1. Session Title: Leading Construction Industry to Lean-Agile (LeAgile) Project Management Session Code: NA15AGL01
Session Title: Leading Construction Industry to Lean-Agile (LeAgile) Project Management Session Code: NA15AGL01
Suhail Iqbal, PE, PfMP, PgMP, PMP, PMI-PBA, PMI-SP, PMI-RMP, PMI-ACP, CAPM
SysComp International Private Limited
Suhail Iqbal, PE, PfMP, PgMP, PMP, PMI-PBA, PMI-SP, PMI-RMP, PMI-ACP, CAPM
SysComp International Private Limited, Pakistan.

2. Learning Objectives
Exploring the possibility of Agility in Construction industry. “Is Agile Possible in Construction?”
Marrying up the concept of Lean Construction to Agile by suggesting possibly applicable Agile Methodologies. “Can Lean And Agile be used together?”
Leading Construction industry to a new concept of Lean-Agile (LeAgile) Project Management. “Can we ever have LeAgile PM”?
Construction industry is one of the most expensive and most expansive industry dealing with multi-million dollar projects world-wide from construction of building infrastructure and utilities. Being a highly structured discipline, construction is assumed to be mostly governed by Theory X since time immemorial. Though a lot of improvements and enhancements to the construction methodology and innovations have occurred dramatically evolving and turning around the concepts of construction in past few decades. Still we observe that the concept of Lean construction was accepted with a lot of disdain and is yet not globally implemented. While the Agile Methodologies are gathering momentum and are being tested to be adopted beyond software industry, construction industry still does not want to entertain the idea of agility in construction projects. This paper will not only highlight the positive need for adoption of agility in construction but will also attempt to marry it up with the lean construction, thus introducing a new concept of Lean-Agile (LeAgile) Project Management for Construction industry.
To introduce a new concept of Lean-Agile (LeAgile) Project Management for Construction Industry.
Not only to highlight the positive need for adoption of agility in construction but also an attempt to marry it up with the lean construction.

3. Contents Introduction to Lean and Agile Lean and Lean Construction
Possibility of Agility in Construction
Can Lean and Agile be used in unison?
Proposed application of Lean-Agile (LeAgile) Project Management in Construction.
Introduction to Lean and Agile
Lean and Lean Construction
Possibility of Agility in Construction
Can Lean and Agile be used in unison?
Proposed application of Lean-Agile (LeAgile) Project Management in Construction.

4. Introduction to Lean and Agile

5. ‘Lean’ and ‘Agile’ ‘Lean’ and ‘Agile’ - two separate approaches
Some identified relationship
Parallel development paths
Some common features and intrusions
Sometimes mistaken to be the same.
Both approaches - distinct and unique in purpose
‘Lean’ and ‘agile’ are two separate approaches to management, but some of the researchers have identified relationship between the two. As they both are historically being developed on a parallel path while some of their features are common and they intrude into the territory of other at various points, giving an impression sometimes that they are one and the same. Whereas both of these approaches are distinct and unique in purpose, but we definitely can find a way how to best utilize them together.

6. 2 Questions for you How do you define Lean and Agile?
What is Lean?
What is Agile?
How do you differentiate Lean and Agile?

7. ‘Lean’ and ‘Agile’ – What to do?
Find a way how to best utilize them together.
Find the similarities and differences
Try to have the best of the both worlds.
We definitely can find a way how to best utilize them together.
We can find the similarities and differences and try to have the best of the both worlds.

8. ‘Lean’ and ‘Agile’ – Construction Industry
Difficult to draw a parallel or clear distinction.
Most organized and well managed industry
still causes a lot of waste
already realised the need to be lean,
Concept of lean construction is already accepted.
Clearer objectives and static scope
Assumed “agile is not for construction”
The dilemma is that construction industry which is supposed to be most organized and prospers on the assumption that it manages the resources most effectively, still causes a lot of waste and they have already realised the need to be lean, thus the concept of lean construction is fast being circulated and implemented in construction projects. Naturally, we do have clearer objectives and static scope in construction projects, so it is automatically assumed by many that agile is not for construction, as they are still struggling with reducing the waste. It will not be wrong to say that this difference in scope has almost eliminated the need for agile, while theoretically, it might be debated that if lean and agile can work together in software and other industries, then why not construction?

