Glasgow Tower Project and Chunnel Project - Case Study Example

Compare and Analyse a Number of Project Management Practices of Two Real-World Projects Executive Summary This study intended to highlight the comparison and analysis of the management practices followed in the two real-world projects, i.e. the Glasgow Tower Project and the Chunnel Project. The Glasgow Tower Project is the only rotatable building and one of the tallest buildings constructed in the Glasgow city while the Chunnel Project is one of the largest tunnel projects ever undertaken between the UK and France. The comparison and analysis of these projects have been conducted in relation to the construction of each project with regard to the selection, delivery system and control of the said projects. In this context, the report revealed that in both the Glasgow Tower Project and the Chunnel Project, the teams followed four similar phases, which included inception, development, implementation and closeout during the construction. Correspondingly, the study revealed that contractors had maintained the performances of the project with the application of various advance operational aspects related with the underlying projects in order to help the contractors to meet the improved requirements of the project. The discussion also identified that in the development and implementation phase, contractors monitored the entire project progress in a more sensitive manner to avoid various risks and challenges. Conclusively, overall findings of the comparison made it apparent that Glasgow Project is significantly more effective than the Chunnel Project as the working team has been quite coordinated manner, wherein the involvement of various contractors and sub-contractors had made the Chunnel Project highly complex. Furthermore, the most possible factors that led to the successful creation and implementation of the project have been presented in the discussion throughout the paper. Compare and Analyse a Number of Project Management Practices of Two Real-World Projects A Summary of the Selected Projects The Glasgow Tower Project is the one of the renowned construction projects of the world that was undertaken as a part of the construction plan for The Glasgow Science Centre, UK. Glasgow Tower is amongst the tallest buildings of the UK, and the only tower in the world, which is capable of revolving 3600. During the phase of its construction, the teams of project had undergone variety of challenges with respect to the limitations of technology and engineering. Besides, the building is considered as a second tallest in Europe, fully covered with titanium, with a height of approximately 341.2 ft or 104 m. Notably, the construction and engineering team designed their plans in order to build the tower as slim enough to suffice its revolving ability in the wind. Consequently, the constructors took more than ten years time to incorporate the tower giving high emphasizes on the safety measures during the planning and implementation phase of the construction. At the inspection phase, architects gave considerable emphasis to the proper balance with ultimate project objective and its constraints. A key objective of the construction project was to provide top cabin’s view from the River Clyde and telecommunication links with The Glasgow Science Centre. In order to ensure high public attraction and concern over the tower, the project team spent around US $12 million into the project (1Anbari et al., n.d.). On the other hand, the Channel Tunnel (Chunnel) project aimed to create a linkage between the UK and France. This project represents one of the largest underground tunnel projects, funded by private companies. The project management team included several regulatory agencies, two national governments, various bankers and several contractors at the top level of the hierarchy. The construction of the project was undertaken with the inclusion of many advance technologies, which was subjected to various additional modifications as per the changing requirements. In order to preserve and ensure long-term sustainability of the project, the management provided significant effort in maintaining coordination at every level of the team and thereby, accomplishing its objective to build a permanent transportation connection amid France and UK (1Anbari et al., n.d.). Prior to 1984, in order to implement this project, the government delivered significant effort in the selection and submission of the final proposal to the contractors. The proposal of the project included the construction of 32 mile or 51.5 km long ‘double-rail tunnel’, capable of carrying both rail and special ‘car-and-truck-carrying train’. The cost required for the project was accordingly estimated at around US$ 5.5 billion, which was finalized at US$ 14.9 billion. Additionally, the development phase of the project faced significant challenges, as the two different companies ‘Translink’ of UK and ‘Transmanche’ of France developed separate plans. Consequently, the implementation of the project started during the fourth quarter of 1987 with a Build‐Own‐Transfer (BOT) arrangement between the client and the owner, which granted Channel Tunnel Group/France Manche (CTG/FM) with 55 years ownership (2Anbari et al., n.d.). Project Management Similarities and Differences Project Selection Project selection is one of the key ways to justify the reason for the selection of the section