Case Study Project Organisation
The following are sections taken from interviews and discussions with key people who worked for the design and build contractor of the skyscraper case study, as well as some of their STCs’ project managers. The interviews were carried out at various stages of the project.
The Project Director
Note: The project director was brought into the project after the D&B contract was placed. He replaced the previous project director who directed the project during the PCSA era and then became an executive director of this project, dealing mostly with the client. The interview was conducted about one year before the end of the job, when CAT A floors were being installed.
When I got here, the design was largely done. Our relationship with the engineers is fantastic because we know them as a business and we know their teams very well. The architects are a relatively new design practice. I have not worked with them before, but they have done a great job, and our relationship with their team remains strong. Now, about 98% of the design is completed. However, there are still some gaps in the design, which usually happens on the back end of a job. For example, some of the planned room spaces and some of the detailed designs need coordination and refinements.
Earlier in the project, Synchro was used to link the BIM model. However when I came in, we introduced additional tower crane, TC 6 (Tower Crane no 6) and the Synchro model at that point in time did not reflect our revised delivery strategy anymore. The question was, whether or not it is worth us spending that money to update the Synchro model to reflect our delivery strategy. Synchro is a good marketing tool, but it did not help me build the building and I was not prepared to have a resource dedicated to that when my pressure is having people on the pitch building fast and safely. I believe in making the job the primary focus, not attractive tools.
[Showing the project organisation chart in Figure 1] How do you make the connection down these chains of people off site and on site to achieve the focus you aim for?
Leadership should be visible. It is about being on site and leading by example. It is about being in early with your boots on, and being out there, and then staying late and making
sure the job is being done. If you have said you are going to do it, I expect you to do it. That is the important thing. That is a very old approach.
Our organisation chart stayed fluid to reflect the evolving needs of the job. We recently divided the organisation into top, middle and bottom of the building. We had teams focused around the top levels (L43 to L62), the middle floors (fit out) and the basements and the first three levels (B3 to L3). We have a project manager in each team, a construction manager and a supporting team around that, and they had clear accountability and clear ownership for their respective area. We have also the M&E team. The superstructure is almost finished now so the team members will be working on other parts of the building or moved to other projects. I also have the commercial director alongside me with his team of managers and quantity surveyors. Then we have our executive director and our principal design manager who are managing the relationships with the client, the architects and the engineers and others higher up.
Executive Director
Sr Project Manager
Project Director
Commercial Director
Superstructure
Project Manager
L56 to L62
Project Manager
Fit Out
Project Manager
B3 to L3
Project Manager
M&E
Project Manager
Design
Sr Design Manager
Design Managers
BIM Manager
Commercial team
Planning
Planning Manager
M&E Planner
Construction Manager
Construction Managers
Construction Manager
Figure 1: The D&B contractor’s project organisation chart one year after the placement of the D&B contract
Sr Document Controller
SHEQ
Principal Design Manager
Construction Manager
Construction Manager
1- H&S
2- Quality
3- Sustainability Assistant Managers & Advisors
1- Concrete Core 2- Steel & Decking 3- Façade
4- Plantrooms 5-Staircases Package Managers
1- Façade
2- Waterproofing 3- Roof & terrace finishes
4- BMU
Package Managers
1- Risers
2- Interior fit-out 3- Core finishes
4- Fire alarms, sprinklers and speakers
5- Toilets
6- Ceilings
7- Floors
Package Managers
1- Façade
2- Canopies
3- Floors
4- Waterproofing 5- Metalwork
6- Interior fit out 7- Painting Package Managers
1- Mechanical
2- Electrical
3- Vertical transportation Package Managers
Logistics
1- H&S
2- Quality
3- Sustainability Managers
1- Risers/Core/ Lobbies
2- CAT A
3- B3 to L3
4- L43 to L62
5- Plantrooms L7/ L25/L41
6- Plantrooms L57 7- Plantrooms L58 Site Managers
1- Concrete Core 2- Steel & Decking 3- Façade
4- Plantrooms
5- Staircases
Site Managers
1- Façade
2- Waterproofing 3- M&E
4- BMU
5- Roof & terrace finishes
Site Managers
Document Controller
Cranes & Hoists Site Manager
1- M&E
2- Façade
3- Canopies
4- Floors
5- Waterproofing 6- Metalwork
7- Interior fit out 8-Toilets
9- Painting
Site Managers
1- Risers
2- Interior fit-out 3- Core finishes 4- Fire alarms, sprinklers and speakers
5- Toilets
6- Ceilings
7- Floors
8- M&E
Site Managers
Out of Hours Site Managers
Assistant Site Managers
1- Lifting operations 2- Perimeter Supervisors
The M&E connects the various sections of the building like the veins that feed the body. It is very important that our people understand that we can build a beautiful structure, we can put on a beautiful skin, but if we do not get the building elements that are on the inside right, the building is no good to anyone. The building has to come alive. For that, you need all the veins, the heart, the lungs to work, and they need the space to be installed. This takes time. For the M&E team. They are turning lights on, they are turning switches on, they are blowing air, etc. to commission various parts of the M&E system. There is a lot more to do, and they can only complete the testing when the building is built. It is the back end of the job we always need to think about, which can sometimes be overlooked.
