2006 Central Region Post Mortem Review

1. 2006 Central RegionPost Mortem Review Tony Barter, P.E Construction Project Manager

2. “Success comes from a culture that investigates and deals with problems” by Robert Glass

3. Typical reports are : DATA RICH/INFORMATION POOR

4. Benefits of Post Mortem Reviews • Team members share and understand perspectives • Blends individual and team learning • Identifies problems • Documents good practices and problems • Positive feedback increases job satisfaction

5. Good, Bad, Ugly • What worked well • Good Solutions • What did we learn for improvement • List of problems and the reasons why a problem • What should be done differently • Few critical issues which must be corrected

6. Designing a Report • Rating System • Design • Construction Management • Schedule • Cost

7. Rating System * Major impact, preventable >25% cost growth * * Major, significant impact, 15% to 25% cost growth * * * Moderate impact, 10% to 15% cost growth * * * * Minor Impact, 5% to 10% cost growth * * * * * No Impact, or up to 5% cost growth

8. Quality of the Design • Are there errors in the plans • Did the designer have the ability to correct issues discovered in construction with the information available • What are the impacts to schedule and cost

9. Design * Major design problems, most of which could have been resolved with information available during design. Issues led to MAJOR impacts on project cost and/or schedule • >25%

10. Design * * Major design problems, many of which could have been resolved with the information available during design. Issues had a significant impact on project cost and/or schedule. • 15% to 25%

11. Design * * * Moderate design issues, some could have been resolved with the information available during design. Impacts on cost and schedule is moderate.. • 10% to 15%

12. Design * * * * Some design issues which could not of been discovered with the information available at the time of design. Project schedule and cost are close to planned. • 5% to 10%

13. Design * * * * * Virtually no design problems and project able to meet schedule and budget as planned. • < 5%

14. Contract Administration Ability to resolve issues without increases in cost or schedule Evaluate communication and partnering Focus on safety, workmanship, and environmental stewardship

15. Contract Administration * Contract team unable to stay on top of issues Resolutions are reactionary Communications are poor Lack of focus on safety, workmanship, and environmental stewardship Major impacts to schedule and cost

16. Contract Administration * * Contract team is unable to stay on top of issues A few issues are resolved proactively Communications are poor with marginal success Failure to dedicate focus on safety, workmanship, and environmental stewardship Significant impacts to schedule and cost

17. Construction Administration * * * Contract team is struggling to resolve issues Attempts at partnering but frequent breakdowns in communication Some issues addressed proactively Some focus on safety, workmanship, and environmental stewardship Moderate impact to schedule and cost

18. Construction Administration * * * *Contract team is managing most issues Communication and partnering efforts are good Issues resolved proactively Good focus on safety, workmanship, and environmental stewardship Minor impact to schedule and cost

19. Construction Administration * * * * *Team is on top of issues Issues are addressed proactively Strong focus on safety, workmanship, and environmental stewardship No impact to schedule or cost

20. Evaluating Cost Comparison to bid Comparison to engineers estimate

21. Cost * Project cost substantially exceeds the original budget • Change orders and quantity variations are substantial • Contractor payments exceed 25% of original bid • Cost growth could have been prevented in design • Impact and delay costs are a major portion of added costs

22. Cost * *Project costs >15% and < 25% Changes and quantity variations are large Added work should have been identified in design Impact and delay costs are a significant part of the increase in cost

23. Cost * * *Project costs >10% and < 15% Changes and quantity variations are large Added work is necessary to accomplish the goals Most issues could have been reasonable known and resolved during design

24. Cost * * * *Project costs >5% and < 10% Changes and quantity variations exist and may lead to added value Delay and impact costs are held to a minimum Design issues would not have been reasonably discovered with additional design effort

25. Cost * * * * *Project costs < 5% of original contract Changes and quantity variations within 5%