Podcasts about project delivery

In this episode Adam reviews the main types of construction project delivery methods. 

Send us a textIn this powerful episode of Project Management Masterclass, host Brittany Wilkins unpacks the rise and fall of the Chill-Can Project in Youngstown, Ohio—a $20 million initiative that promised over 200 jobs, economic revival, and innovation but delivered none of it.This isn't just a case study—it's personal. Born and raised in Youngstown, Brittany shares her firsthand experience of watching hope turn into heartbreak as communities were uprooted, homes were bulldozed, and nothing materialized.Through the lens of project management, she breaks down what went wrong: missing milestones, ignored red flags, poor risk planning, and blind optimism without validation. The episode also examines the chillingly similar case of Zoetic Global—another failed promise in the same city.

BONUS: Tom Gilb on Building True Engineering Culture and Delivering Value Through Evolutionary Methods In this BONUS episode, we dive deep into the world of true engineering discipline with Tom Gilb, a pioneer who was writing about Agile principles before Agile was even named. We explore his latest book "Success - Super Secrets & Strategies for Efficient Value Delivery in Projects and Programs, and Plans" and uncover the fundamental flaws in how organizations approach project delivery and stakeholder management. The Genesis of Success-Focused Engineering "People were failing at project deliveries - even when using Agile. I saw there was very little about setting clear goals and reaching them, it had nothing to do with being successful." Tom's motivation for writing his latest book stems from a critical observation: despite the widespread adoption of Agile methodologies, project failure rates remain unacceptably high. The core issue isn't methodology but rather the fundamental lack of clarity around what success actually means. Tom emphasizes that true success is about achieving the improvements you want at a price you can afford, yet most organizations fail to define this clearly from the outset. In this segment, we refer to the book How Big Things Get Done by Bent Flyvbjerg who published statistics on the poor performance of projects in general. Beyond OKRs: The Power of Quantified Multi-Dimensional Objectives "First you need to have a definition of what it means to succeed. And that needs to be multi-dimensional. And you need to clarify what they are." While many organizations believe they're already quantifying objectives through frameworks like OKRs, Tom reveals significant weaknesses in these approaches. True value isn't just profit—it encompasses multiple dimensions including security, usability, and other stakeholder-specific benefits. The key insight is learning to quantify what needs to be achieved across all critical dimensions, as you simply cannot design for high-quality attributes like security without first quantifying and designing for them explicitly. In this segment, we talk about Tom's paper on OKR's titled "OKR Objectives and Key Results: what's wrong and how to fix it". The Missing Engineering Discipline "Why is the failure rate of our projects so high?" Tom identifies a paradoxical problem: engineering organizations often lack true engineering discipline. This fundamental gap explains why project success rates remain low despite technological advances. Real engineering requires systematic approaches to design, stakeholder analysis, and incremental value delivery—disciplines that are often overlooked in favor of rushed implementations. Stakeholder Analysis: Beyond User Stories "Stakeholders have a requirement - even if we don't know it. They might be people, but also law, contract, policies, etc. They all have requirements for us." Traditional user-centered methods like user stories can lead to failure when critical stakeholders are overlooked. Tom advocates for comprehensive stakeholder analysis as the foundation of engineering discipline. Stakeholders aren't just people—they include laws, contracts, policies, and other constraints that have requirements for your system. The practical tip here is to use AI tools to help identify and list these stakeholders, then quantify their specific requirements using structured approaches like Planguage. The Gilb Cycle: True Incremental Value Delivery "Get things done every week, next week, until it's all done. We need to decompose any possible design into enough increments so that each increment delivers some value." What distinguishes Tom's evolutionary approach from popular Agile frameworks is the focus on choosing the most efficient design and then systematically improving existing systems through measured increments. Each increment must deliver tangible value, and the decomposition process should be aided by AI tools to ensure optimal value delivery. This isn't just about iteration—it's about strategic improvement with measurable outcomes. Building Engineering Culture: A Two-Leader Approach "There are two leaders: the tech leaders and the management leaders. For management leaders: demand a value stream of results starting next week. To the tech leaders: learn the engineering process." Creating a true engineering culture requires coordinated effort from both management and technical leadership. Management leaders should demand immediate value streams with weekly results, while technical leaders must master fundamental engineering processes including stakeholder analysis and requirement quantification. This dual approach ensures both accountability and capability development within the organization. Further Resources During this episode we refer to several of Tom's books and papers. You can see this list below Software Metrics by Tom Gilb Principles of software engineering management - Also available in PDF Evo book   About Tom Gilb Tom Gilb, born in the US, lived in London, and then moved to Norway in 1958. An independent teacher, consultant, and writer, he has worked in software engineering, corporate top management, and large-scale systems engineering. As the saying goes, Tom was writing about Agile, before Agile was named. In 1976, Tom introduced the term "evolutionary" in his book Software Metrics, advocating for development in small, measurable steps. Today, we talk about Evo, the name that Tom used to describe his approach. You can link with Tom Gilb on LinkedIn.

Send us a textIs the customer always right? Only if you measure success through their eyes.In this episode of Project Management Masterclass, Brittany Wilkins shares the lightbulb moment from a company town hall that redefined how she leads projects—and why the secret to lasting impact isn't just hitting deadlines or budgets, but embracing a customer-centric mindset.Whether you're serving internal teams or external clients, Brittany breaks down how true project excellence starts by putting the customer at the center of every decision. Discover why customer centricity isn't just a buzzword—it's a leadership mindset that transforms priorities, builds empathy, and drives real value.From stakeholder engagement to iterative feedback loops, she offers practical ways to reframe your project approach and lead with intentionality.

In today's podcast we focus on the global infrastructure market and find out what the UK might do to accelerate its ambitions to drive economic growth from infrastructure investment.My guest today is Jake Mumm, General Manager for Public Infrastructure at global construction design and delivery business Bechtel - someone who has spent the last three decades at the coal face of some of the most challenging projects around the world.As Jake knows I'm sure, Governments worldwide face mounting infrastructure challenges as populations grow, urbanisation accelerates, and climate change intensifies. Ageing transport networks, outdated water systems, and insufficient digital infrastructure hinder economic growth and quality of life. And pretty much all of them have similar challenges - funding shortfalls, bureaucratic delays, and political uncertainty – which too often delay or cancel critical projects. Yet the need for resilient, sustainable solutions is greater than ever, with extreme weather events exposing vulnerabilities in existing infrastructure. As such, the transition to smart cities, green energy, and efficient public transport is high on the agenda and requires strategic investment, cross-sector collaboration, and innovative financing models.Addressing these challenges is crucial to ensuring that infrastructure that meets society's evolving needs. And so often it falls to businesses like Bechtel to steer a path to success.So let's find out how.Resources Jake Mumm Linked InBechtel InfrastructureRiyadh MetroElizabeth Line LondonCalifornia High Speed Rail

Rooftop solar leases are gaining traction as a way for commercial property owners to generate passive income while utilizing unused roof space. With falling solar costs, rising electricity prices, and new state programs driving demand—particularly in the industrial sector—these long-term agreements can provide a steady revenue stream with no upfront costs, making them an attractive opportunity for property owners. However, correctly navigating lease structures, development timelines, and maintenance responsibilities is essential to avoiding pitfalls. In this episode, Josh Newell, senior vice president of Project Delivery at SolarKal, joins Chris Palmese, partner in Seyfarth's Real Estate department, to break down the key factors property owners need to consider before moving forward with a rooftop solar lease. Read the full transcript of today's episode here: https://www.seyfarth.com/dir_docs/podcast_transcripts/ThePropertyLine_SolarRooftopLeases.pdf

In this episode of Platform Chats, host Walt Bleser sits down with Amanda Ciampolillo, Deputy Director of the Office of Environmental Program Management, and Karla Maffett, Deputy Director of Project Delivery, from the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). Together, they discuss the FRA's mission to enhance rail safety and efficiency through strategic partnerships and impactful investments. Amanda and Karla explore the FRA's grant programs, sharing valuable tips for securing funding, with a focus on the Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI) Program, which has significantly boosted rail funding. Both guests also share their unique career paths to the FRA, showing that success often comes from unexpected journeys. Fun fact: Amanda loves trains so much that a long-distance Amtrak ride smells like adventure!

Episode 148 with Emeka Obiwulu, Founder & CEO of The Offshore Lab (TOL). With over two decades of global experience in engineering and project delivery, Emeka has led impactful projects across continents, emphasising sustainable, community-driven solutions that prioritise local engagement and long-term growth. At The Offshore Lab, Emeka focuses on harnessing technology to empower communities, foster innovation, and unlock local potential.The Offshore Lab offers integrated services in project delivery, consulting, and capacity building, specialising in sustainable innovation for both onshore and offshore operations. Emeka shares insights from leading major projects, like the Wing-E redesign at Murtala Muhammed International Airport, and impactful community initiatives such as The Badamia Home ICT Junior Lab.What We Discuss With EmekaExploring the philosophy behind The Offshore Lab's commitment to moving beyond "short-termism" in African project deliveryHow can investing in technology infrastructure become a catalyst for economic growth across AfricaHow does The Offshore Lab ensure that its infrastructure projects deliver lasting social and economic value to the communities they serve? What methods does TOL employ to actively involve local talent and communities in project delivery, ensuring they benefit directly from each initiative?Why is a maintenance culture often lacking in African projects, and what steps can be taken to foster a stronger commitment to ongoing upkeep and sustainability?Did you miss my previous episode where I discuss Policy, Growth, and Advancing Implementation of the AfCFTA Protocol on Digital Trade in Nigeria with Prachi Agarwal and Alberto Lemma? Make sure to check it out!Like this show? Please leave us a review here -- even one sentence helps!Connect with Terser on LinkedIn at Terser Adamu, and Twitter (X) @TerserAdamuConnect with Emeka on LinkedIn at Emeka Obiwulu, and Twitter (X) @theoffshorelabDo you want to do business in Africa? Explore the vast business opportunities in African markets and increase your success with ETK Group. Connect with us at www.etkgroup.co.uk or reach out via email at info@etkgroup.co.uk

In this episode of the Construction Leaders Podcast, hosts Nick Soto and Carly Trout from CMAA sit down with Tammy McConaughy, Director of Education & Certification for the Lean Construction Institute; Katie Wells, Vice President of Project Delivery with Brasfield & Gorrie, LLC; Christopher Vine, Project Superintendent with Hensel Phelps; and John Zachara Integrated Facilities Solutions and Leader Emeritus with LCI's Chicago Community of Practice (CoP), to discuss lean construction, emphasizing its principles of continuous improvement and collaboration. They discuss the benefits of lean constudction, such as higher efficiency, better quality, and improved project outcomes. They highlight the importance of breaking down industry silos, fostering a positive culture, and valuing team input. Challenges include resistance to change and the need for trust.   The Construction Leaders Podcast is produced by Association Briefings.

In this episode of the Data Center Frontier Show, Matt Vincent, Editor in Chief of Data Center Frontier, is joined by Waleed Zafar, Mission Critical Director at XYZ Reality to discuss using augmented reality to improve Data Center project delivery. XYZ Reality is a leading developer of augmented reality (AR) solutions for construction that give contractors and owners an accurate and objective way to manage and deliver quality projects.

August 2, 2024 ~ Bob Riney, President and CEO of Henry Ford Health, Steve Lorenzo, Vice President of Project Delivery at Barton Malow and Nerissa Morris, Cheif People and Culture and External Relations Officer join Paul live from the Barton Malow 100th Anniverasy Celebration.

Srikrishnan Ganesan “In the professional services business, time is literally money,” says Srikrishnan Ganesan is the Co-founder and CEO of Rocketlane. “That's what you're selling. A typical use case is you need an approval from a client before you do the work you're meant to do and you're waiting on the client. Now, you reminded them today. Do you remind them again tomorrow? Does it get too pushy? These are decisions that individuals make and that's subject to their interpretation of how intense they should be in that engagement. When you take that control away from a person and make it more system driven, where you can set the expectations early on saying, hey, here's how we operate, here's how intense our engagement will be. And that's going to help all of us hold each other accountable and finish the project on time, on budget. I think everyone is better off and that's what an automated system is going help you accomplish.” In this podcast we look at the challenges organizations face in adopting AI for project management and underscores the essential role of AI-driven Professional Services Automation (PSA) software in revolutionizing project delivery and client collaboration. It emphasizes the significant losses due to inadequate project management and the lack of real-time data access for project managers. Rocketlane, a leader in customer onboarding and PSA, addresses these challenges by integrating advanced AI technologies into its platform to streamline resource management, communication, and compliance, thereby enhancing project success rates and efficiency. Co-founder and CEO Srikrishnan Ganesan asserts that Rocketlane's AI-powered solutions are transforming project management by integrating AI and balancing it with human expertise for project scoping, scheduling, and task management, automated time tracking, resource allocation, project accounting, enhancing client engagement, and enabling real-time collaboration and communication tools for seamless client interaction. Rocketlane leverages AI for risk assessment, automated compliance checks, and real-time monitoring of project health indicators to ensure regulatory adherence while enabling intuitive data querying, real-time analytics, customizable dashboards, and AI-powered trend analysis for informed decision-making. https://www.rocketlane.com/

Michael McHale is the President, CEO, and VP of Operations at Production Systems Automation. With over 20 years of experience in developing, commercializing, constructing, and operating commercial and industrial projects, he brings extensive expertise to his roles. Michael's career spans various significant positions, including Lead Project Engineer at Parsons Chemical and Energy, MEP Coordinator at L.F. Driscoll, Vice President at Tishman Construction, VP of Project Delivery at BlackGold Biofuels, and COO roles at Carolinas Resource Recovery, Lantern Environmental, LLC, and Bay Environmental Services, LLC. Michael holds a Bachelor's degree in Mechanical Engineering from Drexel University. Production Systems Automation Inc. (PSA) is a privately owned engineering and custom manufacturing firm founded in 1985, with three locations in Pennsylvania. As a turnkey systems integrator, PSA offers flexible robotic solutions, custom automated machinery, drives and controls, and custom PLC projects. They also provide standard products for specific industries and have expanded their services to include engineering, fabrication, and field service for robotics. Representing top global robotic OEMs like ABB and Fanuc, PSA is staffed with skilled engineers, designers, welders, machinists, and technicians. Their culture emphasizes acceptance, advanced technologies, customer focus, and community stewardship. Meet Production Systems Automation, Inc: https://psasystems.com/ Watch the Full Interview: https://youtu.be/ePTtPF0GE94 Unlock career success with "Riderflex Guide 2.0: Mastering Job Interviews." Over 30 years of Unlocking your potential with our two essential books: "Riderflex Guide: Inspiring & Hiring" and "Riderflex Guide 2.0: Mastering Job Interviews." With over 30 years of expertise, these guides are perfect for both graduates and professionals.

In this episode, I talk with Karen Ditz, PMP, commercial manager, and Phil Tunnah, P.E., operations director, from Stanley Consultants about the importance of consistent project delivery and adapting program management strategies to meet various client needs. ***The video version of this episode can be viewed here.*** Engineering Quotes: Here Are Some of the Questions […] The post TEPM 045: Mastering The Skill Of Secure and Consistent Project Delivery appeared first on Engineering Management Institute.

In this episode we dive into using Augmented Reality on a delayed project with ⁠Eoin Manning⁠ VP of Project Delivery from ⁠XYZ Reality⁠. The Challenge A major construction project you are working on experiences a six-week delay. As a Senior Scheduler, you have many ideas for pulling that delay in. How do you save the project? How do you use this to advocate for programmatic changes? Continue Learning Subscribe to the ⁠Beyond Deadlines Email Newsletter⁠ Subscribe to the ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Beyond Deadlines⁠⁠⁠⁠ Linkedin Newsletter⁠ ⁠⁠⁠Check Out Our YouTube Channel⁠⁠⁠. Connect Follow ⁠⁠⁠⁠Micah⁠⁠⁠,⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠Greg⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠Beyond Deadlines⁠⁠⁠ on LinkedIn. Beyond Deadline It's time to raise your career to new heights with ⁠Beyond Deadlines⁠, the ultimate destination for construction planners and schedulers. Our podcast is designed to be your go-to guide whether you're starting out in this dynamic field, transitioning from another sector, or you're a seasoned professional. Through our cutting-edge content, practical advice, and innovative tools, we help you succeed in today's fast-evolving construction planning and scheduling landscape without relying on expensive certifications and traditional educational paths. Join us on ⁠Beyond Deadlines⁠, where we empower you to shape the future of construction planning and scheduling, making it more efficient, effective, and accessible than ever before. About Micah Micah, an ⁠Intel⁠ project leader and ⁠Google⁠ alumnus, champions next-gen planning and scheduling at both tech giants. Co-founder of Google's ⁠Computer Vision⁠ in Construction Team, he's saved projects millions via tech advancements. He writes two construction planning and scheduling newsletters and mentors the next generation of construction planners. He holds a ⁠Master of Science⁠ in ⁠Project Management⁠, ⁠Saint Mary's University of Minnesota⁠. About Greg Greg, an ⁠Astrophysicist⁠ turned project guru, managed £100M+ defense programs at ⁠BAE Systems⁠ (UK) and advised on international strategy. Now CEO at ⁠⁠⁠Nodes and Links⁠⁠⁠, he's revolutionizing projects with pioneering AI ⁠Project Controls⁠ in Construction. Experience groundbreaking strategies with Greg's expertise. Topics We Cover change management, communication, construction planning, ⁠construction⁠, ⁠construction⁠ scheduling, creating teams, critical path method, cpm, culture, KPI, ⁠microsoft project⁠, milestone tracking, oracle, p6, project ⁠planning⁠, planning, planning engineer, pmp, portfolio management, predictability, presenting, ⁠primavera p6⁠, project acceleration, project budgeting, project controls, project management, project planning, program management, resource allocation, ⁠risk management⁠, schedule acceleration, scheduling, scope management, task sequencing, construction, construction reporting. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/beyonddeadlines/support