Integration is the key. Builders somehow put the M&E people in a different box. The M&E people always complain that they never have enough space to get their pipes, wires, plants, etc. installed. Therefore, it is important that they are integrated within the rest of the team at an early stage of the project. We have worked hard for that, so now we have clusters with the M&E people from different areas, not in the M&E team, but in the top, middle and bottom teams. They have to be integrated because it all comes together. I do not want one team over here saying, “I can’t do this because that team over there hasn’t made me a hole or built a wall or put a door on or cleaned the space.” You are all part of it together.
The package managers work up through off site as well as down the supply chains on site. How much input from the onsite can you get into the offsite?
The on site teams need to be in constant communication with the off site teams. The off site team needs to come to site, be familiar with the site and know the on site team and understand the constraints. It needs to be driven from site as opposed to being driven into the site. Suppliers will try to push their products out of the factory onto the site, as opposed to the site being ready to pull these in. To ensure the deliveries meet on site needs, the programme should be up to date. We took the view here in the early days that because the programme kept changing, we would not stop manufacturing. Consequently, we have to pay for storage as it is much better to have the required products available than to wait for it. We do not want to disrupt the supply chain. For example, disrupting the façade STC production of the panels would be out of the question because to get back into the production slot would be a big challenge. We have so many FCUs (fan coil units) that we could not stop their production. We have to assess each product and each delivery on a case-by-case basis. We de-risk the production end by looking at the bigger picture.
Another important lesson we have learned on this project is the wind factor and its effect on high-rise building projects. A problem in construction competitors undercutting each other to achieve the speed clients require, which can result in pressure to accept unrealistic programmes. Sometimes, clients abdicate their risk, saying for example that the wind is the contractor’s risk not theirs. This does not breed collaboration or success. It can lead to
4
adversarial relationships and unnecessary tension. If the client accepts to take some risk, and the risk is shared around, this would be a much better approach to the project.
This project is an immensely challenging one but also very enjoyable. My team appreciates what they are doing, and how lucky they are. Coming up through my career, this is the type of job I always wanted to be on. To me, this is the Champions League final. You do not get always to play in the Champions League so enjoy it while you can, but earn your right to be here.
The Basement 3 to Level 3 Project Manager (Bottom of the Building)
Note: The project manager of the B3 to L3 part of the building came to the project when the installation works at the bottom of the building had already started. This interview was carried out mid-November, six months after the interview with the project director above.
I am responsible for Basements 1, 2 & 3, Ground Floor GF, Level 1 and Level 2 of the building. There are 134 rooms in the basements to be completed. When I became involved in this project, the external works and three floors of basement installations have started. All were in various states of progress. The basements should finish by Christmas. The ground floor fit out should finish by the New Year. Certain external finishes will continue until the end of March, which includes all the wind concrete canopies, which are over a hundred to go in and glass canopies as well. The construction manager from the Fit Out team joined my team. He is responsible for the internal works at the bottom of the building. He is very experienced and he did most of the fit out of the CAT A floors. The façade package manager also joined my team. He did all the façade on this building and he is now my construction manager, responsible for the external works.
