Does the world truly need another series of articles on disruption and delay? Yes, because a dynamic perspective will deliver key new insights!
On Disruption and Delay
It is well known that, in construction, disruption and delay can have many causes, and they can also impact the project in many different ways – as a result, the linear concept of the “chain of causation” needs to be replaced by that of a “net of causation”. However, using this concept in actual analyses is easier said than done…
What are the mechanisms that drive disruption on construction and engineering projects? Why does disruption just keep going? What are the different ways in which it can impact a project?
Why do we need analyses to prove disruption? Why is project data not enough? What requirements do the methods we use need to fulfil, to be able to prove our case? Meet the “Triad of Proof”!
Ever wondered how System Dynamics is used to assess disruption and delay on complex construction and engineering projects? Here’s your chance to find out!
Yes, large construction and engineering projects are complicated… but why is computer simulation the only way to realistically assess disruption (and often, also delay)? And, since we are on the topic: How does simulation actually work?
People are often still concerned about how an SD-based claim would be perceived by others – especially when this involves arbitration or litigation. We look at what these concerns are, and what SD does to overcome them.
The Measured Mile may well be the most widely accepted disruption assessment method out there today… but on complex, heavily disrupted projects, the advantages of System Dynamics are becoming harder and harder to ignore.
A lot of decision models are used in project management: Critical Path, Building Information Modelling, Measured Mile, System Dynamics… Let us take a step back and ask ourselves: Are they good models? What actually makes for a good model?