The New Scottish Parliament Building Project - Assignment Example

ABSTRACT The New Scottish Parliament Building Project, executed as part of the Scottish Devolution Plan of 1997 was set to open against a deadline period of the new millennium in 2000, and expected to cost around £50 million. However, the construction of this landmark building was fated to pass through a sequence of events steeped in controversy which resulted in the building being opened three years behind schedule at a cost of around £431 million. This paper is an attempt to analyze the Criticism of the Scottish Parliament Building Project, including the problems associated with the project management of the Project, along with an assessment of the most significant among them. The extent to which these problems correspond to those identified in literature has also been evaluated. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 4 Identify the Problems of Project Management Associated with Each Stage of the Project……..4 Assessment of the most significant Problem ......................................................................…...11 Evaluation of the problem against those identified in literature…………………………………………13 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………….14 Introduction The United Kingdom of Great Britain was formed in 1707 as per the provisions of the Treaty of Union, merging the two separate countries of Scotland and England. The enactment of the Scotland Act 1998 and the Devolution of 1999, once again made possible the formation of a separate Scottish Parliament .The perceptible need for a separate building for the Parliament resulted in the Holyrood, site being chosen for the construction of , what was, in Donald Dewar’s words, a “purpose-built parliament offered to make a statement about Scotland’s future”(White &Sidhu, p 6). Though the Scottish Parliament Building Project, was fated to land itself in a series of controversies, resulting in its price tag continuing to rise beyond comprehension1, leading to what critics of the Project consider as the greatest fiasco ever that has happened in recent Scottish history, the fact remains that this magnificent building symbolizes the rebirth of a nation. A.“Identify the Problems of Project Management Associated with Each Stage of the Project” a) Initiation & Definition Stage The Genesis of the fiasco lay in Westminster, in the pay-as-you-go contracts signed by U.K. Ministers much before the Scottish parliament had ever been elected. 2 The crucial decision to adopt the high risk Construction management Route was taken unilaterally by the Project Manager without, without a proper evaluation. 3 The appointment of Bovis, the highest tenderer as Construction Manger smacked of favoritism on several counts. Besides, EU 1 Scottish Parliament –The McConnel years Procurement laws were broken in denying the opportunity of debriefing to an unsuccessful tenderer.4 The feasibility studies were merely indicative in nature and did not represent the actual costs. Even at the time of designer competition, no tentative cost estimate was made, but undue reliance was placed on the verbal assertions of the architectural joint to budgetary compliance.(Fraser, Para 4.51) In addition, the Time-table was too tight and unrealistic. 5 The two arms of the architectural joint venture assigned with the task of designing the project suffered from communication problems between them, causing further cost escalation resulting from the delay to the Project. 6 b) Planning & Development Stage The decision to opt for the procurement route of Construction Management in a haste proved to be a disaster as evidenced by a series of cost escalations and design changes necessitated due to changes in client’s requirements. While the quantity surveyor company DLE had estimated costs at £63.4million, on 2 March 1999, officials changed the cost estimate to £107million on 23 March 1999 based on estimates from independent cost consultants.7 In August 1998, the DLE discovered a concomitant risk exposure of 80%, which rose to 100% by March 1999. By August 1999, the project was already in danger of running out of control. Neither of the two requirements of RIBA Stage D - Basis Structural Form and Cost Plan- were available even as late as in June 2000, when construction work finally began. 8,9 An utter lack 2 10 Years of Devolution 3 Fraser(Para6.15) 4 Fraser(Para 7.14 ,7.15 &7.19) 5 Fraser(Para8.21&8.24) of design information and poor co-ordination between the architect and the cost consultant resulted in an absence of realistic cost estimates. In August 1999, the architect informed the Project Team about an increase in area by 4000 meters squared, which prompted the DLE to revise its cost estimate to £115million.10 The Project Sponsor and Project Management were themselves unaware of the potential cost escalation risks to the Project.11 The Project suffered a setback at the during this period, with the unexpected deaths of architect Enric Mirralles in July 2000 and of Donald Dewar in Oct 2000.While the architect’s death caused a period of delay and disharmony within the architectural joint venture, the death of Donald Dewar, whose brainchild the project was, considerably dampened its spirit and enthusiasm.