1. Problem Recognition, Definition and Evaluation
A company will install Ultrasonic Gas Metering Station for our project. Is the use of OmniClass or 3D WBS can be applied to this project? Which one is better?
2. Development of the Feasible Alternatives
There are three (2) WBS alternatives to compare to answer the question above:
- OmniClass is a means of organizing and retrieving information specifically designed for the construction industry. It consists of 15 hierarchical tables, each of which represents a different facet of construction information or entries on it can be combined with entries on other tables to classify more complex subjects.
OmniClass Table 31 Phases: Table 31 – Phases, is the only OmniClass table that explains the stages (higher level of categorization than phases) of the project activity from conception until project closure.
- 3D WBS is based on three main dimensions: Zones Breakdown Structure (ZBS), Products Breakdown Structure (PBS) and Activity Breakdown Structure (ABS).
Fig 1. 3D WBS
3. Development of the Outcomes for Each Alternative
a. Omniclass table 31 phases
Fig 2 – OmniClass Table 31 – Phases – WBS
b. 3D WBS Model
Fig 3. 3D WBS Model
We will compare both alternatives using Lexicography, one of non-compensatory models for multi attributes decision making technique.
4. Selection of a Criteria
There are four (4) criteria that have been selected as parameters to analyze and compare the above alternatives:
- WBS level of details, this will explain how detail each alternative structures their WBS for design process.
- Number of design activity phase, is the number of engineering phase from the project scope development to the final design.
- Work flow of activities, is how the activities work together from the project scope development to the final design.
- Complexity of the WBS
5. Analysis and Comparison of the Alternatives
Summary information for each alternative :
Table 1 Data Comparison
All attributes in table 1, be ranked in order of importance by doing paired comparison between each possible attribute combination. Result as shown on table 2:
Table 2 – Ordinal Ranking of Attributes
Based on table 2, the ranking is found to be WBS Level of details > Number of design activity phase > Work flow of activities > Complexity.
6. Selection of the Preferred Alternative
Considering the above ranking, the 3D model was found the optimum selection as to be adapted to standardize the WBS.
7. Performance Monitoring and Post Evaluation of Results
Monitoring and supervision should be conducted strictly during project to keep the project inline with the WBS.
- Humpreys, G. C. (2011). Project Management Using Earned Value (2nd ed.). Humpreys & Associates, Inc.
- W16_GW_OmniClass and 3D WBS on Pipeline Installation. (2014, June 15). Retrieved from Kristal AACE 2014 : https://kristalaace2014.wordpress.com/2014/06/15/w16_gw_omniclass-and-3d-wbs-on-pipeline-installation/
- OmniClass. (2017). Retrieved from OmniClass: http://www.omniclass.org/
- Syafri, F. (2013, October 8). Managing Small Project: Omniclass 3D WBS. Retrieved from Simatupang AACE 2014: http://simatupangaace2014.wordpress.com/2013/10/08/w6_afs_-managing-small-project-omniclass-3d-wbs-2/
- Moine J-Y. 2013.3D Work Breakdown Structure Method, PM Word Journal Vol. II, Issue IV–April 2013
- Elrashid, M. (2013, January 2). W10_Mohammed_ Our Current WBS Vs OmniClass and 3D model. Retrieved from Mahakam preparation Class of AACE 2012: http://aacemahakam.blogspot.com/2013/01/w10mohammed-our-current-wbs-vs.html