1

As-Builts Final Gate Review

March 11 2013

Define

Measure

Analyze

Improve

Control

CreateProject

Definition

Map the process

Capture customer

requirements

Validate Measurement

System for output Y

Collect data

EstablishBaseline

Capability

Identify potential sources of

variation and Waste

Analyse root causes

Establish potential process

improvements

Prioritise key X’s - process inputs

Implement control plan

DocumentProcess.

ImplementControls

Determine FinalProcess

Capability

D M A I C Roadmap

IdentifySolution

Plan Improvements

Validate Solution

ImplementImprovements

Gate

revie

w

Gate

revie

w

Gate

revie

w

31 July

18 June

15 Oct

Monitor Project Performance

Over Time

11 March

As–Builts Project Team.

• Project Sponsor : Mike Maunsell • Business Sponsor : Steve Tobin • Process Owner: Kevin Normanton • Draughting Manager: Shane Ballantyne.

• Project Leader : Rod Pedersen • Team members:

– Build Manager : Michael Walding – Draughting Technician : Truby Morgan – Change Management: Katherine Faire

– Senior Draughtsperson Paul Dickons

DEFINE

Voice of the customer

• Shane Ballantyne– I want my team to complete their work without having to deal with

poor quality as – builts – Steady delivery of accurate records to draughting team in a timely

manner. – Consistent reliable as-built information to free up our time.

• Kevin Normanton – As-Builts ,right first time every time from the sub-contractors and

better visibility of progress in the field. • Mike Maunsell.

– The as-builts are crucial in enabling us to invoice chorus and reduce our WIP.

– This project has been identified from our strategy weekend as being high priority and needs a consensus approach to deliver real improvement in bottom line results.

DEFINE

Problem and Objective What is an As-Built ?

– A field recording, documenting actual build location and specifications of all plant installed on the project (BAU or UFB).

What is the problem : – Tracking of as-built records is not visible. There is a general lack of

accountability for doing as-builts to the right standard and quality. Also poor understanding and accuracy affects the timely completion of As-builts to the Draughting team.

Project Objective– To improve the quality and accuracy of the as- builts.– To Improve the tracking and visibility of as- builts – To reduce the time taken to complete the as-builts and deliver the as-builts to

the draughting team within the required timeframe.

Project metrics include:– # of rejections from the draughting team. – # of As-builts delivered daily to draughting team – Time taken to produce as-builts (mhrs) and lead time.– WIP figure waiting for as-builts – Visibility and tracking metrics (daily management of process )

DEFINE

Data: As-Builts. Quality and time

Summary: The average quality of the as-builts delivered to the records team is 6.3.

The average time taken to submit as-builts to records team is 14 days after cabinet completion

Average Quality score = 6.3

87654

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

avg all areas

Frequency

Mean 6.272StDev 1.118N 59

Histogram of avg all areasNormal

2824201612840

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

days afterFr

equency

Mean 13.74StDev 6.848N 27

Normal average days as-builts received after cabinet completion

Average time as-builts are delivered after cabinet completion= 14 days

The quality target is 9.

The delivery target is 2 days

28 days after is a

problem.

Measure / Analyse

“You can’t improve a process if you can’t measure it.”Deming

Data: As-Builts Quality

9

8

7

6

5

4score

1-1

0 o

n q

ualit

y o

f as

built

s

ASH

MAS

NAPWGTN

DND

PLM

ASH

MAS

NAP

WGTNDND

PLM

ASH

MAS

NAP

WGTN

DND

PLM

ASH

MASNAP

WGTN

DND

PLM

ASH

MASNAP

WGTN

DND

PLM

ASH MAS

NAP

WGTN

DND

PLM

ASH

NAP

WGTN

DNDPLM

ASH

MAS

NAP

WGTN

DND

PLMASH

MAS

NAP

WGTN

DND

PLM

ASH

MAS

NAP

WGTNDND

PLM

as-builts deliverables v regions

Summary: Average score of 6.3 /10.

Focus areas for improvement are :

•By Area: Dunedin, Ashburton and Wellington.

