Abstracts and Bios

Abstracts:

Bios:

 

 
by John Jensen Vice President, Rapid Transit - Capital Projects Group at Metrolinx
 
This presentation provides a brief overview of the Toronto light rail program and then explores the ways and means of delivering value and quality in linear Alternative Delivery projects. We will compare and contrast the traditional Design Bid Build model with Infrastructure Ontario’s Design Build Finance Maintain model in the context of driving value and quality through preliminary design, in-market, final design, construction and maintenance. We will then go on to examine how value and quality are being incented in two projects currently underway: Eglinton Crosstown LRT and the Ottawa Confederation Line.
 

by John Jensen Vice President, Rapid Transit - Capital Projects Group at Metrolinx
 
John Jensen is Vice President, Rapid Transit, Capital Projects Group at Metrolinx. He is currently responsible for the delivery of over $8B worth of Light Rail projects in Toronto Canada.
 
John has extensive experience in public transportation with the City of Ottawa and the City of Calgary. Prior to joining Metrolinx, John was Director of Rail Implementation for the City of Ottawa where he was responsible for leading the planning, design, procurement and delivery efforts for the successful selection of a Design Build Finance and Maintain consortium for the Confederation Line, a $2.1 billion Light Rail Transit project and a $200 million Build Finance expansion of Highway 417 in Ottawa, Canada.
 
John was also the transit agency lead for the previous Ottawa North-South Light Rail Project, one of the first successfully procured Design Build Maintain light rail projects in Canada.
 
John has a M.Sc. degree in Urban Transportation and Land Use from the University of Calgary and a Master’s Certificate in Operational Risk Management from the Sprott School of Business, Carlton University.
 

by Will Willson

So what exactly should go on a risk register. Typically time is limited for identification of risks and more importantly time is even more limited in the future for reviewing and managing the risks.  Once a risk gets on the risk register it should be reviewed, and in particular on a public project, any subsequent change in the wording, change to the impact or change to the likelihood all could have serious ramifications if it gets in the public domain.  So it’s important to be conscious from the outset that the risk register should naturally capture the important issues but not perhaps be so comprehensive as to create a “rod” for the projects back for ever more that the project staff cannot maintain. 
 
The fact is that a large list of risks quickly becomes unmanageable and turns into a paper chase that everyone ignores, and even ‘hates’ !  Risk registers become cluttered with issues that are often simply unresolved design issues. Time taken to laboriously review and ‘score’ a risk register starts to become tedious to management & project staff and the impetus is quickly lost.  Then the  strive to make a seamless link between a risk register and a risk model complicates matters since the risk model demands uncertainty and unless risks are comprehensively set out there is little to hang cost and schedule impacts upon.  Also how can the risk exposure be drawn down if the list of risks is not comprehensive in the first place.  Drafting mitigation plans frustrates Project and Design managers who feel the process starts to micro-manage their normal day to day activities & often over states and even elevates issues actually currently being managed.  Subduing risks however denies the Owner the opportunity to mitigate.  
 
Then there is the link to the Insurance policy, contract risk allocation clauses and the necessary appreciation of what risks are not covered by policies, contract and thus what the residual exposure to the Client is at any point in time.
 
This presentation challenges the ‘theory’ against the ‘practical’ application of risk management and is designed to ‘provoke’ comment.
 

Will Willson, Director of Risk Management Gardiner & Theobald Inc.

Will moved to the United States in 2001 joining Gardiner and Theobald in the New York Office in April 2012.  Will is a Chartered Quantity Surveyor and Fellow of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors [FRICS].  Will is also an Associate Value Specialist [AVS] with SAVE.  Will has over 37 years experience in the Construction Industry. 
 