At this part of the building, all our building elements are unique, which makes work very complex. It is important to always be on the top of it and chase people to do their work. My role is to look forward all the time and get those key milestones embedded in people’s heads. You should keep reminding people of these milestones. I run coordination meetings every week on Tuesdays and Thursdays with all the STCs that are working on our part of the project. I have a member of every trade in these meetings. In this way, all the STCs know what they need to do next week. These meetings are held in our ‘tab room’. We have a separate meeting every Wednesday with the project managers of the other teams, to coordinate the work of the whole of the building. These meetings are held in the M&E team ‘commissioning room’
On the boards of the ‘tab room’, I have drawings and plans that show the exact status of each area. This is important because we have so many different areas. Every STC should know where they should be in a given moment and the area colour is changed on the drawing from green to red, ie work should be carried out there. I have a copy and I go around on site to check each area. If an area should be with the M&E trade, for example,
5
why are they not working on it? Then they get a phone call, or if it is over with the dryliners, to do the ceiling and they are not working on it, they will get a phone call. I know the dates when everything is coming in. Everything is written in my book.
When I came to this project, I checked the programme and I challenged the durations stated in it. For example, originally they priced to install a raised floor for all of the GF. However, after a value engineering exercise, a decision was made to change the shallower half of the floor to concrete but they failed to add the concrete curing time on to the programme. On the other hand, you have to avoid wet trade whenever it is possible, particularly in winter. This change added two weeks for the floor to dry and another two weeks to cure. I raised this issue with the project executive. He had to make a decision to go back to a raised floor. Although this option is more expensive, it would save time on the programme and consequently save money on the long run. It takes time to get services installed under the floor and signed off. Once this is done, the raised floors can be installed fast. We are using one of the best raised-floor STCs. They are experienced in airports. They are always ready when we need them to do extended hours or work during weekends to meet the programme.
What was the state of the design when you started working on the project?
The interior fit out STC was well behind on the fit-out design. There was a lot of time and energy pushing that up with the architects to get that design signed off by them. The architects produced the concept design and interior fit out STC has to design the details, such as the balustrades, wall types, secondary steel within walls, interfaces with stone, etc. There were a lot of missing details. Most of these details were discussed in the weekly meetings with the architects but we are still signing off some remaining drawings, even now with only six weeks to go.
The architects keep tweaking the design. In my position I should reject all unnecessary refinements or changes to the design. Architects do not like it but it is time to move on. The architects had the client here a couple of times to back them, which I think was very unprofessional. They should remember who is paying their wages. Design team does not have a concept of the word ‘time’. I have been asking for information for ages. It is the architects’ job to hand this information. I have been assigned the role of finishing this part of the building, the design is not complete and we have been in these meetings for over a year. They have been coordinating the design but they should bring these to a conclusion on time.
In addition, architects do not appreciate the cost and time of the project. They have a concept. We have a budget and a programme and we need to keep the project within these two constraints. We need to understand how to read a drawing, how to interpret that properly, its buildability and how it is maintained once it is built. When designers are designing, they need to understand how someone physically can get into a space to put ductworks in, for example. The designers often miss the buildability and maintenance
6
issues. Under CDM, they are accountable for that but their focus is mainly on aesthetics and appearance. The other big issue is the services interface. In every building, I have been working on the building holes are not coordinated. We have CAD, BIM and clash detection but we are still faced with a situation when we need to break the concrete or cut the steel to create holes for the services.
Does the M&E’s commissioning work in isolation from the rest of the building? How do you organise your work with the others, eg the fit out team?
Within my team of 10, I have two site managers, who are responsible for the mechanical and electrical installations. We work with the mechanical and electrical package managers from the M&E team to understand what their commissioning programme is. I run through the commissioning schedule with them to identify which devices should be installed in which areas, and in which order they are going to be tested, so we will prepare for that. We make sure the environment is not dusty before we start commissioning certain parts of the system. For example, I know that come 6 of December, all devices need to be in the ceiling ready to start commissioning
Do you have to push the STCs to implement a safe approach to their work?
You have to push the STCs because they always try to find a particular way to do something if this will save them time or money. However, if you are looking at the M&E STCs, you will find them more disciplined because of the type of work that they are doing. If you look at the façade and the steelwork, you will find that they are much better at following their own process because they are normally hanging off the building in an unsafe zone. Therefore, they are more mindful of the dangers and they do things more by the book. The people that are the worst are the fit out STCs. For example, they will not think to put netting inside their MEWP as a matter of course. You have to tell them when using heavy tools that these are hazards when you are working on a platform. The tools might drop therefore they must
be tethered.