•By Type: Civils and Hauling As-Builts .

avg Dunavg ashavg masavg napieravg wgtnavg palmerston

9

8

7

6

5

4

sco

re 1

-10

ag

ain

st d

eliv

era

ble

s

fixed fog

tube test

tube allocat

duct tee

hauling

man civil

rib-jointslaterals

duct civil

cab civil

fixed fog

tube test

tube allocat

duct tee

hauling

man civil

rib-joints

laterals

duct civil

cab civil

fixed fog

tube test

tube allocat

duct tee

hauling

man civil

rib-joints

lateralsduct civil

cab civil

fixed fogtube test

tube allocat

hauling

man civil

rib-joints

lateralsduct civil

cab civil

fixed fog

tube test

tube allocat

duct tee

hauling

man civil

rib-joints

laterals

duct civil

cab civil

fixed fog

tube test

tube allocat

duct tee

hauling

man civilrib-joints

laterals

duct civil

cab civil

Quality survey of as-builts accross regions and deliverables

Measure/Analyse

As-builts delivered on time

and to the right standard

Subcontractors (includes Downer) Policies

Environment People

Process

Format/style

Page 1

“As- Builts” Cause and Effect diagram.Purpose: to prioritise the key input factors.

Backfilled before As-builts done or checked

Contractual obligations For as-builts

No clearly defined processFor submitting as-builts

#of rejections of as-builts

UFB As-builts recording document

Payments based on As-builts completion

QA for as-builts)

As-builts std documents

NCRs issued by records team ?

# of as-builts deliverables= lots of variation

Progressive completion of as-builts after work done

Not sure they care that much Or realise the importance

Time needed to do as-builts Not regarded as value add

# of contractors in cabinet area

Not clear about whats reqd Or by when

Backlog of work for each recording Draughtsman

Resources being moved aroundLack of continuity

Motivation levels low

Clear defined roles /accountabilities

Field recording specialist /draughtman

Training . Skill levels

Supervision of cabinet build

Leadership of as-builts process. Cultural norms

Distance of boundaries

Weather (rains on page )

Topography

Geographic location of cabinet

Variation in stds

Handwritten recording on graph paper

Hard copies not kept just scanned

Pen or pencil recording

Field book+ toolsEg GPS technology

Computer drawn -visioVariation of as-builts standards

Size of page A4-A3

Design package Handed over to SM

Design Changes

Delivery process To records

Tracking of as-builts(scalable solution for UFB )

Cabinet type ABF/FAT

Cabinet Completion date

Dble handlingAs-builts

drawn twice

Feedback process For as-builts

Lack of ITPs for as-builts upstream quality

Lost as-builts. No defined process

From sub-cons to SM

Multiple contractorsShifting responsibilities

Top 9 “causes” from fishbone diagram.

1. Design changes

2. No defined delivery process

3. Tracking of as-builts

4. Multiple contractors shifting responsibilities.

5. The number of contractors in the cabinet area

6. The number of rejections due to poor quality

7. Lack of training or skills required to do as-builts

8. Not enough field recording draughties to do QA in the field

9. As-Builts SOPs not readily available or confusing

Measure/Analyse

Precisely how many As-Builts are delivered late ? And what is the

cost ?

By cabinet Location

By tracking and recording

process

By Subcontractor

By Recording Method

# of late as-builts from Recording draughtsman (Downer)

# of late as-builts from hand drawn in field

# of late as-builts from surveyors

# of late as-builts by type eg drillers/jointers

# of late as-builts by skills / capability

# of late as-builts by contract payments

# of Late As-builts from wgtn

# of Late As -builts from Sth Island

# of late As-builts from LNI

# of late as-builts by Wellington.

# of late as-builts rest of UFB

Single PDFs scanned and compiled by one person for

multiple cabinets

Complete as-builts dossier scanned to senior

draughtsman and checked

Measurement System Analysis -Audit is Red There is not enough confidence in the As-Builts measurement system to be sure we will make

a measurable difference in the delivery time to recording team.

# of late as-builts by changes in

programme plan

Recommendation

Fix the As-Builts measurement system before implementing any changes.

# of late As-Builts > 48hrs after cabinet

completion

#of late as-builts by delay in drawing them after work completed

Estimated financial cost

If delivery of As-Builts averages 14 days after cabinet completion and if one production day is lost on average due to As-Builts. This equates to approx $3300 per cab. x 150 cabinets to date = $495,000.00