Prior to joining Gardiner and Theobald, Will has held a number of senior positions where he applied his expertise in cost control, scheduling, value engineering, risk analysis, life cycle costing, project and construction management.  Will is currently Risk Manager for the high speed rail Transbay Transit Center in San Francisco and also the Red Line Light Rail project in Baltimore MD and is heavily involved in East Side Access New York, East Link in Seattle and a number of high profile Government developments throughout New York
 
 

by Chris Carter, KPMG
Measuring and capturing results throughout business transformation is essential, but it’s not just about metrics and measurement. In KPMG’s experience, the achievement and sustainment of expenditure reductions and enterprise wide change is maximized when performance management is embedded in the transformation governance model. KPMG’s Value Management approach is designed to meet these critical requirements, leveraging global, collective insight (in the form of trends, value drivers, reference models, benchmarks, and leading practices) to accelerate and sustain business transformation.
 
Different from Program and Project Management, KPMG’s Value Management approach focuses not just on understanding and measuring benefits but also on building and sustaining tangible value. In other words, the delivery of new capabilities and the realization of benefits cannot be considered as isolated from the achievement of sustained change and enduring value to the organization.
 
Drawing on examples from around the world, Chris Carter will illustrate how Value Management enables:
  • The translation of transformation actions into outcomes, qualitatively documented in the form of value models and quantitatively justified in a “value case”;
  • The measurement and reporting of benefits starting with baseline measurements; and
  • The incorporation of “value” into the program governance and decision-making (roles, accountabilities, scope, risks, mitigating actions).

Christopher J. Carter, CMC, PMP, Senior Manager, Advisory & Director, Value Management, KPMG Global Management Consulting, KPMG LLP, Toronto
 
 
A member of the Strategy and Operations service line within the Management Consulting practice area within KPMG Advisory, Chris Carter is an experienced business and IT management consultant with over 20 years of consulting experience. Chris has consulted to both public and private sector organizations: defining strategic direction, designing appropriate and flexible organizational structures and processes, creating road maps and action plans, developing business cases, assessing outsourcing strategies, formulating and aligning business and application architectures with business vision and requirements, managing change programs, and implementing benefit measurement systems. He is skilled in facilitating group decision-making, and in preparing materials that reflect group consensus. Currently on assignment with KPMG’s Global Management Consulting practice, Chris is leading the refinement and deployment of the Value Management method, insights and enabling software platform. Within this role, Chris is working with KPMG engagement teams around the world in applying the refined method and tool, with clients such as:
  • For a UK-based electricity network distribution provider: Identifying metrics that track achievement of the business outcomes and to embed this new capability throughout the client’s Business Transformation Programme (BTP).
  • For a Middle East Export Development Agency: Applying value management concepts to develop an organizational and transformation program scorecard and individual accountability matrices.
  • For Canada’s Department of national Defence: Leading the design and implementation of a comprehensive metrics and performance measurement framework, in support of the Defence Renewal Program.
  • For the Royal Canadian Mounter Police: Implementing a value management framework and capability for the RCMP’s Information Management Renewal Program.

 

 
 
Allocating Risk of Groundwater Containment to the Contractor on Hwy 24, Whiteman's Creek Bridge Replacement
 
by Frank Hochstenbach, M.Eng., P.Eng., AVS, MTO
 
In addition to replacing the bridge over Whitemans Creek on Hwy 24 south of Paris Ontario, part of the project involved correcting the substandard vertical curves through the Whitemans Creek valley.  This included lowering the highway by more than 3 m in some locations.  One of the major concerns during design was how to manage the groundwater that would daylight during the foundations work and excavation without affecting Whitemans Creek itself, which is a sensitive pristine watercourse and a significant cold water fishery.
This presentation will discuss how the risk for managing groundwater was transferred to the Contractor, what happened during construction, and the results.
 

 
Frank is a Professional Engineer in the Ministry of Transportation’s Provincial Highways Management Division.  He is currently a Project Engineer in the West Region Planning & Design section in London, Ontario, managing Preliminary and Detailed Design studies.  Prior to joining the Ministry, Frank worked in the private sector in both the transportation and building engineering fields.
 
Frank has been a member of the Ministry’s Value Engineering Committee since 2009 and is an Associate Value Specialist.