Saying that, from my experience, STCs are now much more mindful about the safety on site. It is also about how you approach people. If you approach people in a manner that you make them aware of the danger rather than reprimanding or correcting them, they are normally more receptive. Not only that, in this way, people will be coming to you asking questions and seeking advice. Things are going to be improved even more as the younger generation are coming into the industry. It is a second nature of younger people to be aware of the safety issues on site and to be willing to adhere to safety measures.
Has the induction process reinforced all of that?
If I am honest, I will say that we still have people that do not fully understand what is being said during the induction, particularly because of the language barrier, which is a major issue across the industry. You should have a supervisor who can speak English so they translate to their team what is said in their own language. Safety is everybody’s
7
responsibility. As a manager, if someone is not working safely on site, you must stop them and issue them with a yellow card. Consequently, they have to be reinducted along with their supervisor. The supervisor has to sit for about two hours for that so if they have six or seven workers to be reinducted it would be a real problem for the supervisor. Therefore, it is in their interest to employ people who are going to follow the instructions. If the safety issue is more serious, they will be issued with a red card. A red card can be issued only by a committee. No one has the right to individually issue a red card to someone on site. The committee is the project director, the health and safety manager and the person who administered the card. Our project director is the only director I have worked for that has safety at the centre of everything. He would rather a job be late but safe. He reinforces H&S issues every day. In everything he does, safety is absolutely, paramount. Most directors I ever worked for, safety is their last thing on the agenda.
The Electrical Package Manager of the M&E Team
Note: The electrical package manager is part of the M&E team. His role is to deliver the electrical services along with the ancillaries, such as the fire alarm, the security, the BMS, the structured cabling, IT networks, etc, and also to deliver CAT A M&E. This interview was carried out about one year before the previous interviews, a few months after the D&B contract was signed off. The electrical package manager was involved in the project since the PCSA stage.
Our value for the M&E was about £78 million and it is growing to about £86 million so it is
quite a large package. I am accountable for that package and its ancillaries and also
accountable for the safety, the cost and the on-time delivery of that element of works.
My role is for the effective communications with my STCs and their supply chain. The M&E
STC is a group and has a series of project directors that sit within my team, and their sub
and sub-sub-supply chain. Although our contract is with the M&E STC, when I communicate,
I talk to the M&E STC directors and their primary supply chain managers as well.
Strategically, I have to ensure that the programme progress is monitored and
communicated; I need to deliver the package on time, safely, and within budget.
Operationally, I need to meet the programme and make sure that there is no slippage on
the progress. If there are any technical issues, we debate those. I manage
my consultancy team; my architects, my consultants, my structural specialists, to ensure
that the offers from the M&E STC are dealt with, ie either accepted or rejected technically,
and I have the over-arching say in that. I manage the safety of my team and
also disseminate the information, programme, at different levels to different people. I do
not give everybody everything.
None of the professional bodies recognises or wants to recognise the scale of the STCs’
input. As individuals, we cannot make that change and that influence and we are moving
from job to job and from company to company but encountering the same problems. A
fundamental flaw in our industry is that we do not involve our sub-sub-supply chain with the
8
design team, yet they are held wholly accountable and responsible for the design of that
particular system, including its certification and sign-off. They do not have any input
on programme or room design at contract award. That should change. For example, the
client might ask how much we are spending on the fire alarm. The designers would try to
answer, whereas they should say we only produced the specification for the fire alarm. The
designer in the room should be the sub-supplier of the fire alarm because they are equal to
the architects and the other consultants. Nobody ever invites those experts into any design
meeting. Consequently, we lose so much time and effort.
The sub-subcontract for the generator system on this building is over £7 million. The
contractor not once was invited to a meeting when the designer were trying to design the
generator room on level 57. This should be a specialist task as it is not only 100 tonnes of
generator engine but also we have to lift it up to level 57. Are we going to crane that, or
build it in a different way? We have to rethink the entire generator room because the
designers did not ask the M&E STC how large the generator would be – this is how we think
it should be but what is your design what are your thoughts? Consultants usually are able to
provide a scheme for a generator, after contacting most of the companies that provide
generators for information. If you are dealing with the right people, they would tell you how
they build their system and the designers should make sure that the building is compliant
with that particular system. Because we do not invite the STCs’ design managers and we do
not encourage that, we might not get the right information at the right time. Designers are
good but they can do things differently to save time, money and make things more efficient
and more effective, if they have timely input from the STCs.
