1. 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

2. 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?

3. What Is PDRI?

4. 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

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

6. Why Developed?

7. PDRI – Composition Industrial Buildings Sections: 3 3
Categories: 15 11
Elements: 70 64
Score:

8. See page 31
of IR 113-2

9. 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

10. See page 31
of IR 113-2

11. How Broadly Used?

12. 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

13. How Being Used?

14. 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%)

15. 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

16. The Value

17. 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!!

18. 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

19. 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)

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

21. 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)

22. How to Use

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

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

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

26. Summary

27. 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

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

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

30. PDRI Publications PDRI Industrial Projects PDRI Building Projects
CII Implementation Resource 113-2
PDRI Building Projects
CII Implementation Resource 155-2
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.

31. 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.

32. 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…