9. Poll
Is the statement, “Agile is not for Construction” correct?
Yes No

10. Discussion – Diverse Views (5 minutes)
What view will your group support and why?
Agile and Lean cannot work together at all
Agile is a way to do things within the overall perspective of lean
Lean can be applied within Agile
Lean and Agile can work together with equal footing

11. ‘Lean’ and ‘Agile’ – Foci & Scope
Lean focuses on reducing waste,
Agile focuses on being alert to opportunities effecting changes in a fast manner.
Agile is for projects with constantly changing scope.
Lean needs to be very well-planned right from the outset, so scope must be as clear and static as possible.
As expressed earlier agile and lean have many commonalities while there still are differences. Where Lean focuses on reducing waste, Agile focuses on being alert to opportunities effecting changes in a fast manner. As we deduced Agile is for projects with constantly changing scope. Lean needs to be very well-planned right from the outset, so scope must be as clear and static as possible.

12. History of Lean and Agile
Line of Balance (LoB), a visual method of construction planning
JIT by Taiichi Ohno
Lean as a formal approach
Lean in quality and supply-chain
Effective scheduling for construction
Repetitive scheduling method
/ LBMS
1999 – LeAgile for Supply Chain Management
Last Planner System
The ‘lean revolution’ started with the introduction of Just-In-Time (JIT) technique given by Taiichi Ohno way back in Though the lean as a formal approach was not introduced earlier than 1982, when Toyota introduced it by publishing Toyota Production System. Lean was popular in quality circles and later was taken up by supply chain in 1990s, as they assumed themselves to be its beneficiaries. It was not as late as 1992, when construction industry started considering application of lean for construction projects. Since then a lot of work has gone into Lean Construction and physical results have been produced, which now necessitates lean as an integral part of construction project management.
Exhibit 1 – History of Lean and Agile (Copyright Ennova 2011, Friday, 23 September 2011)
There are similar techniques from Japan like Kanban, a scheduling system that helps determine what to produce, when to produce it, and how much to produce. Kanban was utilised mainly in the automotive industry but now it is talk of the town.
Agile movement was also following lean on a parallel path, as in 1995 first paper on Scrum was published soon followed by book on extreme programming (XP). Formally, Agile Manifesto was released in 2001.
Russell and Wong were first to represent effective scheduling for construction in In 1998, Harris and Ioannou coined the term ‘repetitive scheduling method’ (RSM) and in 2000, Last Planner System was first published. ‘Last Planner’ (LP) system and ‘Location Based Management System’ (LBMS) also have a parallel stream in history and in one way or other they show characteristics of either lean or agile. Line of Balance (LoB), a visual method of construction planning was introduced in Various names were used for these graphical scheduling tools like Repetitive scheduling method, Linear scheduling method, Flow-line scheduling, Vertical production method, Time space scheduling method, Time Location scheduling, Time versus distance diagrams etc. (R. Kenley & Seppanen, 2009). LBMS is a construction planning and production control system most often visualized as a flow line.
Exhibit 1 – History of Lean and Agile
(Copyright Ennova 2011, Friday, 23 September 2011)
2011 – Agile and Lean for Construction (ENNOVA)

13. ‘Lean’ and ‘Agile’ - Similarities & Differences
Primarily a philosophy
A conceptual framework
Focus on customer value
Focus on customer satisfaction
Focus on eliminating waste
Focus on simplicity
Integrated and collaborative teams
Self-Organizing teams
Daily and weekly planning
Close and daily cooperation between all parties
Focus on improving task reliability and reduction of overall duration
Focus on speed and adaption to changing circumstances
Maximising profitability by reducing unit cost
Profitable sales maximisation
Exhibit 2 – Comparison of Lean and Agile (Copyright JACOBS)

14. Lean and Lean Construction

15. Lean Principles Task Groupings
Specify value
Identify the value stream
Flow
Pull
Perfection
Womack & Jones (2008)
Value-added
Enablers
Waste
MacAdam (2009)
&
Moujib (2007)
MacAdam (2009) applies the five Lean principles of Womack & Jones (2008) (specify value, identify the value stream, flow, pull, and perfection) into three types every task completed in an organization can be grouped, namely value-added, enabler and waste. Basically all the activities in a project must add value, if any activity is not adding value it must be eliminated, such activities produce waste and are not contributing to the organizational objectives. Still there are some activities which do not add value by themselves but are enablers for those activities which do, such activities are called enablers. So, in construction, if we want to be agile, we must ensure we only have value-adding activities and enablers in our schedule and all non-value adding activities must be eliminated, as they are waste.
Moujib (2007) also identified the five lean principles, highlighted issues and determined how these could be applied to project management, and discussed various types of wastes that exist in projects. The five lean principles as outlined earlier are listed below:
specify value,
identify the value stream,
flow,
pull, and
perfection