Applying Value Analysis for the South Fork Water Treatment Plant

By William Sims

The City of Nanaimo has developed a 50 year vision for long term water supply. Key directions resulting from the Water Supply Strategic Plan include providing a safe, sustainable and affordable water supply, and adopting a multi-barrier approach.

The City of Nanaimo is one of the largest municipalities in British Columbia that still relies solely on chlorination for surface water treatment.

The Vancouver Island Health Authority altered the City’s WaterWorks Permit to require both filtration and disinfection, to attain a given standard of finished water quality.Safe drinking water is a cornerstone for public health, social and economic well-being, and is a fundamental human need.

Starting in 2009, the City began the process to design and construct a water treatment plant. In the beginning, it set several key goals for the project, including:

  • Adopting a multi-barrier approach

  • To meet or exceed GCDWQ, VIHA regulations

  • To proceed with sustainable design objectives

  • To minimize liquid discharge from the site

  • Meet 20 year max day demand

  • To achieve the lowest Life Cycle Cost

To meet these goals, the City is currently mid-way through constructing a 116 ML/d submerged membrane water treatment plant, interconnecting pipelines, and new clearwell. The unique element of the project is that the water will be drawn through the membranes by siphon, taking advantage of the existing hydraulics to avoid pumping the water supply.

In support of the key objective of achieving the lowest life cycle cost, the City undertook two Value Engineering Studies under the direction of a Certified Value Specialist – one at completion of preliminary design; the second at completion of the 50% detailed design. The timing and results of the VE Study produced an extremely positive result on the project, in terms of operability, lower cost and preparation for future expansion. The VE Team, consisting of experts from across North America, were particularly supportive towards the project and enabled the City to realize great benefit, value and excellent return on investment for the Study.

Tenders were received that were significantly over the estimated cost, and the lowest bidder recommended conducting a further VE, or scope-reducing exercise to help trim the capital cost.

The presentation will provide a brief overview of the project, including major ‘before and after’ changes, lessons learned about VE, and an Owner’s perspective on the value of Value Engineering.


William Sims, AScT, Manager Water Resources, City of Nanaimo

Bill Sims is the Manager, Water Resources for the City of Nanaimo. His portfolio includes responsibility for the long-range capital planning, design and construction of the City’s water supply and water supply infrastructure. Mr Sims guided completion of the City’s 2007 Water Supply Strategic Plan, a 50-year vision for water quality, water quantity and infrastructure asset management. Mr Sims has completed several major infrastructure projects as project manager, and is currently in the midst of overseeing the development of the City’s first water treatment plant, as well as developing a future water supply for the City’s 88,000 residents.

Back to Top

Applying VE on AFP/P3 Projects to Improve Value for Money

by Jeffrey Plant, MBA, P.Eng., CVS, PMP, CQA; Vice-President - Civil Infrastructure, Infrastructure Ontario

Inherent to the Alternative Financing and Procurement (AFP) or Public-Private Partnership (3P) model of capital project delivery is the notion that the successful proponent will have some leeway to introduce innovation during the design development. Proponents are encouraged to consider alternative designs during the bid process and to submit priced proposals based upon their preferred approach to designing and constructing a project.  In many cases, proponents are unwilling to share their innovations with the Owner’s representatives prior to bid submission.  Proponents must, by design, take a view on the risks associated with deviating from the Owner’s illustrative solution at time of bid submission.  A function-based approach to evaluation of alternative designs and construction methods can be very beneficial to proponents both at the bid stage and post-financial close.  An AFP proposal that incorporates well-considered innovations that can be accepted by the Owner is likely to be the most attractive proposal and deliver the most value for money – the ultimate goal of a successful AFP procurement!
This presentation/paper is geared towards helping owners, sponsors, implementing agencies, project companies, consultants and contractors to better understand the risks associated with design development.    Jeffrey Plant will share some of the lessons learned on the highly acclaimed and award-winning Port of Miami Tunnel Project – a Billion dollar project that was recently completed on-time and on-budget using a DBFOM model.
 