of the underlying project agreement. In this process, the management has to understand the importance of project and allocate the necessary recourses in order to fulfil the ultimate objective of the project. In terms of the similarities between the two said projects, it has been stated that both the projects has given prior importance on the overall objective of the project during the phase of implementation regardless to the budget allocated to them. It was identified that during the selection of a contractor, high emphasis was given on the Glasgow Tower wherein ISO certified contractor was selected and in the case of the Chunnel Project, biding system had been implemented for selecting qualified contractors. Additionally, nations focused on only capable contractors having strong and experienced workforce. Subsequently, apart from the above, a major noteworthy factor in both the contracts was the component of both the projects based on computer and conceptual models with greater focus on the advanced technologies (1Anbari et al., n.d.; 2Anbari et al., n.d.). Whereas, the identified dissimilarities in both the projects, is that in the Chunnel Project, monitoring and coordinative approaches have been chosen, as there are two different contractors in the project. On the other hand, in the Glasgow Tower project, a flexible approach was undertaken to meet its changing requirements (1Anbari et al., n.d.; 2Anbari et al., n.d.). Project Delivery System The project delivery system is the measure through which, the owner of a project attempts to organize various requirements like construction, financing and maintain ace services by entering into the legal relationship with other parties (Touran et al., 2009). Through proper analysis of both these projects, it becomes clear that these engineering models are large and sophisticated. Furthermore, from the analysis it can be observed that the contractors of the Chunnel Project and the Glasgow Tower projects, delayed to provide the full implementation within the stipulated time because of the requirement of additional funding and necessities of the projects (1Anbari et al., n.d.; 2Anbari et al., n.d.). In case of the Chunnel Project, it has been recognized that contractors have separately emphasized on the overall objective of the project to deliver their respective tasks and noticed lack of communication among each other. On the other hand, in the Glasgow Tower project, contractors were highly focused towards proper initial planning, its efficient execution, appropriate monitoring and controlling all the necessary aspects of project to deliver the assigned task in time. Additionally, during the implementation phase of Glasgow Tower, the governmental authorities and contractors accessed various aspects of the technical risks in respect of both the qualitative, quantitative and simulation methods. In this regard, the theory of project management revealed that the contractors were highly conscious regarding the identification of the risk elements in the project and adopted proper risk management planning in order to analyse and mitigate risks (Kendrick, 2009). Moreover, the key similarity in both these projects was that various contractors were hired to provide necessary materials as well as fire equipment and security systems in enduring the projects successfully (1Anbari et al., n.d.; 2Anbari et al., n.d.). Project Planning Project planning is one of the crucial aspects of project management, which exhibits a brief outline of the ways of progressing towards the ultimate goals determined (Haugan, 2002). The review of the project planning strategies undertaken in case of the Glasgow Tower and the Chunnel Project, reflects that the project planning comprised many important factors like the initial planning, the effective cost estimation measure and the overall risk assessment tools. For instance, in the Chunnel Project, the entire planning phase had been conducted with high emphasis to the activities related with constructing three tunnels in the northern and the southern directions. In the case of the Glasgow Tower, a sensitive project management methodology was utilized in its project planning phase in order to ensure high precautionary measures in the construction of an entire building (1Anbari et al., n.d.; 2Anbari et al., n.d.). On the other hand, certain similarities were also observed in both these projects in respect of planning. Among these similarities, one can be identified with reference to utilizing the advanced technological equipments, which was kept flexible as per the requirements of the project. Additionally, during the planning phase, management teams of both the stated projects gave substantial importance to the aspects related to security and legal issues, due to high durability as well as budgetary and cost constraints associated with it. In this context, it can be ascertained from the proper analysis of both the projects that the technological aspects and proper risk panning has given prior importance in the implementation of the overall plan of the project (1Anbari et al., n.d.; 2Anbari et al., n.d.). Project Control Apart from proper planning, financing and management of the overall project, controlling is also one of the key elements, on which, success of the project highly depends. Project control mechanisms commonly involve application of numerous sets of the knowledge as well as skills in wider sources to