Project Definition Rating Index (PDRI) Revisited G. Edward Gibson, Jr., Ph.D., P.E. Professor, Department of Civil Engineering The University of Texas at Austin

Agenda What is PDRI? How broadly used by CII members? How organizations using PDRI? What is the value of using PDRI? How to use PDRI? Lessons learned since the tool’s introduction? What is the PDRI? How broadly is it used by CII members and others? How are organizations using PDRI and what lessons have we learned since the tool’s introduction? What is the value of using PDRI to project performance? How to use PDRI as a management tool?

What Is PDRI?

PDRI – The Definition An Acronym An Index A Risk Management Tool Project Definition Rating Index An Index Score along a continuum representing the level of scope definition A Risk Management Tool Identifies and measures risks related to project scope definition

PDRI – History Born on date PDRI Industrial: 1996 PDRI Buildings: 1999

Why Developed?

PDRI – Composition Industrial Buildings Sections: 3 3 Categories: 15 11 Elements: 70 64 Score: 70-1000 70-1000

See page 31 of IR 113-2

PDRI Element Descriptions (Example) A1. Reliability Philosophy A list of the general design principles to be considered to achieve dependable operating performance from the unit. Evaluation criteria should include: Justification of spare equipment Control, alarm, and safety systems redundancy Extent of providing surge and intermediate storage capacity to permit independent shutdown of portions of the plant Mechanical / structural integrity of components (metallurgy, seals, types of couplings, bearing selection, etc.) Found on page 37 of IR 113-2; Each element can be considered a written deliverable

See page 31 of IR 113-2

How Broadly Used?

PDRI Usage Among CII Members PDRI TYPE Not Applicable (3) Not Used (24) Used (43) Both (15) Industrial Only (22) Building Only (6) N = 70

How Being Used?

Usage As a checklist in early project development (81%) As a “gate” check before moving to the next project phase (72%) In conjunction with other front end planning measurement methods (72%) As a means of measuring or benchmarking front-end planning process performance (70%) More than once on most projects (42%)

Usage (continued) Others: As an audit tool (42%) In a modified form for small or unusual projects (33%) To help capture lessons-learned (28%) With the help of an outside facilitator (19%) All or some of projects Part of project process as gate Uses: project self assessment audit after the fact

The Value

Understanding PDRI Scores 1000 Points PDRI scoring is based upon a 0 to 1000 point scale, where lower scores are better. It is like the “zero-defects” concept from Total Quality Management: where your score decreases as as your amount of project uncertainty, or risk, decreases. In practice, when we begin our project, we theoretically have Zero Definition and, therefore, have a score of 1000 points. As our level of definition increases, our score decreases. Therefore, the lower the score, the better, much like the game of golf. A major benefit of this system is that elements which do not apply to a particular project can be zeroed-out and this will not affect the final score. This also enables you to use the PDRI on Smaller projects, like retrofit or revamp projects, where many of the 70 elements often don’t apply. 0 Points LOWER IS BETTER!!

What does a score mean? A continuum Relative to timing Only as valid as effort/seriousness Accuracy (the real score) can be improved with facilitation Perhaps is not the most important output of the assessment

Comparison of Projects with PDRI Above and Below 200 — Industrial Projects PDRI Score Performance < 200 > 200 Cost 4% below budget 6% over budget Schedule 3% behind of schedule 11% behind schedule The 60 projects were segregated based on PDRI score at project authorization. On average, lower scoring projects tended to perform better. Therefore, lower scoring projects are more predictable in terms of their authorization estimates for cost and schedule. Note the delta in change orders. A better defined project yields less changes and a more satisfied owner. These projects represent $3.3 billion and 34 companies. Change Orders 6% of budget 8% of budget (N=62) (N=44)

PDRI – The Results EXAMPLE: $55 Million Industrial Project, 24-Month Schedule < 200 > 200 Cost $53 million $58 million Schedule 25 months 27 months

Comparison of Projects with PDRI Above and Below 200 — Building Projects PDRI Score Performance < 200 > 200 Cost 1% over budget 10% over budget Schedule On schedule 21% behind schedule The 60 projects were segregated based on PDRI score at project authorization. On average, lower scoring projects tended to perform better. Therefore, lower scoring projects are more predictable in terms of their authorization estimates for cost and schedule. Note the delta in change orders. A better defined project yields less changes and a more satisfied owner. These projects represent $3.3 billion and 34 companies. Change Orders 7% of budget 11% of budget (N=18) (N=74)

How to Use

Assessing a Project What it SHOULDN’T BE Performed in a vacuum

Time Needed for Assessing a Project Two-and-a-half to four hours initially Less later

Observations Official sanctioning of activity Part of process Small cadre of facilitators Training Does not plan Risk mitigation process

Summary

Benefits of PDRI to Owners Well planned projects Better team alignment and communication Improved risk assessment Ability to make “tradeoff” decisions Can be used in developing a portfolio 4

Benefits of PDRI to Designers and Contractors Ability to measure scope Avenue to communicate Reconcile differences Standardized scope package Monitor progress Minimize design rework

In Summary PDRI works! PDRI is not as easy as it appears “Score” is good, process of getting there is better

PDRI Publications PDRI Industrial Projects PDRI Building Projects CII Implementation Resource 113-2 PDRI Building Projects CII Implementation Resource 155-2 http://construction-institute.org/pdri/ Development of IR181-2 and RS181-2 are to support the deployment of the IPRA and allow organizations to perform assessments. The IR will be discussed at the implementation session. The full research report will delivered to CII December 2003.

Implementation Session Participants Steve Campbell NASA John Fish Ford, Bacon, and Davis Edd Gibson UT Austin Bob Herrington Jacobs Jim Nelson 3M Javid Talib Black and Veatch This panel of industry professionals will briefly present their personal PDRI implementation experiences in the implementation session. The remainder of the session will be devoted to audience questions, shared experiences and feedback on the implementation of the PDRI technique.

Come Join Us! Location: Georgia B Times: Wednesday 10:45-11:45 am 1:00-2:00 pm No telling where the IPRA will be used yet..this project location is out of North America…. Location of the implementation session will be…