20%

15%

5%

60% of late delivery is due to sub-contractor

Change Management Strategy

As-Builts Change

management

Change management

resources

Communication

Sponsors

Training Coaching

Plan

Develop sponsor roadmap

Develop support presentations and

collateral

Change management

strategy

Schedule “intro to change mgmt and ADKAR” training

Rod and Katherine

Allocate responsibilities

ADKAR

Prosci methodology

CM best Practise

Complete Organisational

attributes assessment

Complete change characteristics

assesment

Conduct stakeholder assessment

Identify areas of risk

Develop risk mitigation plan

Understand nature of change

Develop delivery

mechanism

Develop content

People

Process

Technology

Roles

New Design

Systems changes

As-builders

Sub-contractors

Project Mgrs

Site managers

Site supervisors

Sub-contractors

Weekly updates

Downer edition

Downer sponsors /stakeholders

Site managers and supervisors

Early successes

Fit 4 business programme

Key messages

Updates and progress reports

Identify key issues

Incorporate findings into

plan

Posters / notice boards

sub-contractors/as-builders PR+SR 300 6.25 31sub-contractors are keen to help with this project and if we aprtner with them and explain very clearly the goals we are trying to achieve we should get good resuts

downer as-builts coordinators IT+SP 4 5.85 35

The as-builts coordinators within downer are a group that do not have a defined role apart from managing quality as best they can. Defining a new way of doing things may be a challenge even though they will benefit from lower

Build teams sm+ss KN 20 2.50 51

The build teams will struggle the most with the proposed changes as they are effectively the front line for all issues and have repeated requests to improve performance across many fronts. The team is mostly new or have been

draughtys /records team SB 50 4.70 44

draughtys and records team bear the brunt of the poor quality delivered to them and the attempts to get as-builts correct result in frustration.they have a very defined view of the quality they need so it may be difficult to reach a

downer telco backhaul teams EP 20 NA 52

don’t know much about this group but suspect they will have quite a lot to say about asbuilts. The challenge will be getting them on side and in agreeance with any changes. Backhaul is a problem which they are involved in

UFB project managers RBJS 3 5.00 44

UFB project managers are the process owners for as-builts but lack the authority to enable process changes to be effective. They are managing lots of competeing priorities so only have a small amount of time to spend on

design team SBd 50 3.50 35 design group is not impacted significantly by this change.

0 ST 0 6.85 0 0

Mike Maunsell

Shane Ballantyne

Chris Ely

Kevin N

Rob j and Jason S

Shayne Bird

Katherine Faire

CJ

AL C

Downer as-built coordinators

Steve Tobin

Wellington build teams

LNI build teams

SouthIsland build teams

As-builts project team

Mike Walding Mike Kemp

Paul Dickons

Sub-contractor Group

From Mike to his DRS

CM powerpoint and sound bites 1 pager. ADKAR and get his DRs into supporting the change efforts Change management is a process.Leadership/sponsorship

Draughty team

L2 to their DRs

Project details WIIFMADKAR Leadership thru the process

3/6/2013

Sponsor assessment diagram and communications plan for As-Builts project

Measure/Analyse

Change messages from the sponsor

Measure/analyse

• Steve Tobin has my full delegated authority. If there is doubt or conflict, Steve has the final say.

 • EVERYONE has a role to play in making the project successful -

whether that is active participation or support of the processes.

• As-builts are one of our top priority projects. We all agreed this at the May strategy session.

 • I’m committed to this path for the as-builts and I need your

support. • This is a new approach for the project, for Downer and for most of

us personally. It’s our first time using the continuous improvement methodology of Lean Six Sigma.

• This is a fantastic opportunity for all of us to build a better as-built process and to learn about continuous improvement.

As-Builts list of Potential Process Improvements To do Impact

1 Create the delivery process to records. For each cabinet include start and finish dates.

Easy

High

2 Provide faster feedback for poor quality as-builts. (QA at point of delivery ) Easy

High

3 NCRs raised and registered for poor quality as builts Easy

High

4 Communicate end to end as-builts process for cabinet build to all sub-contractors

Easy

Med

5 Develop Comms plan to as-builders to lift awareness and enforce compliance Easy

Med

6 All sub-cons to have contracts with Downer that specifically include as-builts Easy

Low

7 Improve design to reduce changes in the field Easy

Low

8 Include as-built stds in job pack issued to sub-cons Med Med

9 PMs to own the performance relationship with sub-cons and provide 1:1 feedback

Med Med

10 Develop a new tracking /measuring system for as-builts Hard

High

11 Define as-builts stds and check sub-con skills /capability against the stds Hard

High

12 Clear consequences for poor quality as-builts performance and reward good quality

Hard

High

13 Develop a list of approved as-builders that are trained and qualified. We will only accept as-builts from approved as-builders

Hard

High

14 Develop leadership capability to ensure problems are not passed on particularly for as-builts.

Hard

High

Improve/ Control

Improvements Implemented

1. UFB recording guidelines rewritten / simplified 25 pages to 16.

2. New guidelines flipchart checklist designed and printed (120copies )

3. Nominated as-builders trained and mentored. (Wgtn and LNI )

4. A3 base plan layouts defined and implemented.

5. Progressive checking by build zone for each cabinet (cover sheet)

6. Build manager accountability + improved capability.

7. Frixion black Erasable ink pens used to draw as-builts on base plans.

8. New process map9. Status report from Draughting

team.10.Photo of cabinet installation

with each as-built.

