Title: CII
1Making Zero Field Rework A RealityWorkshop
- CII Do It Right The First Time Research Team
- CPI Conference
- Austin, Texas
- September 12, 2005
2Agenda
- Introductions
- Research Overview
- Self-Assessment Opportunity Checklist
- Q As
3ResearchGary SmithNorth Dakota State University
- for
- Do It Right The First Time Research Team
- CPI Conference
- Austin, Texas
- September 12, 2005
4APPROACH
- Considering
- Significant research on the quantitative
evaluation of rework has been done. Methods to
measure rework have been defined. - Significant research on safety has been done
including measurements and safety management
process improvements. - Dramatic improvements in safety have been
measured. Dramatic improvements in rework have
not. What can be learned from safety
implementation?
5OBJECTIVES
- Identify and evaluate safety program components
that may be convertible to quality processes - Identify and evaluate error reduction processes
- Concurrently collect data on safety and quality
processes. - Formulate a comprehensive zero-rework
management process
6Safety Performance TRIR
16.00
14.30
14.20
13.10
13.00
14.00
12.20
11.80
12.00
10.60
9.90
9.50
10.00
8.80
8.60
8.30
7.90
7.19
Total Recordable Incidence Rate
7.10
8.00
6.80
6.12
5.32
6.00
4.31
3.44
3.00
4.00
2.66
2.30
1.67
1.59
1.60
1.23
1.18
1.03
1.02
2.00
0.00
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
325
413
477
497
527
613
644
770
518
765
995
936
1,117
1,073
1,140
Year and Work Hours (MM)
7Previous Rework Data
- CII Research Summary 10-2 (1989)
- 12 rework on 9 industrial projects
- CII Benchmarking Metrics Data Report (1997)
- 3.4 for 19 industrial projects
- CII Field Rework (Rogge RT 153) (2001)
- 4.4 for 109 industrial projects
- Ranges between 0 and 25
- CII Impacts of Delivery Systems (2002)
- 5.0 DB Contractors
- 3.0 DBB Contractors
- 326 Projects all types (Benchmarking Database)
8Basic Trends From Previous Studies
Continuous improvement
CII Safety
Limited data
No recent improvement
???
Field Rework
1989
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
02
03
9APPROACH
The Main Question If effective safety
management has been responsible for reduced total
recordable incident rates, Then what
similarities would there be for quality
management reducing field rework?
10Making Zero Accidents a Reality
- Worker Involvement
- Evaluation and recognition/reward (incentives)
- Subcontract management
- Accident/Incident Investigations
- Drug and Alcohol testing
- Demonstrated management commitment
- Staffing for Safety
- Planning Pre-project and pre-task
- Safety Education orientation and specialized
training
11Research Approach
- Paired question survey
- Can we identify opportunities for rework
reduction by examining safety and rework in the
same cultural environment? - Within the rework information collected can we
identify specific field practices that can
eliminate contractor errors?
12SURVEY FORMAT
- Volunteer Projects
- Demographic Information
- Organized by key safety topics
- Matched questions created within topics
- Additional questions specific to topics also
created - Overall 103 Questions
13Project Type
Project Functional Description No. of projects
Manufacturing 9
Petrochemical 4
Pharmaceutical 3
Power 2
Telecommunication 1
Commercial/Pubic Buildings 3
14Owner and Contractor Responses
Respondent No. of Sites
Owner 12
Contractor 10
Total 22
Average Field Rework Reported 3.13 Is Consistent With Other Studies Considering Blended Data Average Field Rework Reported 3.13 Is Consistent With Other Studies Considering Blended Data
15KEY FINDINGS
Comparative Analysis Findings
Demonstrated Management Commitment for rework reduction was found in the research.
Staffing for Quality Staffing levels for quality were generally lower than safety, given the requirement of discipline specific knowledge for quality
Quality Pre Project and Pre Task Planning Pre-project planning (constructability analysis and project specific quality plans were consistent with safety planning Pre-mobilization quality analysis and pre-task quality analysis were lagging
16KEY FINDINGS
Comparative Analysis Finding
Quality Education Safety education more predominate and averaging 3 hours per month compared to quality/rework at 0.5 hrs per month A standard orientation for quality was implemented on less than ½ of the projects
Worker Participation and Involvement The lower level of craft worker involvement and lack of incentives based on quality
Subcontract Quality Management Subcontractors are more commonly required to submit safety plans than quality plans
17KEY FINDINGS
Comparative Analysis Finding
Quality- Rework Tracking Tracking rework was very common on the study projects Investigation of rework or defects was less common than for safety incidents
Drug and Alcohol Testing Pre employment screening would be functional for both safety and quality programs For cause testing generally conducted more for safety than rework or defective work (206)
Contract Type Lump sum contracts were shown to have less rework than reimbursable contracts which is opposite the relationship for safety
18OPPORTUNITIES TO CONSIDER
- Staff for quality in appropriate manner unlike
safety, inspection requirements in rework and
quality areas is based on discipline specific
knowledge requirements - Consider using subcontractor written quality
plans - Coordinate rework reduction training based on
known factors contributing to rework problems
19INFORMATION EXCHANGE
- Transfer of information to the field could take
the form of rework reduction tool box talks or
similar training opportunity
Note This figure was scanned from a handout
provided to field personnel to reduce field
rework.
20Process Improvement Data Analysis
- Evaluate rework causes in a consistent manner
using Pareto Analysis
21Thank You
22Self-Assessment Opportunity Checklist
Lew Coles DuPont Engineering
for CII Do It Right The First Time Research
Team CPI Conference Austin, Texas September 12,
2005
23Quote from Our Pilot Interviews
Its interesting that we always went back to the
analogy of how we do our safety process so well.
24Zero Field Rework Self-Assessment Checklist
- What is it?
- What is it intended to do?
- Whats the value to my organization?
- How is it different from what I already do?
- When should I use it?
- How does it work?
25What Is the Self-Assessment Checklist?
A tool used by the project team to help identify
areas for further improvement on the journey to
zero field rework. Contains 8 elements and 117
questions.
26Where can the Self-Assessment Checklist be used?
- Large Projects
- Sites with multitude of small projects
- Fab shops
- Any contracting strategy
- By owners and contractorsaround the globe
- Backward integration into engineering design.
27What the Self-Assessment Checklist Is Not
It is not a tool to generate a lengthy list of
administrative action items.
28When Can It be Utilized?
- During project Front End Loading when the
construction quality plan is being developed. - During construction to audit against the plan.
- During the post-project review to help identify
key learnings and improvements for future use.
29The Self-Assessment Checklist Can Help To.
- Improved employee morale
- Reduced rework -- nobody likes rework
- Workers feel more highly valued
- Better communications
- Teamwork
- Reduced costs
- Improved project cycle time
- Improved safety performance
30Self-Assessment Checklist Elements
Primarily focused on People
31Typical Quality Assessment
Primarily focused on Things
32Performance (Results)Element 1 -- Leadership by
Example
- Percentage of workers on the team who understand
how they contribute to quality and rework goals. - Number of quality and rework related issues
observed this period. - Cost of rework activities by month.
- Cost of materials written off due to quality and
rework issues by month. - Hours written off due to quality and rework
issues by month. - Number of quality and rework toolbox talks
completed this month. - Visibility of site quality and rework Goals and
Plan. - Number of open and overdue quality and rework
issues this period.
33Thank You!Questions?