Project Management

[Tony Bath]

Some things need to be said to fellow directors only.
I think I see things differently from you.
I don’t think the two major projects we have are similar.
The LCS etc roof project involves investigation and implementation, and I see the need for a PM.
The man-safe etc project, to use the same jargon, I see as an implementation only project, where a PM is not necessary.

Having said that, I do have experience of working with a PM, albeit in the printing industry.
Words of warning, they can become very expensive, so in the same way as 3Sixty have put a minimum cost on the project, we should apply a maximum cost. Additionally, a bit like a cricket scorer, somebody needs to monitor the costs particularly of the items that come outside the scope.

 

[Mark Brough]

I've noticed @Tony Bath that back in August, on a similar thread here, that Kevin records that he Kevin proposed at a board meeting what you propose above (i.e. PM not necessary) and that Alex agreed.

 

[Mark Brough]

@Tony Bath , @Kevin Cook , @Robin Williams we need to respond with urgency to Adam's reworked PM proposal.

I am minded to accept Adam's proposal. I would prefer the 2nd of Adam's options ("alternatively myself as technical lead with the assistance of Oliver Brett, who would be the day to day liaison."), since that keeps Adam engaged and informed about progress.

The only extra specification I would ask of Adam is that extra costs are notified, itemised and invoiced each month, so that we retain visibility of extra costs.

Tony, Kevin and I are uncomfortable at the minimum fee, for which we cannot see any justification. However, I am minded to accept this for the sake of making progress.

We are short on options here, we are a scarce resource of volunteer amateurs, and yet progress NEEDS to be made on this crucial and urgent project. I am encouraged that Adam has listened to my objections posted on the forum last week, and has responded to a large extent. I also note that we are learning that what the board expects to achieve - namely proactive estate maintenance at a reasonable price, with professional technical solutions and implemented right first time - that this simply is not possible to DRBML in 2023. We have to compromise for best-efforts.

So unless there are any objections to my thinking today I intend to approve Adam's proposal and request please that someone seconds my approval.

 

[Kevin Cook]

@Tony Bath @Mark Brough @Robin Williams, I agree and support.

Thanks .............. Kevin

 

[Tony Bath]

Ok I will go along with Adam‘s revised proposal.

 

[Robin Williams]

Mark - below is what I was referring to earlier today..

O dear, I have only just caught up with this thread (for reason to explain).

Adam's second paragraph, setting out the scope of the works, is consistent with my understanding of the works , and applies to the roofs of all 9 cores (other than where not needed e.g. cores 8&9 already have a mansafe system). .
Concerns as above are noted and agreed.

If not too late, I suggest we proceed with 3Sixty quote in 2 stages. Initially to commit to a fee which covers the first 5 bullet points (down to and including the point with Tender Report). Lets us then view the quotes and assess what we can afford from which we proceed to second stage, I am nervous if we commit to a fee which assumes we will proceed with the 'whole project' in one go when (for financial reason as the need for the works is well accepted) this may not happen. It would also be good if quotes could set out some options should we not be able to fund the whole project in one go..

 

[Robin Williams]

Unless any comment by end of today, I intend to call Adam B tomorrow friday requesting the 2 stage quote as above.

 

[Kevin Cook]

Thank you Robin, I agree. with a few large expenses facing us and uncertainty over the Lend Lease contribution, we may be unable to commit to all of our planned expenditure.

 

[Tony Bath]

Robin,
I agree with you.

 

[Mark Brough]

Thanks for these further suggestions Robin. I too agree with you, in addition to my earlier suggestions above on Nov 7.

 

[Robin Williams]

Apologies to Kevin & Tony having chased them both this morning for approval of Adam's latest quote. I had forgotten this thread exists along with the same on the 'Management' forum. I will now confirm our acceptance of t]v4 of the quote on the Management forum.

I assume this thread will now go quiet until we discuss further news from Adam.

 

[Mark Brough]

Guys, the project management of the LCS roof is not going well. What to do? Ollie has asked us to approve a spend, and has given us almost two weeks to respond! What is going on in that time whilst we are being given time to respond? All we are talking about is lifting a small % of the flagstones, and getting a leak detection firm in. Why is that simple task taking weeks and weeks?

I have queried this with Ollie and he has ignored me. I have then queried it with Adam and he has ignored me too.

3Sixty do not seem to be driving forward this crucial project with the urgency that we are paying them for.

Any ideas of how to drive this forward? @Robin Williams @Kevin Cook

 

[Kevin Cook]

I agree with the expenditure for the leak detection company, although I am surprised by this seemingly minor exploratory step, when I thought we had agreed to bite the bullet and start intrusive and corrective works on a much larger scale.

I apologize Mark in that you have been left to chase 3Sixty, that neither the progress, communication or response is as we should expect. after all that has been discussed, and the abortive attempt to outsource the PM role to improve these matters which now cause exasperation again.

