Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
1
건설사업의 성과평가 (미국 CII 벤치마킹 사례중심으로)
2
발표순서 건설성과 측정 및 벤치마킹의 필요성 미국 CII 벤치마킹 성공사례 국내 도입을 위한 제언 CII 조직 및 역사 소개
벤치마킹 데이터베이스 성과측정지표(metrics) 및 best practices 분석결과 국내 도입을 위한 제언
3
발표순서 건설성과 측정 및 벤치마킹의 필요성 미국 CII 벤치마킹 성공사례 국내 도입을 위한 제언 CII 조직 및 역사 소개
벤치마킹 데이터베이스 성과측정지표(metrics) 및 best practices 분석결과 국내 도입을 위한 제언
4
성과? Performance? 500억 이상 공공공사 사후평가제도 기획예산처의 재정사업 자율평가
미국 PART(Program assessment rating tool) SOC 재정사업 사후평가(국토연구원) 국가 R&D 성과평가(연세대, KISTEP) Performance based contract(미국의 조달방법)
5
Performance Measure? 학 생 건설관리자 공 부 기술/관리기법 개발 건설사업 수행 시 험 성 적 성과측정 석 차
학 생 건설관리자 공 부 기술/관리기법 개발 건설사업 수행 시 험 성 적 성과측정 석 차 경쟁자와 비교 취약점 파악 및 개선 개선여부 불투명
6
Benchmarking? Benchmarking - a systematic process of measuring one’s performance against recognized leaders for the purpose of determining best practices that lead to superior performance when adopted and utilized 왜 비교가 필요한가? 남자 100m 국내 기록: 10.34초 남자 100m 세계 기록: 9.78초
7
발표순서 미국 CII 벤치마킹 성공사례 건설성과 측정 및 벤치마킹의 필요성 국내 도입을 위한 제언 CII 조직 및 역사 소개
벤치마킹 데이터베이스 성과측정지표(metrics) 및 best practices 분석결과 국내 도입을 위한 제언
8
Construction Industry Institute
A consortium of leading owners, contractors, suppliers, and academia that is interested in improving the constructed project and the capital investment process.
9
CII History Established 1983
Response to need for construction research as recommended by the BRT’s CICE initiateve 22 founding members Hosted by UT Austin
10
CII Owner Members 3M Abbott Labs Air Products & Chemicals
Allegheny Energy Supply Anheuser-Busch Aramco Services BP America Bovis Lend Lease CITGO Cargill Celanese ChevronTexaco Colectric Partners ConocoPhillips Dofasco Dow Chemical DuPont Eastman Chemical ExxonMobil GSA General Motors GlaxoSmithKline Intel International Paper Eli Lilly and Company Marathon Oil NASA NAVFAC Ontario Power Petrobras Pfizer Praxair Procter & Gamble Rohm and Haas Shell Oil Smithsonian Institution Solutia Southern Company Sunoco TVA U.S. Air Force Research Lab U.S. Army Corps of Engineers U.S. Dept. of Commerce/NIST U.S. Dept. of Energy U.S. Dept. of Health & Human Serv. U.S. Dept. of State U.S. Steel Weyerhaeuser Company
11
CII Contractor Members
ABB Lummus Global ALSTOM Power AZCO Inc. BE&K BMW Constructors Baker Concrete Bechtel Group Black & Veatch Burns & McDonnell Burns and Roe Butler Manufacturing CCC Group CDI Engineering CH2M HILL CSA Group Chicago Bridge & Iron Day & Zimmermann Dick Corporation Dillingham Construction Holdings Eichleay Engineers & Constructors Emerson Process Management Fluor Daniel Foster Wheeler USA Graycor Fru-Con Construction Hatch Associates Hilti Honeywell International Jacobs J. A. Jones Johnson Controls Kellogg Brown & Root Kiewit Construction Kværner M. A. Mortenson PSEG Parsons Energy & Chemicals Primavera Systems Rust Constructors S&B Shaw Group Siemens Westinghouse Stevens Painton Structural Group Technip USA Turner Construction Walbridge Aldinger Washington Group Williams Group Zachry Construction Zurich North America
12
Universities Active in CII Research
Arizona State Auburn Cal-Berkeley Cincinnati Clemson Colorado-Boulder Florida Georgia Tech Kentucky North Dakota State Oregon State Polytechnic Purdue San Diego State Stanford Texas Texas A&M Virginia Tech Washington Wisconsin-Madison
13
CII Organization Board of Advisors Executive Committee
Strategic Planning Committee Research Teams Implementation Teams Education Teams Analysis Team Product Review Board Marketing Deployment Board Development Board Research Implementation Support Benchmarking Globalization Breakthrough Research Committee Implementation Strategy Committee Education Committee Benchmarking & Metrics Committee Globalization Committee Forums Breakthrough Strategy Committee Questionnaire Team Communications Team Productivity Metrics Team Small Projects Team
14
Benchmarking & Metrics Program
Objectives: Establish common definitions. Establish metric norms. Determine the value of best practices. Provide member companies a basis for self-analysis.