 
Jeffrey Plant, MBA, P.Eng., CVS, PMP, CQA; Vice-President - Civil Infrastructure, Infrastructure Ontario
 
Jeffrey Plant is an accomplished Project Manager with over thirty years of transportation, environmental and building project experience for a variety of clients including government ministries, departments and agencies, international financial institutions, design-build contractors, private developers, concessionaires, building owners, facility managers, railways, transit authorities, municipalities, first nations, and industries.
 
From 2002 to 2011 he acted as the Independent Engineer on the Highway 2000 Project in Jamaica, a PPP concession awarded to Transjamaican Highways Ltd - a joint venture of Bouygues Travaux Publics and Vinci of France. He was contracted by Bouygues Civil Works Florida to assist during the start-up of Port of Miami Tunnel Project. He has also worked on the Kiev to Odessa (Ukraine)Toll Highway Project with Torno of Italy, privatization of the Indian Turnpike and a highway concession project in Lagos, Nigeria. Most recently he has participated in value studies with NCE Value Engineers for the proposed Crosstown LRT in Toronto and the Dulles Corridor Metrorail expansion in Washington.
 
Mr. Plant is certified as an Associate Value Specialist by SAVE International - the Value Society and serves as one of two Canadians on the Executive Committee of SAVE International as the VP Finance and Administration. He has participated in numerous value studies on major PPP projects and represents the international contractor's perspective.

Back to Top

Balancing Risk and Innovation in the Selection of Delivery Models

by Dr. Storer Boone, Ph.D., P.Eng., Golder Associates
 
Achieving an appropriate balance of risk in any civil design and construction contract can be challenging under traditional design-bid-built or delivery strategies.  While alternative delivery strategies can be faster, more innovative and less costly than traditional approaches these benefits are not always realized. Design-build procurement is one of many project delivery tools and, when applied correctly, can lead to significant financial and schedule success.  When risks are "transferred" inappropriately, however, design-build or projects procured using non-traditional approaches can underperform and jeopardize use of this valuable strategy. Development of successful RFPs, contracts and project completion is dependent upon appropriate pre-RFP deliberation based on project-specific considerations.  Examples of competing design-build bids on small infrastructure projects will be used to illustrate several key issues that owners, engineers, and contractors may face. The combined experiences from multiple "mega" projects will also be used to illustrate keys to development of successful projects in the context of various value for money assessment approaches.
 

 
 
Dr. Boone has over 26 years of experience in geotechnical engineering and risk analysis and has authored or co-authored more than 70 publications related to these fields.  He has participated in design-build projects as an engineer since the mid-1990s, for owners and contractors, on projects ranging from small culvert replacements to underground transit and highway infrastructure.  His work has also included probabilistic cost and schedule risk analyses for government agencies related to procurement of more than $9 billion in highway, transit, and urban infrastructure projects under design-bid-build, design-build and public-private-partnership agreements.
 

Bay of Quinte VE Study, Benefits of Stakeholder Involvement

By Don Rowat, P.Eng., MTO

The success of a VE Study is largely determined by the composition of the project team. Typically, members are chosen for their prowess in their technical areas of expertise. However, another important team member should not be ignored; the stakeholder. Collaboration with stakeholders through Value Analysis results in better overall solutions to projects and a meaningful engagement with stakeholders.

The Bay of Quinte Skyway is a 17-span steel girder structure and crosses the Tyendinaga Mohawk Territory. The VE study was undertaken in 2012 and included project team members from the Tyendinaga First Nation.

Don Rowat, MTO

Don is a Senior Project Engineer in the Ministry of Transportation’s Provincial Highways Management Division.  He is currently working as the Head of Quality Assurance for Structures in the Eastern Region Operations Office in Kingston, Ontario. Don joined the Ministry in 2006 and has been a member of the Ministry’s Value Engineering Committee since 2011 and is an Associate Value Specialist.

Back to Top

Claims Avoidance Plan and the GRAP [Geotechnical Risk Allocation Plan]

by Will Willson, Director of Risk Management Gardiner & Theobald Inc.

A claim in the context of this presentation is the assertion of entitlement for compensation from one party of a Owners design or construction contract that the  Owner disputes. 
 