Improve/control

As-builts process map. Future state

Pre-build Day 1-3 Day 3-5 Up to day 7 -8

Bu

ild te

ams

Tel

co(S

ite F

orem

an)

B

uild

team

s C

ivil

(Site

For

eman

)A

s-bu

ilde

r D

raug

hty/

reco

rds

team

S

ite M

anag

er

Pre-start Check all

elements of As-builts process is in

place

Organise and hold 1:1 meetings with

approved as-builders setting

expectations and goals

Civil Work physically starts on

the cabinet

Telco Work

physically starts on

the cabinet

As-builts Deliverables (Civil) Hauling (back+dist)Cabinet Manhole Ducting

As-Builts Deliverables (Telco) Laterals/ Duct tees Ribbonet Joint Tube allocation Tube test data Fixed Fibre FOG plan BH/ Fibre Jointing /splicing OFDF data Exchange rack face Cabinet internals layout

Sketch as-built as required no later than 8 hrs after work completed

Receives sketches from Build teams

at end of each day(by hand)

Sketch as-built as required no later than 8 hrs after work completed

Pass all sketchesTo approved as-builders

at end of each day (by Hand)

Pass all sketches to approved as-builders each day (by hand)

QC check 1 (verbal)

Contact as-builder each day and

confirm they are receiving as-built

sketches

Provides a verbal confirmation to site manager

regarding as-built sketches

Takes sketches and draughts up into the approved as-built format and

style

Takes a hard copy of as-built and

also scans a copy to his own File

Cabinet #Date /Time

At the end of the week submits the original draughted

as-builts to the Site Manager by

hand with a cover sheet

Receives As-Builts from approved as-builders by hand

Signs cover sheet as receiving

QC Check 2Checks qty and

quality of submitted as-builts against the

deliverables and standard

Accept or reject within 24 hrs of

receiving

Receives rejected as-builts from site manager within 24 hrs of submitting

as a pack

Rejected as-builts

Stamps /signs Accepted week 1 as-builts and files into control board

Passes rejected as-builts back to as-builder as a

pack

QC check 3 Nominated

Draughty goes to board and

removes as-builts folder and QC

checks the received as-builts

Accept or reject as-builts within 24 hrs

Marks up as-builts red lining any

discrepancies and red stickering the

cover page.

Draughty accepts the as-builts and signs the cover

sheet

Draughty Returns as-built folder to

the as-builts control board

Reject

Accept

Site manager checks as-builts

control board every 2nd day for red stickered as-

builts

Removes any rejected as-builts from the board

and passes back to as-builder as a pack (puts control card into slot on

board)

Receives rejected as-builts from site manager within 24 hrs after rejection from draughting

team

Corrects as-builts and passes back to site manager

within 24 hrs

Corrects as-builts and passes back to site manager

within 24 hrs

QC Check 4 If week 1 as-builts are not received and accepted by

Wednesday of the following week

Remedy by instructing contractor to stop work.

Site manager to raise NCR against

contractor

Process repeats

Results potential and actual

• Good levels of engagement from the sub-contractor, build and draughting teams.

• 25% reduction in draughty processing time (40hrs per cabinet ) – 40 x 350 cabinets = 14000.00 mhrs x 33 per hr $462,000.00

• Reduction in amount of rework. Avg of 3.8 queries per cabinet.– 80 mhrs per week reduced collating and fixing as-builts in the wgtn Build

teams. = 4160.00 mhrs per year = $137,280.00 x 3 areas = $411,840.00.

• Total estimated hard savings from this project will be $873,840.00 (conservative)

• Improved quality and delivery. Reduced volume of as-builts from average of 70 sheets to 14. (standard format)

• As-builts submitted on average 2.25 days after build complete date (8 cabinets measured) compared to average of 14 days.