In this episode we dive into Earned Value Management (EVM) with Eoin Manning VP of Project Delivery from XYZ Reality. The Challenge You've took a new job and you are the director of scheduling for a large general contractor who wants to implement earned value management. How do you go about doing it? Continue Learning Subscribe to the Beyond Deadlines Email Newsletter Subscribe to the ⁠⁠⁠⁠Beyond Deadlines⁠⁠⁠⁠ Linkedin Newsletter ⁠⁠Check Out Our YouTube Channel⁠⁠. Connect Follow ⁠⁠⁠Micah⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠Greg⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠Beyond Deadlines⁠⁠ on LinkedIn. Beyond Deadline It's time to raise your career to new heights with Beyond Deadlines, the ultimate destination for construction planners and schedulers. Our podcast is designed to be your go-to guide whether you're starting out in this dynamic field, transitioning from another sector, or you're a seasoned professional. Through our cutting-edge content, practical advice, and innovative tools, we help you succeed in today's fast-evolving construction planning and scheduling landscape without relying on expensive certifications and traditional educational paths. Join us on Beyond Deadlines, where we empower you to shape the future of construction planning and scheduling, making it more efficient, effective, and accessible than ever before. About Micah Micah, an Intel project leader and Google alumnus, champions next-gen planning and scheduling at both tech giants. Co-founder of Google's Computer Vision in Construction Team, he's saved projects millions via tech advancements. He writes two construction planning and scheduling newsletters and mentors the next generation of construction planners. He holds a Master of Science in Project Management, Saint Mary's University of Minnesota. About Greg Greg, an Astrophysicist turned project guru, managed £100M+ defense programs at BAE Systems (UK) and advised on international strategy. Now CEO at ⁠⁠Nodes and Links⁠⁠, he's revolutionizing projects with pioneering AI Project Controls in Construction. Experience groundbreaking strategies with Greg's expertise. Topics We Cover change management, communication, construction planning, construction, construction scheduling, creating teams, critical path method, cpm, culture, KPI, microsoft project, milestone tracking, oracle, p6, project planning, planning, planning engineer, pmp, portfolio management, predictability, presenting, primavera p6, project acceleration, project budgeting, project controls, project management, project planning, program management, resource allocation, risk management, schedule acceleration, scheduling, scope management, task sequencing, construction, construction reporting. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/beyonddeadlines/support

In this episode we dive into accelerating Data Center construction. The Challenge You are a Senior Scheduler for a hyper scale data center company. You have a bunch of great ideas about how to accelerate the projects at a company level. How do you focus and make sure your ideas are executed? Continue Learning How to Get Anything Approved (Presentation Templates) Subscribe to the Beyond Deadlines Email Newsletter Subscribe to the ⁠⁠⁠⁠Beyond Deadlines⁠⁠⁠⁠ Linkedin Newsletter ⁠⁠Check Out Our YouTube Channel⁠⁠. Connect Follow ⁠⁠⁠Micah⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠Greg⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠Beyond Deadlines⁠⁠ on LinkedIn. Beyond Deadline It's time to raise your career to new heights with Beyond Deadlines, the ultimate destination for construction planners and schedulers. Our podcast is designed to be your go-to guide whether you're starting out in this dynamic field, transitioning from another sector, or you're a seasoned professional. Through our cutting-edge content, practical advice, and innovative tools, we help you succeed in today's fast-evolving construction planning and scheduling landscape without relying on expensive certifications and traditional educational paths. Join us on Beyond Deadlines, where we empower you to shape the future of construction planning and scheduling, making it more efficient, effective, and accessible than ever before. About Micah Micah, an Intel project leader and Google alumnus, champions next-gen planning and scheduling at both tech giants. Co-founder of Google's Computer Vision in Construction Team, he's saved projects millions via tech advancements. He writes two construction planning and scheduling newsletters and mentors the next generation of construction planners. He holds a Master of Science in Project Management, Saint Mary's University of Minnesota. About Greg Greg, an Astrophysicist turned project guru, managed £100M+ defense programs at BAE Systems (UK) and advised on international strategy. Now CEO at ⁠⁠Nodes and Links⁠⁠, he's revolutionizing projects with pioneering AI Project Controls in Construction. Experience groundbreaking strategies with Greg's expertise. Topics We Cover change management, communication, construction planning, construction, construction scheduling, creating teams, critical path method, cpm, culture, KPI, microsoft project, milestone tracking, oracle, p6, project planning, planning, planning engineer, pmp, portfolio management, predictability, presenting, primavera p6, project acceleration, project budgeting, project controls, project management, project planning, program management, resource allocation, risk management, schedule acceleration, scheduling, scope management, task sequencing, construction, construction reporting. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/beyonddeadlines/support

In this infrastructure industry podcast, Josh Gray, Vice President of Consor Engineering in South Carolina and industry thought leader Adam Dawidowicz share some of the underrated and unexpected benefits they experience from using digital project delivery solutions, including how tech helps attract young talent, managing complex funding structures, and using construction administration tools to evaluate bids against the engineer's estimate. Are you getting the most out of your digital project delivery efforts? Listen to find out. Learn more about Infotech: https://www.infotechinc.com/

In this episode we dive into UK's AI Project Delivery Report, Data Center Investment Surge, The Value of Certifications. Continue Learning Subscribe to the Beyond Deadlines Email Newsletter Subscribe to the ⁠⁠⁠⁠Beyond Deadlines⁠⁠⁠⁠ Linkedin Newsletter ⁠⁠Check Out Our YouTube Channel⁠⁠. Connect Follow ⁠⁠⁠Micah⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠Greg⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠Beyond Deadlines⁠⁠ on LinkedIn. Beyond Deadline It's time to raise your career to new heights with Beyond Deadlines, the ultimate destination for construction planners and schedulers. Our podcast is designed to be your go-to guide whether you're starting out in this dynamic field, transitioning from another sector, or you're a seasoned professional. Through our cutting-edge content, practical advice, and innovative tools, we help you succeed in today's fast-evolving construction planning and scheduling landscape without relying on expensive certifications and traditional educational paths. Join us on Beyond Deadlines, where we empower you to shape the future of construction planning and scheduling, making it more efficient, effective, and accessible than ever before. About Micah Micah, an Intel project leader and Google alumnus, champions next-gen planning and scheduling at both tech giants. Co-founder of Google's Computer Vision in Construction Team, he's saved projects millions via tech advancements. He writes two construction planning and scheduling newsletters and mentors the next generation of construction planners. He holds a Master of Science in Project Management, Saint Mary's University of Minnesota. About Greg Greg, an Astrophysicist turned project guru, managed £100M+ defense programs at BAE Systems (UK) and advised on international strategy. Now CEO at ⁠⁠Nodes and Links⁠⁠, he's revolutionizing projects with pioneering AI Project Controls in Construction. Experience groundbreaking strategies with Greg's expertise. Topics We Cover change management, communication, construction planning, construction, construction scheduling, creating teams, critical path method, cpm, culture, KPI, microsoft project, milestone tracking, oracle, p6, project planning, planning, planning engineer, pmp, portfolio management, predictability, presenting, primavera p6, project acceleration, project budgeting, project controls, project management, project planning, program management, resource allocation, risk management, schedule acceleration, scheduling, scope management, task sequencing, construction, construction reporting. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/beyonddeadlines/support

