 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
  |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Opinion of tools
Name der Fallstudie
Baglan Energy Park Phase 2
Name of tool
Constructing Excellence Movement for Innovation (M4I) Sustainability Project Performance Indicator Assessment Tool,
Opinion of tool - argumentation for choosing the tool
At the initial stages of Phase 2, NPTCBC were approached by Constructing Excellence to test the Sustainability Indicator Assessment Tool in its pilot stage. This was completed by the lead consultant at the design assessment stage of the project and taken to group meetings for discussion. </p>
<p>Sustainability considerations were made throughout the planning stage of the project, so when the Indicator tool was applied, a high score was achieved. The tool produces a radar diagram indicating scores for design, economic, construction and environment. A benchmark is provided for previous projects which can be compared to the projects final score. As the tool had not formally been used to guide planning of the project these results were not submitted for endorsement. Examples of questions asked include: ´has a target for water consumption been set for the construction phase?´ positive points are obtained for yes. This is then followed by ´Is consumption better than the last quarter?´ where on target or better than set targets achieve additional points. Points are accumulated and a final score is accumulated which is compared with benchmark projects.</p>
Opinion of tool - barriers for the tool implementation
No barriers have been highlighted by the municipality or contractor working on the development.
Name of tool
Dispute Resolution Ladder
Opinion of tool - argumentation for choosing the tool
The use of the ladder ensures that minor problems do not escalate into damaging disputes, through the following of a previously agreed process.</p>
<p>The dispute resolution ladder was developed at the partnering workshop and then written by the Neath Port Talbot Borough Council Environmental Consultant working on the project. The ladder was then signed up to by everyone who signed the charter. This was the outcome of a debate on dispute resolution so other initiatives were considered.</p>
Opinion of tool - barriers for the tool implementation
No barriers have been highlighted by the municipality or contractor working on the development.
Name of tool
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
Opinion of tool - argumentation for choosing the tool
The implementation of an EIA is a statutory requirement for projects of a certain type and size which this project is included.
Opinion of tool - barriers for the tool implementation
No barriers have been highlighted by the municipality or contractor working on the development.
Name of tool
Environmental management system: ISO 14001
Opinion of tool - argumentation for choosing the tool
The EMS and the Hochtief Griffiths system had been used on previous projects that members of the team had been involved in. </p>
<p>The use of ISO 14001 was identified as a plus point in the contractor selection process. The use of the HGJV system was agreed at the tenderer selection stage subject to verification by the client. </p>
<p>There was felt no need to have two quality systems on a partnering site. The client felt the HGJV system was more than adequate to ensure a good finished product. The alternative would have been two systems, the second being the NPTCBC system. This was considered unnecessary.</p>
<p>Responsibility for implementation of the EMS lay with the Contract Manager although the Construction Supervisor who was an employee of the Client operated the system on site.</p>
Opinion of tool - barriers for the tool implementation
No barriers have been highlighted by the municipality or contractor working on the development.
Name of tool
Hochtief/Griffiths QUENSH (Quality, Environment, Safety and Health) plan
Opinion of tool - argumentation for choosing the tool
Implementation of the QUENSH plan is voluntary but ensures that various legal requirements were met including ISO 9001, ISO 14001 and Construction Design and Management Regulations. The plan has been used on collaborative Hochtief (UK) Construction Ltd and Alun Griffiths Contractors Ltd projects. <br>
Hochtief (UK) Construction Ltd have a number of procedures in operation which have helped to develop QUENSH plan.<br>
Other construction firms have similar systems in place covering the same legislation. However most systems/tools are internal and are not shared between companies.<br>
Opinion of tool - barriers for the tool implementation
No barriers have been highlighted by the municipality or contractor working on the development.
Name of tool
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
Opinion of tool - argumentation for choosing the tool
KPIs are part of the partnering process. KPIs used in this project assessed issues such as dispute resolution monthly comparison, partnering charter scores covering issues such as ´communication openly and honestly´, ´having a "no blame" culture´, ´maximising the skills of the team´ ´creating a pleasant working environment´ ´through being creative and innovative´ etc.. The use of KPIs allowed the performance to be monitored regularly and responded to immediately.
