by clicking the arrows at the side of the page, or by using the toolbar.
by clicking anywhere on the page.
by dragging the page around when zoomed in.
by clicking anywhere on the page when zoomed in.
web sites or send emails by clicking on hyperlinks.
Email this page to a friend
Search this issue
Index - jump to page or section
Archive - view past issues
Project Manager : Project Manager Aug Sept 2012
www.aipm.com.au Project Manager 33 cAsE sTuDy sTrONGEr cHrIsTcHurcH INfrAsTrucTurE rEbuILD TEAm (scIrT) SCIRT was formed in September 2011 to deliver the rebuild of Christchurch’s roads, storm water, wastewater and freshwater pipes and other infrastructure such as bridges and retaining walls. The head contractual agreement in SCIRT is an alliance between owner participants and non- owner participants. The owner participants are the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (CERA), Christchurch City Council and New Zealand Transport Agency. Non-owner participants are City Care, Downer, Fletcher Construction, Fulton Hogan and McConnell Dowell. There are also many other Christchurch-based companies who are part of SCIRT, playing a vital role in delivering the SCIRT program of work. The enormity of delivering over $2 billion worth of rectification works, while ensuring service continuity where possible to residents, was a major goal. It meant a centralised document and drawings repository was vital. Duncan Gibb, General Manager of SCIRT, says that his key driver in engaging ProjectCentre was the functionality available. Extenuating circumstances also required a fully collaborative project system that presently supports 35 individual organisations geographically dispersed and in excess of 800 individually secured and auditable users. Gibb says ProjectCentre provides a tool to manage information capture, flow and dissemination. “T he definition of ‘process flows’ within the tool maintains discipline in the flow of work to ensure that process is followed and appropriate authorisation is provided for key decisions and work flow releases,” he says. prov ide business continuity, back up the data in multiple locations and, of course, prov ide appropriate data security. Neutrality, accessibility and geographic dispersion. In the past (and often with the best of ‘collaborative’ intentions), project lead companies have attempted to force the other par ticipants ‘ inside’ their ow n enterprise- based information systems. often this only undermines trust and encourages the other participants to duplicate information in their own systems. such systems are also often difficult to access externally due to firewall and remote server locations, further deterring project-wide adoption. These problems are compounded when projects are delivered over dispersed geographies or when creating ‘v irtual teams’ using resources and expertise from other parts of the world, which is becoming commonplace. Accordingly, it is fair to say that collaboration systems are optimised when they are a neutral, CArEEr CEnTrE • third party system that provides role-based access to all project participants any where in the world. Applications that take advantage of cloud and mobile technologies are also an advantage. Conclusion Internet connectivity is ma king collaboration software systems easy to access and adopt. Access to collaboration systems is straightforward and, with maturity of the segment, systems with proven frameworks purpose built for the construction sector ensure rapid low risk deployment. further more, project participants are a lready using social media tools in their day- to-day lives. collaboration systems that utilise this foru m-based approach are becoming increasingly sought after on projects. certainly, these systems a re no longer confined to megaprojects – alliances of smaller fir ms use these tools to create virtual entities to effectively compete for, a nd deliver, projects. •••
Project Manager June July 2012
Project Manager Oct Nov 2012