In this episode of Navigating Major Programmes, Riccardo Cosentino sits down with Sherena Hussain, lawyer, global thought leader in infrastructure and advisor to new partnership and sustainable finance models, to tackle the complex question: is private capital successful in major programmes?   “The research and the industry and the research is beginning to align in the sense that we need to begin to do things differently. Now is the time to start to challenge the paradigm and do better.” – Sherena Hussain   Key Takeaways:The role private capital in infrastructure major programmes  The overlaying correlation and causation of politics in private capital  The biases of private practitioners in determining the use of private capital  Delivery models, risk transfer and the tools for successful major programmes  Systems approach to complexity  The collective responsibility and impact of stakeholder managementSherena Hussain's Published WorkRethinking the role of private capital in infrastructure PPPs: the experience of Ontario, CanadaExploring the Success of Social Infrastructure Public Private Partnerships: The Complex Case of Bridgepoint Active Healthcare in Ontario, CanadaIf you enjoyed this episode, make sure and give us a five star rating and leave us a review on iTunes, Podcast Addict, Podchaser or Castbox. The conversation doesn't stop here—connect and converse with our LinkedIn community: Connect with Sherena Hussain on LinkedinFollow Navigating Major Programmes on LinkedInFollow Riccardo Cosentino on LinkedInRead Riccardo's latest at wwww.riccardocosentino.com Transcript:Riccardo Cosentino  0:05  You're listening to Navigating Major Programmes, a podcast that aims to elevate the conversations happening in the infrastructure industry and inspire you to have a more efficient approach within it. I'm your host, Riccardo Cosentino. I bring over 20 years of Major Programme Management experience. Most recently, I graduated from Oxford University Saïd Business School, which shook my belief when it comes to navigating major programmes. Now it's time to shake yours. Join me in each episode as I press the industry experts about the complexity of Major Programme Management, emerging digital trends and the critical leadership required to approach these multibillion-dollar projects. Let's see where the conversation takes us.  Riccardo Cosentino  0:53  Hello, everyone. Welcome to a new episode of Navigating Major Programmes. I'm here today with Sherena Hussain. How are you doing, Sherena? Sherena Hussain  1:01  I'm doing well. Thanks. How are you? Riccardo Cosentino  1:04  I'm very good. I'm very good. I'm so glad we're on this podcast together. Thank you for agreeing to join me. I've known you for a long time. But maybe for the guests that may not have seen you on CBC or seen your work on LinkedIn, can you introduce yourself briefly? Sherena Hussain  1:21  Oh, wonderful. Well, thank you for that. Well, my name, as you mentioned, is Shereena. Hussein. I'm a lawyer as well as an academic. In addition to being in the infrastructure space for many years, it's so interesting that Riccardo, you and I, we go back, way back, to the Infrastructure Ontario days where I was a summer associate and I was able to work alongside some of your teams. And since then, my career has taken me in different directions. Practicing as a lawyer at McCarthy Tétrault moving into academia, including affiliations with the Schulich School of Business, and also dovetailing into a variety of different international work, including affiliations with the G7 and the G20, trying to pair private capital to sustainable infrastructure projects all around the world. And now more specifically, trying to connect different types of research to actual problems that we have in the infrastructure community, more specifically, how do we make those projects bankable but also sustainable economically as well as environmentally speaking? Riccardo Cosentino  2:26  Okay, very interesting. So you, obviously, our path connected in the past and having this still do because I'm also still involved with private capital. I work for AtkinsRéalis doing investments into infrastructure. I have not been able to attend your courses at Schulich. But I certainly have seen them or your affiliation with the university. I mean, today, we want to talk about, obviously, private capital, but we want to also talk about major programming in general, and the challenges that major programme bring in terms of on-time delivery, on-budget delivery, and the complexity of major programmes and the multitude of stakeholders that they involve. So it's a very, very complex ecosystem. And I think I would just want to explore with you what you've picked up over the years in terms of what is the function of private capital and how can private capital at times help and at times doesn't help major programmes? Sherena Hussain  3:34  Yes, and first and foremost, I'm so happy that you're having this podcast series, because often we don't talk about this enough, and really being able to step back, see how well we're doing as an industry, but also, where are the rules or the ways that we can otherwise find solutions? How do we improve or at least create a dialogue around that? And with my research, and it's actually in fact, one of the reasons why I ended up doing a dovetail into academia, was really coming to the reflection point of whether or not we can do things better. And you know, as well as I do, and most of your listeners know that there has been a considerable amount of challenges that are almost endemic to major projects and the idea that items are over budget, they're never on time and then there's fallacies on how we plan and how we execute. And you can just look for the headlines from time to time, in which case, we always end up scratching our head and asking ourself, how did this happen? And that was one of the major questions that led me to move into academia and also conduct research with a bit of a slant towards private capital, but less so from a pure financial perspective, but rather looking at the role of private capital at the intersection of law, risk, as well as how that infuses some of the planning processes. So that intersectionality is quite challenging to wrap your head around, let alone do research. What I found really telling is that in the process, being able to step away from just each project stage and each project clause or project agreement, which as a lawyer, you can appreciate that's something that matters very much to what we do. But being able to step back and look at, well, how do these items interact with one another? In the context of say, are these projects able to attract private capital? What influence does this have on how the parties behave over the duration of long-term project agreements, some instance upwards of 30 years? How does that then influence the different stakeholders outside of the agreements? And then how then does different decision-makers reflect upon that whether at the front end and when they're coming out with some of the projected benefits, but also, as they try to communicate what went well, and try to then encourage other jurisdictions to follow suit. And it's that latter piece, which some of my research has gained a lot of traction, because looking at, say, Canada, we are regarded around the world, as some of the leaders when it comes to preparing infrastructure projects using different delivery models. I know some of your listeners might not recognize that. But as someone who then goes around the world, and interacts with say, senior government officials that are looking to bring on board different types of sustainable infrastructure, they always ask, what is Canada doing? How can we learn from Canada? What are some of your practitioners' best practices? And how then do we follow suit? So when you put that into the context of things like private law, risk, and all the different, the contextual features that come into play with how we put in place major projects, we're not just making a decision as a one-off, we are influencing effectively global infrastructure. And that's where some of the research on private capital is anyways, both fascinating, but also daunting because it does have a ripple effect in terms of how practitioners may then take them into account, and then replicate that in other places around the world. Riccardo Cosentino  7:21  Wow, there's so much to unpack in that. Certainly, yeah, the role of private capital. And I think we, what we're seeing right now in Canada, and what we're seeing in the UK, is how the role of private capital has started to shift in certain type of infrastructure. Again, I don't want to overgeneralize, because, you know, there's a lot of places where a lot of assets where private capital is still using is still the domino form of financing. But in more traditional public infrastructure, we've seen a bit of a decline in the use of that type of capital, as a tool of achieving outcomes, because I think that that's important, I think it's important to define that in Canada, the use of private capital was with the purpose of creating different incentives and creating different outcomes for major projects, rather than using private capitals, as a source or as a gap filler for project funding or project financing. So I actually would like to ask you, what's your view in terms of how effective is private capital being, it's a loaded question, but how effective is private capital being in achieving different or I would say, better outcomes for project delivery or major projects in general?   Sherena Hussain  8:55  That is a loaded question. I'll try to address this from the perspective of both research but also practice considering that I really have a foot in both worlds. Let me step back and understand well, what are the motivations to then introduce private capital? In many ways, those are your benchmarkers for success in terms of did it achieve that or did it not? And when we stop and think about the theory behind the use of private capital in mega projects, many of the key items include things like is it a way to then align incentives between different parties? Is it an opportunity and then to incentivize certain behavior so that you achieve value for money in terms of how best different parties are able to manage risk, as an example, or some of the the windfall profits can then be better managed by virtue of using private capital. You have the benefit of leverage to then induce different types of returns to then bring different forms of maybe longer-term private capital providers to the table which otherwise may have not been available. And then again, can you align the incentives with what the public sector also wants to achieve? One of the key challenges, though, that exists with just that theoretical approach to then benchmark, how well does private capital work or does not work is that just so much more (inaudible) with or without private capital. And this, you move beyond the theory, and then you look at, say, the process to then create a market that then entices private capital. The processes involved in terms of structuring different tender documents, getting some degree of negotiation, and also making your way through the process of financial close and then when the real fun begins, when the capital comes into different projects, that's when you see things like leadership and personalities come into the conversation. We also see the role of which different capital markets come into play. And inevitably, there's a political climate that, for the most, part does overlay whether or not private capital is available, but also how well it's priced and if that price outweighs some of the benefits that come with private capital. We're now entering a period in which case interest rates are much higher than they have been in at least the past six to seven years. That, in and of itself, introduces a different paradigm for just private capital and a cost-benefit analysis that might come into play. But also in that period, at least here in Canada, we're also seeing a morph in terms of what kind of delivery models have we introduced and how much private capital have they also been deployed. And that makes it somewhat difficult to then apply, say, our theoretical approaches for whether private capital is successful or not because there have been things outside of that traditional analysis that have occurred as well. So from a research perspective, it's difficult to say causation versus correlation. But what it ultimately means from, say, a decision maker's perspective is, well, if private capital was successful five years ago in a specific industry, does it mean I can replicate the exact same set of circumstances for another industry today? And the short answer is no, you have to then reevaluate, is it the right solution? And if it is, how much private capital? Which source? At what period of time? And all these different variables to then being able to then achieve some of those benefits like, are we aligning incentives over the long haul? Who takes on some of the most problematic risks that comes into play? And I will say that, Riccardo, is one in which we're entering a new frontier when we start to think about the role of private capital of mega projects, because not only has the ecosystem changed, but also much of the research is catching up to now being able to pull some holes in those assumptions. And the practitioner community is even recognizing that yes, we need to stop and think about is this the right set of contexts or circumstances for us to determine is it the right use? Is it not? And then be able to benchmark after the fact of whether it's successful or not. Riccardo Cosentino  13:18  Again, a lot to unpack. As you said, it was a loaded question, I think you answered it beautifully. For certain, the landscape has changed. And I like how you refer to practitioners. And so, by the way, for the non-academic listeners, we, I am a practitioner, as people in the industry are the practitioners. And so we have our own views. And I have to say that, without taking away much from practitioner, I do believe that the practitioner view's a little biased. So relying, of course, a practitioner will, a private sector practitioner will always push for private capital, and get that generates a return on the capital that is deployed. And so I think relying on practitioner to provide views on the use of private capital is a little biased but I think it's a necessary point of view. I think you touched upon the ability to assess the outcomes of these mega projects and the influence of private capital or public capital to the mega projects. However, I think it can be challenging because the horizons are very long and the datasets are limited when you have such horizons, right? When you have a project that could last five, seven, 10 years, you might actually not know the outcome of that project, probably couple of years after the contraction has been completed. And that could be 12 years from now. So it's really difficult to have, to assess the benefits of the impact that certain decision, like the decision of using private capital, can have on the outcomes. And that's why I touched upon the bias because obviously if you, if the people making the assessment are biased and you have incomplete data and long span horizons, the verdict, so to speak, might be highly biased and geared towards certain preferences of the industry or the person that is making that assessment. But nevertheless, it's important that we do assess, and we do try to understand, what private capital can do, or other tools in the toolbox, for that matter, that are used to tackle the challenges of major programmes, right? Major programmes are very complex, they have a history, if you're starting a major programme, you should know that you probably going to be late and over budget. And if you think that your major programme is not going to do that, then you probably don't understand major programmes because the history, the data is out there. Having Professor Filberg is, I can't remember the stat but probably 90% of major programmes are late and over budget. So in any case, major programmes are complex. And we need the tools to deal with this complexity. And so private capital is one of the tools but in your mind are their other tools and is the choice of tools, an important choice? And if I can add one more element, is the choice of tools fixed or the tools actually change along the lifecycle of a major project?   Sherena Hussain  16:54  This is an excellent question. And I like to use the analogy of tools in a toolbox, but also whether or not it's an individual who's picking up that tool? Do they know what to pick up at any given time? And for what project are they trying to use this tool for? So think of, say a home renovation, in which case, today, you might use a variety of different tools, supplies for a particular problem. But think about, say three years from now. And you might have to reconsider, oh, do I need to replace? Do I need three player? Which tool from the toolbox do I need now? If we use that and then apply that sort of question-answering queue to then major projects, then we have to think about at what point are we thinking about the problem? Are we thinking in terms of, say, delivery models? And often that's where we get the analogy of tool in a toolbox? Are we thinking of one form of risk transfer versus another? And this is where we often gravitate towards and say, well, this type of a public-private partnership or alliancing model, this is one tool from our toolbox. That's a very simplistic approach. Because yes, we ask that question. But we also have to ask ourselves, who's in fact using these tools? Do we have the institutional capabilities in order to then be able to leverage these tools in order to achieve an outcome? Go one step further, are we actually addressing the right project at any given time? Do we have to up-scope or descope it? And if we start thinking about that perspective or going beyond just a micro project approach, which is typically how much of the private capital research is focused on, it really goes down to a project level or a subset of different portfolio data. But once we try to introduce it into an institutional context, that's when we see a variety of different theories that ultimately can gravitate towards things like the systems in which case private capital then operates in. And that's why I think there are different solutions that are available that thinks about, well, it's not just what's in the toolbox. But there are also solutions such as how do we upskill? Or what capacity are we building? What about, say, things like critical thinking skills and problem definitions? That's another tool which, there are different intellectual models that exist and we can train and teach for that we can conduct research in that, that also then has an impact on the use and or success of different types of private capital. And I can give you an example of how I'm currently grappling with this from a research but also in terms of application and by the way, this particular public-private partnership agency wants to then attract private capital to do so. In that process, we're looking at okay, which delivery model works, let's prepare the project. And we can go through a lot of those more micro-level analyses. But what is critical is the fact that private capital may or may not be attracted to that and particularly at the right risk-return profile. And that's when you step up and start looking at the norms, the processes, the people, the broader institutional ecosystem that comes into play, that all has to work together. So much so that the term private capital, which might be politically advantageous in those markets are not really used much anymore. It's called blended capital, how well can you de-risk private capital to then bring them into a market, so you have a balance between public capital, and private capital and different types as well like the nonprofit sector? And that's where we're seeing an inflection point in how, not only the research but the practitioner community in certain regions where private capital is just not available, is trying to evolve in order to address, can we get some of the benefits, but also knowing that some markets just do not exist today. Riccardo Cosentino  20:56  Yeah, I like how you describe major projects, and you look at all of the facets, the delivery model, that type of contract used is one facet. But you know, I think we study, we study major projects, as temporary organizations and being an organization, you need to consider multiple facets, you need to consider, as you said, exactly what you said is the people, the processes, the culture that gets to sits in the middle, how these people compensated, what kind of bureaucracy do you have, and all of these should exist in a harmony that allows the system, so the major programme, to deliver the appropriate outcomes. And yeah, there are situations where certain tools will work and other tools won't and vice versa. So, alignment, as you said, the private capital is very good at aligning incentives and providing risk transfer. But, you know, does that really apply to every single project? I mean, I can think of one industry that never really used private capital to its full extent, which is the nuclear industry there's no way you can find privately financed nuclear power plant because of because of the risk. So you really need to understand I think, my law professor, during my master said, what problem are you trying to solve? And then from that, once you've established the problem you're trying to solve, you find the right contract to help you solve that problem, right? If the problem is I want to transfer the most amount of risk, then you've got to find a contract like a PPP or like a project finance solution where you're transferring the majority of the contract, but that comes with cost, as you pointed out, or the private capital might not be available so the risk transfer might not be, might not be the right mechanism for that particular project. So, I think we've been conditioned over the last few years, over the last 10 years, that there is our delivery model that will accomplish the best outcomes. But I think that's very reductionist because you really need to look at the system that you're dealing with and that is much more multifaceted than just, oh, this contract versus that contract.   Sherena Hussain  23:22  Absolutely. And when you start to explore that, you also then have the opportunity to then look at systems solutions to system challenges. And from one end, to be able to have that conversation is quite challenging, because some would say, well, that's just outside my zone of influence, or that's outside my industry, or you just have to wait for something to happen but we need this built today. That elements of not so much public, or public or political considerations, but also more broadly about the role in which organizations and different disciplines can then interact with one another is also something to be challenged. We often think about, well, one company only does X, they rely upon a consortium to come together and provide a solution, say in major programmes. So to be able to then offer a system space solution, then a similar sort of coming together of disciplines looking at some of the solutions they have, what are the problem they have to solve knowing that it isn't going to be a simple answer to a relatively challenging problem also requires even within the public sector and even, you know, at least even drop the distinction between public and private, a systems-based approach to thinking about what's the problem we're trying to achieve and what are some of the solutions that exist, ultimately are ways in which we can at least beginning to scratch the surface and look at can we actually get to the root of some of these problems and then start to implement some of say, the innovations that come forward. I am mindful that there are certain delivery models out there that are masking themselves with some of those broader solutions that say, well, we might be doing things like alliancing, which on its surface suggests that we're doing exactly that. But as we've discussed so far, it's, in some ways, it goes beyond just a project and a delivery model. It's looking at, do we have the right skills? Do we have the right capabilities? Are we pricing risk accordingly? And what about things like norms, culture, that do you have to be addressed? They could be addressed within a delivery model. But what's been clear in the research and the theoretical framework is that we have to go beyond that. And that does require an evolution within the industry, but also within different types of interactions and yeah, I would even say, broaden what the industry means in order to start moving that envelope across the board, to then being able to say we're now developing system space solutions to system space problems in mega projects. Riccardo Cosentino  26:08  Okay, I want to pause a little bit on system approach. Because I think you and I are familiar, and probably a lot of the listeners, are familiar with system thinking. But it is a discipline that it's certainly underutilized in, certainly in Canada, as far as I know, because I've not come across system thinking until I ended up in the U.K. where it's a concept that even there is not broadly used, but it's I think a bit more understood and at least the benefits of system thinking and approaching issues from a system perspective is something that is being embraced more and more especially in civil engineering in mega project, because when you have a lot of complexity, you need to think of different types of relations between agents within the various system. And you might even have a system or systems to make things even more complicated.   Riccardo Cosentino  27:14  But the system approach is, it's important because I'm always trying to explain it to known to people who have never come acrossed system thinking that the example I always give is the butterfly effect, right? Whenever, we always know we've always heard some in, when a butterfly flaps the wings in Australia, you might have a tornado in North America. And that's basically how I explained system thinking where there is no direct cause and effect, which is perceived by as more causality that happens in a way that we don't quite understand. And so we need to really understand all of the elements to trying to understand our all of the elements, in our case, for major programmes, stakeholders, interact with each other because only when we understand those interactions, we can start seeing patterns of actions that occur within the system. And we always have a tendency as human beings to reduce the complexity, and always thinking of linear cause and effect, when in reality, we're talking about circular cause and effect. And in fact, it is not even cause and effect it is just circularity of relations. So sorry, I wanted to take just a few minutes just to get all the listeners on the same page, when we talk when we say systems and system thinking and system approach. What do we mean? And I guess, you and I have discussed this in the past, but what are? What are the advantages of having a system approach? I think you touched on some of them already, but in your mind, what are the advantages of system thinking and system approach to major projects? Sherena Hussain  29:08  Yes, and when we stop and think about, why should we entertain such levels of complexity amongst not just one system, but multiple systems of systems, and one area is it offers the ability to think through how different say, stakeholders, actions, activities, risk, capital sources, all interact or can be affected by a certain course of action. And for the most part in our daily lives we don't think necessarily like that. For the reason you mentioned before we're, it tends to have a reduction as an (inaudible) from simplicity and how we undertake our affairs. However, if you're willing to then step back and do that mapping exercise, that identification often will yield you the ability to see some of the assumptions that have possibly been made. In different circumstances, you might have to test those assumptions. An excellent example that I grapple with daily right now is in the context of decarbonizing transport, meaning try to reduce CO2 emissions from transport through other propulsion technologies like battery electric, like hydrogens, like anything else in between. I can tell you, Riccardo, but often they say, well, you just need someone to get a vehicle, put in a charger, and you're on the road and everything is great. Well, if that were true, then we'd probably have a lot more, you know, different types of vehicles on the road, but we don't. And then once you start mapping that out, you realize, well, you interact with utility, that electricity has to come from somewhere, there's a supply chain that comes with, say, critical minerals that go into the components to the vehicle to the charger. There's also different individuals and regular regulatory frameworks that are impacted such as safety, such as the individuals who have to maintain like the mechanics, do they feel safe touching these vehicles? Do they need to be trained? What about our ecosystem for upskilling and reskilling the trades. So once you start looking at systems and unpacking that, you're able to not only identify who your stakeholders are, but some of the embedded assumptions into our projects. And once you have that insights, then you can make decisions such as you know what we need to bring in certain stakeholders earlier, or you know what, maybe the utility is a source of low-cost financing to this project, because they might have a vested interest in greater adoption of certain types of electricity sources through electrification. So that's another, those are some of the benefits that comes with systems theory, and systems thinking. But I also want to throw the caveat out there is that it's not a one-size-fits-all all approach. Often, you have to do this on an ongoing basis for the same project, but also on a project-by-project basis. And that's where the application of this type of thinking, in some ways is very challenging in the mega project space, because there's always a tension about, can we get economies of scale, and how we can then replicate some of these across some of the say, smaller projects that just do not have the capital in place, or the budget in place to do this on an ongoing basis. So that is ultimately something that comes into place. Do we have solutions available to then make it a more timely and cost-effective to apply systems thinking? I would say yes, but we just haven't figured it out yet. Or we can at least try and see how we do that. And I'm sure, Riccardo, you've seen in some of your work in your masters that there are solutions around the world to do that. So some of these benefits could be realized. Riccardo Cosentino  33:02  Yeah, for sure. I do think that understanding, okay, I'm going to reduce the complexity a little bit. And in my mind, one thing that projects don't do and I'm going to be very specific, is stakeholder analysis and the effect of stakeholders onto even onto the day-to-day delivery, right? We, you know, even when we start in delivery project, and we're on-site, there's a little bit of work done in stakeholder management, but not to the extent that is required, and that has detrimental effects on delivery. And I think sitting down and understanding and do and apply system thinking the second you apply system thinking you have to think of the stakeholders because, you know, if you're an on-site delivering a project, all you are looking at is your Gantt chart, right, your schedule, and you know, that by the way, that's a whole new podcast on the fallacy of a linear schedule for a complex mega project is you know, I don't even know where to start with that, where you you have all these activities and somehow something as complex as a major project you end up with, with a delivery day, like to the day you can tell when the project is going to be done. But which is a fallacy, because the second you start actually looking from a system perspective, you understand that there's so many moving parts, so many relations, you don't understand that how you can predict to that level of accuracy is beyond me. As I said, that's a different podcast. I think it's important though, that we start using these approaches because we drive in blind, like I think there's a lot of project director, project managers out there that are driving blind because they're using, they're using tools that are designed for things with little complexity and the tools that we're using for high complexity, issues of say high complexity projects are not good enough. And that basically, doesn't basically makes the project director being oblivious to what's ahead. And so we're getting more in the specific now of project delivery. But you know, if you step back, you know, even in the planning phase, applying systems thinking during the planning phase, or during the early phases of the project, to understand what the challenges are going to be making the project more resilient. Because ultimately, I think that's also what system thinking allows you to do. It allows you to do how the project might fail over the long term. And I'm not just talking about the delivery phase, I'm talking about the planning phase, you know, a lot of projects don't get the funding, they get shelved, and but applying system thinking upfront, allows you to understand what could go wrong, you know, there's a change in government that happens. Doesn't mean that the project needs to stop if there's a change in government, you could set it up in a way that is politically agnostic on who's the leader, right? So these tools are very, very helpful, but I don't think they are understood or even why they're not utilizing, I don't think they're even understood. Sherena Hussain  36:36  And that's where I find that that could be an opportunity. An example of one of those tools, just carrying on on the example of stakeholder management is one that I teach to my master's students. And also, when I engage with senior government officials, and that is a power interest matrix, it's a very simple two by two matrix. On one axis, you have power, another axis, you have interests, and then you plot your stakeholders. What's really telling is that if a stakeholder for example, has high power, high interest in your mega project, say, during the planning stage, well, you have to make sure they're consulted and they're involved in that project. If you have a stakeholder that has low interest, but high power, you want to make sure that they're amendable. But they have, for the most part, as long as they're disinterested, they're not going to exercise their power. That analysis continues throughout the duration of our mega projects through all its stages, because a stakeholder might shift in their power or their interest. So say the mega project experiences a significant delay that then affects one of those stakeholders. So their interests, even though they're very powerful, but low interest now increases. So they're by far one of your most problematic issues to your project in getting, say, consensus to get this project back on track. If you're not thinking about stakeholder management, then that is going to just emerge and potentially not be foreseen, and you're behind the eight ball. Whereas before, if you had a constant view of your stakeholders, and even if it's say, looking in quarterly, looking in and reflecting monthly, then you're in a better situation to get ahead of those situations and develop solutions before it minds for that. What I'm very clear to all my students is that this is not just for, you know, the stakeholder management consultants, this is everyone's job, everyone should be thinking about stakeholders, because whether you're involved in say, claims management, or if you're involved with project coordination from, say, a public sector perspective, you're still dealing with stakeholders, from your vantage point, you should be managing that as well, such that we can at least be applying some of these systems based solutions to then avoid the common pitfalls that typically come with major projects. Riccardo Cosentino  39:01  Yeah, you make me smile when you say the stakeholder consultant because yeah, that's my experience too, right? You don't just make a project you typically have and it's typically a comms firm or somebody that just when in reality, stakeholder management is at the core, right, the project director should have direct visibility and influence on that and should be spending quite a bit of his or her time on stakeholder management because, as you said, it's evolving, right? I really liked your two by two matrix because you have to continue reviewing it, because the situation change and somebody that didn't really matter early on in the project may become very influential. And if you haven't mapped it out at the beginning, guess what? You're going to be completely blindsided because if you haven't done the exercise at the beginning of the project, to understand who these parties are and what their role are, when they see intuitions shift and somebody now becomes irrelevant if you hadn't mapped it to begin with, you'll never even going to know what's going to hit you. Sherena Hussain  40:07  And this is where you might you must know the term, and your listeners too, the term social license, that we need a social license to build mega projects. We need a social license to be able to introduce X, Y, and Z. Well, yes, but what does that actually mean? How do we develop a social license? How do we maintain it? How do we grow that? Often, if based upon our conversation, we're pretty much saying it's on the basis of applying systems thinking, systems theories to stakeholders. And that's how you're able to cultivate the social license. And it's not just the jobs for the comms department or the consultant. It's everyone's job when we're dealing with major projects, because we all have a zone of influence in what we're doing. And that all has some form of impact, like the butterfly on how that mega project unfolds at the end of the day. Riccardo Cosentino  41:04  Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely. Yeah. stakeholder management has become a new pet peeve. Okay, I think we're coming towards the end of today's podcast, but you know, before, before we wrap up, I just wanted to ask you what, do you have any hope for the industry do you, as a bit of a broad, sweeping question that, you know, you've been in the industry for a long time and I ask this question to most of my guests, it's, you know, are you positive are you negative about major programme as an industry, in Canada and or around the world? Sherena Hussain  41:51  I would say I'm optimistic for a variety of different reasons. If we looked at purely from a public policy economics perspective, infrastructure is critical to the success of any society. Canada's no difference. So there will always be a role for mega projects. A lot of decisions that we have to make today are informed by things that maybe we didn't think about 10, 20 years ago, such as climate risk, how does this affects some of our mega projects. It's not just bringing a consultant who tells you to do X, Y, and Zed that requires an application of systems thinking. And the theory is across all facets of a mega project's lifecycle, not just in project development. So I think that is going to be one of the biggest drivers paired with the fact that across some of the major industries that require either a renewal, or the investment of different types of infrastructure, leveraging technology, again, highly complicated. That's another realm for where we will see the need to apply different forms of system thinking and systems solutions that we've talked about today. So with that in mind, we either have the opportunity to continue doing what we've been doing before and possibly just fail or not be able to achieve the outcomes, or reflecting upon in our daily lives, we have to deal with more systems-based thinking, because our lives are getting more complicated. Why not start thinking about how that applies to mega projects and major programmes. And I think that is an opportunity that I'm bit excited for, in the sense that the research and the industry is beginning to align. And so in the sense that we need to begin to do things differently. How quickly we're able to mobilize? I'd say I'm also optimistic because you have a podcast like this talking about it. So to the extent that your listeners are decision-makers as well, they're being influenced by the fact that now it's time to challenge the paradigm and think about how we do things better. Riccardo Cosentino  43:52  You make me blush I'm doing I'm trying to do my part. I'm trying to do my part and then with this podcast for sure, because it's I am a little bit more negative than you I think it is, it is a monumental challenge. For decades, we've been trying to improve major programmes and major programme delivery and the progress is slow. But at least we are definitely moving in the right direction. But you know, when you see when you see outcomes of major programmes on a day-to-day, I won't name projects but you start to think you know, how long is it going to ask is going to take for us to have a situation where it's not a given that a major programme will be late and over budget. But although I have a little bit of a negative outlook, here I am trying to do my part to change and I, you know, as people like you and that are helping these change by bringing different perspective from different parts of the industry. So on that, I want to thank you for taking the time today. It's been a fantastic conversation. Hopefully, we won't let pass another war 15 years from the next time we talk to each other. But yeah, thank you very much, Sherena, for for joining me today. Sherena Hussain  45:24  My pleasure. Thanks for having me. Riccardo Cosentino  45:27  That's it for this episode of Navigating Major Programmes. I hope you found today's conversation as informative or provoking as I did. If you enjoyed this conversation, please consider subscribing and leaving a review. I would also like to personally invite you to continue the conversation by joining me on my personal LinkedIn at Riccardo Cosentino. Listening to the next episode, we will continue to explore the latest trends and challenges in major programme management. Our next in-depth conversation promises to continue to dive into topics such as leadership risk management and the impact of emerging technology in infrastructure. It's a conversation you're not going to want to miss. Thanks for listening to Navigating Major Programmes and I look forward to keeping the conversation going.   Music: "A New Tomorrow" by Chordial Music. Licensed through PremiumBeat.DISCLAIMER: The opinions, beliefs, and viewpoints expressed by the hosts and guests on this podcast do not necessarily represent or reflect the official policy, opinions, beliefs, and viewpoints of Disenyo.co LLC and its employees.