16. Seven Types of Lean Waste
Over Production Waste
Waiting Waste
Transportation or Conveyance Waste
Over Processing Waste
Inventory Waste
Motion Waste
Correction or Defects (Repair or Rework) Waste
How the seven types of lean wastes apply to lean construction is defined as under:
Over Production Waste: This waste occurs when we produce more than needed, faster than needed or before it is needed. Excess production is not required and costs money.
Waiting Waste: Any non-work time waiting for approval, supplies, parts, etc. In construction this waste is very common due to a preceding activity not delivering on time or finishing completely. It creates waiting time during which no value-added activity is performed.
Transportation or Conveyance Waste: Wasted effort to transport materials, parts, or finished goods into or out of storage or between processes with n specific purpose due to poor planning. Transportation should be minimized and if done it must be on JIT principle.
Over Processing Waste: Doing more work than is necessary is a kind of waste common in poorly planned construction projects where there is lack of coordination and communication. All unnecessary steps in operations, which adds no value to the product or service, must be eliminated.
Inventory Waste: Maintaining excess inventory of any supply (materials or goods) in excess of what is required to build the current homes under construction. Inventory includes raw materials, work-in-process and finished goods. Excess inventory can quickly build-up and tie-up dollars and resources.
Motion Waste: Any wasted motion to pick up parts or stack parts, also wasted walking. No extra steps should be taken to account for inefficient processes and other faults. If you have to move, it must add value.
Correction or Defects (Repair or Rework) Waste: These are products, materials or services that do not meet expectation or conform to specification. Corrections and defects are anything requiring repair or rework or even scrap.

17. Value Flow Make the value flow
Differentiate between the value-adding activities, enablers and non-value adding activities
By eliminating non-value adding activities we eliminate waste.
Once value is created, it is not delivered to customer until and unless customer needs it and pulls it on JIT principle.
The whole process is then perfected by continuous improvement.

18. Possibility of Agility in Construction

19. Agile Manifesto (2001) Software Industry
Individuals and interactions over processes and tools
Working software over comprehensive documentation
Customer collaboration over contract negotiation
Responding to change over following a plan
Before we explore the possibility of application of Agile practices in Construction industry, we need to quickly review the agile values which were published in 2001 in the Agile Manifesto for Agile Software Development:
Individuals and interactions over processes and tools
Working software over comprehensive documentation
Customer collaboration over contract negotiation
Responding to change over following a plan

20. Group Discussion – (5 minutes) Re-write Agile Manifesto for Construction Industry
Individuals and interactions over processes and tools
Working product over comprehensive documentation
Customer collaboration over contract negotiation
Responding to change over following a plan

21. Agile Manifesto – How Can It Apply
Agile Manifesto – How Can It Apply? Construction Industry (Discuss Reasons)
Individuals and interactions over processes and tools
---
Individuals and interactions over processes and tools.
Processes and tools are valued more and status quo maintained.
Still Construction industry evolves, innovates and adapt.
What if we consciously promote creativity
Give initiatives to team and stakeholders to innovate.
LBMS where a conventional schedule may not be workable for all locations, plan separately for each location.
Start prioritizing individuals and interactions over processes and tools.

22. Agile Manifesto – How Can It Apply
Agile Manifesto – How Can It Apply? Construction Industry (Discuss Reasons)
Working product over comprehensive documentation.
---
Working product over comprehensive documentation.
Needs a workable product but perfection sought.
Results in gold-plating and exceeding the basic specification.
If not for customer’s changing requirement, we are causing waste and are not even meeting the target of being lean.
In LP system, the schedule is divided into five layers, only first being mandatory, and are not detailed or restrictive.
LPS has already taught us to reduce documentation and take to the last planner level.

23. Agile Manifesto – How Can It Apply
Agile Manifesto – How Can It Apply? Construction Industry (Discuss Reasons)
Customer collaboration over contract negotiation.
---
Customer collaboration over contract negotiation.
Contract is the binding force in any construction project.
Engineers will never agree to give priority to customer collaboration over the contract.
Contract revisions and changes, anyways, still occur.
Why can’t we remove this barrier and work as partners?
In LP system, last planner improves his bottom-level plan due to feedback of the customer.

24. Agile Manifesto – How Can It Apply
Agile Manifesto – How Can It Apply? Construction Industry (Discuss Reasons)
Responding to change over following a plan.
---
Responding to change over following a plan.
We must be ready to respond to change as and when it is needed.
Make our construction phases smaller in size and iterative in nature.
In LP system, Weekly Plans are prepared and collaboration with customer is promoted.

