Platform of excellence

A journey to discover innovation in the tools, techniques and teamwork used to deliver specialist projects led to some surprising results. Kevin Parry, Jayne Thomas and Sarah Martin report back on an APM study tour, which found project management being practised but not as we know it!

This is a story in two parts. A study published in the International Journal of Project Management (Vol. 27, Issue 8, 2009) highlights the special characteristics of innovation projects. In the article by Per Sundstrom and Annika Zika-Vikorsson, they observe that innovation projects often separate the approach in the early phases of a project from the execution phase. They observe that this is in-line with linear project management models and allows the high levels of freedom and risk-taking in the early stages, but keeps work within the box in the execution phase. The challenge is how to keep that creativity and innovation when work is time-critical, cost-critical or needs to be replicated, for example in simultaneous deployments.

They observe that: Creativity in project teams has to be complemented with efficient learning processes in order to find solutions to new technical problems.

Spurred on by this, we had aspirations to find innovation in the tools, techniques and teamwork used to deliver projects by two extraordinary companies; one in Drumclog near Glasgow, and one in Rosmalen in the Netherlands. Both were linked by the use of advanced and potentially revolutionary technology in making extensions to railway platforms.

Innovation

The known innovation was in the application of two established technologies: expanded polystyrene (Styrofoam) and fibreglass, used in reinforced platform edging. These were developed by Compa Tech BV, a subsidiary of VH Infra BV, at the request of the Dutch Railways (ProRail) and subsequently developed in the UK by George Rowe who was at the time, the commercial director of QTS Group.

Compa Tech had developed Comparon as a new form of lightweight platform using expanded polystyrene and Comparand, a fibre-strengthened synthetic profile used in platform edging. These two technologies meant that not only were extensions to platforms now less expensive in materials than using conventional technology by a factor of two thirds, it also weighs the same as soil, so is weight neutral when replacing earth on an embankment. The replacement platforms are designed with a 100 year lifespan but can be manoeuvred by hand.

George Rowe had approached Compa Tech at the invitation of Network Rail and has since acquired the UK exclusive distribution rights to the Comparon technology, noting that the Comparand system is unique to the Netherlands and cannot be adopted in the UK. Subsequent to our visit it became apparent that for the system to be fully approved and implemented a dedicated resource would be required, so Mr Rowe has set up a new company, MegaTech Projects Ltd, which now holds the UK rights for the marketing, distribution and installation of the approved Comparon system.

Impressive

QTS have won Green Apple and Vibes environmental awards in 2008 for its site in Drumclog and we hoped to find that they were also innovators in the application of project and programme management. We soon learned, however, that this was not the case; at least not when measured by conventional maturity models in terms of a project management process, specific training or tools. We found that no-one had the title of project manager and that it was not seen as a whole job, just part of several roles, such as that of the commercial director and our host for the day, George Rowe.

Not only did we find that project management wasnt seen as a discipline in its own right for the deployment of the platform extensions, we found that the distribution contract and the commercial relationship between the two companies wasnt completed as a project, either. So did this mean that they were not as impressive as they first seemed? Not at all, if anything, they were more so.

QTS operates a strong culture of trust, embodied in the philosophy of managing director, Alan McLeish. People are hand-picked for their organisational fit and are then left to do their job, which includes a responsibility to contribute their experience to the knowledge of the company as a whole. It is the polar opposite of management systems which de-personalise jobs into roles which can be filled by any qualified candidate, in this case, any of the professional management team managed projects and the Compa Tech products were just the same.

Time savings

When we visited the Compa Tech sites in the Netherlands and met the management, hosted by Martijn de Oude, the commercial director, we asked how they managed the projects for Pro Rail BV. It seemed clear that they had been seen as successful, they were testament to the customer satisfaction and in some cases, what were built as temporary extensions had been left in place indefinitely. Time had been saved compared with traditional methods, safety enhanced by the use of light weight materials which could be positioned by men alone and the possession time the technical term for a contractor taking possession of a piece of track- reduced.

Each installation told the same story. They looked great, wore well and blended in with the older platform they were joined to. So how were the projects managed? Our question of Martijn on his project management qualifications met a slightly embarrassed look of puzzlement. I am a civil engineer, he said. I am not trained in project management. In both QTS and Compa Tech, it was clear that we were with highly innovative, agile and creative companies. There was also no question of the caliber of people employed. So how could they do this project work without recognised project management methods of managing change?

In the case of both QTS and Compa Tech, their learning was at the personal level but not necessarily at the organisational level. The culture reinforced dependence on the individual rather than organisational learning, and so they do not differentiate their approach in different phases of the project. The result is that they may find it hard to scale their project deployment capability to address a large market or window of opportunity.

This poses an interesting question: if we believe that QTS, Compa Tech and now MegaTech Projects need the second half of the project methodology the post innovation phase then where would they find that assistance? How can we meet their needs to train, support and equip the project managers of those companies and the hundreds like them in developing ways of working that can harness and not alienate the brilliant people who conceive the technical breakthroughs and the high levels of trust in their culture? This may be where specific consultancy, rather than standard training, can help.

Far from not knowing about project management, these companies simply had a different idea of what it was. They may well need methods to manage risk and earned value but we as project managers, need to make sure that we meet their needs in the context of their business environment. This means finding a less rigid and equally innovative approach, which has the potential to match existing methods with some inspiration of our own.