We are not pulling our trades and our supply chains fast enough, hard enough and proactive
enough. We are letting them push along under their own steam. They are top of the range
construction professionals in their field but they do not understand the importance of the
strategic programme delivery. All they want to do is earn their money. The other issue is
that our STCs and suppliers are becoming so diverse. In one trade package, we would have
many sub-sub-trades and suppliers. We get a specialist in cable pulling, a connection person,
someone for the busbar, someone to provide lights and plug in and so on. These interfaces
between these organisations are not always managed by the lead STC as effectively as they
should, although they charge money for that. Do these sub-subs provide enough training to
their people? We as the main contractor are not buying the services of the lead STC but in
fact the services of their sub-sub-sub trades and we do not have direct control over these
companies.
Clients now are extending the list of the contractor design portion (CDP) exponentially. The
designers produce simpler parts of the design very well but when they get to the complex
interfaces, they wrap it up under a CDP, leaving so many gaps in the design. The STCs on the
other hand, do not have enough knowledge about the project to deal with these risks when
they are appointed. Then we realise as we move along to the end of our pre-construction
period that we have not appointed those people early enough. The client should be advised
9
to have multi-stage contracts, two or three stages instead of CPD. The bottom line is that, to
be competent as a main contractor you need to engage with all members of your supply
chain and the relationship should be open. Will that allow the client to get the best price?
This will get the client an accurate price but not necessarily the lowest price.
The Mechanical and Electrical STC
Note: This interview was carried out in the same month of the meeting with the electrical package manager.
On the shell and core we are doing the fire alarms, security, ICT, BMS and the electrical
installations. On the CAT A floors, which are typical floors from levels three up to level 56,
we are doing, in addition to the previous installations, the mechanical installations too.
Our package at this project is quite a large package for us. It is over £75 million. There are
not many projects of this size. Not only regarding the body of work but also the financial
aspect of it as well. Consequently, what we did is split the project organisation in line with
our sub-packages. We have teams and project managers for all the different sub-packages.
With the support of one of our director, I have an over-arching role so I would oversee all of
these sub-organisations. It is vital to have the right level of management on a job this size to
be able to finish it.
CAT A floors are going pretty well at the moment. It is the shell & core fit out, that seems to
be struggling slightly and falling behind a little bit. There are various reasons for that but as
we get to the top of the building the programme becomes a lot tighter. We had recently an
internal meeting with all our sub-packages and we did our presentation to our CEO. We
were a little bit concerned with the way the programme is going. We do not have enough
management on the job. Work progress has been slow and we are delayed in the basement,
therefore the basement supervisors, who are supposed to have moved now up to the higher
floors, are still stuck in the basements. The managers of these packages raised their concern
regarding cost and programme overrun. This meeting provided the opportunity for
everyone to state what they need to meet the revised programme date. The meeting was
successful and they took it on board and consequently we have now the people we need to
manage the job. We have now about 40 people managing the work. We also have about five
people in our CAD team on site. The intention is to have all the CADs done on site. If there is
a problem out on site, things like missing information or unclear connection on a drawing
etc, the operatives can come and speak straight to the draftsman, look at the 3D model,
interrogate it there and then and go away and make any changes they need out onsite.
Not a lot of design has been done during PCSA agreement period. A lot of the design was
still outstanding when we signed the contract. During the PCSA period, we knew what the
programme was going to be and we fixed the price of our subs into an end date. We have
now this discussion where the programme has gone out by three months. Now, we are in
negotiations and discussions with our subcontractors to see what additional premiums they
10
may need, etc. We had to put a cost in recently to the D&B contractor. That was not well
received. However, it is a discussion and it needs to be sorted out. They have a meeting for
that today. The programme is extended by three months then we need extra premiums to
go out three months. In addition, we set the labour rates’ increase according to the JIB
(Joint Industry Board) for 2017 and 2018. However, some of the work is now moving to 2019
so we have an increase in labour costs. The delays are not our fault so we are not
responsible for cost increase because of that. My worry is that we might not get half of the
extra money we demanded, but we need to raise this issue anyway. Most of our jobs are
fixed-price, same as on this job. Fixed-price is a big risk. When you look at the cost for the
three months’ delay, it is quite extortionate. It is a big number considering the delay is only
three months. However, when you break it down, it is right. We have additional resources
that require additional supervision. It is that sort of thing that is not always looked upon.