( White &Sidhu p14) c) Execution & Control Stage DLE, the Quantity Surveyor and Cost Consultant to the project did not take a proactive role required to identify that design were being developed outside of the cost plan during this period. Although the Scottish Office was aware about the unrealistic nature of the Project’s budget as early as in November 1998, this was not conveyed to the Ministers.12 No effort was made by the concerned officials to notify the risks identified by the DLE or consulting the DLE over its accuracy.13 The civil servants had, apparently made a decision to manage the risks between themselves without informing the Ministers14. The Project Execution Plan of Curran was not finalized by the Project Management.15 6 Fraser(Para8.30&8.35))7 White & Sidhu(p11) 8Fraser(Para 9.6) 9 White & Sidhu (P14) 10 White & Sidhu(p13) The realization that the Project was running into more and more trouble with each passing day, was evident in the recommendation of the Spencely Report which almost suggested the need for a pause, but the prevailing political situation in Scotland precluded that option.16 The SPCB lacked any legal power to delegate to HPG. This resulted in the HPG being reduced almost to a decision making body though devoid of any statutory power to act on its decisions .17 d) Closure Stage During this period, different factors like the redesign of Debating Chamber, further increase in space requirements from 17,5000 to 23,000 meters squared, incorporation of foyer roof, Kemnay granite, and an additional formal entrance to the building, contributed to a corresponding series of unpredictable design outcomes and cost escalations.19 Due to the complex nature of design, the design flow was too slow and did not match the speed of the progamme as per client’s requirements of deadline. The installation of the complex windows and cladding necessitated a final reassessment of the 11 Fraser(Para9.23)12 Fraser(Para8.17) 13 Fraser(Para8.44) 14Fraser(Para8.57) 15Fraser(Para9.52) 16 Fraser(Para10.27) programme during this stage. The delay in design delivery caused delay in construction process and consequent increase in costs. By Sep 2003, the estimated costs crossed the figure of £400 million and by Feb 2004, the estimates reached £430.6 million.20 Consequent to the happenings of 26/11, there was a renewed emphasis on tightening of security measures and making the existing guidelines mandatory which hiked the costs by another £29 million.21 The New Scottish Parliament Building at Holyrood was finally opened on 9 Oct 2004 by Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II setting the curtains over the controversial project. B. “Assess which was most significant in terms of cost increases & schedule slippage”. The problems highlighted from different quarters on the Holyrood Project are not identical in every report, but all can be traced to what Lord Fraser has remarked as “the biggest single error” in his Inquiry Report – that of using a Construction Management method.(White & Sidhu, p19) According to the Auditor General report of 2004 the main cause of delay to the Project since Sep 2000 was the production of detailed design variations and the late supply of information during the construction process whereas the cost escalation has been attributed to design development and delay in construction process.22 The Holyrood Inquiry has also revealed that there was an overall tendency to prefer quality and aesthetics over cost. From the very beginning of the Project, it can be observed that time for completion, was the only 17 Fraser(Para9.32&12.47)) 18 White &Sidhu(p14) 19 Fraser(Para12.49) priority, which was a political decision blind to realities. Hence, the hasty choice of construction management route -a short cut resorted to meet the deadline compulsions dictated by politicians, turned out to be the cause of all the reported problems like lack of co-ordination, slow pace of design output, ill-defined priorities, inability to lie within budgetary allocation. Even then, the inability of design flow to keep pace with the progress in construction of the building as dictated by an unrealistic time-table can be considered as the crucial problem encountered in this Project. Since the complexity of the constantly evolving design flow could not keep pace with the fast-track construction management work activities, with every incremental resultant slippage in time, there was a net cascading effect, leading to even further cost escalations. There never was a true picture of the cost of the Project right from its very outset, and a conscious monitoring of cost was absent, unlike that of quality or aesthetics and fixity of deadline. This situation is