15
Benchmarking & Metrics Database
Number of Projects in Database 1251 projects Worth > $60 billion Domestic 996 International 255
16
Benchmarking & Metrics Database
Domestic 996 International 255 Contractor 550 Owner 701 120 60 343 178 53 45 48 404 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 Buildings Heavy Industrial Infrastructure Light Industrial Industry Group Number of Projects 68 162 191 217 62 158 139 109 82 <= $5MM $5MM – $15MM $15MM – $50MM $50MM – $100MM > $100MM Cost Category
17
What do we measure? Performance Practice Metrics Use
Statistical Analyses Cost Performance Schedule Performance Safety Performance Change Performance Rework Performance Const. Productivity Eng. Productivity Pre-Project Planning Constructability Project Change Mgmt. Automation/Integration Tech. Team Building Safety Practice Planning for Startup Materials Mgmt. Quality Mgmt. Alignment Design Effectiveness Value of Best Practices
18
Performance Metrics Current Metrics Cost Metric Schedule Safety
Changes Rework Construction & Engineering Productivity Current Metrics 75th Percentile 50th Percentile 25th Percentile Mean Median Category (n = 20 ) Metric Respondent: Cost Category : Project Type : Location: Industry Group: Project Nature: -0.15 -0.10 -0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 Number of projects Better
19
CII Benchmarking Metrics
Cost Performance Metrics Cost Growth Actual Total Project Cost - Initial Predicted Project Cost Initial Predicted Project Cost Delta Cost Growth | Cost Growth | Budget Factor Actual Total Project Cost Initial Predicted Project Cost + Approved Changes Delta Budget Factor | 1- Budget Factor | Phase Cost Growth Actual Phase Cost - Initial Predicted Phase Cost Initial Predicted Phase Cost Phase Cost Factor Actual Phase Cost Actual Total Project Cost
20
Cost Performance Metrics
21
Cost Growth Comparison
22
Schedule Performance Schedule Growth Delta Schedule Growth
Actual Total Proj Duration - Initial Predicted Proj Duration Initial Predicted Proj Duration Delta Schedule Growth | Schedule Growth | Schedule Factor Actual Total Proj Duration Initial Predicted Proj Duration + Approved Changes Delta Schedule Factor | 1- Schedule Factor | Phase Schedule Growth Actual Phase Duration - Initial Predicted Phase Duration Initial Predicted Phase Duration Phase Schedule Factor Actual Phase Duration Actual Total Proj Duration
23
Schedule Performance Metrics
24
Schedule Growth Comparison
25
Safety Performance RIR LWCIR
Total Number of Recordable Cases x 200, Total Site Work-Hours LWCIR Total Number of Lost Workday Cases x 200,000 Total Site Work-Hours
26
Actual Total Project Cost
Change Performance Change Cost Factor Total Cost of Changes Actual Total Project Cost
27
Total Field Rework Factor
Rework Performance Total Field Rework Factor Total Direct Cost of Field Rework Actual Construction Phase Cost
28
Construction Productivity Engineering Productivity
Productivity Metrics Construction Productivity Engineering Productivity Concrete Structural Steel Piping Instrumentation Equipment Electrical Insulation Examples Work-hours / CY Installed Design Hours / CY Designed
29
Performance Metrics(web ver.)