In today's podcast we will delve into the knotty and, it seems, unending challenge of controlling and reducing the cost and the time spent delivering our major infrastructure projects. As we a constantly reminded by politicians, the public and our colleagues, the track record of global major project delivery is not good. I have referenced the findings of Oxford University professor Bent Flyvbjerg's book How Big Things Get Done many times on this podcast before – specifically his findings that globally over the last 30 years, just 8.5% of projects met cost and schedule targets while just 0.5% satisfied all benefit goals.It's a pretty shocking set of findings. And we don't have to look far in the UK to see evidence – I give you HS2, Hinkley Point C, Crossrail, etc etc. But given that the UK government just published its £800bn pipeline of infrastructure aspiration in the face of an increasing public finance black hole, the pressure is growing to turn this around.So what is going wrong? Well my guest today is Ali Mafi, an engineer who has spent a career, largely in the shadows, trying to drive change across the sector. In fact he is currently collaborating with Bent Flyvbjerg and Alex Budzier of the Oxford Saïd Business school under their Oxford Global Projects consultancy to try to bring some new thinking to the sector.And the focus for this work, is the Timist programme, which he founded last year and, as he will explain now I hope, he defines as a next generation project delivery system – a new approach major projects that he reckons could see teams deliver better outcomes in a shorter time and at lower cost than any other systems available. He believes – as the name of his approach suggests – that most problems really stem from our inability to focus on time. As a result projects lose on average 2.5 days per week which means that the output and productivity is half of what it should be. That's the diagnosis – so what's the cure?ResourcesTimist websiteThe Latham Review - Constructing the TeamThe Egan Review - Rethinking Construction Association for Project Management article on ward rounds

Age-related vision loss is a rising concern for our growing aging population. According to the most recent data published by the CDC, nearly 20 million Americans aged 40+ have been diagnosed with some form of age-related macular degeneration (AMD). By the age of 75, roughly 1 in 3 people living in the United States will have some form of AMD, and about 1 in 4 of those will have a vision-threatening, late-stage form of AMD. These statistics underscore the need for heightened public awareness and increased accessibility to innovative treatments.February is Low Vision and Age-Related Macular Degeneration (AMD) Awareness Month. In this episode, Laszlo Bekesi, MD, Vice President of Strategy and Innovation, and Jonathan Angelastro, Executive Director of Project Delivery at Syneos Health provide valuable insights into the evolving field of ophthalmology and the efforts to address the growing burden of age-related vision impairment—with a  focus on understanding both wet and dry AMD types, the complexities of AMD, its impact on vision and the urgency for early detection and treatment. They also discuss the current landscape of research and development in the space and highlight the opportunities for—and inherent operational challenges of—conducting clinical trials in ophthalmology.The views expressed in this podcast belong solely to the speakers and do not represent those of their organization. If you want access to more future-focused, actionable insights to help biopharmaceutical companies better execute and succeed in a constantly evolving environment, visit the Syneos Health Insights Hub. The perspectives you'll find there are driven by dynamic research and crafted by subject matter experts focused on real answers to help guide decision-making and investment. You can find it all at insightshub.health. Like what you're hearing? Be sure to rate and review us! We want to hear from you! If there's a topic you'd like us to cover on a future episode, contact us at podcast@syneoshealth.com.

In this episode I chat with Matt Barber the VP and GM of MES at Infor. Matt has 15 years of MES experience, starting out as a Software Engineer at Lighthouse Systems, swiftly transitioning to Project Delivery and later heading the Shopfloor-Online Product team. In 2021, Infor acquired Lighthouse, rebranding the product to Infor MES and in 2024 Matt took the VP of MES role at Infor and is responsbile for Infor MES. His focus is on all things MES, including Sales, Pre-Sales, Marketing, and Product Growth and Strategy. Matt always had a passion for training others on MES, and has now taken this a step further by regularly posting educational content on LinkedIn and introducing MES Matters (mesmatters.com) where his mission is simple....educate the world about: - MES / MOM - Smart Manufacturing - Digital Transformation - AI in Manufacturing - IIoT Lot's of great information shared, I hope you like the episode!

This week, you're invited to venture beyond the boardroom into the wilderness, daring to challenge the very essence of comfort zones. Join Ken and our distinguished guest, the true trailblazer Cris Howard, as they navigate uncharted territories, embrace discomfort, and uncover the striking parallels between success in leadership and the courage to confront the unknown.  Join us on a captivating exploration of Cris's illustrious three-decade career, where she honed leadership skills in Fortune 500 companies like J&J, GlaxoSmithKline, and Labcorp. Mastering the art of building and managing global teams, Cris shares real-world experiences, emphasizing that leadership is more about asking the right questions than having all the answers.  But the adventure doesn't stop there. Cris's narrative takes an unexpected turn as she leaves her prestigious position at Labcorp. Experience the awe-inspiring tale of resilience and determination, where someone with zero hiking experience embarks on a 2200-mile odyssey through the Appalachian Trail—14 states, 5 months, and a profound journey into the unknown. Cris's transition from the boardroom to the trail becomes a testament to universal leadership principles, showcasing how resilience, adaptability, and strategic thinking prove indispensable in both worlds.  In this thought-provoking discussion, Cris leaves us with a powerful takeaway: leadership thrives when you push beyond your comfort zone. It's about asking the right questions, not having all the answers. Cris challenges the conventional notion of failure, presenting it as an ongoing narrative rather than a final chapter. She advocates for viewing challenges as opportunities for personal and professional growth, highlighting the importance of perseverance and continuous problem-solving.   Join us for an episode that challenges norms, inspires change, and proves that true leadership happens when you step into the unknown.  About Cris Howard: Cris Howard is a seasoned clinical operations executive with 30 years of experience in the biopharmaceutical industry. As the Global Head of Project Delivery at Labcorp Drug Development, she led a team of 300 professionals across 24 countries and 29 locations, delivering operational excellence and strategic innovation for drug development projects. Cris is passionate about transforming the clinical research landscape through agile and patient-centric solutions. She created and scaled the PM Academy, a pioneering initiative that optimized project team performance and achieved $11.7M in savings ahead of schedule. She also inspired employee loyalty and retention, winning the HERO's Award and being selected for the ELEVATE Women's Executive Leadership program. Cris is a globally recognized speaker, educator, and board member in the field of project management and holds multiple degrees and certifications. She is also an avid hiker and a retired elite triathlete, who founded the Women for Tri Foundation and completed 12 IRONMAN competitions.

Pei Mun Lim is a UK-based lifelong consultant. Her firm, Zenhao Training helps create great consultants. She is also the author of Salesforce Discovery 101, and has another book on the way.Pei is a delight to speak with, and I am so glad to have met her. Enjoy!

In this episode, the guest, James Garner, discusses the role of AI in project management and its future implications. He shares his origin story and how he got into the field of AI. The conversation covers the definition of AI in project management and the different levels of AI sophistication. The guest also talks about the pace of AI implementation and the factors that contribute to the fear and adoption of AI. The episode concludes with a discussion on the government's generative AI framework and the importance of making project data freely accessible. The conversation explores the changing landscape of construction, the benefits of AI in project functions, the evolution of associations with AI, governance and safeguarding AI, and various other topics related to AI and technology.Takeaways AI in project management is a broad term that encompasses various levels of AI sophistication, from simple automation to more advanced machine learning and neural networks. The future of project management with AI involves a gradual progression towards increased automation and predictability, allowing professionals to focus on value-added tasks. The pace of AI implementation in project management is expected to be gradual but exponential, with constant advancements and increasing adoption. The fear of AI in project management can stem from a lack of understanding, time constraints, and the rapid pace of technological change. Education and accessibility are key to overcoming these barriers. The government's generative AI framework and initiatives like data trusts are important steps towards making project data freely accessible and fostering collaboration in the industry. The construction industry is evolving with the adoption of AI, robotics, and 3D printing, leading to changes in site operations and improved safety. Consultancy services, such as engineering and architecture, can benefit from AI by streamlining workflows and providing innovative solutions. Associations like APM and RICS have a role in setting standards and guidelines for AI adoption in the construction industry. Governance and safeguarding of AI are crucial to protect data privacy and ensure responsible use of technology. Common misconceptions about AI include the belief that it is a recent development and the lack of understanding about its potential impact. Leadership is a combination of nature and nurture, with the potential for individuals to develop leadership skills through training and experience. Recommended book: 'The Singularity is Near' by Ray Kurzweil, which explores the future of AI and predicts the point at which machines surpass human intelligence. James, an accomplished data leader in the construction industry, began his journey as a Quantity Surveyor in 2000. After earning a first-class honours degree, he wrote his university dissertation on data and digitalisation in the construction sector. James quickly built a strong portfolio, becoming a member of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) in 2002. In 2012, he was elected as a Fellow of RICS for his significant writing contributions to the RICS Black Book technical standards.   Throughout his career, James has worked on prestigious projects, including buildings for Imperial College and various Oxford University Colleges. Whilst employed at Gleeds as a Quantity Surveyor, he became head of the Education sector for London. In 2020, James took on a new challenge as Head of Insights and Analytics at Gleeds. This opportunity allowed him to further his skillset and qualify as a data analyst in 2022, launching the company's data analytics and research capabilities. UK Gov paper - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/generative-ai-framework-for-hmg/generative-ai-framework-for-hmg-html#understanding-generative-ai James' newsletter - https://projectflux.beehiiv.com/subscribe Project Chatter is Proudly Sponsored by Deltek --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/project-chatter-podcast/message

In this episode, I interview Christian Knutson, CEng, P.E., PgMP, PMP, FICE, F.SAME, Director of European Defense and Security Programs at Jacobs, about the intersection of the engineering sales cycle and project management in engineering projects. We discuss the importance of project delivery success, the role of program management, and how to align sales goals […] The post TEPM 035: How Project Delivery Fuels the Engineering Sales Cycle appeared first on Engineering Management Institute.

Donna Berry, Deputy Director for Project Delivery and Chief Engineer at Caltrans since 2022, leads over 11,000 employees in managing California's transportation projects. With a Civil Engineering degree from UC Davis and over 25 years at Caltrans, her career spans multiple leadership roles, focusing on project management and stakeholder collaboration. An advocate for diversity in STEM, she is an active member of NSBE and WTS, where she was recognized as 2020's Woman of the Year. A licensed civil engineer in California, Donna exemplifies commitment to excellence and mentorship in the transportation sector.  Donna will be recognized as NABWIC's Woman in the Spotlight during NABWIC's Billion Dollar Luncehon in Transportation Opportunities.  The luncheon will be held virtually on Friday, January 26, 2024 at 11.30 am EST. Contact:  Donna Berry |Chief Engineer/Deputy Director for Project Delivery |California Department of Transportation | (916)416-2384 | donna.m.berry@dot.ca.gov |https://www.linkedin.com/in/donna-m-berry-1195b8196/ ___________________________ NABWIC's Vision: The Vision of the National Association of Black Women in Construction (NABWIC) is to build lasting strategic partnerships with first-rate organizations and individuals that will provide ground-breaking and innovative solutions for black women in construction and their respective communities.| NABWIC.ORG  

