Planning and Visualization: Civil Engineering - Assignment Example

Task Bulding Project Start on site 2. Structure 2 Foundation 2.2 Piling 2.3 Pile caps & ground beams 3. Column & Beams GF 3.1 Columns GF 3.2 Beams GF 4. Columns & Beams FF 4.1 Columns FF 4.2 Beams FF 5. Columns & Beams SF 5.1 Columns SF 5.2 Beams SF 6. Columns & Beams TF 6.1 Columns TF 6.2 Beams TF 7. Envelope and Claddings 7.1 Envelope and Claddings GF 7.1.1 PCC GF 7.1.2 Blue brickwork external skin GF 7.1.3 Door & windows GF 7.2 Envelopes & Claddings FF 7.2.1 Zinc cladding FF 7.2.2 PCC FF 7.2.3 Window FF 7.3 Envelopes & Claddings SF 7.3.1 Zinc cladding SF 7.3.2 PCC SF 7.3.3 Window SF 7.4 Envelopes & Claddings TF 7.4.1 Zinc cladding TF 7.4.2 PCC TF 7.4.3 Window TF 8. Project Completion Safety risk in construction The risk management process has undergone rapid evolution since the last century. Its evolution has seen its transformation from a perfunctorily employed activity to a critical requirement in enterprise management. Recognition and mitigation of risks, regulations compliance, increased market valuation and asset usage optimization have been incorporated into the risk management process. Unlike risk managers in other industrial sectors who have to only deal with real-time risk measurement and mitigation, risk managers in power and automation industries have to deal with increased complexities due to its inherent nature. Optimization of returns and minimization of risks in plant usage, delivery schedules, market balance and cash flows remains a formidable task that the managers have to reckon with (Allan, 2006). Effective risk management involves the following strategies (Cris et al, 2002: 2) 1. Understanding the risk 2. Organizations self-awareness and hence building of protection strategies. 3. Increased awareness and quick responses. 4. Security posture sustenance. The proposed framework defines a systematic approach to the risk identification and mitigation cycle as described by the figure below A project risk is any form of danger or uncertainty relating to an investment. It expresses a level of uncertainty and hence possibility of incurring some losses in project undertaking. According to Wilson (1982) risk is the likelihood of the project suffering some form of detriment prior to completion. In every project, risks will always be present. It is therefore vital to develop analytical and quantification structures in order to effectively allocate and mitigate risks. Such a measure ensures that the projects progress and completion are not deterred in any way. Infrastructure project transactions are non-recourse or limited recourse and hence it’s imperative to adequately allocate financial responsibility for the various project risks (Smith, 2003). While risks are present in any commercial undertaking, they are important characteristic defining infrastructure project (Raz & Michael, 2001). Unlike full recourse undertakings, the lenders look up to the project alone to recoup their investments. This essentially makes infrastructure project a high risk undertaking from legal as well as structural point of view. Banks charge interests to such projects based on the level of risks associated with the project (Nevitt, 2000). The higher the risk is the higher is the interest rate charged on the project. Risks allocation is best done based on how well a party can control and skew the project towards the desired outcome (Bing, Akintoye, Edwards, & Hardcastle, 2005). The guiding principle is that the best suited party suited to mitigate a particular risk is assigned the risk. This decision is not purely based on the party’s ability to influence the risk and control its risk factor. Other than this, the party should be able to predict possible changes in risk factor and also absorb the impacts of the risk. However, it’s important to note that the party to whom risk is allocated is obliged to respond either by requesting some gain in return, often a financial benefit or expect some incentive. Incentives motivate the party to alter its behavior in a manner that improves its efficiency (Wilson, 1982, pp. 46). For instance, in an electricity project, the person who bears 100% risk of power outages will be motivated through an incentive to ensure such outages are minimal. There should be clear contractual provisions for risk allocation to minimize disputes over responsibility to a particular risk. Risk allocation can only be considered complete once the party to whom the risk is assigned endeavors to manage it (Smith, 2003). For instance, the aforementioned risk of power outages may take various forms including checking and clarifying license terms as well as concession to minimize political risk or entering into hedging agreements to minimize exchange rates (Wilson, 1982, pp. 47). However, it’s important to mention that some risks like natural disasters are beyond control and hence cannot be predicted. Such risks are spread out by various techniques e.g. insurance covers. The y may also be mitigated e.g. implementation of preventive initiatives like implementation of fire safety policies (Hoffman, 2001). Lean philosophy in construction Implementing lean philosophy in construction is concerned with application of lean thinking to construction industry. It entails enhanced delivery of finished construction project to match and even exceed client expectations. Despite the substantial differences operations and supply