Overview
As often occurs in the world of manufacturing, a global manufacturer decided to build a new facility. The purpose was to increase their production capacity and decrease the distance (and associated costs) of shipping their product to a high usage region of the country.
The manufacturer hired an Engineering, Procurement, and Construction (EPC) firm to manage all aspects of the building’s construction from initial design up until the manufacturer took occupancy and began production. However, while the EPC had an internal Automation Group that typically develops the control systems for projects like this, the scope of the automation system, its size, and the complexity of many of the requirements led them to look for an outside Systems Integrator (SI) to partner with for the delivery of the controls and SCADA systems. As we had previous experience with the manufacturer/end customer, they recommended us to the EPC as a solid bet to deliver successfully. After evaluating our approach and proposal, the EPC selected us and we began a two-and-a-half-year project working in partnership with both the manufacturer and EPC to design, develop, and install the automation system for the new, state of the art plant.
The Challenge
In addition to the usual project challenges (the scope, schedule, and budget) and common technical challenges (the new components, design changes, and creative problem solving) a project such as this introduces an additional challenge: we had to navigate serving two masters. In emphasis, we had the existing 20+ year relationship with the manufacturer while the EPC was technically, and most importantly, our contracted customer. Over the course of our history, we have found that a triangle project relationship has the potential to end badly. This can happen for several reasons, but primarily because there are tendencies for:
• All parties’ voices are not viewed equally
• Not all parties are in the loop
• Success is viewed only if “my party” (any of the three involved) comes out on top
The Avanceon Solution
Consistent with our company’s cultural fundamentals, there are five things that we practiced throughout this project. These “truths” allowed us to push back against pitfalls:
1. Involve the right people: In this situation, we only had partial control. Having the right people representing the manufacturer, the EPC and SI are vital to the success of the project. From the SI’s perspective, the lead needs to recognize that even though the EPC is the one paying the bill, ultimately both the manufacturer and the EPC are the customers.
2. Be Engaging: To be successful in a project like this one, there needs to be a lot of collaboration. This will require many meetings, design reviews, status updates, etc. Most of the time the engagement involves all three parties. The only time the manufacturer might be excluded is if the discussion is purely commercial or contractual, but these are exceptions. The goal is to keep all three entities (through their respective project leads) informed and up to date.
3. No Surprises: Always be on the lookout for risks and issues. When identified, communicate them early and to everyone. There’s almost never a reason to withhold a potential risk from one party or the other. In this way, all three leads can mitigate anything that might come up.
4. Add Value: In our company, we follow a structured project execution process. As a third party, it can be tempting to defer to the EPC’s process. Don’t. Stay committed to your process. If what the EPC is doing aligns, then join that. However, if there are gaps, you want to fill them in. For example, if the weekly status meetings lack structure, don’t be afraid to step up and take the lead by organizing the meeting, adding an agenda and providing more detail in the status reports. Or suggest sprint reviews as a means to bring life to the topics you are discussing. Within our company, everything we do has a purpose. There is no reason, even if you are a subcontractor, to lay a value-added process aside just for the sake of conforming.
5. Choose to Win: This is the most important thing. Just remember that the definition of winning must be right. In this case, it is vital to recognize that EVERYBODY CAN WIN. Winning means that the manufacturer gets a solid system that does what they want, that the EPC delivers and looks good while doing it, and that the SI executed a successful and profitable project. It also means that all three parties want to work together again.
Result
By using the above fundamentals, our company, the manufacturer, and the EPC were able to walk through a detailed design process and create a complex system that consisted of multiple process areas that included both continuous and discrete batching. We were able to develop and demonstrate the system according to the design using a standardized approach for device and control logic and High-Performance HMI principles. We were able to perform the IO Checkout and field startup and achieve the milestones established by the construction schedule. The project was a success and, at the end of the day, we galvanized our relationship with both the manufacturer and EPC, and are ready to start working with them on future projects.