W6_TH_ Standardized WBS Structures for Gas Station Project-Part 3

1. Problem Definition

After compare two best practice of standardized WBS on Blog W2 and W5, this week the Blog will determine and analyze which of the 15 elements Omniclass tables specially on Zone Breakdown Structure would be appropriate to use in creating a 3D WBS structure for a Gas Station Project.

2. Develop the Feasible Alternative

Moine (2013) has developed a 3D WBS model[5].

  • Product Breakdown Structure (PBS) is constructed by Systems, sub systems, products and sub products. Products are an extension of Systems. On Omni Class it is contain Table: 11, 12, 21, 23 and 36.
  • Activity Breakdown Structure (ABS) is constructed by phases, macro-activities, activities and sub activities. On Omni Class it is contain Table: 22, 31 and 32.
  • Zone Breakdown Structure (ZBS) are physico-functionnals, they are divided by Areas, Sections, for instance. ZBS can be a topographic view of the construction site of a project, it can be a notion of geography. ZBS can be also viewed as functional zones, like for design phase and commissioning phase for instance. On Omni Class it is contain Table: 13 and 14.

All of this three dimension projects can be integrated in comprehensive 3D models which visualized as figure 1 below[2]:

Fig 1. Project Cubes Concept of 3D WBS Model[2]

3. Develop of the Outcome for Alternative

In this week, author will be chosen what kind of GBS/ZBS element on Omniclass that applicable for GS Project. Author will use the Lexicography Non-Compensatory Models tool.

4. Selection Criteria

Two standardized WBS will be evaluated considering the following attributes:

  • WBS level detail completeness
  • Tables applicability/uses for oil & gas project
  • WBS that reflect function boundaries of gas station
  • WBS level description
5. Analysis & Comparison of Alternative

There are two elements on OmniClass that present ZBS element: Tables 13 and 14.

Fig 1. OmniClass Table 13

Table 13 content Spaces by Function that are basic units of the built environment delineated by physical or abstract boundaries and characterized by function.

Fig 2. OmniClass Table 14

Table 14 content Spaces by Form that are basic units of the built environment delineated by physical or abstract boundaries and characterized by physical form.

The ZBS Elements Table comparison of the attributes is expressed in Table 1 below:

Table 1. Comparison of ZBS Elements

Attributes in table 1 were ranked in order of importance by applying paired comparison between each attribute combination. Results are shown as follows:

Table 2. Ordinal Ranking of ZBS Elements

Following Table 2, the ranking is ordered as follows:

Table 3. Application of Lexicography

6. Selection of the Preferred Alternatives

The Table 13 was found the optimum selection, since it has the highest score. The Table 13 not only can reflect function boundaries of GS Project but also has the highest level details that include level description. Therefore, it could be adapted as a standardized ZBS element to enhance the project performance and cost control GS projects.

7. Performance Monitoring and The Post Evaluation Result

A standardized WBS structure is one success key for project team to the deliver project with OTOBOS. Next week, author will build up GS WBS from Table 13, to prove whether the conclusion above is correct and start evaluating the impact during phases of the project.

 

References:

  1. Planning Planet (2017). Creating Work Breakdown Structure. Retrieved from http://www.planningplanet.com/guild/gpccar/creating-work-breakdown-structure
  2. Ardi, Satria. (2014). W14_SAS_Developing|Soroako AACE 2014. Retrieved from https://soroakoaace2014.wordpress.com/2014/12/12/w14_sas_developing-standardize-omniclass-3d-wbs-for-electric-furnace-rebuild-project/
  3. OmniClass (2017), OmniClass Table 21 – Elements (includes design elements). Retrieved from www.omniclass.org/tables/OmniClass_21_2012-05-16.zip
  4. Norsok Standard Z-014 (2017), Norsok Standard Z-014. Retrieved from http://www.standard.no/pagefiles/951/z-014.pdf
  5. Ardi, Satria. (2014). W12_SAS_Developing|Soroako AACE 2014. Retrieved from https://soroakoaace2014.wordpress.com/2014/11/28/w12_sas_developing-3d-wbs-for-electric-furnace-rebuild-project/
  6. El Rashid, M. (2016). The Influence of Non-Standard Work Breakdown Structure on Change Orders and Cost Estimation for Sudan Oil and Gas Projects, PM Word Journal Vol. V. Retrieved from http://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/pmwj53-Dec2016-ElRashid-non-standard-work-breakdown-structure-sudan-featured-paper.pdf
  7. Gannasonggo, Gustaf. (2012). W3_GGS_OmniClass WBS|Casablanca AACE 2012. Retrieved from https://aacecasablanca.wordpress.com/2012/02/06/w3_ggs_omniclass-wbs-table-selection-using-additive-weighting-technique/
 

2 thoughts on “W6_TH_ Standardized WBS Structures for Gas Station Project-Part 3”

  1. Sorry Pak Tommy but you are now making the same mistake that Pak Fakhril is making.

    Moine’s 3D model is only ONE EXAMPLE of the many different combinations and permutations. If you look at the last slide in the examples I sent to Pak Fakhril you will see that there are 12 different combinations and that they can produce not only a 3D model but a 4D model as well:
    ABS = Activity Breakdown Structure
    CHBS = Change Breakdown Structure
    CLBS = Claims Breakdown Structure
    CPM = CPM Schedule Breakdown Structure
    CTBS = Cost Breakdown Structure
    CWBS = Contractual Breakdown Structure
    PGBS = Progress Breakdown Structure
    PRBS = Product Breakdown Structure
    RKBS = Risk Breakdown Structure
    RSBS = Resource Breakdown Structure
    WBS = Work Breakdown Structure
    ZBS = Zone Breakdown Structure

    You are on the right track but you need to take all 15 of the Omniclass tables, and using Multi-attribute decision making, select which of them meet your acceptance criteria, understanding that because what you are creating is a RELATIONAL DATABASE, you can have 3, 4, 5 or theoretically, even 15 different ways to view your project, depending on what your stakeholders need or want.

    Bottom line- Moine’s three dimensional model ZBS X ABS X PBS is only ONE possible combination that is appropriate. There are many more possibilities.

    BR,
    Dr. PDG, Jakarta, Indonesia

     
  2. PS Pak Tommy, what it appears you are doing is finding a solution FIRST, then trying to JUSTIFY it. What you need to be doing is start with an open mind and then trying find what the “best” or “most appropriate” solution is for YOUR stakeholders.

    BR,
    Dr. PDG, Jakarta, Indonesia

     

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *