Overview of the basics of Advanced Work Packaging and WorkFace Planning with an introduction to the evidence collection process aiming at documenting the industry experience and perception of AWP processes and implementation challenges.
For many years, the construction industry community has focused on field execution planning techniques to unlock field productivity improvements. While many benefits were achieved, those techniques remain limited by the sequencing and the quality of the flow of information produced during the definition and engineering phases.
Access AWP defitnions and send us back your comments to improve the industry defintions around AWP
Capital projects use work packaging to divide their projects' scope into manageable portions of work for planning and execution, all to achieve improved productivity and increased predictability. However, currently, no common industry standard for work packaging is widely and uniformly implemented within the North American capital projects industry. As documented by CII RT 272 Phase I (2009-2011), companies have been implementing a number of varied work packaging practices at different stages of the project lifecycle with emphasis on the construction phase. Due to the varied implementation, there is currently little evidence of the benefits of extending work packaging to the Front End Engineering Design (FEED) and the Detailed Engineering (DE) phases. To provide the best current evidence, this thesis describes new findings on Advanced Work Packaging (AWP) as an execution practice, with special emphasis on design activities. This research combines data collection methods such as interviews, observations and document review, as well as surveys. The reader will understand the current industry status on Advanced Work Packaging in terms of levels of implementation as well as evidence of benefits and implementation challenges across the project lifecycle. Documented benefits include productivity improvements on the order of 25% in the field, with corresponding reductions of 10% of total installed cost. Other significant benefits include improved safety, improved productivity, less rework, significant reduction in RFIs and increased stakeholder alignment. Documented AWP implementation challenges include lack of process formulization, persons’ resistance to change and lack of buy-in, stakeholders’ conflict of interest and working culture, incompatibility with some contractual scenarios as well as traditional change management practices.
To enable the holistic effectiveness of all these project delivery components, a project needs to operate within a framework capable of ensuring both the right timing and the optimum quality of information used