You are on page 1of 37

The Scottish

Parliament Building
A case study on why politicians should not manage
projects

Sources
Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body Report on the
Holyrood Project

http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/SPICeResources/SpencelyRep
ort.pdf

Auditor General, The new Scottish Parliament building:


An examination of the management of the Holyrood
project

http://www.audit-scotland.gov.uk/utilities/search_report.php?i
d=290

Sources
All the Ministers Men: The truth behind
Holyrood, David Black
Archaeology
http://www.holyroodarchaeology.org/index.
html
(now dead!)

News sites and architect forums

Background
Advent of new government 1997
Perceived need for devolved Scottish Parliament
Early advocates John Smith Labour Party Leader before Tony Blair
Project Champion Donald Dewar
Tacit support from majority of Scottish political parties and public following a
referendum (Sept 1997)
May 1999 Scottish Parliament came into being
4

The original brief for the Scottish


Parliament Project
The building the Scottish
Parliament occupies must be of
such a quality, durability and
civic importance as to reflect
the Parliaments status and
operational needs; it must be
secure but also accessible to all
including people with special
needs; it must promote modern
and efficient ways of working
and good environmental
practice.
Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body Report on the Holyrood Project (2000)
5

The brief (cont)


It will be an important symbol for Scotland. It should
pay tribute to the countrys past achievement and
signal its future aspirations. It must be flexible enough
to accommodate changes over time in operational
requirements. Quality and value for money are also key
considerations.

The accommodation must allow Scottish


Parliamentarians and their staff to work
efficiently harnessing the best of modern
technology.
People must be able to see and meet
with their elected representatives and
watch the Parliament in operation.
Provision needs to be made to permit
easy reporting and broadcasting of
parliamentary proceedings so that people
throughout Scotland can be aware of its
work and decisions. Historic surroundings
should be respected and the design
should be integrated with surrounding
landscape and urban context
Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body Report on the Holyrood Project (2000)

What is clear from this is


the true client is the
people of Scotland. We
must, above all, aim to
meet their aspirations
for this hugely symbolic
project.

Project stakeholders
Project Sponsor Scottish Parliament
Initially controlled by the Scottish Office
Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body
took over in June 2000

Customer Scottish Public


Performing Organizations
Joint Architect team of Enric Miralles and
Benedetta Tagliabue (EMBT)and RMJM Ltd.
Bovis Lend Lease
And many others

1999
Total budget 109 million
Included 62m plus 6m for contingency
for construction
Included modest allowance for fitting out
16m plus enhancement for higher
quality fittings

No inclusion of risk allowances


62 million of this was construction
costs but
Assumed limited design changes
No delays
10

A specification in flux*
Immediate change in design
The Chamber

Emerging needs of parliament


i.e. more people therefore larger building
From 23000 square metres to 30000

Cost per square metre remains the same just more


needed.
*sound familiar?

11

Queensberr
y House

MSP
Building

Committee rooms,
meeting rooms and
Parliamentary staff offices

Debating
chamber

Public
go in
here
Latest Design of the Project
12

The Chamber under construction after redesign

13

A Specification in flux*
Queensberry
House found to be
unsound
Remedial work
doubled to 9.4m
Redesign needed
because original
design for
incorporating the
house not suitable
to Historic
Scotland
*sound familiar?

14

15

16

Cost control
11 cost reports compiled
8 for Scottish office when it was responsible for project
Major value engineering exercise in Summer and
Autumn 1999

17

Defn: Value engineering


process usually undertaken at key stages in the
development of a projects design to determine whether
the major elements of the design provide value in
relation to their costs, whether a different approach
might offer a better value, and whether the value from
the design could be increased within the existing costs.
To provide an independent, fresh view it may be
undertaken in conjunction with a team not directly
involved in the project.

Auditor General the new Scottish Parliament building


An examination of the management of the Holyrood project Sept 2000
18

Value Engineering Lifecycle*

Define
the
Proble
m
Generat
e Design
Ideas
Evaluate
Feasibility
Develop and test
most promising
solutions
Select
design
solutio
n

*Project Management for Information Systems Yeates and Cadle 3 rd Ed 2001


19
Also go on to look at value management as well that there is often not common objectives in a project

Spencely report
Past President of the Royal Incorporation
of Architects in Scotland (RIAS),
Remit:

To review the current estimates of cost and


time to delivery and occupation;
To review the value for money of the project;
To review and compare the advantages of
alternative contractual methods;
To review the effect on cost and delivery of a
reduced specification;
To review the effectiveness of
communications between the Corporate
Body and the Project Team and to make
recommendations.
20

Findings
Budget must relate to the brief and the
design
The design must be signed off
i.e. frozen

Estimated construction costs risen to


125m (total estimate 230m)

Includes inflation which up to that point had


not been included

Also concludes that savings of 15-20%


can be made
Recommends that the project continue

Too expensive to scrap estimate 30m plus.