Opinion of tool - barriers for the tool implementation
No barriers have been highlighted by the municipality or contractor working on the development.
Name of tool
Partnering scheme
Opinion of tool - argumentation for choosing the tool
The project believed that partnering promotes improved performance through collaborative business relationships based on best value rather than lowest cost. </p>
<p>The decision to implement partnering was taken by the Baglan Energy Park Steering Group following suggestion by NPTCBC. A detailed report was procured from the site Cost Consultant and a detailed strategy determined and agreed.</p>
Opinion of tool - barriers for the tool implementation
When the Baglan Phase 2 experience was presented at a conference in Wales many local authorities attending suggested that procedures currently in place within local authorities for legal and financial reasons would prevent partnering from being used. This has however changed and Partnership is now widely used within Welsh local government.
Opinion of tool - assessment by tool users
The project manager was positive about the Constructing Excellence Sustainability Indicator tool, believing that it is a useful tool to ensure that all aspects of sustainability are considered. A criticism of the pilot tool is that some of the questions were subjective, and as a result were difficult to measure.
Other comments include that by fulfilling the indicator criteria the organisation undertaking it has the desire to strive towards sustainability, rather than to achieve a ?badge? for sustainability. This tool is therefore only likely to be used by those who are genuinely concerned to be sustainable.
Although the Constructing Excellence Sustainability Indicator is a transferable tool, it has not been implemented again within NPTCBC as it is only a small municipality with few projects large enough in which to implement tools such as the Constructing Excellence Sustainability Indicator Tool.
Since its use in Baglan Energy Park, the Partnership Scheme is now widely used within Welsh local government. NPTCBC recommend ?partnership? as a useful tool and are supportive of a change in council practices to allow the partnership approach to continue.
The Hochtief/Griffiths QUENSH plan has provided a process to for the project to follow. However the tool at present doesn?t provide a formal plan for waste and recycling, although since the tool is constantly being redeveloped and improved it is likely to formally include such issues shortly.
Although created for this one-off joint partnership project, the Hochtief/Griffiths QUENSH tool has been used on 3 to 4 other projects due its success and clarity. Although the tool is not available to the public, the tool concept could be developed and implemented.
Opinion of tool - reviewer\'s assessment
Sustainability Project Performance Indicator Assessment Tool is a straightforward tool with clear layout. Further explanations are available through the questionnaire, and the end results are well presented in graphs and on a radar type chart.
KPI?s have a number of positive features:
? The construction industry regularly uses KPIs which therefore makes comparison straightforward and reliable.
? ensures that attention is regularly focused on the relevant points e.g. on clients specifications or on environmental targets.
? KPIs can show past performance and allow assessments to be made about what needs to be done to improve the situation.
? The continuous use of KPIs, including the sharing of information, keeps people informed.
? KPIs allow performance to be continually observed, e.g. if accidents happen continuously month after month, KPIs call help reveal a pattern.
However there are also a number of negative features:
? It can be easy to make KPIs too complicated and therefore not followed,
? KPI information can become out of date if not regularly updated,
? If there are problems on site it is often hard to remember to do a KPI assessment.
? Need a committed person on site to ensure that KPIs are ongoing.
With regards to an Environmental Management System the structure of the tool already exists and the stages to develop an EMS are well defined.
The Hochtief/Griffiths QUENSH plan is a valuable tool to have in place for those working in industries with a lot of legislation. The adaptability of the plan ensures that the tool is applicable to a range of projects and that all aspects can be considered.
Welche Tools wurden verwendet, um Nachhaltigkeit zu beurteilen?
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
Environmental management system: ISO 14001
Hochtief/Griffiths QUENSH (Quality, Environment, Safety and Health) plan
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
Weiterführende Informationen (nur auf Englisch):