Giorgio Locatelli

The successful delivery of megaprojects: a novel research method

Megaprojects are often associated with poor delivery performance and poor benefits realization. This article provides a method of identifying, in a quantitative and rigorous manner, the characteristics related to project management success in megaprojects. It provides an investigation of how stakeholders can use this knowledge to ensure more effective design and delivery for megaprojects. The research is grounded in 44 mega-projects and a systematic, empirically based methodology that employs the Fishers exact test and machine learning techniques to identify the correlation between megaprojects’ characteristics and performance, paving the way to an understanding of their causation.

Toward a More Realistic, Cost-Effective, and Greener Ground Movement Through Active Routing: A Multiobjective Shortest Path Approach

This paper draws upon earlier work, which developed a multiobjective speed profile generation framework for unimpeded taxiing aircraft. Here, we deal with how to seamlessly integrate such efficient speed profiles into a holistic decision-making framework. The availability of a set of nondominated unimpeded speed profiles for each taxiway segment, with respect to conflicting objectives, has the potential to significantly impact upon airport ground movement research. More specifically, the routing and scheduling function that was previously based on distance, emphasizing time efficiency, could now be based on richer information embedded within speed profiles, such as the taxiing times along segments, the corresponding fuel consumption, and the associated economic implications. The economic implications are exploited over a day of operation, to take into account cost differences between busier and quieter times of the airport. Therefore, a more cost-effective and tailored decision can be made, respecting the environmental impact. Preliminary results based on the proposed approach show a 9%-50% reduction in time and fuel respectively for two international airports: Zurich and Manchester. The study also suggests that, if the average power setting during the acceleration phase could be lifted from the level suggested by the International Civil Aviation Organization, ground operations may simultaneously improve both time and fuel efficiency. The work described in this paper aims to open up the possibility to move away from the conventional distance-based routing and scheduling to a more comprehensive framework, capturing the multifaceted needs of all stakeholders involved in airport ground operations.

Special Purpose Entities in Megaprojects: empty boxes or real companies?

Megaprojects involve organizations called “Special Purpose Entities” (SPEs) also known as “special purpose vehicles.” Despite their relevance, particularly for governance, SPEs are under-investigated. In the project management literature, there is neither a widely accepted definition of SPEs nor a clear understanding of what it does. This article presents an extensive literature review, which considers three domains: legal, financial, and project management. Four outcomes are presented: the definition of SPE, the typology of existing SPEs, comparisons of existing SPEs, and descriptions of SPE uses in megaprojects.

A methodology based on benchmarking to learn across megaprojects: the case of nuclear decommissioning

Purpose The literature lacks a single and universally accepted definition of major and megaprojects: usually, these projects are described as projects with a budget above

The need to improve communication about scope changes: frustration as an indicator of operational inefficiencies

1 billion and a high level of innovation, complexity, and uniqueness both in terms of physical infrastructure and stakeholder network. Moreover, they often provide fewer benefits than what were originally expected and are affected by delays and cost overruns. Despite this techno-economic magnitude, it is still extremely hard to gather lessons learned from these projects in a systematic way. The purpose of this paper is to present an innovative methodology based on benchmarking to investigate good and bad practices and learn from a portfolio of unique megaprojects. Design/methodology/approach The methodology combines quantitative and qualitative cross-comparison of case studies and statistical analysis into an iterative process. Findings Indeed, benchmarking offers significant potential to identify good and bad practices and improve the performance of project selection, planning, and delivery. Research limitations/implications The methodology is exemplified in this paper using the case of Nuclear Decommissioning Projects and Programmes (NDPs). Originality/value Indeed, due to their characteristics, NDPs can be addressed as megaprojects, and are a relevant example for the application of the methodology presented here that collects and investigates the characteristics that mostly impact the performance of (mega)projects, through a continuous learning process.

