After we sign the project contract, we start doing the job. To be able to measure the project, monitoring progress, reporting, and mitigation (if applicable), we need to develop a tool to measure it.
DEVELOPMENT OF FEASIBLE ALTERNATIVES
As a progress measurement is a tool that can be used to measure project progress. This progress measurement is corresponding with work breakdown structure, hence it is possible to use Norzok-104 with PBS point of view as demonstrated on this writing.
DEVELOPMENT OF OUTCOMES FOR EACH ALTERNATIVE
In order progress can be identified in the lower level, it needs to develop weighting factor to each level of detail.
Level 1- Weighting factor
Overal Progress will be on Top Level (Level 1, PBS View) and will be broken down in to following Breakdown weighting factors:
Figure 1. Level 1 Weight Factor (PBS point of view)
Level 2- Activities weighting factor
Level 2 progress will be broken down in to following activities (SAB point of view) with it’s weight factor:
Figure 2. Level 2 Weight Factor (point SAB point of view)
SELECTION OF CRITERIA
There are some criterions to be an acceptable progress measurement. Some of them are:
ü It shall cover all deliverable list to be executed.
ü It shall in line with other project controlling tools such as scheduling, and cost control, and estimating.
ü It shall accommodate lesson learn requirement to be used later on.
ü Integrated with document system, where the progress can be validated.
ü Progress can be measure in term of cost, hours, quantity, and schedule.
ANALYSIS FOR THE ALTERNATIVES
Below progress measurement consider that Product Breakdown Structure as a Top level where it can be divided in to Common offside facilities, Well Cluster and Central processing Trains, Utilities Facilities, Jetty and Offloading Facilities, Sales Gas Pipeline, and Gas Custody Transfer Metering Stations. Below is the Mapping of the EPC Facilities Breakdown with Norzok Z-014 WBS Standard (PBS)
Figure 3. NORZOK Z-014 (PBS) vs. EPC Scope of Work Descriptions
For the progress monitoring purpose, the progress plan, progress achieved, Plan value, and earn value of each product (PBS view) is shown in the figure 4 below. As demonstrated in the figure 4., as of October 05, 2013, below are the project status:
Progress Plan = 61,8%
Progress Earn = 48,76%
Plan Value = $61,800,000
Earn Value = $48,760,000
Schedule Performance index (SPI) = 0,84 à Behind Schedule
SELECTION ON THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVES
Below are selected alternative for Onshore Gas Production & Pipeline Projects using Norzok Z-014 point of view:
Figure 4, Progress Measurement Table (PBS View)
PERFORMANCE MONITORING AND POST EVALUATION RESULT
Based on the status above that project SPI 0,84 < 1,0, the project is delay. Mitigation action is required. Type of mitigation action will be depend on CPI, SPI, and Total Float path of the schedule assessment.
Norsok Standard.(2012).Standard Cost Coding System. Access October 04, 2013 from
Ecosys.(2013).Progress Measurement. Access October 05, 2013 from
KLM Technology Group.(2013).Progress Measurement Procedure.Access October 05, 2013 from
Oil and Gas Engineering Guide.(2013).Effective Engineering Progress Monitoring.Access October 5, 2013 from