recommend on suitable action plans for a relative improvement area (Ford & Nosbisch, 2013). In the case of the Glasgow Tower project, it has been observed that to meet the objectives and specifications of the tower, project managers and constructors had extremely emphasized over the ‘quality performance criteria’. Moreover, to have adequate control over the allocated cost budget and other technical problems that planner had expected to encounter in the future, contractors also focused on utilizing appropriate controlling tools for the close and regular monitoring of the progress. The main objective of providing proper control over the government authority is that the contractors can highly focus towards their respective task and minimize the risk (1Anbari et al., n.d.; 2Anbari et al., n.d.). Besides, the identified similarities between these two projects, is identified in terms of the involvement of advanced engineering, technical and political feats in these projects. Moreover, emphasis was also provided towards controlling the quality issues, regardless of the increase in the cost than budgeted and delay in the incorporation time (1Anbari et al., n.d.; 2Anbari et al., n.d.). The project controlling process has been accordingly exhibited in appendix. Project Management Evaluation In terms of proper project management evaluation of ‘The Chunnel Project’ and ‘The Glasgow Tower as stated earlier that both the project focused outsourcing the project agreement to the certified contractors. The main objective in entering into the legal relationship with the global contractor was to ensure that the operations were to be accomplished and meet the specifications among others acceptances. In terms of the rationale, the techniques of outsourcing the task to global contractors’ helps to ensure that projects can be accomplished on the basis of quality concerns of the customers because the contractors are highly flexible, experienced, greater variety of interest and highly knowledgeable regarding the tasks. The graphical representation of step involve in the evaluation of a project is shown in appendix (Glenaffric Ltd, 2007; 1Anbari et al., n.d.; 2Anbari et al., n.d.). Additionally, from the proper analysis of the both the projects it can be revealed that in the phase of the selection of the project, contractors conducted the selection of the project module the necessary requirements of the different recourses in order to fulfil the ultimate objective of the project. In regards to the Glasgow project, in the project selection the contractors had high aim towards satisfying the changing needs of the building project and applied a flexible approach in the selection. Whereas, on the other hand, in ‘The Chunnel Project’, the contractors were selected on the basis of bidding criteria to monitor and coordinate the project(1Anbari et al., n.d.; 2Anbari et al., n.d.). With respect of the project delivery system, the analysis of similarities and differences in both the projects have been identified, which revealed that the Glasgow Tower has been focused to ensure quality in the tower construction project more effectively through proper initial planning, execution, monitoring and controlling. Besides, in the case of the Chunnel Project, the contractors’ focused towards accomplishing their respective tasks in a different manner to deliver the assigned objective in time. Thus, through proper assessment in project delivery systems of the two projects, the contractors and the underline governmental bodies were able to give prior importance to the ultimate objective of these projects. Accordingly, it was also identified that the legal and security issues have also given chief significance in the project deliverance phases regardless its delay in the competition time (1Anbari et al., n.d.; 2Anbari et al., n.d.). During the analysis phase, with regard to project planning, it can be identified that both the projects had been conducted based on project management life cycle, with the assistance of which, initial planning, cost estimation and risk assessment were made in order to design the project structure. In this regard, it can be asserted that initial planning is the most essential constituent for a project. As usual, risk assessment is regarded as one of the most crucial factors in case of project management. In this regard, it can be argued that without risk assessment, contractors may not understand the project related threats, so that such threats can be mitigated in the phases of project management (1Anbari et al., n.d.; 2Anbari et al., n.d.). Similarly, during its project-planning phase, the Glasgow Tower project contractors had undertaken a significant approach in the preparation of the overall planning of the building in order to ensure construction operations effectively. Moreover, the analysis also revealed that in project planning, various cost effective measures and regular risk assessment processes have been given due importance (1Anbari et al., n.d.; 2Anbari et al., n.d.). From the above discussion and analysis, after comparing all the four key project management factors, i.e. project selection, project delivery system, project planning and project control, it can be inferred that the project management practice followed in both the projects were appropriate. Additionally, the objective of the projects was not deemed similar in many respects. On the other hand, project planning