21

Findings
Main contractor (Bovis) estimate of project end date
(Feb 2000)
delivery of building 24th Dec 2002
Occupation 25th Aug 2003

Spencely believed unlikely


25th Aug 2003 and 24th Dec 2003

Get the MSPs to occupy the buildings early

22

Comparisons used in the report

(cost per m2)

MSP Block
(accommodation for MSPs)

3,659m2

Equivalent Headquarters
Buildings in Edinburgh

1,544m2

Portcullis House
(accommodation for
Westminster MPs)

4,742m2

Cost/m2 on 161m2 four


bedroom bungalow
standard
deluxe
The Housebuilders Bible, Mark
Brinkley

877m2
1600m2

Other comparisons also used, like the Museum


of Scotland and the Chamber. Also the comparisons made of
fitting out costs

23

Value for Money


Value for money is in the eye of the beholder; in this
case, the Nation as expressed through the collective
voice of Parliament in debate.

24

Value for Money


Overall quality
Value for money is perception of what one is getting for ones money in
absolute or relative terms.
Have to reconcile cost cutting (reducing size or quality of construction with
design brief of The building the Scottish Parliament occupies must be of such a
quality, durability and civic importance as to reflect the Parliaments status and
operational needs

Still cost associated with rehousing people elsewhere

Work to keep Queensberry House was a waste of time and money


but its a done deal so have to keep it

25

The review of the contract process


Construction Management
Subcontractors tender for work packages at
the appropriate moment
Most economical is accepted
Bovis do construction project management
(as specified by Client)

Or single stage lump sum building


contract
One main contractor
One lump sum

sential Activity: Have a look at construction management as a form of contract for other projec
26

Pros and Cons


Construction Management
Design doesnt have to be completely finalised
prior to work commencing
Allows parallel activities and in theory can
shorten completion date. Also:
Construction manager engaged prior to building and
can liaise with design team and provide additional
expertise
Each activity budgeted separately, therefore if youve
overspent on one then you can trim the budget off
the subsequent activity
E.g. linoleum instead of carpet, nickel plated door
handles instead of brass

Take advantage of market conditions at the time of


tender i.e get the best price from
subcontractors/supplier etc.

27

Pros and Cons


Single stage lump sum
Client knows the price its fixed
Design is longer but is frozen prior to
construction
Single point of responsibility
i.e. main contractor

Cost is determined by what the main


contractor has estimated including the cost
of their work the subcontractors and profit
Possibility of Dutch auction scenario with
subcontractors fighting for work which can
effect quality.
Also applies to construction management
although Spencely did not acknowledge this.

28

Contracts
Spencely recommended that the existing contract
should remain
As there would be a loss of existing expertise.
Delay due to drawings and design having to be finalized.

29

Reducing the specification (another


design change!)
Changes to save money usually cost
more but
Reduce specification
Cheaper than the delay incurred by the
design changes
Scope for reducing cost up to the
Design Team and the Project Team (?)
15%-20% seen as feasible
30

Reviewing the effectiveness of the project


communication between the Sponsor and
the Project team

Conventional management structures and management


processes in place for government funded project in
place
Adopted a Plan of Work approach to the design phase.
But they dont work

31

Reviewing the effectiveness of the project


communication between the Sponsor and the
Project team (continued)

3 characteristics which the existing systems* were


designed to prevent;
The Approved budget bore no relation to the current Brief
The current Design bore no relation to the approved budget
The project could not be completed by the completion date

*Note no PRINCE
2

32

Reviewing the effectiveness of the project


communication between the Sponsor and the
Project team (continued)

Established route
Messages communicated but not
understood
Delayed action being taken
Project team knew for 9 months that time
and cost targets where not being met

33

Reviewing the effectiveness of the project


communication between the Sponsor and the
Project team (continued)

Established route not always used


Line managers less well informed than the
people they are managing

Communication between the client and


the Design Team were not being passed
through the Project Manager and the
Project Team.
Led to misunderstandings

34

Reviewing the effectiveness of the project


communication between the Sponsor and the
Project team (continued)

Despite this existing structure kept

When decisions had to be made they now


would have to be spelt out.
Those making the decision had to use the
right channel (presumably telling those the
decision effected)

The capability of the Corporate Body of


making decisions and having the time to
make decisions has been questioned.
Bring in specialist member or
Set up another committee

35

Conclusions
Success or Failure?
Has won awards
Sydney opera house now a success despite being a failure
when built

Financial disaster
With identifiable reasons

36

Conclusions
Poor project management?
Communications
Design
Control

Groupthink?

Did the parliamentary body exhibit traits of groupthink

Risk Management complete lack of


The public will ultimately decide whether it is a success or not
Arguably starting to fade from the publics memory
Other parliamentary projects to focus on
Trams
Independence
37

You might also like