30
Cost Growth by Project Size
31
Budget Factor by Project Nature
32
Recordable Incidence Rate by Project Size
33
Practice Use Metrics Current Practices Other Tools Metric
Zero Accidents Techniques Team Building Constructability Pre-Project Planning Automation/Integration Tech Project Change Mgmt Materials Management Planning for Start-up Quality Management Alignment Percent Design Complete Metric Respondent: Cost Category : Project Type : Location: Industry Group: Project Nature: Number of projects Category (n = 20 ) 25th Percentile Mean Median 75th Percentile 2 4 6 10 8 Practice Use Better Current Practices Other Tools Full PDRI
34
Practice Use Metrics (web ver.)
35
Safety Practice Use by Project Size
36
Team Building Use by Project Size
37
Value of Best Practices
Practice Use Performance Correlations Value of Practice Use
38
Improvement Potential
Better Performance Metric (Scale Metric Dependent) Average Performance Improvement Low Use High Use Practice Use Metric Better
39
Cost Benefits (Contractor)
8% N=62 N=60 N=65 N=58 Respondent: Contractors (D&C) Cost Category: Greater than $5MM Project Type: All Database: Global Industry: Heavy Industry Project Nature: All Project Budget Factor vs. Pra ctice Use Index By Practice Use Index Actual Total Project Cost Initial Predicted Project Cost + Approved Changes Project Budget Factor=
40
Project Schedule Growth vs.
Schedule Reductions Respondent: Owners Cost Category: Greater than $5MM Project Type: All Database: Global Industry: Heavy Industry Project Nature: All Project Schedule Growth vs. Practice Use Index 5% N=60 N=55 N=65 N=57 By Practice Use Index
41
Safety benefit 64% Zero Accident Tech. Practice Use vs.
Respondent: Owners Cost Category: Greater than $5MM Project Type: All Database: Global Industry: Heavy Industry Project Nature: All Zero Accident Tech. Practice Use vs. Recordable Incidence Rate Zero Accident Techniques Practice Use 64% Improvement Total Number of Recordable Cases x 200,000 Total Site Work Recordable Incidence Rate (RIR)=
42
Practice Use Categorization
Respondent Type : Owners Industry Group : Heavy Industry
43
보고서 및 활용 Reports; 활 용; Annual Data Report Key Report Safety Report
Value of Best Practices Summary Report 활 용; 시설물 계획 공사 초기단계 성과예측 적정 수준의 공사관리 노력
44
발표순서 국내 도입을 위한 제언 건설성과 측정 및 벤치마킹의 필요성 미국 CII 벤치마킹 성공사례 CII 조직 및 역사 소개
벤치마킹 데이터베이스 성과측정지표(metrics) 및 best practices 분석결과 국내 도입을 위한 제언
45
Barriers 필요성에 대한 공감대 결여 데이터의 정확성 데이터 비밀 보장 (Code of Conduct)
불합리한 제도 (장기계속공사 등) 장기지속적인 모니터링 불가능
46
Recommendations 발주기관과 계약자의 공감대 형성 건기법 ‘사후평가’ 개선 및 활용 지속적인 제도 개선
건설성과 평가기관의 설립 및 운영 입찰시 업체 성과평가의 고려(performance based contract)
47
What gets measured, gets improved!
Thank you. Any Questions?
Similar presentations
![1 “Beginning in 1999 [John] Mathis and others at CII began taking detailed looks at 38 projects with construction values of $50 million to $600 million.](/13/4056108/big_thumb.jpg "1 “Beginning in 1999 [John] Mathis and others at CII began taking detailed looks at 38 projects with construction values of $50 million to $600 million.>")