25. Can Lean and Agile be used in unison?

26. ‘LPS’ and ‘LBMS’ Common Characteristics
Both systems are lean by nature
Both focus on decreasing waste and increasing productivity.
Both, the Last Planner (LP) system and Location-Based Management System (LBMS) are lean by nature as they focus on decreasing waste and increasing productivity. LP system achieves this through an approach very similar to agile in which Last Planner is the person actually doing the work or the lowest level supervisor in construction. The planning is not centric and involvement of this last planner is essential. Tis makes the planning a collaborative effort and better commitments are achieved. LBMS is more of a technical system in which work flow lines are created for different locations while the overall plan may be governed by traditional CPM and PERT methods. LBMS makes the buffers of critical chain explicit and forecasts future performance based on statistical projections.
Koskela, L., et al., (2008) compares Last Planner system (Ballard & Howell 1998, Ballard 2000) with Critical Chain Project management (CCPM) (Goldratt, 1997)., while Shankar, A., et al., (2013) compares Location based Management System with CPM and PERT.
It is interesting to note that Last Planner and Agile has a lot of structural characteristics in common. Exhibit 3 show five levels of a LP schedule in construction. Last Planner interacts with the customer just similar to Agile and based on the feedback adjusts and improves the plan on the go. Master schedule is just to define the key milestones where the Phase Schedules are slightly more detailed explicitly defining the handoffs from one phase to the other. These two levels are mandatory but the third schedule, Look-Ahead Schedule is optional and if you have time to forecast or if anything has to be re-planned, we can use this level. Last two levels have similarity to Kanban as well as Agile. Weekly Work Plan may be considered somehow like an agile iteration and Progress Tracking may be the feedback loop with the customer, keeping the door open for scope changes at lowest level. The similarity to Kanban is that Weekly Work plan is something we intend TO DO, while Progress Tracking deals with DOING and DONE of Kanban. Probably the missing link between Lean and Agile is Kanban which has the capacity to bind them together into LeAgile.

27. ‘LPS’ and ‘Agile’ Similarities
LPS uses approach similar to agile
Last Planner is the person actually doing the work or the lowest level supervisor.
The planning is not centric and involvement of this last planner is essential.
This makes the planning a collaborative effort and better commitments are achieved.
Both, the Last Planner (LP) system and Location-Based Management System (LBMS) are lean by nature as they focus on decreasing waste and increasing productivity. LP system achieves this through an approach very similar to agile in which Last Planner is the person actually doing the work or the lowest level supervisor in construction. The planning is not centric and involvement of this last planner is essential. Tis makes the planning a collaborative effort and better commitments are achieved. LBMS is more of a technical system in which work flow lines are created for different locations while the overall plan may be governed by traditional CPM and PERT methods. LBMS makes the buffers of critical chain explicit and forecasts future performance based on statistical projections.
Koskela, L., et al., (2008) compares Last Planner system (Ballard & Howell 1998, Ballard 2000) with Critical Chain Project management (CCPM) (Goldratt, 1997)., while Shankar, A., et al., (2013) compares Location based Management System with CPM and PERT.
It is interesting to note that Last Planner and Agile has a lot of structural characteristics in common. Exhibit 3 show five levels of a LP schedule in construction. Last Planner interacts with the customer just similar to Agile and based on the feedback adjusts and improves the plan on the go. Master schedule is just to define the key milestones where the Phase Schedules are slightly more detailed explicitly defining the handoffs from one phase to the other. These two levels are mandatory but the third schedule, Look-Ahead Schedule is optional and if you have time to forecast or if anything has to be re-planned, we can use this level. Last two levels have similarity to Kanban as well as Agile. Weekly Work Plan may be considered somehow like an agile iteration and Progress Tracking may be the feedback loop with the customer, keeping the door open for scope changes at lowest level. The similarity to Kanban is that Weekly Work plan is something we intend TO DO, while Progress Tracking deals with DOING and DONE of Kanban. Probably the missing link between Lean and Agile is Kanban which has the capacity to bind them together into LeAgile.