In this episode, Riccardo Cosentino sits down with fellow Oxford alumni, Rachael Patel, to discuss integrated project delivery (IPD). With a background as a registered nurse, Rachael brings her unique expertise to her current role in the health sector specializing in strategic planning and execution of health services, research and infrastructure projects in North America. The pair discuss the impediments and challenges of adoption of the IPD model, specifically how it relates to private and public healthcare major infrastructure projects and the procurement process.“You add an integrated project delivery, where the idea is risk sharing and then you use that same methodology to calculate value for money, IPD will never win because IPDs base core base is sharing risk. It's two issues in our procurement, it's the idea of what value for money is and how we calculate money.”– Rachael Patel Key Takeaways: The origin of IPD and how its optimizing project design and construction Why value for money is problematic for IPDFinding a better way to allocate risk, relational over transactional  The policy associated in procurement and how it is hindering the marketplace shift to alternative models Links Mentioned: A critical perspective on Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) applied in a Norwegian public hospital projectBenefits and challenges to applying IPD: experiences from a Norwegian mega-project If you enjoyed this episode, make sure and give us a five star rating and leave us a review on iTunes, Podcast Addict, Podchaser or Castbox. The conversation doesn't stop here—connect and converse with our LinkedIn community: Navigating Major Programmes PodcastRiccardo CosentinoRachael Patel Transcript:Riccardo Cosentino  00:00If you're listening to Navigating Major Programmes, the podcast that aims to elevate the conversations happening in the infrastructure industry and inspire you to have a more efficient approach within it. I'm your host Riccardo Cosentino. I bring over 20 years of major programme management experience. Most recently, I graduated from Oxford Universities they business group, which shook my belief when it comes to navigating major problems. Now it's time to shake yours. Join me in each episode as a press the industry experts about the complexity of major program management, emerging digital trends and the critical leadership required to approach these multibillion dollar projects. Let's see where the conversation takes us.  Racheal Patel is an Associate Vice President and senior project manager at a global architecture and engineering firm. She's a registered nurse, and also the Master of Science in major program management from the University of Oxford, and a Master of nursing from the University of Toronto. Racheal is a skilled leader in the health sector specializing in strategic planning and execution of health services, research and infrastructure projects in Canada and the United States. Her expertise includes guiding organization for the initial strategic planning phase, through detailed planning and design to the implementation of transformative and innovative capital projects. Hello, everyone.  Welcome to another episode of navigating major programs. I'm here today with Richard Patel. I met Racheal at Oxford University when we were completing together our mastering major program management. And I asked Racheal today to join us on the podcast to discuss her dissertation, which is quite interesting and very relevant to the topics that we've been discussing on navigating major programs. How're you doing, Racheal? Racheal Patel  02:00I'm good Ricardo. And thanks for having me here. I'm excited to have a platform to talk about my dissertation and you providing that platform to talk about major programs. So thank you very much for having me.   Riccardo Cosentino  02:14It's my pleasure. So maybe since I've tucked up your dissertation a little bit, well, what was the topic of your dissertation?  Yeah, so my topic was actually looking at the challenges of adopting integrated project delivery in health infrastructure here specifically in Ontario. And I kind of was interested in this because here in Ontario, as you know, we've been in a transactional type of model for some time, and I wanted to see could we push the boundary and look at other project delivery models that would achieve the the goals of infrastructure for healthcare in a different manner? Interesting. And you talk about transactional contracting, and you talk about IPD, can you maybe explain for some of our listeners the difference or what was in the context of your, your research, what those terms mean? Racheal Patel  03:20So when we when I say transactional, it's more of a contractual obligation. So it's what we see today, like a p3, you know, alternative delivery model where you have a relationship based on some terms and conditions. Relational, it's a similar idea in that more, they're not similar, but it's a similar idea, in that it's a relationship based model where you're working together as a team, there's no one, you know, a buyer and a seller you are, I guess, in a way, a group or collaborative, all working towards the same goal and you have incentives and so forth, in a nutshell, that it's different. We in transactional, as you know, you have contractual requirements, you're obligated to meet certain things, whereas in relational, it's really about the relationships and the collaboration and the people and people organizations that come together to deliver. So it's, it's harder, sorry, relational is more softer compared to transactional in my non legal way of trying to explain. Riccardo Cosentino  04:41So another way of putting that is an is one that of an example that I use in the past is that transactional contracting or is more of a zero sum game where there is a party, a winning party in the losing party. We're in relational contracting. We're all on the same table, we all have one common goal, one common incentive. And all of the incentives are aligned providing a more collaborative environment.   Racheal Patel  05:11Yeah, yeah, that's probably more eloquent and articulate in the way I'm trying to explain it. That yeah, like, with relational, and specifically with IPD, you have everyone coming together with a common goal objective, and you're all measured on that same group of objectives or metrics metrics. And I would say transactional is a very much risk transfer moving risk to one party to hold that and your obligation to meet those risks, that transfer of that risk. But yes, I would say what you what you said is more eloquent than how I'm trying to explain it. Riccardo Cosentino  05:54No, yours is more is more detailed and more accurate by this very broad strokes. But maybe maybe for again, for our listeners, I know, in your research, you know, part of your literature review you you actually had a bit of a dive into IPD, which means integrated project delivery. And I actually cover some of that in my dissertation. So in a previous podcast, where I talked about IPD, Alliance and collaborative contracting, maybe just for those listeners that didn't listen to that podcast. Can you talk a little bit about the origin of IPD?  Yeah, no problem. So IPD, which is integrated project delivery is the definition. It's kind of vetted by the American Institute of Architects, or specifically the California Council that came up with this notion of IPD. Being that it's a project delivery model that integrates people, businesses, and legal structures into a process that drives collaboration, while it optimizes efficiencies in the design and the construction phases of a project. So what that really means is that your you know, you're kind of like a temporary project organization, or a temporary organization all set to one vision, a shared vision, purpose, and a goal. And you're all working together, in, in what we work in organizations to achieve that. And each part like, you know, you have a joint management decision making where you come together. It's not one party oversight on one, you have key party members within your organization that sit together make decisions, for the best project outcome, you agree on the targets and goals. So what what are we trying to like? What is our project mission values, but what are we trying to achieve with this, you bring everyone to the table. So it's early engagement of parties, like in our current models, or in some of the models, we're all used to, you know, you have owner, you know, their designers are the design team, and then they work together, then you bring in somebody else later in the game, whereas in this one, everyone's sitting at the table on day one, working together to achieve the vision. The other thing with integrated project delivery is that you're sharing the risks and rewards. So it's not self interest driven. It's more we work together, and we share the risk of the solutions we put together or the rewards of the solutions like we work together to do that. So it's a pain share gain kind of model, where if we all do it together, and we're successful, we profit in it together. If we made some bad judgments, we all suffer together in a nutshell. And then the other thing that's different than probably an alliance model, is that our life, reduce liability exposure. So there's no blame game, you know, you're waiving claim and liability between each other. I mean, I'm sure there are legal mechanisms that if it's willful, or negligent, like in that way, that it's purposeful, there's repercussions. But basically, what you're trying to do is create an environment that has trust or respect. And in order to do that, you don't have legal mechanisms that will point to someone and say, Well, you did this, now you're a blame because you all are all on the same page or sharing that reward or the risk or making the decisions.  Yeah, that's why I was That's why I was talking about a zero sum game, because I think what you described it, you know, I think the legal recourse creates a situation where there's going to be a winner and a loser in case things go wrong. I mean, at the end of the day, I mean, my my experience is that yeah, a contract. If a project goes well a contrast is on the shelves and nobody looks at it, but is when things start to go wrong, that you take out the contract. Look what the contract says and you pursue your legal remedies. I think what what you did ascribe to the IPD. And to a certain extent, even the Alliance model, or any relational contract allows for that. You know, if the project starts going badly, you don't reach for the contract to start appointing blame, but you actually have to sit at the table and come up with with a solution from the project team, rather than from the contract. Racheal Patel  10:25Yeah, like it's very much in this type of model. It's working together, you know, and in my experience, too, on the other types of contracts, if a project goes well, right, yeah, you're never gonna, you're never going to open it up and blame game. But I think, as the complexities of health infrastructure continues, and I'm talking health infrastructure, like continues to grow, I think we're more heading down the line. And I've seen it going down the line where that contract is open, and that blame game starts. Whereas an IP D, and what I like what I've seen in the industry, and those that have used it, you don't see those levels of escalation, or you don't hear about yourself as an escalation, because everyone that's in this delivery in this project are working together to achieve the same thing. So if, you know if blame is shared, everyone shares I mean, if blame is to be shared, everyone shares that blame. And so that that's the difference in this model, for sure.   Riccardo Cosentino  11:28Okay, so I think I think we've set the scene and we talked about IPD. So hopefully, people listening who are not familiar with a Marvel getting a sense. So like to take you back to your dissertation. And, you know, ask, I'd like to ask you, what were the key findings of your, of your, of your research. Racheal Patel  11:52So my, just to kind of give your listeners a little bit of context. So what I was trying to understand in this in this research is, what are the impediments or the challenges of adoption of this model? And so when I looked at, when I looked at, you know, how, how I would identify them, I interviewed individuals in Ontario, both in the public and the private end of health infrastructure, that are decision makers in the process and have been involved. And, you know, we looked at different categories. So is our market even ready to accept a model? Right? Like, are we are we in Ontario, even willing to say, hey, let's look at different project delivery models? You know, what's the impact of culture and environment? The legal ramifications, financial procurement, because we work through a different procurement body? And is there any impact of our regulatory authorities on how we go through it? And so I think, overarching, like one of the biggest findings, and the resounding is, the individuals that I interviewed, were all were like, We need a different model. So it was a resounding yes. The marketplace is saying we need to look at different ways to deliver these infrastructure projects. Because the complexities, the cost they're increasing. And the current models we have, while they deliver an amount saying that P3 are not good, but they do deliver. But for what we're delivering, it's not the best solution. And from a culture and environment, I think, you know, with integrated project delivery, it's about trust and collaboration. And our environment has a huge impact on trust, how we work together and so forth. So I think, I don't think are the culture we work in or in the environment. Everyone's like, it's going to be difficult to apply this model. And I think from a procurement perspective, one of the biggest, you know, ideas that came out was, you know, our procurement, the way we procure projects, that whole process, not necessarily, the broader procurement of the BPS has to change but we have to look at it in a different way to apply this type of model. I think those were some of the key big findings. Riccardo Cosentino  14:22Okay, so I think in your, your dissertation, you you talk about some of the challenges and some of the findings and I think procurement challenges is the one that I found quite interesting. And you talk about how the how the the process to secure funding for the developing new or new health infrastructure. creates challenges in adopting IPD. And also you look at the the value for money analysis used when procuring new infrastructure now that could be a barrier for the for the deployment of integrated project delivery. And so I'm very curious to draw upon your knowledge of what the MO Ministry of Health process is, and why is it detrimental? Racheal Patel  15:18So, I mean, it comes back to so the Ministry of Health process, if we look at, you know, how hospitals kind of work within our system, the hospitals are within, you know, the Ministry of Health. And it's not that they're regulated by the Ministry of Health, because each hospitals, independent corporations, they have their own board of directors, but they're tied to a lot of the operational funding the capital funding come through the Ministry of Health, so you have to work with them in order to get funding for whether it's a renovation or a new build. And so the capital, the health capital planning process, and I know they've changed it in in the last year, or they've added some different nomenclature of stages. But basically, it's separated into two different stages, in that you have your early planning, that talks about, you know, what is the infrastructure proposal how you're going to address it. And that then is requires approval to proceed further into the actual development of the health infrastructure structure project you want to actually implement. And so there's two different approval process within the government through the Treasury Board that your project has to go through. And then during that those approval processes, set dollar amount, whatever that is, whatever is established for that project, and that includes, you know, transaction fees. And so all the other fees that are held, that number is carried across the process. And that kind of is you're upset value or your total value of the project. But when you look at the process, the duration of this process is so long, and you know, healthcare projects can take 10, to, you know, 13 years to get through this process, where you actually go to a part where you go to RFP and start to bid and build, that there's such an evolution, the way we deliver healthcare, because it's rapidly changing with technology operations, and so forth, and different models of care, that what you first envisioned in your project, maybe you're one and where you ended up, when you're about to go to bed could change, but that number doesn't change. And so it's not agile enough to respond to the market. Riccardo Cosentino  17:36I guess another challenge is that when you know, because of the planning process, you develop a design and a solution. And you develop it to probably award 5% design completion. And so you lock in in certain certain things with your, with your master planning, you block schematic as you go through the approval process. And obviously, you wouldn't be able to have an IPD contractor on board, that early on to start that collaboration is that one of the findings, one of the challenges, Racheal Patel  18:11it is a challenge, but I think if you look at the way the US where IPDS is predominantly used for healthcare, you can have your business case written and your idea written, but then you know, when you get into blocks, or schematics, you engage that contractor into the process, right. And then together with the designer, the owner, the and the contractor in some of their sub trades, you start to build or design and plan for that future facility. So in the US, they do do that. Here in Ontario, we have a very process driven stream that contractors are not engaged and their value is not added until they get the bid documents. And so could the contractor come in earlier in the process? I believe it could. But that means you're procuring certain things earlier in order to have those conversations at the table. And they would have to be integrated into this. I don't see it being a barrier. I think it's a shift in mindset and how we approach it. And if this is the what we have to do with the ministry's process and Treasury board's approval for release of funding, then I think we have to look at, you know, when does a contract or when does the sub trades When did those key individuals get involved? Riccardo Cosentino  19:33Well, yeah, because what we have is a very linear process, you know, you have all these stages and you know, you can only is a Stage Gate approach. Well, I think without with IBD, you want a more fluid, more fluid approach that creates collaboration and interaction as early as possible because that's where that's where the value is created. And that's where optimization has appearance is it's at the early stages of the project. Racheal Patel  20:02Right. And it's also where the innovation happens, right? Like with the optimization, but it's innovation and maybe how we address mechanical I mean, you look at healthcare, mechanical, maybe 45, to, if not 50, but close to 50% of the value of our healthcare project is the engineering systems that run, not a name, excluding the equipment that you know, that it's put into the organization. But when you have such a heavy value of your costs sitting, like and you don't have those players that are going to build it at the table, it's a huge detriment, right. And we ended up having issues going down. And I think that's the benefit of this process of IPD. Everyone comes to the table early in design, so you can work out those solutions and the problems, say, you know, what's the best approach for, you know, air handling? What's the best approach for, you know, feature flexibility of data and so forth? I mean, I'm not an engineering to talk technical, but, you know, I've worked in situations where you have everyone at the table, and you can create something more efficient in its operation, but also in the price. Riccardo Cosentino  21:11Yes. Yeah. You know, enough to be dangerous. That's the mean. So, touched upon value for money. So let's, let's jump on to that. Because I think that's the other that, you know, and I worked for infrastructure, Ontario, and I know the value for money methodology. But, again, I think in your findings, you describe it beautifully. Why is problematic, so I won't steal your thunder. I leave, I leave you to explain why the VFM methodology is problematic. Racheal Patel  21:52Yeah, so So you, I get in trouble and not you. Alright. So I do believe that the value for money calculation that we use in Ontario is problematic, because the way we calculate value for money is that, and, again, I've listened and not at Infrastructure Ontario. So I can't say that with certainty. But my understanding of it is that when so let me take a step back when the idea of I think it's the idea of value for money first is problematic. When we think of value for money, we think of lowest price in Ontario. But when you look at what really value for money, it's the best, it's the best solution based on financial and non financial objectives. That's what value for money is value for money is not finding the cheapest bid. And I think, in Ontario, and I'm not just talking p3, but in Ontario, whether it's through supply chain procurement, so if we always look for this lowest price, because we believe that that is value for money, that itself is problematic for IPD. Because in IPD, its value for money is based on a number of other things, right? Value for money is on the team, it's on. It's not on a fixed price, it's how the team works together, right? Like, that's, you know, when you procure IPD, you're not procuring a fixed price, what you're procuring is the team that comes to the table that will work with you to develop the solution for what you're coming together for, you know, their qualifications, their experience, how they work together, their behaviors, that is what you're evaluating how you choose a team. It's not like, here's my lowest bid. And so I think that's one of the biggest challenges in Ontario is that we had this idea of low bid is the right solution. And then sorry, go   Riccardo Cosentino  21:52yeah, I was gonna I was gonna, you seem reluctant to come to the punch line. So I was gonna I was for you, in case you're too scared. Racheal Patel  24:00Scared, so but I just wanted to say, you know, like, so when you get to value for money calculation, and the way we do it is that it's about transferring the risk, right? So when you look at the value for money calculation, and how, you know, how one thing is, like one procurement model, p3 is better. It's because they're seeing the risk allocation, the transfers of the risk to the private sector is value for money for the public sector, because they're not burdened by that risk. And so that's kind of the premise. And I don't think that's correct, because you're measuring, you know, p3, the risk transference and against a traditional model where there isn't a risk transfer. So that's kind of the issue with the value for money calculation. Now you add an integrated project delivery, where the idea is risk sharing, and then you use that same methodology to calculate value for money IPD will never win because it's IPDs base core base is sharing risk. Because, you know, the definition is if you share a risk, you share solutions, right? Like you're working together to problem solve, as opposed to transferring that problem to somebody else doesn't get to the punch. Thank you. I'm not afraid to say it. But I just wanted to kind of, you know, I think it's two issues in our procurement, it's the idea of what value for money is and how we calculate money.   Riccardo Cosentino  25:26Okay, so I think I think that paints a pretty good picture of what what are the, in my mind, I mean, I'm your research talks about other challenges. And I think there's there's most the softer type challenges, which is, you know, resources, availability of resources, and culture and environment, which you talked at the beginning, but I'm a commercial person. So I always gravitate toward the heard liabilities and the heard numbers. So not that's not the sort of stuff but you know, the soft stuff is important. And yeah, I agree with you, I mean, value for money as to be and it to be to give credit to Infrastructure Ontario for for new projects. Now, on the civil side, they are starting to use more collaborative model, the studying to assess cognitive they do cognitive behavioral assessments for all the people that work on those project, because at the end of the day, there needs to be a culture of fit of everybody's at the table, because otherwise, you're not going to achieve the collaboration that you need. Racheal Patel  26:29100%. And, you know, I, I've spoken to people at Metrolinx, as well about the different ways they're trying to approach project delivery, civil projects are so complex, I would say probably even more so than a hospital delivery. You know, I think the hospital itself is a complex, but what Civil Works does, that's even more complex, but they're willing to try different models. And so if our partners here at Metrolinx, or other organizations are looking at different models, why can't we apply that? That's kind of also why I'm driving this idea. Like, let's look outside the box of what we've traditionally done here, Ontario. Riccardo Cosentino  27:06Yeah, I couldn't agree more. Okay. So jumping on, I wanted to maybe ask you more of a broader question, which, if you have actually had the chance to look at some case studies when you were doing your research, and if there's anything that that jumped out, you might you might have not actually looked at case study, because I know your literature literature review was a bit broader than that. But any, any anything that jumped out and key successes that jumped out,   Racheal Patel  27:34you know, IPD, in general, is permanently used in the US, but I think other countries are looking at it. So when I was doing this study, specifically, I was trying to find public hospitals or public systems that have applied integrated project delivery. The one organization I found was an I'm going to pronounce this wrong, because there is a lot over one of the letters, but it's in Norway, is the Songa project. And so the Norwegian government decided they've had enough with cost overruns, scheduled delays, adversarial relationships. And they actually implemented integrated project delivery in the redevelopment of hospitals, specifically one in this specific region and can't remember the name, but I can get you the reference or anybody that wants to know it after. And so they applied integrated project delivery, because they wanted more of a collaboration and a different approach to public infrastructure, it's probably the closest thing that you would see to a true definition of integrated project delivery, with the exception is that there is no multi party contract. So in integrated project delivery, all the individuals are under a multi party contracts, you all signed together. And so in this public project, that was the only key characteristics of a true IPD. That wasn't in there. But all of the risk sharing the reduced liability, not waiver of liability was there, you know, the the key concepts were there, with the exception of the multi party agreement. So that was probably the only one. There's still in the middle of the build stages. And if you do look it up. It's multi phase project. It's very complex redevelopment in this system. But they've just started issuing case studies or publishing case studies are starting to talk to the public or the global public about this specific example. And it's successful because they have delivered and they've achieved what they've wanted to they've had innovations through the process. But it's the first example of public system using integrated project delivery for health infrastructure. Riccardo Cosentino  29:43Interesting. Okay, I'll try. I'll try to get the details. We'll put in the shownotes. Search it up. Okay, so I guess, as maybe as a final question, probably quite a challenging question but are going to have Is there any way? What will be your recommendation to Ontario policymakers? entities like MOH, or Infrastructure Ontario? To what what would they have to do to embrace IPD for future projects? How can they navigate these challenges? Effectively?   does. I think, I think if I can paraphrase. I mean, there's a there's a need for a shift for a fundamental shift in the policy, because as you describe the fact that hospitals are risk averse, and they can't really absorb too much or cost overruns, or, you know, as lower risk. But that's a funding issue. Right? That's a policy issue there. I mean, at the end of the day, hospital are a creature of the Ministry of Health, right. So ultimately, the governance could allow could be put in place to allow a hospital to to have a different approach a different commercial approach. So it is it is within the gift of the policymaker and the politicians. Racheal Patel  33:45Yeah. And 100%. And I think, you know, when you're paraphrasing it better than I wrote it, I think, but I'm trying to put, you know, 60 pages into small answer. But if you look at you know, just even the allocation of how hospitals have funding for resources to do infrastructure. In the study, a lot of individuals brought up that thing that goes, there's not even enough money to do the current projects that we have with the lack of funding, you know, because they get a certain percentage of ancillary funding in order to pay their staff. But in this situation, when we do IPD, you're going to have a plethora of individuals and experts and stuff that have to sit in the hospital organization to do this. And a hospital isn't an infrastructure professional, right? They bring in the resources to do what they need to but they're they're there to deliver service and care to their community. And so they need to bring all these specialists in but if our if our ancillary costs are how until your cost is given and or funding is given to the hospitals to have the resources doesn't meet the need of these comp, this type of project delivery, you're never going to be able to add execute it. Right now, it supports more of the transactional. So yeah, to your point that also has to be done from a ministry level saying we need to look at how money is given the allocation of funding for these types. Riccardo Cosentino  35:15Okay, so I mean, if I gonna, I'm going to try to summarize I mean, I think my three takeaways is having the there needs to be a change in changing culture, and environment. In order to bring a different type of behaviors to the table, there needs to be a change in the way that risk is allocated, or better, we need to find a better way to share risk. We need to we will need to change some of the policies associated with procurement and project development. And if all this was to happen, then potentially we could have a rich IPD market in Ontario.  Yeah, I think you separated and I think maybe IPD, just in its and probably negate everything I just said about why I'm passionate about IPD. But I, I, I think this would be true for any relational type of contracting like Alliance, Alliance, as well as IPD. They have similarities as we talked about earlier. But what you've summarize are critical for our marketplace to allow for different models. And I think that's kind of the crux of the issue is that we have a marketplace that's set up for one specific type of delivery model. And if we need to look outside the box, we need to look at these issues. Okay, now, you said it better than me, well, Racheal Patel  36:44play off of you. Riccardo Cosentino  36:47Okay, I think I think that's all we have time for today. Thank you very much for joining me today. Racheal. This was a fascinating conversation about our own province, our own in our own country. So thank you for joining me and all the best for your future endeavors. Racheal Patel  37:02Thanks, Riccardo and thank you for the platform to talk about this right now. Riccardo Cosentino  37:08That's it for this episode on navigating major problems. I hope you found today's conversation as informative and thought provoking as I did. If you enjoyed this conversation, please consider subscribing and leaving a review. I would also like to personally invite you to continue the conversation by joining me on my personal LinkedIn at Riccardo Cosentino. Listening to the next episode, we will continue to explore the latest trends and challenges in major program management. Our next in depth conversation promises to continue to dive into topics such as leadership risk management, and the impact of emerging technology in infrastructure. It's a conversation you're not going to want to miss. Thanks for listening to Navigating Major Programmes and I look forward to keeping the conversation going  Music: "A New Tomorrow" by Chordial Music. Licensed through PremiumBeat.DISCLAIMER: The opinions, beliefs, and viewpoints expressed by the hosts and guests on this podcast do not necessarily represent or reflect the official policy, opinions, beliefs, and viewpoints of Disenyo.co LLC and its employees.

