“How Big Things Get Done” Book Review – Part 2, The Success

Success road is always paved with failure. Success which creates value and benefits is rare as shown in part 1 of this review. That’s why part 1 of the Book “How Big Things Get Done” review was first about failure not success. Success starts by learning from others’ failures before you learn from yours. The provided cases give us very good positive learning.

The book discussed many successful mega medium and small projects cases to understand how projects team succeed to deliver it within budget and time and with benefits. Of course, Success cases are not as much as the failed projects. However, most of them are sharing a pattern and model we can follow.

This pattern starts with the focus on the ultimate target of the project (the vision). When developing an idea, most visionary establish the idea with parameters around it from cost and time. They might have numerous goals to be achieved. However, there is usually one primary objective that the vision is centred around. While the other goals may provide additional value, in some instances, they may prove to be disruptive.

This is like driving from point A to B. Point B represents the ultimate destination, which is the primary target. You plan the means to reach it and considered time and budget. However, it is important to consider whether any delays resulting from detours to explore interesting sights and locations along the way are affordable while still delivering the primary objective.

Therefore, when secondary goals and disruptive factors arise, it is crucial to maintain focus and ask why we are doing tis project, whether the extra goals will delay the primary objective. When project leadership comprehends this single goal, it ultimately defines success. This is what Madrid Metro leadership teach us as an exemplary success story in delivering a rail network which usually known for delays and budget overruns. The leadership team behind the project demonstrated an unwavering focus on the main purpose and delivered the project on half the budget and double the speed.

The project began in 1995 and was completed in two stages of only four years each. The first stage involved constructing 56 kilometres with 37 stations, followed by the second stage, which extended the line by a further 75 kilometres with 39 stations. This remarkable feat was achieved through a radically innovative approach to tunnelling and typical station building design, which allowed the project to be completed with impressive efficiency.

The capable and credible leadership responsible for this achievement was the dream of any investor or owner seeking to deliver their vision. The Madrid Metro leadership was keenly aware that new product development is one of the riskiest ventures any organization can undertake, including their own. Thus, they focused solely on what worked and could be accomplished quickly, inexpensively, safely, and at a high level of quality. They avoided personal goals or egos and prioritized the ultimate goal of delivering a much-needed service for the people and the economy.

By combining existing and tested products and processes in innovative ways, the Madrid Metro leadership was responsible for one of the largest and fastest subway expansions in rail history. This success story serves as a reminder that effective leadership, focus on the primary objective, and a willingness to innovate can result in remarkable accomplishments even in the face of significant challenges.

The Madrid Metro leadership early strategic decisions that contributed to their success, could be summarised as following:

1. Designing an intelligent approach to adopt underground rail using tunnelling to avoid land problems and environmental issues, saving a lot of time.
2. Using only proven technology and avoiding new, untested products.
3. Creating simple, functional station designs that are best suited for their purpose, rather than focusing on signature architecture.
4. Planning to work on multiple gangs for a certain number of kilometres, allowing for different teams to deliver simultaneously. They had six boring machines working together at one time, which provided opportunities for positive learning and team experience exchange.
5. Managing the community effectively by setting up a feedback system to avoid time-consuming disputes with community groups. The Madrid Metro leadership also convinced communities to accept 24/7 tunnelling, instead of the usual daytime and weekday working hours, by asking if they preferred a three-year or an eight-year tunnel-construction period.
6. By working at such speed, they eliminated the big window time risk, which usually allows more risks to enter the project and increase the cost and delays. The long time window open any projects to new uncertainty and unknown risks. We have these recently in  the shape of  COVID19, The War in Ukraine, Floods, new technology disruption. Simple shape of risk of long window time is a competitor with similar investments release his product before you.

These decisions aimed at eliminating risks, which makes sense in any project. The Madrid Metro leadership adopted a “no monuments, no innovation, modular, and fast” approach, which could be perceived as a recipe for boring, low-quality design. However, the Madrid Metro is a workhorse, with large, functional, and airy stations and trains, transporting millions of passengers, day in and day out, year after year, exactly as planned.

The lessons learned from this success model are numerous. Most important lesson was to avoid the uniqueness trap. This trap which is an application to attract more risks. However, limited people are cleaver to get away from it as the study cases we had in the book with more than 92% of mega project are over budget and with significant delay and with confirmation of delivering their benefits. Some of them failed completely with xero output because the uniqueness dream. However, taking in consideration of Sydny Opera House story, uniqueness might be your hidden success gem after decades of clear lost business case. Sydney Opera House is a single example with others two projects for NASA with huge cost overrun and delays.