chains in construction and those in manufacturing, lean philosophy is equally applicable. In essence, Lean is about designing and building a solution that meets client needs and getting it right first time. Improvement of processes and elimination of waste is fundamental. To achieve this it is essential that we work closely with the client in order to deliver a product that meets their needs. Lean needs to focus on delivering value by addressing the lowest total cost as opposed to being driven by price. To do this it is necessary to focus on processes that can be improved and remove all those elements that do not add value. Design is paramount and can be helped by engaging expertise that will deliver a buildable solution. It is essential that a clear strategy and policy are defined and understood by all elements of the supply chain. It is a fact that lean philosophy is a tool that helps in delivery of successful supply chain management, whether in a manufacturing or a construction industry. Equally, a well-managed supply chain is necessary in order to successfully implement lean philosophy. For a number of organisations, supplier base rationalisation is fundamental, and a reduced, manageable and meaningful list of suppliers who are capable and willing to deliver organizational needs is important. Probably, amongst the most effective means of applying lean thinking engagement of a construction lean improvement programme. As a matter of benefits of lean philosophy implementation in construction are numerous. Research has for instance proven that successful application of lean can lead to potential consistent savings amounting to 30% when compared against traditional construction approach. Further, lean philosophy is believed to bring about shorter order fulfilment lead times. Additionally, lean philosophy guarantees less project down-time, increased innovation, and true cost reduction. Evidence of usage of lean thinking has revealed that there are lots of benefits to be made from application of lean principles to construction. Other benefits often associated with lean philosophy in manufacturing include improved productivity, increased reliability, improved quality, more client satisfaction, increased predictability, shortened schedules, less waste, reduced cost, enhanced build-ability improvements to design, and improved safety. It is important to note that a lean organization uses lean philosophy across its entire operations, which is the sole means through which a lean enterprise is created and the benefits are fully achieved. As a matter of fact, lean enterprise stands out as a complex socio-technical system that consists not solely of Core Company but of company relations aimed at providing mutual benefits via collaboration. References Allan, N. (2006). Strategic risks: thinking about them differently. Proceedings of ICE Civil Engineering 159, p. 10–14 Arditti, F.D. (1996). Derivatives: A Comprehensive Resource for Options, Futures, Interest Rate Swaps and Mortgage Securities. United States of America: Harvard Business School Press Baker & M. (1996).Infrastructure project: The Guide to Financing Power Projects. Playhouse Yard: Euromoney. Banks, E. (2007). Credit Risk of Complex Derivatives. Basingstoke: Macmillan. Bing, L., Akintoye, A., Edwards, P. J., & Hardcastle, C. (2005). The allocation of risk in PPP/PFI construction projects in the UK. International Journal of Project Management, 23, p. Buckley, A. (2004). Multinational Finance (5th Ed). Essex, United Kingdom: Prentice Hall. Chance, D. M. (2002). An Introduction to Derivatives and Risk Management (5th Ed). Orlando: Harcourt College Publishers. Clifford, C. (2003). Infrastructure project. London: IFR Publishing. Donaldson, T.H. (2006). The Traditional Approach, in Project Lending. Edinburgh: Butterworths. Esty, B. (2003). “The economic motivations for using infrastructure project”, mimeo, Harvard Business School. Hainz, C. & Kleimeier, S. (2003). “Political risk in syndicated lending: theory and empirical evidence regarding the use of infrastructure project”, LIFE working paper 03–014, June. Hoffman, S. L. (2001). The Law and Business of International Infrastructure project (2nd Ed). Ardsley: Transnational Publishers Inc. Lewin, C. (2006). Enterprise risk management and civil engineering. Proceedings of ICE Civil Engineering 159, p. s 4–9 Paper 14895 Nevitt, P. K. (2000). Project Financing (7th Ed). London: Euromoney, 2000. Perry, J. G. & Hayes, R. W. (1985). Risk and its management in construction projects. Proc. Insin Civ. Engrs. Part 1, p. 499—52. Raz, T. & Michael, E. (2001). Use and benefits of tools for project risk management. International Journal of Project Management, 19, p. 9 – 17. Smith, M.R. (2002). Infrastructure project in the Utilities Industries, in Project Lending. London, United Kingdom: Butterworth’s. Smith, N. J. (2003). Appraisal, risk and uncertainty. London: Thomas Telford Publishing, Thomas Telford Ltd. Smith, V. (2007). Infrastructure project Review, International Infrastructure project Lecture Note, CEPMLP, Unit 1. Tinsley, R. (2005). Infrastructure project: Infrastructure project Risks, Structures and Finance ability (2nd Ed). London: Euromoney. Vinter, G. D. (2006). Infrastructure project (3rd Ed). London: Sweet and Maxwell. Wilson, R. (1982). “Risk measurement of public projects”, in Discounting for time and risk in energy policy, Resources for the Future, Washington DC. Read More