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 June July 2013
www.aipm.com.au Project Manager 23 OUTCOME Given the crisis that DEFPO was facing at the end of 2010, with an inefficient maintenance structure leading to significant problems at many ranges and training sites, the NTARIP presented a new model for the delivery of these programs on a national scale. The most telling sign of success for SKM is the legacy they have created at DEFPO. The NTARIP project management method and procurement model have since been replicated in ongoing maintenance programs. Projects of this magnitude accrue a long list of outcomes. From 150 visits at more than 26 sites, 52 scoping reports were submitted leading to the creation of 520 drawing sheets, 1600 pages of civil, architectural and technical design specifications, 28 procurement processes, and the management of 12 different Defence Groups and more than 20 other stakeholder groups. Yet the main outcome of this project has been the creation of an organisational structure and communication practices that ensure close monitoring and informed, flexible project management. Process Early in the project, SKM identi ed the need to balance informed and hands-on leadership with e cient monitoring and delivery of speci c aspects of the program. e added bene t of engaging SKM early in the process was the forging of a strong client relationship from day one. A highly collaborative scoping process ensued, leading to an innovative organisational str ucture that helped SKM close the program on time and to budget. e organisational structure consisted of three tiers with clear lines of communication between all levels: A central Project Management O ce was responsible for collecting reports and liaising with key stakeholders to overcome program challenges. 11 localised delivery teams completed the maintenance, repairs and construction at more than 26 sites nationwide. ree monitoring teams consisted of Program Management O ce Support (including value management, quality assurance, risk management, procurement), a Cost Management team and Program Technical Enablers (including document control, engineering, design, architecture, communications). is organisational structure enabled consistent reporting from on-the- ground teams, which informed regular meetings with the leadership team. Using a method consistent with Work Breakdow n Str ucture (WBS), as well as Earned Value Management, the PMO identi ed any schedule slippage and decided whether to allocate additional resources or reprioritise certain projects to keep on track. e PMO was faced with the challenge of creating e ciencies of scale by bundling works across the program. However, the bundling and sequencing of works was complicated by strict access controls. For ex ample, work at the Lancelin Defence Training Area in WA was interr upted by the visit of the US Navy's 5th Fleet to conduct naval gun re exercises. Discussions with the leadership team at the PMO, where delivery teams had requested access during this time but the client could not oblige, were tense. While access was not granted on this occasion, on another occasion visiting British Gurkha soldiers were relocated to another range to allow the local delivery team site access. Overall, a fairly traditional project management process was used, but it was employed with a strong commitment to collaboration, constant communication and exibility. Monitoring and controlling teams could pick up on any issues to spark a renewed collaborative planning phase, leading to the modi ed execution of certain projects. Clear and constant communication is what makes this system work. ••• THE PMO IDENTIFIED ANY SCHEDULE SLIPPAGE AND DECIDED WHETHER TO ALLOCATE ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
Project Manager Apr May 2013
Project Manager Aug Sept 2013