Remember, the ultimate goal drives your vision. Is it a restricted by time. Is it your only investment, that if failed and not delivering profit as soon as it completed, it means a bankruptcy and failure. Usually, visionary projects with defined time frame means it should deliver what promised by that time (like Olympic Games) otherwise, it failed.

Try applying it to your mega-project existing and next time you and analyse the risks around your strategic decisions.

The Heathrow Terminal 5 (T5) is the remarkable second success story in project leadership. Its main building is the largest freestanding structure in the United Kingdom, and with the addition of two more buildings, T5 boasts a total of fifty-three gates and a footprint of 3.8 million square feet, all built at a cost of £4.3 billion. To ensure smooth operations, T5 required a long list of additional systems, including tunnels, roads, parking facilities, rail connections, stations, electronic systems, baggage handling, catering, safety systems, and a new air traffic control tower for the entire airport. All of this was built between two runways, with the existing central terminal area at one end and a busy freeway at the other. The airport could not shut down during construction, making the project even more challenging.

Construction began in 2002, with a planned opening date of March 30, 2008, at 4:00 am. The planning process had taken 19 years, and project leaders were confident in their ability to meet their target by hour which they did. Despite the challenges, the project was completed on time and on budget, thanks in large part to effective project leadership.

First factors in the project’s success was data-driven planning. Leaders utilized forecasting models that showed if the project were delayed beyond the planned 6.5-year delivery time and budget, it could potentially sink the BAA company, which operates the airport. This critical thinking and visualisation of the impact of negative cost and time variation on the organisation served as a reminder to every team member about the importance of staying committed to the deadlines.

The second factor that contributed to the success of the Heathrow Terminal 5 project was the use of a visual planning system. This system visualised every single activity, including the manufacturing of materials outside the site and the delivery of those materials to the site when needed only. This accuracy in planning and delivery ensured that the project remained on schedule and within budget.

The third factor was the creation of a new culture that encouraged people to seek out, capture, and exploit the best practices of others, remove barriers and inhibitors to doing things differently, motivate and support good ideas, and leverage commercial incentives to perform exceptionally. This culture encouraged workers to express their opinions and speak out about anything that could impact their safety or improve their work. Workers were even encouraged to replace their safety gear for even minor issues. This culture of openness and collaboration led to improved safety and productivity on the site.

The fourth factor was the procurement and contracting strategy adopted for the project. The procurement methods used in the T5 agreement created a different climate compared to traditional design and build methods. Trust and cooperation were key to success, given the range of engineering disciplines and the large number of contractors involved in the project. With over 60 contractors, 16 major projects, and nearly 150 sub-projects underway on the 260-hectare site, a unique management approach was required. The approach was based on the idea of “one team” that shared the risk and success of the project. This approach made everyone feel like they belonged, believed in the project’s vision and mission, and committed to its success.

The contract used for the construction of T5 was a cost-plus contract, where the suppliers were paid the actual cost plus a fixed fee which included overheads and profit. This approach was based on a partnering approach, with the aim of promoting bespoke interactions between BAA and suppliers. Unlike traditional approaches, the T5 agreement emphasized behaviours and relationships, which discouraged contractors from resorting to the usual bidding games to win contracts.

In this approach, a goal-sharing culture was adopted where the risk of construction and funding was accepted by BAA. This eliminated the fear of penalties and blame for any delays and enabled the contractors to concentrate entirely on delivering the project. Any disputes that arose were attended to immediately, rather than delaying them until their impact was clearer to evaluate. The project leadership managed disputes by sharing the risk and solving them to avoid any delays.

This approach provided companies with positive incentives to perform well, such as bonuses for meeting and exceeding benchmarks. It ensured that the interests of the different companies working on the project were not pitted against one another. Instead, everyone had the same interest of completing T5 on time. The book describes in detail how this approach enabled the project leadership to manage disputes and foster a shared sense of purpose among the many companies involved in the project.

The above two cases, provides insight in how to design your strategy early. You might choose to apply it to all your strategy c projects or apply to some and mange the risks around it.

The success factors defined in the book with the different terminologies. I tried to summaries the real adopted approach which easy for E&C to translate into processes and strategic decisions to adopt on the initiation stage.

Concluding that the book is opening the fair discussion about mega projects spending budget and the opportunity to save Trillions of dollars. Yes the book is suggesting that following the suggested models for success will save trillions of dollars. A statement with full credibility coming from ana cadmic researcher who will not write anything with out data to approve it. If I am one of the governments in Europe, I will fund him to apply his model to their projects.

Finally, if you did not read the book yet, I recommend you read it. It will save you billions. Thanks to prof. Bent for this valuable book and thanks to all his team.

Visits: 373