Infrastructure Project Case Study
Context:Assessment 2 builds upon the first assessment and adopts a similar case study approach but focuses on the implementation and decommissioning phases of an integrated infrastructure project. This assessment is designed to enhance your knowledge and analytical skills in the management of the project life cycle with a specific focus on project performance, asset management and sustainability and operational safety and security. This will involve the
consideration of management perspectives in terms of quality, control, risk, leadership and decision-making throughout the life cycle and which are integral to ongoing process improvement and project success. Crucial to this success is the way in which infrastructure systems are managed and, specifically, the need to plan prior to and beyond the decommissioning phase of a project for asset maintenance and sustainability. This inevitably
involves safety and security considerations both from a contracting and user point of view.
This assessment adopts a similar case study approach but focuses on the implementation and decommissioning phases of an integrated infrastructure project. You may use the case study selected for Assessment 1 or an alternative case study which you believe will better address the requirements for examining and analysing the management of the project life cycle, project performance, asset management and sustainability and operational security and safety as specified in this brief. Your analysis and findings from the case study can be structured in four parts as follows:
Part 1: Infrastructure Project Life Cycle,
Part 2: Managing Infrastructure Project Performance,
Part 3: Asset Management and Sustainability, and
Part 4: Infrastructure Project Security and Safety.
Particular attention should be paid to reference material addressing control processes, quality management, risk management, supply chain management and project leadership. As a guide, the case study analysis should address the following requirements:
• Explain the approach project leadership utilised to manage the project. How was quality integrated into the project management function?
• Describe the risks associated with this project and the assessment of these risks. Explain what was done to mitigate/manage these risks throughout the project life cycle.
• Explain how the project leadership managed the supply chains for the project. Were there any difficulties in integrating quality management and control processes into supply chain network?
• Explain if leadership integrated quality into the process and if so, how?
• Describe what tools might have been used in the project’s life cycle to aid in the above tasks.
• Identify opportunities for best practice improvement in the management of the project’s life cycle.
• Were any infrastructure support systems put in place for the project?
You will note a focus on the definition of project performance, the importance of building high performance teams, monitoring and controlling performance risks, monitoring and managing the supply chain of an infrastructure project, and approaches to project procurement. As a guide, the case study analysis should address the following requirements:
• Explain how the project defined project performance
• Explain how the project monitored and controlled the project’s performance risks
• Explain how the project monitors and manages the performance of the supply chain in the project
• Explain if there is a relationship between the approaches to procurement and the infrastructure project’s actual performance
• Did the project utilise an integrated project team that promoted project performance? Is there a link between team building and project performance?
• Do you think there were opportunities for improvement in the management of the project? Describe what improvements you would suggest.Part 3
The emphasis is on asset maintenance and sustainability-based management throughout the complete life cycle from planning to post completion. As a guide, the case study analysis should address the following requirements:
• Explain the commissioning steps for the project
• Explain how project leadership managed the following:
o Contract handover and sign-off
o Infrastructure maintenance issues
o Strategic planning for maintenance
• Explain the techniques the project utilised for maintenance management
• What methods and techniques did the project use for managing the critical infrastructure and the assets from a sustainability perspective? What are the best practice approaches to asset management?
You will note an emphasis on safety and security from different perspectives including facility vulnerability, safety considerations after disaster events, disaster management information system requirements and decision-making tools, contamination/hazard sites and contingency models. As a guide, the case study analysis should address the following requirements:
• What were some of the broader operational issues for the project?
• Were there any strategies in place for dealing with safety and security threats?
• How did the project identify security and safety threats? What methods were used?
• Were there any safety and security issues and, if so, what was the project management response to these issues and how were they managed?
• Do you think the project leadership had the ability and disposition to deal with serious safety and security issues on the project?
• What types of techniques were used for safety and security management?
In considering these requirements, always be mindful of, and reflect on, the findings and the lessons learnt from the case study and how they can be applied in your own personal development and professional career. Highlight any specific instances where your strengths and limitations as a project manager have been identified.
Outcomes to be submitted:
This assessment is broken down into 3 parts to assist student progress through with support.
Part A: Proposed report structure – End of Module 4 – 5%
For Part A, submit a proposed report structure of the case study analysis by the end of Module 4. The report structure should reflect the requirements for the assessment and the way in which the relevant information needs to be organised, evaluated and communicated. The structure should at least go down to the next level under the proposed main headings.
Part B: Draft report – End of Module 5 – 15%
For Part B, submit a draft report which includes an introduction and the section which outlines and addresses the project life cycle by the end of Module 5.
Part C: Final report – End of Module 6 – 30%
For Part C, review the feedback received from Part A and B, complete the final report and submit by the end of Module 6.