Search

Purpose The purpose of this study is to better understand distinct solution strategy types for common commissioning and startup problems (Hot Spots) in the construction of industrial facilities. The authors also sought to better understand which solution strategy types offer the best value for the effort required. Design/methodology/approach The authors used a method of qualitative coding of text-based data to identify themes, patterns and trends from a collection of 178 commissioning and startup (CSU) solution strategies for the CSU Hot Spots. Coding categories emerged after multiple iterations. The authors also mapped high-value, low-effort solution strategies across the categories. Chi-squared testing and analysis of proportion statistics help quantitatively justify this qualitative research. Findings The authors identified 12 distinct coding categories and showed that they follow a non-uniform distribution via statistical testing. Those strategy types which provide particularly good value for the effort required are identified (such as quality assurance and control strategies), as well as those strategy types that do not. Research limitations/implications Research is limited to CSU for the construction of industrial facilities. The findings are also limited to a subset of the most commonly problematic CSU activities. Many findings may be beneficial for heavy civil and commercial CSU as well. Practical implications Coding categories, definitions and descriptions provide a good overview of all 178 solution strategies for CSU project professionals. Implementing certain types of solutions or solution programs may allow CSU managers to prevent multiple Hot Spots from becoming problematic or to keep problems already occurring from becoming worse. Managers will also benefit from knowledge about which strategy types are more likely to give a higher value for lower effort. Originality/value Qualitative coding and analysis of solution strategies for common CSU problems have never been conducted so rigorously in any other CSU study. This method has yielded results distinct from other CSU studies which have used quantitative methods. Insights from findings have advanced the body of knowledge surrounding problem-solving in the commissioning and startup sub-discipline.

Purpose The main purpose of this paper is to identify high-value, low-effort solution strategies to common commissioning and startup (CSU) problems experienced during industrial construction projects. Design/methodology/approach Data on the value provided by solution strategies and effort required to implement them were collected from 35 industry experts via an electronic survey. The authors used a PICK (Possible, Implement, Challenge and Kill) chart two-axis modeling method to distinguish high-value, low-effort strategies from among the set of 178 possible solution strategies to the 20 most common CSU problem activities. Findings A total of 38 strategies were identified by industry experts as both high-value and low-effort solutions to the most common CSU problems experienced on industrial construction projects. The 20 common CSU problems had an average of almost nine solution strategies each, of which an average of almost two were identified as high-value, low-effort. Research limitations/implications The research findings are limited to industrial-type construction projects; however, parallels may exist with heavy civil, commercial and other types of construction. The sample size was relatively small but in accord with other CSU surveys. Practical implications Managers are provided a list of 38 highly effective strategies to use when they encounter common CSU problems. By implementing these strategies, managers will provide their projects with more benefit for less investment. Originality/value Although several studies have identified solution strategies to CSU problems, none have sought to differentiate between strategies. This study distinguishes between an extensive set of 178 strategies along both effort and value metrics, identifying high-value, low-effort strategies using a novel application of the PICK chart model.

Purpose The purpose of this study is to discover which solution strategies to common industrial commissioning and startup (CSU) problems (Hot Spots) owner and contractor organizations identify as most effective and to identify which strategies are identified by one or both organization types. Design/methodology/approach Ratings for the relative value provided by strategies, and the effort required to implement strategies were solicited from CSU industry experts employed by owner or contractor organizations via a survey. Quantitative modelling using the Possible, Implement, Challenge, Kill (PICK) chart method distinguished high-value, low-effort strategies from other strategies. Findings Owners and contractors identify distinct sets of CSU solution strategies as high value and low effort, with some overlap. Of 178 total strategies, 40 (22.5 per cent) were identified by owners and 34 (19.1 per cent) by contractors, with 19 (10.7 per cent) of those strategies in common. Strategies with the greatest differences in opinions between owners and contractors are also identified. Research limitations/implications Research findings are limited to industrial-type, operational systems-intensive facilities. Similarities may exist with other systems-intensive project types, such as some commercial or infrastructure projects. The survey sample size is relatively small (n = 35), but close to that of other CSU-related surveys. The majority of survey participants were based in North America at the time of participation. Further, the number of contractor and owner participants differed slightly. Practical implications CSU managers and personnel should consider using high-value, low-effort strategies before resorting to other less effective strategies, as applicable on their projects. Depending on which organization is executing CSU, or if both organization types share CSU responsibilities, different solution strategies may be most effective. Originality/value Differences in owner and contractor perspectives and opinions have been noted in other aspects of the project lifecycle but never for CSU solution strategies. Use of the strategies identified will support more effective CSU execution.