“Projects get delivered by people and how we do things in our day to day life and how we make big decisions around our day to day life, whether it's small or big, are actually very relatable on how we make decisions in the business world when funding, approving and delivering projects.”– Dr. Diana Nada Dr. Diana brings over 20 years of experience advising public and private sector clients on strategies and toolkits for best practices in improved capital project delivery and informed decision making. She is a regular industry contributor, a published scholar educator with over 25 speaking engagements. She is the current AAC Canada Region One director, and is a member of the ULI Public Development and Infrastructure Council and the UK APM Project Assurance SIG. Diana is one of the contributing authors to the 2023 first edition for A Guide to Auditing Programmes and Projects, published by APM. She was shortlisted as one of the 2020 A Woman Infrastructure Network, emerging leaders in Canada. Key Takeaways: The importance of qualitative research in major projects, where social sciences intersect with major programmesBasing major project success on a rocky foundation, the deflation of estimates and unrealistic expectationsHow PMBOK (Project Management Body of Knowledge) and PMP (Project Management Professional) certification can evolve to encompass broader strategic considerations and better prepare major programme implementersCollaborative contracting and identifying collaboration (regardless of delivery method) as a key component for success in major programmesPerformance measurement and how not aligning incentives can influences decision-making and team relationships Links Mentioned: Dr. Diane Nada's Project Approval Decisions: Exploring Success FactorsCurbing Optimism Bias and Strategic Misrepresentation in Planning: Reference Class Forecasting in Practice by Bent FlyvbjergThinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman  If you enjoyed this episode, make sure and give us a five star rating and leave us a review on iTunes, Podcast Addict, Podchaser or Castbox. The conversation doesn't stop here—connect and converse with our community via LinkedIn: Navigating Major Programmes on LinkedInFollow Riccardo Cosentino on LinkedInFollow Dr. Diana Nada, PhD on LinkedIn Transcript:Riccardo Cosentino  00:05You're listening to navigate major problems, the podcast that aims to elevate the conversations happening in the infrastructure industry and inspire you to have a more efficient approach within it. I'm your host, Riccardo Cosentino brings over 20 years of major product management experience. Most recently, I graduated from Oxford University's day business school, which shook my belief when it comes to navigating major problems. Now it's time to shake yours. Join me in each episode, as I pressed the industry experts about the complexity of major program management, emerging digital trends and the critical leadership required to approach these multibillion dollar projects. Let's see where the conversation takes us. Dr. Diana nada is a project management expert and advisory mega capital projects, a civil engineer by background with a PhD in project management from the University of Calgary. She brings over 20 years of experience advising public and private sector clients on strategies and toolkits for best practices in improved capital project delivery and informed decision making. She is a regular industry contributor, a published scholar educator with over 25 speaking engagement. She is the current AAC Canada region one director, and is a member of the ULI public development and infrastructure Council and the UK APM project assurance SIG. Diana is one of the contributing over to the 2023 first edition for a guide to auditing problems and project published by APM. She will show listed as one of the 2020 A woman infrastructure network, emerging leaders in Canada. Hello, everyone. Welcome to our new episode on navigating major programs. today. I'm here with Diana nada PhD. Diana did a dissertation a few years ago. And I was very intrigued by her dissertation. And so I asked her to join us today in the on the podcast. How are you doing, Diana? Great. All right.Diana Nada  02:15Thank you, Riccardo for having me.Riccardo Cosentino  02:17Nice to have you. Yeah, I took a lot of joy in reading your dissertation. And it's was quite interesting for me because it was written a few years ago. And some of the topic is still extremely relevant. But you know, maybe you can tell us a little bit more about your dissertation, why you picked it, and what do you learn from it?Diana Nada  02:37Okay, so it's very interesting that we're having this conversation right now. Actually, I did defend the PhD, exactly 10 years ago, around October 1. So if it's been 10 years, and every time I check it, then you've made me go and look into it again. And and remember some of the reasons why I picked this or that. So it's very interesting to reflect after all of those years, maybe a bit about myself. I'm a civil engineer by background, but got very intrigued by project management early on, in my degree. Coming in, as a third culture kid with parents who are engineers, I decided to go into engineering, just probably not by choice, but expectation. My career has been very interesting that I grew up in Dubai. And by the time I graduated and finished my masters, it was very booming in Dubai early 2000s. And I ended up working in a lot of mega projects, a lot of big projects in with a lot of multinationals. In you see how projects get executed get funded. And for me, it was more of I've seen it from the side of delivery and working with a project management consultant. But then I worked also as a developer, and this gave me a bit of like, okay, I've worked on the same project on both sides of the table. And I could see things differently. So I wanted to step back and know more why, why projects go over budget, why there are scheduled delays. And I wanted to explore that and know more about it because project management is a very applied field. I felt that there is a lot in literature and research that actually doesn't get translated into the industry. And that's when I decided to move to Canada and did my PhD at the University of Calgary. Big thanks to my late supervisor, Professor Francis Hartman. I have to say when I started my degree, I presented a specific research interest And then the first day I met him, I said, I don't want to do that. And he was a great mentor. And I don't think I did my research, the outcome of it. And where I was few years later was what I anticipated. It was more of a journey, and a learning experience and a reflection of what I saw in Dubai, what I was seeing in Canada, it was the recession, the financial crisis has just started. By the time I graduated, there was the oil crisis in Calgary. So it's always an opportunity to just reflect on how things around you impact our projects get delivered. So what was your dissertation about? As a research topic, it was called Project Approval decisions exploring success factors, when I mentioned it, the first thing that most people think of is okay, this is about is this is very quantitative, it's about economic analysis, or value for money, etc. But I took a very different perspective, I took it from a qualitative aspect. It's a it's a qualitative research. At that point in time, I didn't know what is qualitative research. As an engineer, you're like thinking about numbers. So it was very intriguing, and I didn't think it applies. So what, as time went by, I learned that qualitative research is very interested in the project management field just because it's an interpretation of why we do specific things, how we solve complex problems. And and I think, in that sense of mega projects, or capital projects, you're dealing with a number of stakeholders, you're dealing with complexity, you're dealing with a timeframe that could be decades. Qualitative research gives you an opportunity to study this from a research base that is based on how people think I had to read a lot of psychology. I've learned a lot of terms like neuro economics, biases. And I remember when I was reading all of this, besides the academic research, part of like, what is qualitative research, I was very intrigued with the psychology and how our brain works. And I remember having conversations that I think it's very applicable to my day to day life, rather than to project management. And this was, for me a very eye opener, because projects get delivered by people, and how we do things in our day to day life and how we make big decisions around our day to day life, whether it's small or big, are actually very relatable on how we make decisions in the business world when funding approving delivering projects.Riccardo Cosentino  07:50Yeah, it's very interesting. Yeah, I, you know, I also learned, when I did my master's degree, in major program management that major programs are treated, the research in major program is treated as a social science. It's very, very interesting, as well as yourself. I'm a civil engineer. And to me, mega projects were always concrete and rebar and, you know, ashphalt and numbers and, and then, you know, when you actually look at the research, you learned that no, it's more about the people. It's more about the biases. I think your your I can't believe how still relevant to your researches in today's world. You know, optimism bias, strategic misrepresentation is still a very relevant topic when it comes to understanding why major programs get delayed and over budget. And it doesn't seem but however, even though that's a well established cause nowadays, it doesn't seem to be a way, especially in the public sector to tackle that issue. You know, I think you mentioned in your research, Bent Flyvbjerg, and you know, is, you know, he's done the most work in translating the Daniel Kahneman research Prospect Theory from the field, the Kahneman and Treviski did into major programs. So they're in you  talk about that. And, you know, I'm new to this academic field. And it's interesting to see that, even after 10 years is still relevant and still not being fully addressed.Diana Nada  09:30Yes, I totally agree with you, even when I was doing it, and I was you read stuff that are 20 years ago, and you're like, oh, this didn't move. We didn't move the needle much in 20 years. And after I was done my PhD and actually before it, I went to the AAC conference and presented it as a pilot to just see how people are gonna react and then presented it few times after that point. When you talk about social sciences, soft skills, trust biases, It was a very different conversation. And people were very skeptical on what that means to project management, to design to construction. And now 10 years later, I think the conversation has shifted, there's more talk about what you've mentioned, like optimism, bias, strategic misrepresentation, the research by Professor Bent. And I remember reading, Thinking Fast and Slow, and was like, wow, really, this is applicable in how amazing or how much we actually need to do this things differently. Because the success rates of projects is really bad. And we all talk about how we should deliver differently and how we should do things in a different way. And only maybe the last few years. I can say maybe for the first time, there is an acceptance of maybe doing but it's it, we're going to see how this movement or how that shift in mindset will will, will take place.Riccardo Cosentino  11:06Yeah, that that's, that's a very, very interesting point, and how, you know, the social science is actually at the core at the core of the success of major projects. And as an engineer, I always wondered, you know, because I know how projects are estimated, and I could not quite rationalize, if you're estimating a project, we're all very smart human beings, we can all determine we have all the statistical tools, we have all the past data, we have all the information, how can you how can we get this so wrong? How can we get the budget so wrong? I mean, we're smarter than that. And so it was refreshing when I learned, you know, the Bent theory about prospect theory about applying to mega project. And that to me was that, to me was the answer. It is like, okay, it's not about not being able to adapt the number to the right budget is just all these biases in these alternative ulterior motive, like strategic misrepresentation in the public sector. In order for in order for project to move forwards politician cannot afford to have the real budget, share publicly, because the sticker shock will stop the project for going forward. So there's always going to be a deflation of the project estimate, even at decision or the point of decision making, or the point of approval, because politicians and the public is not really prepared to accept the true cost of the project. And but then, then you end up in situation where there's there's a big confusion is five years, 10 years after the project was approved? Why is the budget not enough and you know, and then nobody looks backwards to why it was, you know, what happened at the decision making point, they all looked at? Oh, well, you know, the project was mismanaged. And sometimes that's the case in my experience, but it's not always the case. Sometimes you never had a chance to begin with, because if you're not given the proper resources to begin with, you're never going to be on time and on budget.Diana Nada  13:32Yeah, yeah. And I had the same, I'd say a epiphany I was looking as like, yes, we are. How do we get the budget that wrong? And how do we get the schedule as well, because we are building something like we're putting a schedule, that's unrealistic, and a budget, that's not going to be met. A and that was the point in time when I was very curious, is this the environment I am working in? Is this the industry like construction? Is this different teams? And the research was mostly around, okay. It's not related to the industry, the most of the industries that are plagued with the same issues, whether you're looking at infrastructure, healthcare, it oil and gas, any any you name it, and it's not by the location across the world. And that's why the interesting part you mentioned is this critical point and when you make the decision to invest or want or approve the project, and that's what and that was a point when I wasn't very appreciative. Our what could go wrong at this point. And the fact that we actually start on the wrong footing, like right from that point, you approve a budget and a schedule that no one believes If you ask anyone they would know that this number is I would, in an extreme sense, a, an educated guess, the schedule. And later on you are evaluating the success of this project, like you said, by the people by the management of the people, the teams. Other factors, what you're actually not looking back to see, did we approve, did we do this right? Was this business case, fully representative of of all factors that we need, but then later on, I appreciated that you actually cannot predict the future at that point in time. And I think embracing this risk and change is important. Because no matter how much you learn at that point in time, you are trying your best. And it's based on limited or less information that you will know as you actually design and have a project because there is no project at that point in time. It's all numbers. And and I think that's why the qualitative part is important. Because the quantitative part takes the attention as a doc as a business case, and everything. But that qualitative and how we actually go about that decision and deliver on font is what, what actually we need to pay more attention to. And I think even right now, this aspect of the how we approved the project in to get the funding and to get it approved. And to get that signature and to get it sanctioned. I think this is where we will struggle for a bit. Because even though I'm going to speak about the environment in Canada, we are now in a phase where we are considering other models, this number still, we have not went back to see this this number, the right number we start from or not the right schedule or not. And that's even without considering that you're making this approval or this schedule 20 years, and then by the time you're actually on the ground, it's 20 years later, by the time this number is approved by a specific politician. This number probably stays the same for 10 years without inflation and escalation. And then you don't visit it, because you can't at that point in time, and you just keep going. Yeah,Riccardo Cosentino  17:33I mean, they are according to Bent Flydjerg. I mean, part of the problem is, is that yes, I mean, it's correct that these numbers, once he's approved, it doesn't get changed. But I think the reality that the main, the main problem is that sometimes the number is is strategically deflated. Because if you actually calculate the right number and present the right number are gonna get is not going to get approved. And because in you know, there is, you know, there are, you know, Kahneman talks about it and Ben Flybjerg talks about it, you know, you can you can have an outside view. So you can you can do a benchmarking, you know, usually you can do bottom and bottom up estimate, which is not going to be perfect, because you don't know, as you said, you cannot. But, you know, by by also having a bottom up estimate a benchmarking estimate using an outside view, you could triangulate a better number. But so I don't think that predicting the future is the main issue, I think, is that the true cost of a project and the decision making, or the point that the shoe making point is just never something that politician can stomach. So there's always going to be a tendency to deflate it in order to get through.Diana Nada  18:55Yep. Yeah. And, and even the sense of like, you cannot predict the future, but you can get better at it. Yes. And that's why Professor Bent talks about reference class casting and how you can actually look at how you have been delivering projects and making it and, and working out backwards and see how you can make that estimate better. But we're not doing that. We can get better, but we're not thereRiccardo Cosentino  19:20Let me let me take you to another part of your dissertation that I found quite interesting. And hopefully, hopefully you still remember it. But you know, I think is in the original introduction in the literature review, you actually do a critical assessment of the PMBOK Yeah. And and the and the you know, the the PMP and I found a found that is quite interesting. I think I think your your findings were probably the PMBOK is not is not a deep enough tool to help keep project on time and on budget. Can you. Do you remember Can you elaborate?Diana Nada  19:55Yeah, I do. I do. Remember that. I tackle it all the time. So I first learned about the PMBOK. Actually, during my undergrad, there was a course that was on the PMBOK. For me, at that point, it was like, wow, there is a project management, body of knowledge out there. And I think it was maybe second, third addition. And then at that point in time, you're like, you have to get the PMP, you have to get the PMP. This is important. And the PMP, I think, is important because it gives you the basics, the jargon, and I'm talking, I'm now moving into a term that a lot of people would not appreciate. But I don't think so I finished my degree. When I when I, when I finished my literature review, it was 2012 2013. So at that point in time, the PMBOK did not yet touch the PMI, triangle strategy business, it was still very focused on project management. From a technical perspective, the edition in 2013, or 14 has, like, if you look at it 10 years later, there has been a big shift, the PMBOK has changed quite a bit. So my analysis at that point in time was very much based on this is not enough, you're only talking about 10 bodies of knowledge. You're not talking about external factors, you're not talking about the style, which socio political economic factors. You're not talking about the business case and the strategy. And you're also not talking about, you're talking about human resources, even from very, like HR, but not you're talking about that you can't find resources or supplies or challenges around that. So I found that very limiting at that point, and that's why I have that, that view, and I would go even an extra step and say that the PMP on its own, it's like talking about education versus experience versus studying for an exam, it's a mix of things, you can't say that just because someone has this experience, or this degree or this certificate that they know it all, it's a bunch of things. So that's why I addressed it from from this point. But I also then learn that that journey about the APM, the Association of project management in the UK, and and I found that the that there are aspects there and research based aspects that I think is worth. US including in North America, mind you, the jordanelle, the Project Management Journal of the PMI is, is huge. It most of the research is out of the PMI, I think is just how we can embrace some of this research in that the PMI hosts to into the PMBOK And in I think that's that's where the the issue is. Yeah, I have a similar, I have a similar so I used to have a PMP designation, I kinda lead a lapsed, and a you remember? So this was probably around even before 2013 Yeah, and I found it was very, very rigid, very rigid structure. And I agree with you now that I've been exposed to novel theories, like major programs that cause complex adaptive systems, right. And you know, treating major programs or temporary organization and designing designing major programs as organization. So applying, you know, the, what we typically apply to businesses to project a major project. I mean, we talk about major projects, because those are more complex. And so, you know, the same way you apply a porter five forces to, to a corporation, you should be able to also apply, you know, maybe not Porter, but a different framework that, you know, we apply to Galbraith star to a major program, and adopting the PMBOK goes into that level of organization design, and, you know, and as managing external stakeholders, and, you know, applying system thinking to major programs. So, yeah, I don't know if now PMBOK got there. But yeah, at the time, it wasn't there. And it probably is not there today, either. Yeah, there has been a shift and change in the last seven years. There are some aspects I still go and like I'm curious to see how much it has changed. But I don't think it has changed yet. But but the most important thing is that for me that when I did it, it was very, compared to maybe it Two years later, after I defended, there was a change in the PMBOK. But I don't I think there it is critical that the pm Bock embraces some of those factors given that it is the basis of, of how, like, it's basically okay. Do you know project management? Do you have a PMP? which is… I put the question mark.Riccardo Cosentino  25:29is more complex than that? Yeah, yeah. Okay. So, you know, I know, we talked about your, your dissertation and how you defend it, you know, in a few words, how would you how would you characterize the findings of your research?Diana Nada  25:46So I think the biggest finding that I kind of put out there is that the documentation or the approval for funding or the sanctioning that critical point is not documented well? And is is that that what we talked about at the beginning that we start on the wrong fitting, that I think wasn't what a major or a big finding out of it, there were the other ones where I studied how executives make decision making making and how project I called them project implementers, not project managers, basically, the delivery team. And even you can think of it of a context of an organization where there's executive slash staff. So there is the difference in how teams make decisions. And this difference is mostly around, their priorities are different. When you're making a decision, as an executive, you are thinking about specific priorities, and you're thinking about the company interests, you're thinking about profit, you're thinking about shareholder value, you're thinking about different aspects. And then when you're making a decision as a delivery team, you're actually thinking about cost, schedule, budget scope. And these are two different worlds, or two different realities. In a lot of my data collection was around making sense of how those two teams interact, and what are their priorities, and how they share information, or not share information, transparency, trust, communication, and all of these factors that come into play, once you actually start delivering the project. So the findings were around that how we make decisions as teams is very different. There are different priorities and acknowledging that this is a big factor that will continue. But I think, to bridge this gap, is to actually share why we're doing this project. Because we're, why we're doing the project from each team's perspective is very different. And the way I've termed it is like a project intent. Getting alignment on this, from the different stakeholders that are involved is key, so that we're working towards the same success. Outcomes are the same, the definitions of how we want to proceed. And then I take examples of how teams change make a decision around the change in scope, around priorities, etc. Part of this big research was also a big picture of at that point in time, collaborative contracting at that point in time, and that was the big research group. So each one of us had had a specific aspect, in like my contribution at that point in time was around those the teams are different. And how we can make sure that the teams work together from a success outcome, and other team members were taking it from procurement from risk, etc. So that was kind of how sharing information trust communication, and biases impacts how actually projects get delivered. And how do they actually make or break a project and cause delays or overruns.Riccardo Cosentino  29:14Very interesting. So this was 10 years ago. Yeah, already looking at collaborative contracting. We now talking about collaborative contracting in Canada. Yeah. On the largest scale, and we have authority started to exploring I don't want to say embrace because nobody's embrace collaborative contract. That definitely exploring but yeah, it's been it's been out there for a while. And yeah, I've I've had, you know, my dissertation was about that as well. Obviously, not a PhD dissertation, but, and I've had other colleagues coming on the podcast to talk about IPD alliances in different sectors. Yeah, it's, yeah, I mean, I'm I anecdotally I I believe collaboration is a significant player is a key component of success in delivering major programs. I always said that, you know, I think it was my anecdote that lawyers, you know, money that you spend on legal fees don't get to pour concrete faster. So if you are able to remove the litigation from the day to day running of the project, and you focus that those resources on actually moving the project forward, you have a better chance of achieving success and completion on time and on budget.Diana Nada  30:32Yes, yeah. And at the end of the day, a contract, whether it's an IPD, or an alliance, or a P3 or a design build is a contract, you will find issues with the contract. It is how you interpret the contract and how you work together, and collaborate. So even if you change the type of contract, and you're not doing all those things that you need to do from a success, like collaboration and how you share information, you're still gonna might get the same result.Riccardo Cosentino  31:06The contract is I defined a contract myself has, you know, that's, that's, that's the ultimate back stopper, right? Yeah. So ultimately, when when relation breakdown and or the working level contract, you go and look at a contract, right. And so I believe that you can have collaboration within even like, contract with, with litigation built into it. However, you have less room for maneuvering, right. So if you have not enough budget, because you never would never price the correctly or you never had to write rewrite budget at the decision making point. And then you have another adversarial contract, eventually, with all the best will in the world, is going to come to a clash at the working level, and you're going to go back to the contract, and then it is going to become litigious. So I think you can have collaboration, but without without a collaborative contract. But then you need to have the right resources available. Because if when there's scarcity of resources, you go back to the contract, and then you find a way of getting the money that you loosing.Diana Nada  32:25court. Correct? Correct. And that's probably why my my research was very, was not tied to a specific contract as well, because I believe that that collaboration is key, regardless of how you're delivering the project. Some of my recommendations were around, okay. How do you enhance this collaboration regardless of of the contract in, in any project in in, and I think this is applicable, like some of the stuff that I talk about is our rules of engagement, how you would do partnering meetings, that you're not talking about the project that design the cost and schedule, but you're talking about all of us as a team, how we're working together, what behaviors we need to change, what what decisions we need to make, because a lot of the time that you go into litigation or you go to that stage, when actually you have failed in, in having a proper communication or a decision or resolution of a of an issue. So how will you share that bad news and make a decision, because that a lot of the times, even not making a decision is a decision. So how you would have that environment where we are working in a in a in a transparent, relatively transparent environment where you could say this went wrong. Or you could share and, and most of the time, I remember that the best projects that we all remember are the teams and people we worked with. Not that the schedule was over budget, or the schedule was was delayed, or it was an overrun, but you remember your relationships that you've built in that project. And that's why building this relationship, and even how you form a team, you're not gonna start a team and trust each other from day one. If we take like marriage, you're not like or if you meet someone, this this is something you're investing in, and it's the same as a project. So so how you build that, so that you are all working towards the same success outcomes. I also talk about how you can bridge this gap between how teams, executives or project managers think Think or prioritize differently. And I say, well, we need to be in each other's shoes. So I call it correct courier swaps. Give the opportunity for project team members to understand why you are making decisions from a business perspective this way, share with them more information. And vice versa. The project team is not sharing the right budget, or the schedule with your design consultant, or the contractor. So, so try to find opportunities where you would actually learn from each other because your realities are different. And you're also governed like, performance measurement for each one is different. So you're actually going to make decisions differently. So if you are, if your performance is going to be measured by profit, that's different if your performance is going to be measured by meeting a project deadline, and I've seen it firsthand when, when I work then and I usually give this example. I worked on one project where I was part of the project management team. And there was sales there was strategy team. And this sales and marketing team were able to sell the apartments or the or, or the basically go on sale like and meet their priorities in terms of, okay, we sold X number of apartments, and they got their bonus. But the project team was putting a budget and schedule that was not favorable. So they didn't get a bonus. But we're all working on the same project. But we're measured differently. That was for me, an aha moment that if we are measured differently, then there are our outcomes will be different. And that's not even talking about job security, by individual biases, and all of that. So and that's why I talk about company interest, Project interest and individual interest and they are different.Riccardo Cosentino  37:13Yeah, I mean, that's why I mean, I mentioned earlier, the Gerber f star right, aligning processes, people remuneration, strategy, culture, like that's what you do in any organization. However, we don't seem to do it when it comes to project. And this is the perfect example. You know, you've got a sales team, who's focuses on selling the project management team is supposed to construct and build and it's one team, right. And then so you've now by not aligning the the incentives and aligning the compensation, you now created. Diverging interest. Yeah, it'sDiana Nada  37:51point two fingers.Riccardo Cosentino  37:53But it's interesting how there is so common knowledge and common practice in business, right, I've done an MBA. So I mean, that's, you know, you go to MBA, and you study all of this. And in yet, when it comes to project management or major program management, there's not the same level of understanding, but it's it's it's, it's there it's hobbyists, major projects is an organization.Diana Nada  38:18Yeah, I still find it very fascinating. It is, when I see projects, and how team members interact, and how a project or when looking at documents and all of that, it is a very fascinating field.Riccardo Cosentino  38:36So the No, this was a really, really interesting conversation, I think, I think we're coming to an end of the podcast. You know, I think you've, you've now defended your dissertation. 10 years ago, you seen some changes? I just, I've asked this question in the past to our guests, and I'm going to ask you as well was, Do you have any hope for the industry? Do you have any hope for the field of project management?Diana Nada  39:03I do. I do. And then in it's interesting, you asked the question. And I myself went through a learning curve. So the when I got asked, I actually got I got asked that question differently. It 10 years ago when I was like, oh, Diana, then you're saying there is no hope. And at that point in time, you're still fresh from your PhD, you don't you have not tested it again, like you did. You you worked. You did the research, and you want to go back to industry and actually test okay, because the research was mostly testing what you've seen. That's how I saw it. And I think there is there is hope. I think the conversations that we are all having in the interest in the sharing of knowledge across the different borders. Is there as simple as The research by an in, in us having that conversation when we first met about Professor bent and all of all of that, I think there, there's more talk about it. So I think there is hope. And I think there's some how, and appreciation that okay, we need to stand back and see what we're doing wrong. Because we're getting the same results. It's basically I was Einstein scoring six, yeah, Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. And we've been doing things over and over again, expecting different results. So I think there is an appreciation that we need to do some something about it. We are trying to do things differently. And I think this is good in that sense. And I think for me, it's more of an appreciation that actually projects are not unique. You can learn from past projects, and you can come up with better schedules and better budgets, you can make decisions at the right time, you should also acknowledge that there will be changes on the project. We had the pandemic, no one expected it. It's a black swan event, things could go sideways. And I think the governance in how the teams work together is what's the hope that we could actually do projects differently and better. And if we study the projects that were successful, they did something that we should learn about.Riccardo Cosentino  41:34No, I could No, I could not agree more. I think you touching upon or very, very relevant topic. You mentioned uniqueness bias. I mean, bent, always says that your project is not unique. So uniqueness bias is a problem. A lesson learned from successful projects. I posted an article a few weeks ago about OPG here in Ontario, learning from from what went wrong in nuclear and changing for the refurbishment of Darlington and now their project is going very well. So yeah, I mean, there is hope. There is hope. It's not all doom and gloom, but I think yeah,Diana Nada  42:12and don't rush into execution. Yes.Riccardo Cosentino  42:15What does Ben say? Glance thing lands? Execute fast.Diana Nada  42:20Yeah, yeah. So plan, you have to plan. And then you have to execute, but don't rush into execution and break ground.Riccardo Cosentino  42:31Well, and on that note, thank you very much they and it was it was a pleasure to have you on the podcast. And I look forward to to meet you again. Some somewhere in Toronto. And maybe we'll have you back for season two to explore other topics.Diana Nada  42:47Thank you, thank you Riccardo for this opportunity and actually giving me the opportunity to reflect on on this in a way that I have not had the chance to actually go back and revisit and read. So thank you for for that and pleasure beings.Riccardo Cosentino  43:04Thank you. Bye now. That's it for this episode on navigating major problems. I hope you found today's conversation as informative and thought provoking as I did. If you enjoyed this conversation, please consider subscribing and leaving a review. I would also like to personally invite you to continue the conversation by joining me on my personal LinkedIn at Riccardo Cosentino. Listening to the next episode, where we will continue to explore the latest trends and challenges in major program management. Our next in depth conversation promises to continue to dive into topics such as leadership risk management, and the impact of emerging technology in infrastructure. It's a conversation you're not going to want to miss. Thanks for listening to navigate the major programs and I look forward to keeping the conversation going Music: "A New Tomorrow" by Chordial Music. Licensed through PremiumBeat.DISCLAIMER: The opinions, beliefs, and viewpoints expressed by the hosts and guests on this podcast do not necessarily represent or reflect the official policy, opinions, beliefs, and viewpoints of Disenyo.co LLC and its employees.