Similar but Different: A Top-Down Benchmarking Approach to Investigate Nuclear Decommissioning Projects

Abstract Early and timely sharing of information can provide a sustainable competitive advantage. However, even if lean information management aims to improve this information flow, it has mainly been investigated in ‘operations-based’ companies. This paper fills this gap, drawing upon the experience of the authors working within a large project-based company engaged in the ‘engineer and manufacture to order’ of a complex piece of equipment costing millions of dollars, for its strategic long-term client, both working in the same industrial field, i.e. nuclear decommissioning. This research investigates the information flow regarding scope changes between the project-based company and the long-term client adapting and applying a five-step framework to highlight operational inefficiencies, reduce the corresponding transaction costs and increase the overall company’s competitiveness. This is exemplified through a particular case, but can be applied to other project-based companies dealing with strategic clients involved in long-term relationships.

We Never Built Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), but What Do We Know About Modularization in Construction?

Project management literature has, until now, mainly focused on new build and only in the last decades the issues of decommissioning (mega) projects has arisen. To respond to this changing environment, project management will need to understand the challenges of decommissioning projects. Decommissioning projects within Oil & Gas, Chemical and Nuclear sectors are characterized by high costs, long schedules and uncertainty-based risks. The budget for Nuclear Decommissioning Projects and Programmes (NDPs) are subject to well publicized increases and, due to their relatively recent emergence, complexity and variety, key stakeholders lack a full understanding of the key factors influencing these increases. Benchmarking involves “comparing actual or planned practices [...] to identify best practices, generate ideas for improvement” and offers significant potential to improve the performance of project selection, planning and delivery. However, even if benchmarking is the envisaged methodology to investigate the NDPs characteristics that impact on the NDPs performance, until now, it has only been partially used and there is a huge gap in the literature concerning benchmarking NDPs. This paper adapts a top-down benchmarking approach to highlight the NDPs characteristics that mostly impact on the NDPs performance. This is exemplified by a systematic quantitative and qualitative cross-comparison of two major “similar-but-different” NDPs: Rocky Flats (US) and Sellafield (UK). Main results concern the understanding of the alternatives of the owner and/or the contractors in relation to (1) the physical characteristics and the end state of the nuclear site, (2) the governance, funding & contracting schemes, and (3) the stakeholders’ engagement.

Fusion: Go Small To Go Fast

The key characteristics of small modular reactors (SMRs), as their name emphasized, are their size and modularity. Since SMRs are a family of novel reactor designs, there is a gap of empirical knowledge about the cost/benefit analysis of modularization. Conversely, in other sectors (e.g. Oil & Gas) the empirical experience on modularization is much greater. This paper provides a structured knowledge transfer from the general literature (i.e. other major infrastructure) and the Oil & Gas sector to the nuclear power plant construction world. Indeed, in the project management literature, a number of references discuss the costs and benefits determined by the transition from the stick-built construction to modularization, and the main benefits presented in the literature are the reduction of the construction cost and the schedule compression. Additional costs might arise from an increased management hurdle and higher transportation expenses. The paper firstly provides a structured literature review of the benefits and costs of modularization divided into qualitative and quantitative references. In the second part, the paper presents the results of series of interviews with Oil & Gas project managers about the value of modularization in this sector.

Power plants as megaprojects: Using empirics to shape policy, planning, and construction management

This paper presents the business case for small fusion reactors. The conventional view in fusion research is that “economy of scale” means that small reactors are not economically viable compared to their larger counterparts. However, empirical evidence shows how the importance of the “economy of scale” is overrated. Firstly several studies show that large investment projects are usually delivered over budget and late. Large projects (or megaprojects) are more likely to go over budget and larger the project greater the overall risk. On the contrary, small plants are more manageable investments. Firstly, for the same power installed, there is more chance to exploit the advantages from learning and co-siting economies. Since the overall investment is a fraction of a large plant, the overall “bankability” is better and the financing easier. Secondly, small plants are more easily usable for cogeneration and load following. This is becoming a fundamental design criteria for power plants to be delivered after 2030. Lastly, the division of a large investment into smaller investments provides investors with “degrees of freedom” to hedge some of the risks and exploit valuable opportunities. The “Real Options approach” is a mathematical framework able to price these options. In summary, small fusion reactors can represent a more credible and faster route to deployment than large fusion reactors.