28. ‘LBMS’ and ‘Agile’ Similarities
LBMS is more of a technical system in which work flow lines are created for different locations
Overall plan may be governed by traditional CPM and PERT methods.
LBMS makes the buffers of critical chain explicit
LBMS forecasts future performance based on statistical projections.
Both, the Last Planner (LP) system and Location-Based Management System (LBMS) are lean by nature as they focus on decreasing waste and increasing productivity. LP system achieves this through an approach very similar to agile in which Last Planner is the person actually doing the work or the lowest level supervisor in construction. The planning is not centric and involvement of this last planner is essential. Tis makes the planning a collaborative effort and better commitments are achieved. LBMS is more of a technical system in which work flow lines are created for different locations while the overall plan may be governed by traditional CPM and PERT methods. LBMS makes the buffers of critical chain explicit and forecasts future performance based on statistical projections.
Koskela, L., et al., (2008) compares Last Planner system (Ballard & Howell 1998, Ballard 2000) with Critical Chain Project management (CCPM) (Goldratt, 1997)., while Shankar, A., et al., (2013) compares Location based Management System with CPM and PERT.
It is interesting to note that Last Planner and Agile has a lot of structural characteristics in common. Exhibit 3 show five levels of a LP schedule in construction. Last Planner interacts with the customer just similar to Agile and based on the feedback adjusts and improves the plan on the go. Master schedule is just to define the key milestones where the Phase Schedules are slightly more detailed explicitly defining the handoffs from one phase to the other. These two levels are mandatory but the third schedule, Look-Ahead Schedule is optional and if you have time to forecast or if anything has to be re-planned, we can use this level. Last two levels have similarity to Kanban as well as Agile. Weekly Work Plan may be considered somehow like an agile iteration and Progress Tracking may be the feedback loop with the customer, keeping the door open for scope changes at lowest level. The similarity to Kanban is that Weekly Work plan is something we intend TO DO, while Progress Tracking deals with DOING and DONE of Kanban. Probably the missing link between Lean and Agile is Kanban which has the capacity to bind them together into LeAgile.

29. Last Planner System - Phases
Exhibit 3 – Scheduling Levels in Last Planner
(Copyright Ennova 2011, Friday, 23 September 2011)

30. Last Planner in Construction
Exhibit 4 – Last Planner in Construction Management
(Copyright Ennova 2011, Friday, 23 September 2011)

31. Proposed application of Lean-Agile (LeAgile) Project Management in Construction

32. Question? Is there any Existence of any Proposed Application?
If not why?
If there is one, how should it look like?
No proposed application exists so far
Discussion to stir up minds to the possibility of LeAgile
Some research and white papers exist but none for construction.
Lean Construction does exist.
LeAgility in Construction is not a far-fetched idea.
LPS and LBMS already hold the key to LeAgility.
Opposition expected from construction industry
Opening the floodgates of new possibilities.
reduce waste in construction projects
make them much more efficient and profitable,
why can’t we be fast and flexile as well.
saving enormously on time and cost,
satisfy our stakeholders and
be able to sell more, thus
making even more profits

33. How should the proposed application look like?
No proposed application exists so far
Discussion to stir up minds to the possibility of LeAgile
Some research exist but none for construction.
Lean Construction does exist.
LeAgility in Construction is not a far-fetched idea.
LPS and LBMS already hold the key to LeAgility.
Opposition expected from construction industry
Opening the floodgates of new possibilities.
reduce waste in construction projects
make them much more efficient and profitable,
why can’t we be fast and flexile as well.
saving enormously on time and cost,
satisfy our stakeholders and
be able to sell more, thus
making even more profits

34. LeAgile Supply Chain Management
Where did leagile come from?
Christopher, Peck and Towill are not the first to use the term “leagile” . In fact, “leagile” has has been around for quite some time. Already in 1999, Naylor et al. published Leagility: Interfacing the Lean and Agile Manufacturing Paradigm in the Total Supply Chain, and since then, several authors have picked up on the subject. Leagile comes from a synthesis of  Lean manufacturing, which has a long history, and Agile manufacturing, which is considerably younger.
What does leagile mean?
Leagile has emerged as an answer to the problem of reconciling long lead times with unpredictable demand. In a certain (predictable) world, going lean is fine, it is  a cost-saver. However, when demand is uncertain, a company must retain its responsiveness vis-a-vis its customers. This is only possible if the supply chain is agile. But what if demand is unpredictable, while lead times are long, as they typically are in today’s global outsourcing? That is were leagile has a mission.

35. Leagile Construction System (LCS)

36. Click on my session and answer the survey questions
Thank you!
Name: Suhail Iqbal
Web:
Twitter:
LinkedIn:
Facebook: 
Google+: 
To rate my session
Click on my session and answer the survey questions
Please add your notes here