and Occupancy.
Professional Services Collaborative Forum April 14, 2016
Continuous Improvement Project (A Guideline For Sponsors)
Bjarg Bjarg is non-profit apartment rental company that operates in compliance with Act on General apartments from The company was founded.
BIM & IPD This PPT is about Building Information Modeling (BIM) and
Introduction to Quality and Statistical Process Control
Chapter 6: Database Project Management
IN-CLASS EXERCISE #3 COVER SHEET WITH: “IN-CLASS EXERCISE #3” THE DATE
November 2004 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [San Antonio Closing Report] Date Submitted:
Learn. Engage. Grow Student Affairs Professional Development Day 2017
Engagement Discussion A3
CONTRACT DOCUMENTS & CONSTRUCTION
Technical Decision Making
Advance Software Engineering
(Additional materials)
Presenter Name | Company Name
<Name of Product>Pilot Closeout Meeting <Customer Name>
Supplier Partnership Supplier Partnership is the discipline the strategically planning for, and managing, all interactions with third party organization.
Defining an IT Workflow, from Request to Support
Punch list / Close Out - Project Completion
<month year> doc.: IEEE < e>
قانون المنافسة ومنع الاحتكار
End of Year Performance Review Meetings and objective setting for 2018/19 This briefing pack is designed to be used by line managers to brief their teams.
SUPPLIER PARTNERSHIP 2.
Spring Semester 2015 Lecture 7 Needs vs. Wants
<month year> doc.: IEEE < e>
TITLE: Contribution on Vertical Service Codes (VSC) Action Item
Presenter Name | Company Name
Employee satisfaction survey 2018
Team Tips #2 Working in Teams.
Wellington Condominiums Project
Presenter Name | Company Name
doc.: IEEE <doc#>
doc.: IEEE <doc#>
< November, 2011 > Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [More Low Energy Mechanism Details]
<month year> doc.: IEEE < e>
One input from Mirco Barbero
2 OVERVIEW Cybersecurity initiative launched in July 2015 to create a trusted environment to address Cybersecurity -- Focus on the security needs of operators.
Spring 2018 Final Project Phil Tayco San Jose City College
Presenter Name | Company Name
doc.: IEEE <doc#>
Sept 2010 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: Proposed MAC Comment Resolutions Date Submitted:
doc.: IEEE <doc#>
PCS CONTENT ON CMS.
Dana Williamson, Director Texas Health and Human Services Commission
What is a Value Stream Map?
January 2005 doc.: IEEE /0055r0 September 2005
Statewide Public Communications Services RFP#
Presenter Name | Company Name
July 2010 <month year> doc.: IEEE g Doc.: IEEE g
doc.: IEEE <doc# >
One-Touch Make-Ready Toolkit
doc.: IEEE <doc# >
Project Kick-off <Customer Name> <Project Name>
September 2008 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [Suggested TG3c PAR Changes] Date Submitted:
Update on PAR Comment Resolution
Comments to IEEE /68 Date: Authors: September 2009
You have an Identity-of-Interest if …
Presentation transcript:

14th Annual PACE Research Seminar Spring 2006 Partnering for Value Engineering Sean Ehlers Construction Management Option

Research: Partnering for Value Engineering Background: Value Engineering – methodical advance to improve the overall value of a product and accompanying services Partnering – management tool to improve quality and program, to reduce confrontations between parties, thus enabling an open and non-adversarial contracting environment Survey Utilization: Key dates Sources of VE suggestions Satisfaction or displeasure within project team interaction

Research: Partnering for Value Engineering Survey Utilization: Key dates of design development when did VE occur? Sources of VE suggestions and their purpose cost cutting or adding value? Satisfaction or displeasure within project team interaction What are the attributes of successful VE?

Research: Timing of Value Engineering Chart #1. Teams in Timely VE Process 100% 75% 50% 25% Designers GC/CM Overall Good Timing Designers – 22% good timing 78% poor timing Poor Timing GC/CM – 40% good timing 60% poor timing Overall – 29% good timing 71% poor timing

Research: VE within Document Development Chart #2. Timely VE w/ Document Development 20% 15% 10% 5% 25% 25% Docs 50% Docs 75% Docs 100% Docs 25% DD – 15% good timing 0% poor timing Good Timing Poor Timing 50% DD – 8% good timing 0% poor timing 75% DD – 8% good timing 23% poor timing 100% DD – 0% good timing 23% poor timing

Research: Adding Value or Cutting Cost Chart #3. Adding Value vs. Cost Cutting 100% 75% 50% 25% Designers GC/CM Overall Adding Value Designers – 25% add value 75% cost cut Cost Cutting GC/CM – 15% add value 85% cost cut Overall – 80% add value 20% cost cut PE @ Rathgeber/Goss Associates – “owner, developer, and GC are all from the same company, 95% of their decisions were made with the point of adding value”

Research: Sources of VE suggestions Chart #4. Sources of VE Suggestions 40% 30% 20% 10% 50% Designers GC/CM Owner Engineer Designers – 22% Owner 22% Architect Architect GC/CM 28% Engineer 28% GC/CM GC/CM – 10% Owner 26% Architect 16% Engineer 48% GC/CM Mechanical Engineer – “I add unnecessary items which an be removed during the VE process, so we look like we are contributing”

Research: Project Team Interaction Chart #5.

Research: Partnering for Value Engineering Final Observations/Recommendations Designers and GC/CM’s are in agreement that VE timing is poor and the earlier suggestions are best Overall aim of cost cutting and a noticeable difference in sources of VE suggestions may cause dissemination between project teams and their goals The problem is not so much partnering, but the overall mechanics of VE

Research: Partnering for Value Engineering Comments? or Suggestions?