In this episode we dive into mentoring the CEO of a General Contractor The Challenge Imagine you've recently been consulted by a close friend who happens to be the CEO of a major general contractor. She's expressed concerns about her company's project management approach, fearing that it might be costing them valuable contracts. Continue Learning ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Access to Top Planning and Scheduling Jobs.⁠⁠ Subscribe to the ⁠⁠⁠Beyond Deadlines⁠⁠⁠ Linkedin newsletter. ⁠Check Out Our YouTube Channel⁠. Connect Follow ⁠⁠Micah⁠⁠, ⁠⁠Greg⁠⁠ and ⁠Beyond Deadlines⁠ on LinkedIn. Beyond Deadlines Specialized in empowering construction planners and schedulers worldwide, we offer rich content, advice, and tools to launch and boost your career in planning and scheduling. No degree? Transitioning? Seasoned expert? We're your resource. Forget about expensive certifications and out-of-date degrees. Access the future of planning with us. About Micah Micah, an Intel project leader and Google alumnus, champions next-gen planning and scheduling at both tech giants. Co-founder of Google's Computer Vision in Construction Team, he's saved projects millions via tech advancements. He also writes two construction planning and scheduling newsletters. M.Sc in Project Management, Saint Mary's University. About Greg Greg, an Astrophysicist turned project guru, managed £100M+ defense programs at BAE Systems (UK) and advised on international strategy. Now CEO at ⁠Nodes and Links⁠, he's revolutionizing projects with pioneering AI controls. Experience groundbreaking strategies with Greg's expertise. Topics We Cover change management, communication, construction planning, construction scheduling, creating teams, critical path method, cpm, culture, KPI, microsoft project, milestone tracking, oracle, p6, planning, planning engineer, pmp, portfolio management, predictability, presenting, primavera p6, project acceleration, project budgeting, project controls, project management, project planning, program management, resource allocation, risk management, schedule acceleration, scheduling, scope management, task sequencing. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/beyonddeadlines/support

In this episode we dive into mentoring the CEO of a General Contractor The Challenge Imagine you've recently been consulted by a close friend who happens to be the CEO of a major general contractor. She's expressed concerns about her company's project management approach, fearing that it might be costing them valuable contracts. Continue Learning ⁠⁠⁠Access to Top Planning and Scheduling Jobs.⁠ Subscribe to the ⁠⁠Beyond Deadlines⁠⁠ Linkedin newsletter. Check Out Our YouTube Channel. Connect Follow ⁠Micah⁠, ⁠Greg⁠ and Beyond Deadlines on LinkedIn. Beyond Deadlines Specialized in empowering construction planners and schedulers worldwide, we offer rich content, advice, and tools to launch and boost your career in planning and scheduling. No degree? Transitioning? Seasoned expert? We're your resource. Forget about expensive certifications and out-of-date degrees. Access the future of planning with us. About Micah Micah, an Intel project leader and Google alumnus, champions next-gen planning and scheduling at both tech giants. Co-founder of Google's Computer Vision in Construction Team, he's saved projects millions via tech advancements. He also writes two construction planning and scheduling newsletters. M.Sc in Project Management, Saint Mary's University. About Greg Greg, an Astrophysicist turned project guru, managed £100M+ defense programs at BAE Systems (UK) and advised on international strategy. Now CEO at Nodes and Links, he's revolutionizing projects with pioneering AI controls. Experience groundbreaking strategies with Greg's expertise. Topics We Cover change management, communication, construction planning, construction scheduling, creating teams, critical path method, cpm, culture, KPI, microsoft project, milestone tracking, oracle, p6, planning, planning engineer, pmp, portfolio management, predictability, presenting, primavera p6, project acceleration, project budgeting, project controls, project management, project planning, program management, resource allocation, risk management, schedule acceleration, scheduling, scope management, task sequencing. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/beyonddeadlines/support

Join J. Richard Jones as he dives into conversation with Chris Earl, Vice President, Project Delivery, Victoria Shipyards to learn more about the history and future of Canada's submarine program and how Victoria Shipyards is uniquely positioned to support it. Chris Earl joined Seaspan Victoria Shipyards in 2021, and in July 2022, assumed his current role as Vice President, Project Delivery. Chris is a retired Rear-Admiral (RAdm) in the Royal Canadian Navy, where he spent the last 35 years serving Canada. During his last four years in uniform, RAdm (Ret'd) Earl served as the Chief Engineer of the Royal Canadian Navy and was appointed as the Chief of Staff (Material); the most senior military procurement and sustainment specialist within the Material group of the Canadian Armed Forces. In his current role as Vice President, Project Delivery, Chris is responsible for all Naval maintenance programs and National Shipbuilding Strategy build support activities conducted at Victoria Shipyards. Chris is a graduate of the Royal Military College, holds a Bachelor's degree in Electrical Engineering, a Master's degree in Defence Studies, and is a graduate of both the Canadian Forces College Joint Command and Staff and National Security Programmes. Victoria Shipyards specializes in complex projects up to complete vessel conversions. It is an integral part of the Canadian Navy frigate and submarine maintenance programs, with its highly specialized and experienced team providing critical maintenance on Canada's Halifax-class frigates for over 20 years and in-service support for its Victoria-Class submarines for over a decade. Victoria Shipyards is one of the few North American shipyards executing work on international cruise vessels and performing the first major vessel LNG dual fuel conversion on two ships. Victoria Shipyards operates within the federally owned Esquimalt Graving Dock (EGD), the largest solid bottom commercial drydock on the West Coast of the Americas. In this episode: Seaspan's history as a trusted partner in Canada's submarine maintenance and sustainment program The uniqueness of working on submarines How Team Victoria Class (with partners Babcock and BMT) is providing value for Canada Considerations for the future of Canada's submarines The future of Team Victoria Class and Seaspan And more!

