Day: September 9, 2017

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/

1. Problem Evaluation

I work at Central Supply & Distribution Division in My Company. This division main responsibility is to distribute fuel all around Indonesia. This division has four departments that are Fuel Product Quality & Quantity, Fuel Terminal Infrastructure, Operation Supply Chain, and Performance & Evaluation.

Figure 1. Organization Structure

This division has a very high mutation frequency, in other words employee only stay for 1 up to 2 years in this division.  Beside mutation frequency, employee educational background variation and employee number also influence team stage. This time, I want to determine leadership skills and styles for My Division and Performance & Evaluation (P&E) Department by knowing the stage of them. Appropriate leadership skills and styles will give us more advantage to achieve our goal, distribute fuel all around Indonesia with operational & service excellent.

2. Development of feasible alternatives

To fine appropriate leadership style there are some theory has been published, but the best one is Tuckman’s model. This model has five stages of team development and behavior that are Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing, and Adjourning. This model also explains how Team develops maturity and ability, relationships establish, and the leader changes leadership style. Beginning with a directing style, moving through coaching, then participating, finishing delegating and almost detached.

Figure 2. Team Development and Behavior Stage

3. Development the outcome for each alternative

To know the current My Division and Department stage, sample employee fill Tuckman scoring template two times, first as a Division team member and the second as a P&E Department team member.

Table 1. Scoring template result as S&D Division team member

Table 2. Scoring template result as P&E Department team member

4. Selection of criteria

Based on the individual’s scoring template result above, PERT analysis was performed to identify team behavior at P90 because most of these team member already join over long time (1-2 years).

5. Analysis and comparison of the alternative

Summary result of the survey data using Delphi technique with P90 as follow:

Table 3. P.90 Delphi technique result for S&D Division Team Member

Table 4. P.90 Delphi technique result P&E Department Team Member

Based on Delphi technique calculation in Table 3 and 4, we can conclude S&D Division team is in Norming stage but in Department team is in Performing (indicated by the rank).

6. Alternative selection

For S&D Division is in norming stage, team members often experience:

• Agreement and consensus largely forms among the team;
• Roles and responsibilities are clear and accepted;
• Big decisions are made by group agreement;
• Smaller decisions may be delegated to individuals or small teams within group.

Hints for Vice President as team leaders:

• Step back and help team members take responsibility for progress towards the goal;
• This is a good time to arrange a team-building event.

Style of leadership this stage is “TEAM BUILDING” mode where some leadership is to make team responsible for reaching the goal.

For P&E Department is in performing stage, team members often experience:

• The team is more strategically aware;
• the team knows clearly why it is doing what it is doing;
• The team has a shared vision and is able to stand on its own feet with no interference or participation from the leader;
• There is a focus on over-achieving goals

Hints for Manager as team leaders:

• Delegate tasks and projects as far as you can;
• Once the team is achieving well, you should aim to have as light a touch as possible;

Style of leadership this stage is “DELEGATING” mode where some leadership is shared by the team.

The differences stage between Division and Department are most influenced by number of team member and frequency of working together (closeness team member). It is important for vice president to more flexible in changing his leadership style when He gives assignment to employee. Because it would be different atmosphere of Employee as Division team member or as Department team member.

7. Performance monitoring & Post Evaluation Result

Tuckman model assessment should conduct periodically to capture team stage changing and give a clue to team leader to select appropriate style of leadership to improve coordination and productivity of the team. The Leader must have strategies to move the team through to the next stage in the team formation process

References

1. (2017). Tuckman Forming Storming Norming Performing Model. Retrieved from http://www.businessballs.com/tuckmanformingstormingnormingperforming.htm
2. (2017). Forming, Storming, Norming, and Performing – Understanding the Stages of Team Formation. Retrieved from http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newLDR_86.htm
3. Hendarto, Tommy (2017). W4_TH_Tuckman Survey on Non Process Engineer Team |EMERALD AACE 2017. Retrieved from http://emeraldaace2017.com/2017/08/24/w4_th_tuckman-survey-on-non-process-engineer-team/
4. Michell, Tony (2017). W2_ABM_Folow Up Tuckman|EMERALD AACE 2017. Retrieved from http://emeraldaace2017.com/2017/08/08/w2_abm_follow-up-tuckman-survey-on-spj-offshore-construction-team/
5. Saputra, Dhanu (2017). W1_Dhanu_Tuckman Analysis Assessment |EMERALD AACE 2017. Retrieved from http://emeraldaace2017.com/2017/08/01/w1_dhanu_tuckman-analysis-assessment/