is recognized to be an effective factor for the contractors as the expenditure on the project and the risk evaluation can be measured through it. Thus, it can be concluded that with the help of adequate project planning, the feasibility criteria of the project operation can be enhanced. Thus, after considering the best practice of the project planning, both the projects were identified to be effective in terms of its designing, but the way of working of the contractors in both the projects were quite dissimilar. In this respect, it can be evidently concluded that the Glasgow Tower project has performed better over the Chunnel Project, in respect of the all the project management practices. Based on the comparative analysis of both the projects, it can be ascertained that the Glasgow Project team was highly coordinated by the respected group members; whereas, both the contractors of the Chunnel projects, i.e. Translink of the UK and Transmanche of France, were moving towards the similar goal but there were no proper communication amongst them. Moreover, in the Glasgow project, during the implementation phase, it was observed that the employees worked as a team and had a proper trade-off between objectives and constraints. Besides, a proper Code of Business Conduct was provided to the contractors to execute the task of tower project effectively. In the inception phase, a proper teamwork and communication was noticed in the project as well. Moreover, mode of selecting contractors was also based on the proper analysis of their capacities with respect to the certification of ISO standards (1Anbari et al., n.d.; 2Anbari et al., n.d.). On the other hand, in case of ‘The Chunnel Project’, proper coordination between the two contractors was lacking, regardless the fact that they both were moving towards the same common objective. Moreover, as per the Channel Tunnel Treaty, the project can only be financed through private sources and thus, it can be stated that contractors are not lacking to obtain proper aid from the government. Moreover, quality and specification issues have been influencing the projects during construction. Furthermore, due to the involvement of around ‘700,000 shareholders’, ‘220 international banks’, involvement of ‘British and French legislation’, various construction companies along with suppliers had to face severe complexities in the overall process and difficulties to revert the issues of satisfaction (2Anbari et al., n.d.). Summary Undisputedly, both these projects had its influence in the history of engineering in the world. While, the Channel Tunnel (Chunnel) project is one of the largest tunnel projects, funded by the private companies, the Glasgow Tower is the only building that can rotate 360º. During the implementation, significant effort had been provided to minimize the barriers and accomplish the project efficiently and smoothly. The prior objective of providing a proper mean of communication linkage with a permanent transportation connection between France and the UK effectively has given a significant importance. The working group of the project also emphasized security and legal issues in order to ensure confirmed success of the project. However, project management team had to face issues related with communication gap between two different teams. Nevertheless, irrespective of the challenges in engineering and political feats, the project proved to be one of the greatest construction examples ever. Comparatively, concerning the Glasgow Project, the four project phases, i.e. ‘project inception’, ‘development’, ‘implementation’ and ‘closeout’, proved efficient enough to ensure better effectiveness in the way of completion of the entire project. In order to identify the unique features as aimed for the project, the construction squads were observed to have provided significant endeavour in order to achieve successfulness and perfection. Thus, from the above evaluation and assessment, it can be comprehended that in order to make the project successful, any project management team needs to prepare planning based on the objectives of project. References 1Anbari, F. T., Kwak, Y. H., Chernyaeva, O., Spector, T., & Wu, A. H. (n.d.). The Glasgow tower project. Project Management Institute, 1-11. 2Anbari, F. T., Giammalvo, P., Jaffe, P., Letavec, C., & Merchant, R. (n.d.). The Chunnel project. Project Management Institute, 1-14. Ford, D. N., & Nosbisch, M. R. (2013). An industry/academia partnership for construction project control education. Cost Engineering, 34-39. Gido, J., & Clements, J. (2008). Successful project management. United States: Cengage Learning. Haugan, G. T. (2002). Project planning and scheduling. United States: Management Concepts Inc. Kendrick, T. (2009). Identifying and managing project risk: Essential tools for failure-proofing your project. New York: AMACOM Div American Mgmt Assn. Royer, P. S. (2001). Project risk management: A proactive approach. United States: Management Concepts Inc. Touran, A., Gransberg, D. D., Molenaar, K. R., Ghavamifar, K., Mason, D. J., & Fithian, L. A. (2009). A guidebook for the evaluation of project delivery methods. Transit Cooperative Research Program, 1-101. Appendix Appendix 1: Six Steps Evaluation Activity of a Project (Source: Glenaffric Ltd, 2007) Appendix 2: Project Risk Management Process (Source: Royer, 2001) Appendix 3: Project Control Process (Source: Gido, & Clements, 2008) Read More