1. Effective Use of the Global Engineering Work Force James B. Mynaugh Rohm and Haas Company CII Research Team 211

2. Wages/benefits costs for recent engineering grads: – U.S.A.: $ 70,000 – Hungary: $ 25,690 – China: $ 15,120 – Russia: $ 14,420 – India: $ 13,580 Source ASEE Prism Global Engineering Work Force 2003 Engineering Graduates Source: US Census Bureau/NASSCOM

3. Project Goal To develop a framework to address the comprehensive issues involved in successful Global Virtual Engineering Teams through identifying best practices in: – Personnel, – Work processes, – Tools, and technologies.

4. Definition A Global Virtual Engineering Team (GVET) is a group of geographically dispersed engineers that needs to overcome: Space and Time issues, Function and Organizational barriers, and National, and Cultural differences

5. Thank you to Anheuser-Busch Studios Director: Jim Duff Scriptwriter: Jody Lambert Coordinator: Todd White Western Team: Sandie Hartwick Amy Lunn Adam Jost Joe Dollar Eastern Team: Rakhi Gupta Radhika Kamath Nhon Dang Speedy Warner

6. Use of Global Engineering Teams All Projects 6 % On First Project 15 % On Many Projects 62 % Not Using 17 % Survey Results: CII Members

7. Future of Global Engineering Teams Maintain 19 % Increase 81 % Survey Results: CII Members

8. Top-Rated Driving Forces 1. Reduce engineering cost 2. Competition 3. Global (or local) customers 4. Locate services close to project location 5. Reduce engineering schedule Survey Results: CII Members

9. Perceived Impact of GVET Performance Metric Average Opinion Engineering CostMore than 10% reduction Construction CostNo impact Engineering TimeNo impact Overall Project Delivery TimeNo impact Engineering QualityNo impact Construction QualityNo impact Survey Results: CII Members

10. Case Study Results Typical Engineering Cost on Projects >$5 million = 16.9% Total savings (5 projects) was > $20 million or roughly 30%. ProjectLocationYearCapital Cost ($) Engineering Cost ($) Engineering Cost (%) #1US1992101.310.110 % #2Europe199393.810.210.9 % #3US1995937.78.3 % #4Europe199673.37.810.6 % #5US200191.210.211.2 % Average10.2 %

11. Top-Rated Failure Factors 1.Poor communication, lack of face-to-face meetings. 2.Lack of understanding of local work practices, cultural differences, and/or language issues. 3.Lack of management involvement & experienced leadership. 4.Slow response to change. 5.Incompatible or poor technology support. Survey Results: CII Members

12. SOLUTION ?? GVET Execution Planner

13. Software application Six primary categories: 1. Scope definition 2. Communication 3. Project organization 4. Technology 5. Project controls 6. Quality assurance

14. GVET Execution Planner SNAPSHOT

15. Workshop Join us for: - Demo of GVET Execution Planner - Additional research findings - Live discussion with virtual team members Room: Grand Ballroom

16. Effective Use of the Global Engineering Work Force Research Team Robert J. BeakerGeneral Motors (Co-chair) Karl E. SeilStone & Webster, Shaw Group (Co-chair) Hector Brouwer de Koning Black & Veatch Dennis ChastainMustang Engineering Chuan ‘Victor’ ChenPenn State University Gregory GouldBurns & McDonnell John HackneyNova Chemicals Lona HankinsConocoPhillips Robert E. HoughtalingDuPont George JosephPenn State University Aivars E. KruminsABB Lummus Global John I. MessnerPenn State University James B. MynaughRohm and Haas Batuk PatelThe Dow Chemical Co. Matthew J. PetrizzoWashington Group International Reinhard PrattAMEC Gerald A. SchachtAbbott Bruce A. StruppParsons Corporation H. Randolph ThomasPenn State University Todd WhiteAnheuser-Busch

17. THANK YOU