On this episode of Defence Deconstructed, David Perry speaks to Chris Earl, Jason Kenny, Jeff Tasseron, and Pat Thauberger about how the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces can harness industry's anti-submarine warfare expertise. Kate Todd and Charlotte Duval-Lantoine talk about the latest in defence and security news. This episode is an excerpt from our conference, Canadian Anti Submarine Warfare in the Future Strategic Environment, which took place on June 15, 2023. It was made possible thanks to the support of the Department of National Defence's MINDS Program, CGAI's Strategic Sponsors Lockheed Martin Canada, General Dynamics, and Irving Shipbuilding; and our event sponsors: BAE Systems; IMP Aerospace and Defence; CAE; Seaspan Vancouver Shipyards and Bombardier. Defence Deconstructed is brought to you by Irving Shipbuilding and CAE. Participants' bios RADm (ret'd) Chris Earl is Vice President Project Delivery at Seaspan. https://www.seaspan.com/leadership-team/ Col (ret'd) Jason Kenny is Director of Business Development, Canada & United States at IMP Aerospace and Defence – https://www.impaerospaceanddefence.com/contact-us.php Col (ret'd) Jeff Tasseron is the Director of Strategic Growth & Acquisition at CAE and a CGAI Fellow – https://www.cgai.ca/jeff_tasseron Col (ret'd) Pat Thauberger is Director CMMA at General Dynamics – Mission Systems Canada – https://ca.linkedin.com/in/patrick-thauberger-col-ret-1258aa12 Host Bio: 
Dr. David Perry is President of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute – www.cgai.ca/david_perry Recording Date: 15 Jun 2023 Follow the Canadian Global Affairs Institute on Facebook, Twitter (@CAGlobalAffairs), or on LinkedIn. Head over to our website at www.cgai.ca for more commentary. Produced by Charlotte Duval-Lantoine. Music credits to Drew Phillips

https://youtu.be/QvcTzrraMS0 Jay Aigner is the CEO of JDAQA, LLC, a scalable team of experienced software quality assurance professionals that helps software development teams remove the stress of testing. We discuss the project delivery framework, ways to remove yourself from the business process, and why software testing is important. --- Nail Project Delivery with Jay Aigner Our guest is Jay Aigner, the CEO of JDAQA, a software consulting company focused on implementing and automating quality assurance, accessibility, and security testing. That was a mouthful. Welcome to the show, Jay. Thanks for having me, Steve. Glad to be here. So you are running a somewhat technical company. So I think our challenge is going to be to keep it high level so that everyone can relate to it. But on our pre-discussion, I think we achieved that. So I'm kind of excited about how it's going to go. So let's start with your journey. So you start as an upfair contractor a few years ago, and now you have over 60 people working for you. How did you do that? How did you build this business from just being a freelancer? So I kept my nine to five job while I built the freelancing side up. I use my experience in QA to basically land a bunch of gigs, land a bunch of jobs, had a bunch of run at the same time. I didn't set out necessarily to run a business. I just was trying to make extra income. And then eventually I started pulling other people that I'd worked with previously. My old boss actually ended up working for me and then built a team out. One of the bigger milestones was hiring a chief operating officer. She was one of my kind of ace QA people, and she had the option to either work with me at full time or to get a promotion and kind of stay at her current job. She said she really wanted to work with me. I took a leap of faith there and it was probably one of the best decisions I could have ever made because it took me from working in the business to working on the business. And it was a big transition for me. And then we just started keep hiring contractors. We have US based folks, people in Mexico and then the Philippines. And we've built out each one of those over the years. So it's been a good run, man. That is exciting. So you talk about your hiring contracts in different geographies. So what's the difference between a contractor that you hired in the Philippines and one in Mexico? Are there cultural differences? Is there a different approach that these people take? So walk me through what is your thinking and what is your experience? Great question. Yes, there's certainly cultural differences. United States folks are much different than our team in Mexico. And then the people in the Philippines, completely different than either one of the other two. I think the common thread is hard workers, good communication skills. And you got to kind of find those common threads to be able to build those teams in different areas because good communication for someone in the Philippines is the same as good communication in America and Mexico and anything else. You have different time zones to deal with. You have different accents and things to get used to when you're working with those different folks. But culturally, I think everybody that at least is on our team appreciates being paid well for working hard. And I think once we've established that as our foundation everything from there is pretty easy. Okay, so in terms of communication are you saying it's the same so you have to communicate the same way to people in Mexico and the Philippines or the US or it's different?  I think it's the same I don't treat them any differently I don't talk to them really any differently there's some nuances where maybe one location is more introverted or reserved or quiet than another. Maybe one kind of talk tends to ramble and just talk more than the other. Maybe people, and I'll go ahead and say it, the United States are maybe a little overconfident sometimes...

In this episode the fellas talk about the role and future of the newPM and explore how Project Managers will move toward a data-centric project environment and just what does that men for project delivery? Donne and Jonathan are approaching this differently, they are focusing on the human centred approach, and in a world of tech, gadgets and information, perhaps this is what projects really need? Donnie MacNicol is the founder of Team Animation which works across multiple sectors energising leaders and teams delivering complex change to maximise value and certainty of success through a focus on the human dimension. Donnie acts as a catalyst to support organisations to improve their collaboration and productivity – aspects that will be critical to tackling the many challenges we face today including climate change and in particular in meeting the NetZero target Jonathan Norman was a business publisher for 26 years, specialising in topics including project and programme management. Following six years as Knowledge Manager at the Major Projects Association, he now works freelance as project strategy and knowledge consultant, specialising in communities of practice, as as a freelance development editor for business book authors. A big thanks to our sponsor for making our podcast happen. InEight.com --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/project-chatter-podcast/message

Jay Aigner is the CEO of JDAQA, LLC, a scalable team of experienced software quality assurance professionals that helps software development teams remove the stress of testing. We discuss the project delivery framework, ways to remove yourself from the business process, and why software testing is important.   Time Stamps [00:34] Jay's entrepreneurial journey [02:25] Difference between contractors in Mexico and the Philippines [03:53] Communication among contractors [05:27] The Project Delivery Framework [07:04] How to remove yourself from the business process [10:42] The biggest benefits of delegating [13:13] Software testing and why it's important [17:57] How to automate software testing [21:08] The use of AI in software testing [24:02] Quality assurance in all software  [27:33] Parting Thoughts    Links and Resources Steve and Greg Cleary's Book: Pinnacle: Five Principles that Take Your Business to the Top of the Mountain Work with Steve - Stevepreda.com Jay's LinkedIn Jdaqa.com Jay's email: Jay@Jdaqa.com

Exceeding Project Delivery ExpectationsCourtenay Bauer is a Principal of Los Angeles-based architectural firm Verse Design, which has a sister studio in Shanghai. Prior to co-founding Verse Design LA in 2015, Courtenay worked as a project architect at offices on both coasts of the United States.Courtenay leverages more than 20 years of focused experience in architectural planning, design, and contract administration on a variety of projects in the United States and China. Her work is committed to the ideas and importance of efficient and sustainable construction, while advocating for the implementation of innovation in our built environment. As Principal, Courtenay's strengths lie in her ability to adroitly identify a project's status and manage teams to exceed delivery expectations.Courtenay holds a Bachelor of Science in Architecture from the Catholic University of America and a Master of Architecture from Pratt Institute in Brooklyn, New York. Furthering her connectivity with the profession, Courtenay has been involved in the academic community, teaching visual studies seminars and design studios at SCI-Arc, UCLA, and USC.This week on EntreArchitect podcast, Exceeding Project Delivery Expectations with Courtenay Bauer.Learn more about Courtenay at Verse Design, or connect with her on Facebook and Instagram.Please visit Our Platform SponsorsDetailed is an original podcast by ARCAT that features architects, engineers, builders, and manufacturers who share their insight and expertise as they highlight some of the most complex, interesting, and oddest building conditions that they have encountered… and the ingenuity it took to solve them. Listen now at ARCAT.com/podcast.EntreArchitect Network. Since 2012, EntreArchitect has helped thousands of architects like you find the connections, training, and critical business resources needed to build happy, healthy, profitable architecture firms. Join EntreArchitect Network today.Visit our Platform Sponsors today and thank them for supporting YOU… The EntreArchitect Community of small firm architects.

Sign up for the CSI National Conference here: Follow CSI here: https://www.linkedin.com/company/construction-specifications-institute/

In this episode, I talk with Arthur Antoine, Ph.D., P.E., PMP, DBIA, a civil engineer and senior project manager at Mott MacDonald with over 20 years of experience in the construction and engineering industry, about the importance and benefits of collaborative project delivery. Arthur also sheds light on the key characteristics that encourage collaboration among […] The post TEPM 022: The Benefits of Collaborative Project Delivery in the Construction Industry appeared first on Engineering Management Institute.

In this episode Dale and Val talk to the infamous Greg Lawton about the impact of AI and how it may be used, abused and help enhance our cognitive abilities for real-world practical application. Greg does an incredible job of making us understand the simplicities and subtle notions that may provide the biggest increase in service support, innovation and climate. How might AI be the driver of the car or in Project Controls AI might be the interpreter looking for endless ways to improve the project to achieve the outcomes. Where is AI going to hit first (disruption has already begun)? Greg shares his views and the landscape of AI in project-related fields. For those that are looking at how AI may be taken advantage of in the workplace, Greg will have you thinking broadly and more specifically about where it can really make a positive difference. Greg has a vast knowledge of generative AI and project technology. The biggest innovation was not a technological one it was a productive one with the advent of an accessible, easy-to-use human interface. The start of usability to much larger capability within the deeper AI capability. Listen to various approaches and discussions around ChatGPT, Bard, CoPilot and others breaking into this era of AI-supported project transformation. What you need to know is about AI and how Role, Job and Career - insightful stuff Greg! A little bit about Greg... Greg Lawton is the CEO and co-founder of Nodes & Links, a project intelligence and analysis platform that applies machine learning and automation to project data. The software outputs actionable insights to help teams tame project complexity. Prior to founding Nodes & Links, Greg was an astrophysicist working for BAE Systems, managing large defence programmes and advising the board of directors on international strategy. It was during his time at BAE that he realised there was a need for a tool that could simplify the lives of project control professionals by reducing manual tasks. Greg is focused on building a world-class product and ambitious team who are committed to driving innovation and pushing the boundaries of what is possible with technology. He lives in Zurich with his wonderful wife, Anina, and his adorable puppy, Dippy. Proudly brought to you by InEight www.InEight.com For more information visit www.ProjectChatterPodcast.com. #ProjectControls #ProjectPlanning #AiProjects #AIConstruction --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/project-chatter-podcast/message

Editor's Note: Exciting changes are coming to the Postlight Podcast! We're taking a few weeks off from recording and sharing some of our favorite episodes from the Postlight Podcast archives. We'll have some big announcements for you soon, so stay tuned!In this episode, get another look into how Postlight works as Chris and Gina discuss how specific training and onboarding guidelines can restrict progress and creative approaches to project delivery. Can encouraging critical thinking lead to better products and happier clients? How much freedom is too much? And do the benefits match the costs?  Links:The Agile Manifesto

Pamela Kellert has a background in strategy and she brought this to the podcast prep with a 2 page document outlining the topics she hoped we could cover.  It's a thing of beauty, covering leadership development while working hybrid/remote, culture, opportunities for women and minorities and a detailed chart of how improved leadership is a benefit and opportunity for organizations. Pamela and I met during YouMap coach certification training and I was drawn to her intentional and thoughtful leadership approach.  I knew she was based in Germany but the true scope of her global network was not something I understood until this podcast conversation.  Like me, she was working in distributed teams well before the pandemic and remembers how much we had to MacGyver to make the technology and the teams work. Pamela Kellert bio and contact info: Pamela Kellert helps female professionals in STEM sectors thrive in leadership roles. She is a seasoned Strategic Leadership Expert with over 16 year's experience working in Strategy, Business Development and Project Delivery, heading diverse teams at leading organisations across Australia, Asia, Europe and North America. She has managed complex engineering projects and profit & loss responsibility of over $100 million with a team of over 100 employees. As a leadership coach, Pamela supports women on various experience levels to lead effectively and authentically. Pamela Kellert | LinkedIn Women Leading in STEM By Pamela Kellert

If you toss a baseball anywhere inside the Washington, D.C. beltway, you will probably hit a company that develops software. Well, what differentiates them? Size?  Degrees the staff hold.  The number of contracts?  Today, we sit down with a couple of software development experts from Excella to talk about completing more that the bare minimum for a project. They argue, quite cogently, that quality is the characteristic that is the hardest to achieve and has the most lasting impact on federal projects. Two representatives from Excella are in the studio to argue their case.  Doguhan Uluca and Keith Mealo from Excella sat down to discuss everything from shift left to legacy to elite performance. The interview begins with a discussion about FISMA High Impact and FedRAMP.  From there, they provide opinions on memory safe-languages and cloud-native development. They both have extensive experience with highly sensitive software development projects. Some companies look at a project and set up a checklist and methodically go down the list.  When the minimum is completed, the project is complete. Keith Mealo suggests that one must have full-orb comprehension of the system.  When a person examines the consequence of deciding can you get an idea of solving the problem, not just checking a box. During the discussion, the moderator tried to draw a parallel between an automobile getting a State inspection. A mechanic may see   “examine the seat belt” and hit the check box.  A better inspector may ride with the driver to make sure the safety device is in use.  However, the master mechanic will notice a problem with the brakes while looking at the seat belt and not release the vehicle until the entire vehicle is safe. Follow John Gilroy on Twitter @RayGilray Follow John Gilroy on LinkedIn  https://www.linkedin.com/in/john-gilroy/ Listen to past episodes of Federal Tech Podcast  www.federaltechpodcast.com

How to start your privacy career? A talk with Akarsh Singh and Punit Bhatia in the FIT4PRIVACY Podcast E081 S4 Is a privacy career for you? How would you start without any experience? Watch this podcast dedicated on discussing what a successful privacy career journey looks like and how to grow in this path, with Akarsh Singh and Punit Bhatia. KEY CONVERSATION POINTS 00:02:25 GDPR 00:04:01 Who is a privacy career for and who is it not for? 00:06:52 How would you recommend someone to start their career in privacy 00:09:22 About certification CIPP-E, CIPM, CIPT, and more 00:12:20 How do you join the industry without any experience 00:18:53 Starting salary 00:29:24 About Tsaaro ABOUT THE GUEST Akarsh Singh is the CEO and Co-founder of Tsaaro, a privacy and cybersecurity consulting firm, and Tsaaro Academy, a unique privacy certification training platform. Akarsh is an expert in privacy and helps multinationals and startups with their emerging privacy and cybersecurity challenges. He possesses the right mix of Information Technology and analytical skills. He holds a Bachelor's Degree in Manufacturing Engineering from the National Institute of Advanced Manufacturing Technology in Ranchi (Formerly NIFFT) and began his career at KPMG, where he helped several IT/ITes organizations strategize, reinvent, rethink, build, and operationalize their Cybersecurity Framework and Privacy Programs. He has proven experience in Consulting, Stakeholder Management, and Project Delivery roles. He is a Fellow in Information Privacy (FIP) by IAPP - the highest certification in the field of Privacy. He also possesses certifications in CIPT - Certified Information Privacy Technologist, CIPP/e - Certified Information Privacy Professional, CIPM - Certified Information Privacy Manager, and ISO 27001 Lead Auditor. Akarsh also hosts data privacy and cybersecurity podcasts on his channel Privacy Cast, where privacy experts from around the globe join to share their knowledge and help the audience understand data privacy technology, its evolution, and the change it brings to society. ABOUT THE HOST Punit Bhatia is one of the leading privacy experts who works independently and has worked with professionals in over 30 countries. Punit works with business and privacy leaders to create an organizational culture with high privacy awareness and compliance as a business priority. Selectively, Punit is open to mentoring and coaching privacy professionals. Punit is the author of books “Be Ready for GDPR” which was rated as the best GDPR Book, “AI & Privacy – How to Find Balance”, “Intro To GDPR”, and “Be an Effective DPO”. Punit is a global speaker who has spoken at over 30 global events. Punit is the creator and host of the FIT4PRIVACY Podcast. This podcast has been featured among the top GDPR and privacy podcasts. As a person, Punit is an avid thinker and believes in thinking, believing, and acting in line with one's values to have joy in life. He has developed the philosophy named ‘ABC for joy of life' which passionately shares. Punit is based out of Belgium, the heart of Europe. RESOURCES Websites http://www.fit4privacy.com, http://www.punitbhatia.com Podcast https://www.fit4privacy.com/podcast Blog https://www.fit4privacy.com/blog YouTube http://youtube.com/fit4privacy --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/fit4privacy/message

The Key to Improving Tech Outcomes: Project Management E33 From managing budgets to meeting deliverables in a timely manner, project managers play a critical role in helping organizations improve outcomes and maintain successful partnerships. So, how can tech companies leverage project management to reimagine how they produce deliverables for their clients? The December 2022 episode […]

In this episode host Burke Jones, FMP is joined by Salum Stutzer the Director of Facilities and Purchasing at the Independence Public School District Salum drops some huge knowledge with us about unconventional project sourcing and delivery methods that saved his district of $1,000,000 on one project. We also talk about alternative fuels for bus fleets. Tune in to the School Facilities and Operations interview to hear: - How to purchase HVAC equipment direct from manufacturers - Solicit qualified labor bids from contractors - How to look at alternative fuels for vehicle fleets. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/schoolfacilities/message

Design-build, design-assist, IPD, hybrid approaches—what's the difference between each of these delivery methods, and how do owners determine which approach is right for them? Join Govan Brown's Colin Gray, Structure Tone New York's Stephen Soviero, Layton Construction's David Burton, and LF Driscoll's Ed Hanzel as they compare their experiences leveraging alternative delivery models in markets across North America.

In this episode, we talk to Elizabeth Dwyre, PE, D.GE, a Senior Technical Principal with WSP USA, who shares her recipe for success for building a successful project delivery team. Engineering Quotes: Here Are Some of the Questions We Ask Elizabeth: Can you explain what a project delivery team does? Why do you think it is […] The post TGEP 62: How to Build a Successful Project Delivery Team appeared first on Engineering Management Institute.

Wouldn't it be cool if everyone followed all the processes we built? If everyone on our team followed the PMBOK or SCRUM methodologies perfectly every single time and every estimate we ever received was perfectly accurate?  Of course that doesn't happen. But did you ever stop to think - why? Well, our guest today has. Dr. Josh Ramirez has combed the scientific literature on human behavior and combined that with his love of project management to help explain why people do the things they do - and don't. Today he shares with us how to use human psychology to change the way we approach project delivery to account for the weird ways humans behave. OUR AMAZING GUEST DR. JOSH RAMIREZ Dr. Josh Ramirez is the founder and CEO of the Institute for Neuro & Behavioral Project Management Building an organization (www.nbpmi.com) that is working on redesigning project management with behavioral, social, cognitive, and neuroscience, toward an emerging field of Behavioral Project Management. In addition, he is currently researching application of science to project management to build a foundation of project science under existing practices. The future of project management is in redesigning around the beings that predict and deliver projects: humans.  He is also co-author of NeuralPlan with Dr. Shari De Baets, and an adjunct professor of project management, with experience that includes business operations management, project management, and project controls, including work at several national laboratories and other projects throughout the U.S. Department of Energy complex, as well as private sector project work.  Read more about Josh's great contributions to PM here: The Institute for Neuro & Behavioral Project Management: https://www.nbpmi.com/  Behavioral PM Membership Site: behavioralpm.com (new membership site) https://www.behavioralpm.com/  Neural Plan: https://www.neural-plan.com/    JOIN THE HAPPY HOUR! Get access to all podcasts, PDU certificates, bonus content, exclusive member Q&A webinars and more from our membership! https://pmhappyhour.com/membership STUMP THE PM'S! We love to hear about your tough PM issues, so please hit us up at podcast@pmhappyhour.com or on Facebook at facebook.com/pmhapyhour and we'll see if we can help you. If we use your question, we'll send you a PM Happy Hour coaster you can enjoy at your next happy hour.