J V 64 Wn 104Wn 103Wn101PTN sea 24 PTN sea 23PTN cab 12PTN cab 13

10

5

0

-5

cab id wgtn

Indiv

idual Valu

e

_X=2.25

UCL=9.09

LCL=-4.59

J V 64 Wn 104Wn 103Wn101PTN sea 24 PTN sea 23PTN cab 12PTN cab 13

8

6

4

2

0

cab id wgtn

Movin

g R

ange

__MR=2.571

UCL=8.402

LCL=0

I-MR Chart of No of days after BC

Improve/ Control

Feedback Hi Michael,Feed back for the recordings PRO/AU FFP13:In general, since this is my first recordings from Daniel Renshaw Drainage, I can rate the

recordings 7.5 out of 10 compared to other recordings I have worked with.Cheers, Jesse Respecio Draughtsperson Downer

Hi PaulI have all done with WN/BN 101 As-built. Please tell the drawer of the as built: well done, that’s

the best as built I have ever got.As far as I am concerned, all the things that I ever want to find in an as built, clarity, tidiness,

sufficient dimension, are achieved in this as built.Cheers Mintie

Hi Rod,As discussed yesterday to demonstrate the improvement that the new as-built

process is achieving in the quality of the as-built records I have compared three Petone Year 2 cabinets.

PTN FFP5 as-builts were produced under the old process and resulted in 47 separate queries back to the build team for more detail or information.

PTN FFP24 and FFP14 as-builts were produced using the new ‘base plan supplied’ format and resulted in an average of 12 separate queries back to the build team for more detail or information.

Cabinet FFP5 took 50% more time to complete the records update work than the average of the other two cabinets.

It looks like that the evidence is pointing to what we are hearing anecdotally that the new methodology for producing civil as-builts is improving the quality of the as-builts and reducing the time it is taking for the records team to complete their work.  I would suggest that once the new QA component of the process kicks in fully the 12 queries per cabinet on the ‘new process’ cabinets should be able to be reduced significantly.

Hope that helps. Shane

Control Plan

Prepared by: Page: of 1

Approved by: Document No:

Location: Approved by: Revision Date:

Area: Approved by: Supercedes:

KPOV KPIV

X

X

X

X

X

residential cabinets

wellington

1Rod Pedersen Process Name:

Int/Ext

As-Builts

Records/draughting team

CI Process Control Plan

Customer

email response all queries every time build manager

as-builts queries

time to rectify emailed query from records to build manager

24 hrs 8hrs as builts cover sheet

as-builder to be called and spoken to

TBA

Where Recorded

SOP Reference Decision Rule/

Corrective Action

as-builts delivery

submit as-builts to records team

after build complete milestone achieved

48hrs O hrs as-builts tracker all wgtn res cabinets

every cabinet

Records team

HS spreadheet

report out each week TBA

as-builts quality

Records team mark as-builts out of ten for quality

each complete as-builts set needs a quality score

10 1 as-builts tracker all cabinets received

every cabinet

Records team

as-builts cover sheet

feedback to each build manager after each cabinet

TBA

all cabinets allbuild manager

approved as-bulders

each cabinet must have an approved as-builder assigned

competence and training of as-builders

approved as-builder against each cabinet

no as-builder stop contractor work

TBA

as-builts progressively completed and submitted to draughting

as-builts submitted after build zone complete

defined build zone completion dates.

24 hrs 8hrs as-builts cover sheet

all cabinets all

cabinet work packet

Sample Size Frequency

build manager

as-builts cover sheet

as-builts not submitted within 24 hrs after each zone complete then stop work notice issued

TBA

as-builts cover sheet

Measurement Method

Who Measures

Sub ProcessSub Process

StepSpecification

Characteristic

Specification/ Requirement

USL LSL

CTQ

Lessons learnt / Pitfalls to avoid

• This project has been open to long and should have been closed Dec 2012.(increased speed for next time)

• Take up has been slow outside of Wellington. – Note: for next LSS project wider stakeholder representation

required from other geo areas. • Measurement/tracking system for as-builts still not fully operational as

yet.• Built some capability and trust with the approach and the roadmaps. • Overall results are starting to turn positive.• Needs a push by PMs to carry on the work and bed in the change. • Risk of this project being half implemented in some areas due to

perception that current method is ok .• Dollar savings are there for the taking but are est. at this stage apart

from wellington.

Final Gate Review

Criteria for Go, Cancel, or Recycle decision

For all Gate Reviews Consider People Factors Financial Analysis (Business Case) Risk Assessment/ Management Voice of the Customer (VOC) Project Documentation / Materials Lessons Learned

Key Questions to Consider Have the improvements been

implemented and the targets met? Has the improved process been

accepted by the team? Has the project been transitioned to

the process owner?

Completion of Control phase

Fin

al G

ate

Control planVisual controls

Control charts

Target improvements met – process is stable

Control plan in place