I feel acutely embarrassed as a Director of DRBML, that after all our efforts, we are not now making meaningful progress to resolve the issue for the sub-let tenants of No.11 LCS.

 

[Mark Brough]

I spoke very briefly with Robin about this yesterday, and Robin kindly offered to look for an opportunity to speak with Adam. I would suggest @Robin Williams that there may be two things to stress to Adam:

1. Ollie. We all made the choice to manage this with a junior (Ollie) doing the bulk of the work in conjunction with Adam. (We chose this over option B, which was to have just one project manager.) Ollie is showing himself to be extremely junior, and that is fine so long as he is working in conjunction with Adam. Adam needs to be keeping an eye on what Ollie is doing when, and what decisions he is taking. Adam cannot abdicate responsibility to Ollie.
2. We expect our project manager team to drive things forward. We all agree how urgent this project is. Losing a day here and a month there for no good technical reason is not welcome by any of us.

Thanks for offering to do this Robin.

 

[Mark Brough]

I took this project management challenge to my partner Liz, who is a RICS surveyor. She sent me the attached RICS guide to appointing a project manager. 3Sixty fulfill pretty much none of the qualities described in this document (section 3.1), although that's perhaps fine because our two projects are perhaps small and cost-constrained.

Section 2.2 covers our situation. I quote:

+++++++++++++++++++

2.2 Project managers as strategic advisors

First-time clients and those that only occasionally have contact with the construction industry may often need advice in the early stages of projects, but the ongoing cost of a full-time project manager on smaller projects may outweigh the benefits it brings. In these circumstances a reduced scope of service concentrating on the important strategic aspects associated with projects and tailored to provide value for money may be considered.

The resultant strategic project management advisor role should concentrate on helping to define and establish the processes and procedures that are necessary to ensure that the project proceeds and is completed as planned. The required processes and procedures may be recorded in a Project Execution Plan.

Typical elements of this role may include:

1. advising on methods by which to engage with the construction industry (procurement of design and construction)
2. establishing an overall development programme with intermediate milestones for key activities for procurement, design and construction. This may also include an indication of key interfaces and constraints, such as planning permission
3. the definition and development of client organisation structure
4. identification of key stakeholders and managing their input (e.g. FM, security, IT, etc.)
5. advising on statutory requirements, such as planning permission and how to obtain it
6. assisting with strategic decision making and in the development of the project brief and a project execution plan
7. reviewing and commenting on emerging design proposals to identify if they remain consistent with the project brief; and
8. assisting in the handover process at completion.

+++++++++++++++++++

I also attach here a second RICS document which is a checklist to use when engaging a project manager.

 

[Kevin Cook]

All very interesting, wouldn't this type of relationship be a relief,

 

[Mark Brough]

Once again we are suffering from bad project management:

1. My complaint here about lackadaisical expediency was not responded-to. It has been ignored. I am increasingly concerned at the continuing bad practice whereby my considered, concise and reasonable requests or complaints are simply ignored.
2. Oliver has requested an urgent response, but it is clearly not at all urgent because he has given us 4 days! Crying wolf - it is not good practice to claim that things are urgent when they are not.
3. Seriously, this could have been discussed weeks ago. It is not on the Critical Path. There is no need for this to be an urgent matter. When engaging 3Sixty I requested a project plan. But was ignored. If the project manager had a project plan, he would have seen weeks ago that he had to undertake a discussion with his client which need not have been urgent. It feels that Oliver is just doing stuff when he thinks of it and gets around to it, rather than planning ahead.
4. Adam is clearly not fulfilling our agreement whereby he takes the lead and oversees Oliver.

 

[Kevin Cook]

I too, feel that we are wading through chest-deep mud whilst re-inventing wheels that were previously ready for use and that progress is too slow for the urgency of this matter.

 

[Mark Brough]

I just wanted to say thank you to Robin for his elaborate post here accepting Oliver's recommendation of Hills.

I have now given up on the details that Robin has considered here in his post, since my comments and any attention to detail is mostly disregarded by 3Sixty's project managers. I would simply have responded "accepted" to Oliver's tender review, in despair.

I note that we are now in an identical situation to the one I was in five years ago when I approved of expenditure to buy the new fire alarm - I couldn't find out why we were being recommended a new fire alarm, most of my concerns and queries were ignored, I tried but failed to get two additional quotes, and BNS didn't even try. And now five years on we find out from Alex that that spend was inappropriate and recklessly-managed.

So, great start there from Robin but let's proceed with care.

 

[Mark Brough]

Note Oliver's forecast of work beginning in October! So it will have taken one year for 3Sixty to have arranged for work to commence.

Edit - Robin reckons that Oliver's forecast is for the work to be completed in October, which is possible. Oliver's writing is ambiguous.