1. 2013 Annual Conference July 29–31 Orlando CII’s 10-10 Performance Assessment Campaign - Implementation Session CII Performance Assessment Committee

2. James Blaschke, ConocoPhillips Robert Chapman, NIST Guadalupe Chiriboga, Jacobs Russell Cusimano, ePM Charles Green, Aramco Services Kay Harlow, Southern Company Tom Isbell, Alstom Power Emmanuel Jimenez, Abbott Noah Kahn, Kaiser Permanente Mark LaClair, Walbridge Kevin Miller, Black and Veatch James O’Connor, Univ. of Texas Randall Park, Zachry Holdings David Perkins, Invista Oscar Rodriguez, URS Corporation Jason Rose, CB&I Bruce Strupp, CH2M HILL * Noé H. Sáenz, Burns & McDonnell * Paul Woldy, Chevron * Committee Co-Chairs

3. Agenda Moderator Noé H. Sáenz, Burns & McDonnell Panel Stephen Mulva, CII Mike Elliott, Phillips 66 Bruce Strupp, CH2M HILL TheoryApplicationResults

4. Motivation Senior Management Disconnect Need for Actionable Information Measures Roll Up, Down $/BOED, $/GSF, Capacity Efficiency Quality, Design Efficiency, Leading, HR Budget Factor, Change Cost Growth, WH/LF Piping, Project TRIR, etc. CII General Program CII 10-10 Program

5. CII’s Legacy of Improvement

6. 2013 Annual Conference July 29–31 Orlando Theory Stephen Mulva, CII

7. We Stand for the Project! Project – Company – Individual “Governing Dynamics” courtesy Universal Pictures

8. 21 st Century Project Context “Old School” Project Management Phase-Gate Based Project Management EPC F1F3F2ESUCOPS P FEP The “Hidden” Projects 8-11% Variation

9. “Drunkard’s Walk” (Markov Chain) 9 What is the Probability of Success (?) FEP 1 FEP 2 FEP 3 ENGR. PROC. CONST. S/U OPS. 33% Worse Better BAR 5% Off Course 10% Off Course 15% Off Course 10% Off Course 15% Off Course

10. Project Health Indicators (RT 220)

11. PHI – Predicted Outcomes

12. CII Model Plant / CII Reference Project Project A Capacity: 2,600 tons/yr BOM: 1.78 RF Project B Capacity: 1,150 tons/yr BOM: 0.83 RF Bill of Material (BOM) Work Hours Baseline Reference Factor (RF) CII 10-10 Database Design Efficiency (DE)

13. “Famous” Construction Quotes “Construction would be easy, if it weren’t for all the people involved” “When we pay for benchmarking, we typically tend to find the data being asked” ̶ Ted VanWyck ̶ Sanat Doshi

14. 2013 Annual Conference July 29–31 Orlando Application Mike Elliott, Phillips 66

15. 10-10 Questionnaires Practice-Based –Yes/No –5-point scales (strongly agree strongly disagree) Phase-Based –Help for current projects –Answered as project nears phase completion Quantitative, yet simple to answer Research-based, empirically tested Paper-Based (2013-2014) Examples…

16. The interfaces between project stakeholders were well-managed. A.Strongly Agree B.Agree C.Neutral D.Disagree E.Strongly Disagree FEP Questionnaire Input Metrics: Organizing, Leading

17. The equipment procurement and vendor schedules were a significant challenge or problem for this project A.Strongly Agree B.Agree C.Neutral D.Disagree E.Strongly Disagree Engineering Questionnaire Input Metrics: Planning, Controlling, Partnering & Supply Chain Management

18. Preferred suppliers were used effectively to streamline the procurement process A.Strongly Agree B.Agree C.Neutral D.Disagree E.Strongly Disagree Procurement Questionnaire Input Metrics: Planning, Controlling, Quality, and Partnering & Supply Chain Management (SCM)

19. The availability and competency of craft labor was adequate A.Strongly Agree B.Agree C.Neutral D.Disagree E.Strongly Disagree Construction Questionnaire Input Metrics: Planning, Controlling, Quality, HR and Safety

20. The project experienced an excessive number of project management team personnel changes A.Strongly Agree B.Agree C.Neutral D.Disagree E.Strongly Disagree Start-Up Questionnaire Input Metrics: Organizing, Leading, and Human Resources (HR)

21. Start-Up Questionnaire Which of the following statements characterize the decisions made by the manager(s) of this project? (please check all that apply) –Considered final and not revisited –Collaborative and inclusive –Made at the lowest appropriate level in the organization –Communicated promptly to the team –Made in a timely and effective manner –Consistent with the delegation of authority Input Measure: Leading

22. 2013 Annual Conference July 29–31 Orlando Results Bruce Strupp, CH2M HILL

23. 10-10 Program Metrics 23 10 Input Measures10 Outcomes Planning Controlling Design Efficiency Human Resources ….. Proj. Sch. Efficiency Capacity Efficiency Proj. Cost Efficiency Burn Rate ….. Mat’l. Mgmt. Plan Other Pre-Task Plan Questions $/BOED $/GSF $/Ton/Day Measures ImplementationCII General Program CII Industry-Specific Metrics Programs

24. 10-10 Outcome Metrics (6 of 10 Shown) 24

25. 10-10 Input Metrics 25 Simple Motivating Insightful Partnering and SCM Safety Sustainability Quality Leading Controlling Organizing Planning Design Efficiency Human Resources

26. 10-10 Integration, Diagnostics Phase-Based, Sector-Based, Attribute-Based 26

27. 10-10 Program Integration Member Imperatives 10-10 Program Knowledge Base 27

28. 2013 Annual Conference July 29–31 Orlando Campaign Noé H. Sáenz, Burns & McDonnell

29. 10-10 Program Campaign August 2013 – April 2014 –Anonymous Data Collection (~1,200 Phase- Projects) –10-10 Automation July 21-23, 2014 CII Annual Conference 2014 and Beyond –Company-level dashboard –Self-help vs. facilitated evaluation and implementation It starts NOW! 29

30. 10-10 Campaign – Next Steps Before you leave the room 1.Your business card. 2.10-10 Questionnaires (by phase) When get back to your office 1.Identify the phases / projects you want to assess 2.Form a team; engage your Next-Gen Leaders! 3.Stay tuned; get support along the way. a.Performance Assessment Community of Practice b.Info website / Linked-in group…coming soon! 4.Submit your 10 project phases before year end. 30

31. Questions? Moderator Noé H. Sáenz, Burns & McDonnell Panel Stephen Mulva, CII Mike Elliott, Phillips 66 Bruce Strupp, CH2M Hill TheoryApplicationResults