It is important for an Owner to establish a policy for avoiding Claims closely aligned to their risk retention capacity and transfer policy and appetite.  To understand how Claim / s may arise, many of which are common to all projects, is essential in development of contract documents and approach to management and supervision in construction.  The impact of any particular claim is different on all projects therefore a specific claims avoidance plan for each project is believed essential.   
 
The Claims Avoidance Plan ( or CAP) sets down the Owners  strategy for avoiding claims between  contractors, the Owner,  and other third parties during the development, design, procurement, and construction of a Project or program of projects. The plan  includes a strategy for mitigating impacts where claims may occur. 
 
The CAP is the top level claims avoidance strategy.  Geotechnical risks, or risks occurring as a consequence of differing site conditions, unforeseen sub-surface conditions and the like are typically the most damaging in terms of delay and cost impact to a project.  The presentation will review the progression of further detail into the GRAP, the Geotechnical Risk Allocation Plan, and how that then rolls down and then back up from the GBR, the Geotechnical Baseline Report.   The presentation will include typical outlines of both the CAP and GRAP.
 

Will Willson, Director of Risk Management Gardiner & Theobald Inc.

Will moved to the United States in 2001 joining Gardiner and Theobald in the New York Office in April 2012.  Will is a Chartered Quantity Surveyor and Fellow of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors [FRICS].  Will is also an Associate Value Specialist [AVS] with SAVE.  Will has over 37 years experience in the Construction Industry. 
 
Prior to joining Gardiner and Theobald, Will has held a number of senior positions where he applied his expertise in cost control, scheduling, value engineering, risk analysis, life cycle costing, project and construction management.  Will is currently Risk Manager for the high speed rail Transbay Transit Center in San Francisco and also the Red Line Light Rail project in Baltimore MD and is heavily involved in East Side Access New York, East Link in Seattle and a number of high profile Government developments throughout New York

Back to Top

Combining Lean and other Problem Solving Methodologies with Value Methodology

by James Bolton, PE, CVS-Life, PVM, FSAVE President and Owner Bolton Value Consulting, LLC

Lean has been around for a long time and has helped many organizations become more efficient in the way they conduct business.  This presentation seeks to introduce other Value Improvement Practices (VIP) that have been developed after Lean and how they also are supporting organizations to become more effective.  They will be briefly discussed and then compared to what I believe is the ultimate process to improve efficiency, performance, and cost which is the Value Methodology.  It has been around for over 60 years, but may not be as familiar to you as Lean, Six Sigma, Design for Manufacturing and Assembly, and TRIZ.  I have been trained and have used all of the above VIPs for most of my 43 years working in many global organizations such as General Motors, Valeo, TRW Automotive, and Whirlpool Corporation. Due to this experience, I will be able to make valid comparisons of these various tools to improve value, how they differ, and why I believe that the Value Methodology is the premier process to maximize efficiency.

 


James Bolton, PE, CVS-Life, PVM, FSAVE President and Owner Bolton Value Consulting, LLC

Jim Bolton is a Certified Value Specialist-Life (CVS-Life), a Professional in Value Management (PVM), a Fellow of SAVE International (FSAVE), and currently the President of SAVE International. He has conducting numerous Module I Workshops globally where he has been the advisor and mentor for over 250 certified AVS practitioners.  He is currently the Design for Value Global Lead for Whirlpool Corporation where he has developed a global Value Engineering and Design for Manufacturing and Assembly process within that corporation.  Jim was elected as Executive Vice President of SAVE International in June 2011 after completing a two assignment as Vice President of Global Affairs following a two year assignment as Vice President of Manufacturing for SAVE International in June 2009 and 2007 respectively.  He also served a six year team on the SAVE International Certification Board from 2003-2009.  He has been the Director of Administrative for the Greater Michigan Chapter (GMC)  of SAVE International since 2005 after completing four years as President of the same Chapter from 2001-2005.  In addition, Jim served as a Director on the Miles Value Foundation from 2004-2009 and was a co-author of the Value Methodology Memory Jogger. 

