conflict cloud to examine core project conflicts

Not rated yet. Be the first who rates this item!

Company A is building a LNG facility as part of its intention to service a growing demand for LNG in the Asia Pacific region. The construction of the LNG facility has been progressed via a range of third party contracts related to the design, supply, fabrication, construct and commissioning of the proposed LNG facility. These contracts were originally established at a time where the project critical path was still under development and therefore the contracts were signed without considering the critical path for the overall project. The contractors are rewarded(paid) each month based on their performance against their original contracts.
The contracts have been managed via a sophisticated Earned Value system whereby contract performance is measured by their performance against calculated earned value. There is a concern that the contracted parties are not driven by a concern for the critical path and also that sometimes the contractors (understandably perhaps) inflate their “earned value” calculation by aggregating their overall contract performance by including performance against project activities that ultimately have no relevance to the critical path.
The project was approved to proceed and a year after that decision a project change request has been logged in the Management of Change system to request additional funds to pay overtime ($1.5m) to complete the footings for the gas turbines (GT’s). The gas turbines are a vital component of the LNG facility as they provide the entire energy requirements for the LNG liquification site. When the Gas Turbines don’t operate, there is no LNG produced. The original schedule had the footings completed by the 30th November but the proposed change is now targeting the 1st of November. This timing is feasible due to the fact that procurement have been able to bring forward the shipping date and the GT installation team are able to mobilise earlier. However, it is costly.
The area manager for the GT’s scope of work is keen to have the work done by the 1st of November in order to recover from earlier slippages on other project tasks. The overall project manager however is less convinced that the $1.5m extra cost is justified. You have been called in as a consultant to help facilitate a decision that is logical and defensible. You have been asked to use the “evaporating cloud” (conflict cloud) method in order to expose the basic problem and underlying rationale for either side’s argument point of view . This cloud will then help to decide whether to bringing forward the completion date for the GT’s (and therefore spend an additional $1.5m)is beneficial or not. It will also identify what alternatives (injections) exist to validate or invalidate the area managers or project manager’s assumptions.
An evaporating cloud (aka Conflict Cloud) is a tool developed by Dr. Eliyahu Goldratt as part of a set of tools described as ‘The Thinking Processes’. The evaporating cloud is used to systematically and diagrammatically describe a conflict in a form that seeks to expose the underlying cause and effect logic and assumptions that underpin the opposing viewpoints. When the conflict is written up in this way, it becomes apparent that the conflict is based on one or more false assumptions that when exposed effectively ‘evaporate’. They evaporate because if they are false, or can be neutralised through the introduction of one or more new ideas (or injections).

D: change my schedule with the extra cost of $ 1.5m.
D': Not change my schedule and cost.
B: ensure the project is completed by 1st November and the earlier slippages on the project tasks are also recovered.
C: plan and spend time on activities and resources required to achieve our target.
A: see the overtime payment of $ 1.5m is justifiable in completing the footings for the gas turbines.
Click on the icons on the arrows to see assumptions and injections
In order to see the overtime payment of $ 1.5m is justifiable in completing the footings for the gas turbines. I must ensure the project is completed by 1st November and the earlier slippages on the project tasks are also recovered. and in order to ensure the project is completed by 1st November and the earlier slippages on the project tasks are also recovered. I must change my schedule with the extra cost of $ 1.5m.. But, in order to see the overtime payment of $ 1.5m is justifiable in completing the footings for the gas turbines. I must also plan and spend time on activities and resources required to achieve our target. and in order to plan and spend time on activities and resources required to achieve our target. I must Not change my schedule and cost.. I can't both change my schedule with the extra cost of $ 1.5m. and Not change my schedule and cost..
RelationAssumption(s)Injection(s)
D-D'i don't have enough time to do overtimei cannot reschedule the project task.
B-Dcomplete the project before timethe materials and manpower are available.
C-D'changing my schedule will prevent me from taking holidays.my schedule does not allow flexibility.
A-BIt is important to complete some task earlier.There are no other alternative ways.
A-Ci have not schedule my time for overtime work.the activities needed to achieve goals will remain same as i scheduled.