best illustrated in the words of Benedetta Tagliabue, the widow of the late architect Enric Miralles, who said in the public gallery during a marathon debate on the Project, on 22 Sep 2004, “ I don’t think the project went wrong. I think there was a misunderstanding of the real price of it at the very beginning”. C. “Evaluate the extent to which the project management problems (failures) of the building correspond with those identified in the literature.” The main problems in Project management identified in literature are as follows:- The project 20 White&Sidhu(p17) 21Fraser(Para 15.2.15.6&15.9) 22White&Sidhu(p16) cannot begin in time, has vague requirements, Project managers cannot comply with project parameters, Absence of strategic alignments, problems with Stakeholder management, Communication problems, Void created by the exit of an individual crucial to the project’s success, Project managers unwary of impending disaster, and Lack of faith in unconventional paths.23 Team members waste time in unnecessary paperwork, Management wants the project be finished too fast, Decreases in speed as the Project approaches completion, Changes are made to the original mission, Cost escalation approaching over-budget, Loosing of faith in successful completion of the project.24 Problems in information exchange between team members, Problems of changes management, incident and risk management.25 Co-ordination problems representing the complexity of modern day construction projects and situations arising out of exceptionally long times taken by architects or owners to review a particular proposed change order have also been discussed.26 In the instant case of the Scottish Parliament Building Project under consideration, it is observed that the Project could not begin in time, had vague requirements of Cost estimates and Design at its very outset and at Stage-D, Communication problems arose between the architectural joint venture members, Crucial exit of two persons created further delay and confusion, Approaching disaster(of cost escalation and time of completion) was collectively ignored, Project Management team fixed an unrealistically tight Time-Table in the beginning, Revisions were made to the Original budget, Cost escalations occurred, Problems arose in Information Flow between participants, Problems surfaced due to poor Changes management and Risk management and Exceptionally long times were taken by the architect in producing the Design. Thus, most of the problems that have occurred in this Project are those already identified in literature as potential problems that occur in construction projects. Conclusion The above Report highlights the need for introducing accountability in the commissioning of public funded projects in compliance with relevant EU regulations on the subject, if expensive projects should ever be completed as per schedule, and if tax payers money should not be wasted by whimsical acts of omission and commission by government officials. The problems that occurred in this Project are not by themselves exceptional or unusual. The overall finding summarized by Lord Fraser in his press conference of 15 Sep 2004 while concluding that there was no single “villain of the piece” for the project’s failings, appears credible enough(BBC News). The controversy surrounding the Scottish Parliament building is the net result of poor political decision making by ministers, absence of communication between different teams and the deliberate non-disclosure of professional advice to decision makers by concerned civil servants who should have been more circumspect in dealing with public largesse . 23 Steve Yager 24 American Management Association 25 Articlebase.com26Levy Works Cited Levy, Sidney M. (p217) Project Management in ConstructionMcGraw Hill 2002 Stv.tv “Scottish Parliament –The McConnel years”13 May 2009.5-July-2009 http://video.stv.tv/bc/stv-news-090513-s2-devo/ 10 Years of Devolution http://www.sundayherald.com/news/heraldnews/display.var.2505714.0.10_years_of_devolution.php Steve Yager “Artemis solvesTop 10 Project Management problems” available at http://dssresources.com/papers/features/yager10032001.htm American Management Association “Overcoming Project Management Problems” available at http://www.amanet.org/editorial/pjct_mgnt.htm Articlebase.com http://www.articlesbase.com/find-articles.php?q=Top+ten+Problems+in+Project+Management+ Lord Fraser Inquiry Conclusions and Recommendations available at URL: www.holyroodinquiry.org/FINAL_rep[ort/conclusions.pdf 22White&Sidhu, Building the Scottish Parliament, The Holyrood Project retreieved on 29-6-2009, last updated: 12 Jan 2005 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/8111464.stm BBC News Uk-Scotland-What has devolution done for us? Scottish Parliament Feature Page available at URLhttp://www.undiscoveredscotland.co.uk/edinburgh/scottishparliament/ BBC News:Uk-News-Scotland-http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/8111464.stm Read More