Another big issue now is the design. When we tendered the job, rightly or wrongly, we
priced it and tendered it on one typical floor, which was then replicated up by 56 floors,
typical CAT A floors. We are now finding things are not quite as that. That was our risk. The
design then was not complete. It was done as a stagey design for the shell & core. The
typical floors for the CAT A were just done on one floor. We had to take that design and
then reproduce that on a number of floors and price it accordingly. We were told that there
would be five variations of the typical floor. When we actually had the chance to look into it
with the 3D modelling, because of the steel work and the holes in the beams, etc, it comes
to a lot more than that. Probably about 18 variations of the typical floors. That is 18 more
models that need to be produced.
It all comes at a cost. There is some element of flexibility within our cost. We foresee there
might be some things not right so we put some risk factor and we price for that risk. We do
not always do that because some jobs are not competitive and might be negotiated. On this
project, the electrical part was negotiated with us but the design was not complete, which is
why we are still looking at the higher top of the building. Before we signed the contract,
80% of the design finished during the PCSA but the 20% that was left was probably the
hardest. It took us a lot more time to do the harder stuff than it was to do the repetitive
stuff.
In few instances, we have to redesign some of the engineer’s design. These were not wrong
but because of the programme constraints at the top of the building, we needed to reduce
the installation time. We have looked at prefabricating some of the switch rooms upstairs.
We spent a lot of time and effort producing revised plans, revised models, and once we put
the cost in for this prefabrication it was rejected by the client who was quite happy for the
programme to go out by X number of months, rather than paying that premium on top. No
one now wants to pay for that redesign cost. We spent a lot of time, and people spent a lot
of money on it. It was not necessarily us but our suppliers spent a lot of time and effort
trying to help the project as a whole. That is a discussion that we have to do and we would
like to think they would get something along the way.
11
I did not work with the engineers before. They are quite helpful. If we need to change
anything or we do not see something is quite right, they are quite helpful, they come down,
run through it with us and change it right there on the floor.
Cladding Package Manager
Note: A workshop was carried out during the PCSA period when the structure of the building was still being constructed. The purpose of this workshop was to evaluate the effectiveness of implementing technology clusters on the project. The following is the views of the cladding package manager.
Some of the architects’ and the engineers’ designs, as well as the coordination of the design
are the biggest problem. Additionally, in some meetings not all the right people have the
required skills or authority to contribute effectively to the meeting, which make these
meetings ineffective. Above the level of package managers there is a need for a level of
management that deals with the trade-offs of the commercial issues, the programme, the
cost, the design and coordination between the various systems of the building, ie steel,
concrete, cladding, etc. The problem is with the over-seeing of some issues on a higher level
than the package itself, in order to stop the fire-fighting situations. The role of the design
management team is currently missing or confused when it comes to cladding focused or
steel focused meetings. for example.
Steelwork Package Manager
The following is the views of the steelwork package manager.
Two times a week for an hour in the morning, we go through the site general roles, no
smoking, do not tamper with certain stuff, all we expect as PPE, what the access routes are,
other general site issues. Then we expect that the lads will take forward these and send the
message to their people on site on a more detailed level of what they are doing, ie how the
general roles of the site should be applied to a particular trade.
It is important to appreciate the amount of pride that one should maintain on the job.
Taking pride in workmanship is very crucial. The head people off site are making all the
decisions, but, for example, the people from demolition would never have decent welfare
facilities as they are always first on the door, they always get the dirt. However, once they
are off site, we will have a brand sparkling new canteen, clean welfare facilities etc.
Taking pride of workmanship also will foster an environment when workers will buy in to all
of that we try to induce through the induction session – things like safety practices, the stuff
that we need to do on that day or week, buying into programme, etc. When we do not have
it, you would not get everybody buying into health and safety for example. The workers
would say in this case “look who cares about us anyway”.
There is plenty of support at the higher level but the main problem is with providing the
directions. All the package managers are focused on their little jobs but that take their
12
attention from the bigger picture. A package manager is totally focused on one supply chain
and has several elements to their role, ie design element, production element, logistics side,
etc. The package manager can pick a number of key items to be targeted and it is easy
enough to hit these targets on a daily basis. It is quite easy to keep the balls moving on a
package just by concentrating on the package. What we are lacking is somebody to bring it
all together and to have that over-bridging of everything. Someone who is able to foresee
how various interfaced actions are affecting each other. Someone who is able to tell your
counterpart STC that to design something is actually going to affect the other interfaced
jobs in two year’s time and this is not an easy job. It is our biggest problem.
13