Besides presenting Value Engineering technical papers at 10 consecutive SAVE International Annual Conferences, Jim has also presented VE papers at two Canadian Society of Value Analysis (CSVA) Conferences, at two Society of Japanese Value Engineers (SJVE) Conferences, at two Society of Korean Value Engineering (SKVE) Conferences, at the 2nd International Conference of Value Engineering and Enterprise Technology Innovation Conference in Hangzhou, China, at two Hong Kong Institute of Value Management (HKIVM) Conferences, at four INVEST (India) Conferences, and at the 2nd SAVE International European VE Conference held jointly with the Society of Hungarian Value Analysis (SHVA) and the European Governing Board (EGB) in Budapest.  Jim also co-presented a technical paper at the Value Deutsch Institute (VDI) Value Engineering Conference in April 2012.  In addition, Jim presented the first Module I Workshop in the PeoplesRepublic of China in Beijing in 2006 where 21 AVS Candidates became certified.

Jim holds a BSME and MSME from PurdueUniversity, has lectured at various universities in the area of VE and was presented with SAVE International’s Rising Star Award and a Presidential Citation at the 44th and 46th Annual SAVE International Conferences respectively.  Jim has 42 years of manufacturing experience with Harrison Division of General Motors (now Delphi Thermal Systems), Valeo Climate Control Division, TRW Automotive and Whirlpool Corporation. During his stay at GM, Jim earned three U.S. patents and helped build a manufacturing facility with a General Motors/Daewoo joint venture company, DHMS, in Korea from 1986-7.  Jim received the ‘DFMA Supporter of the Year Award’ at the 2007 International Forum on DFMA held in Warwick, RI while at TRW Automotive and is a registered Professional Engineer in both the states of New York and Michigan.

Back to Top

Combining VA and Activity Based Costing to Achieve Better Outcomes

by Dr. Paul Scarbrough, MBA, Ph.D., Goodman School of Business, Brock University

Activity Based Costing is a powerful tool that focuses on the management of activities as a route to improve both performance and the value received by customers. Value Analysis is a technique that helps identify and clarify user needs and develop alternative ways to meet those needs. It is the use of Function Analysis that makes Value Analysis unique from other problem solving techniques. Combining Activity Based Costing with Function Analysis significantly improves the chances of a successful outcome with ABC.
 
What is an Activity? There is nothing in traditional accounting that addresses this question, yet failure to effectively identify activities is one of the main contributors to ABC problems. The Value methodology is the most powerful tool we have to define Activities precisely—because an Activity is, in essence, a function.
 
Additionally, the Value methodology assists in focusing ABC on the specific Activities needed to solve business problems.  It is often assumed that activities are obvious and do not need special effort to identify, however, many Activities identified by the ABC implementation are not focused on solving business problems. Although they may be real Activities, they are not controllable in the decision horizon, and so, of no use to measure separately. The Value methodology is the only tool that gives control over these two underlying issues in ABC.
 
In this session I will provide a roadmap to integrating the Value methodology into your ABC plans.
 

Dr. Paul Scarbrough, MBA, Ph.D., Chair of Department, and Associate Professor of Accounting, Goodman School of Business, Brock University

 
Professor Scarbrough has been at Brock University since 1995 and has held several positions in the Faculty of Business. Prior appointments include Boston University and Bentley College. International teaching experience includes Waseda University [Tokyo] and Linnaeus University [Sweden]. He is also Vice President of the Asia Pacific Management Accounting Association.
 
Professor Scarbrough is co-author of two books on Japanese cost management and has written many articles on cost management in Japan. One of the bedrocks of the Japanese cost management approaches is the Value methodology. His general research interests are cost reduction and the effect of corporate culture on the use of cost reduction methods. He uses the Value methodology in teaching his Cost Accounting courses as a basis for both general analysis and ABC. He has extensive consulting experience, primarily in cost analysis.

Back to Top

Construction Staging Workshop - An Effective Value Methodology Application

by Warren Knoles, PE, AVS

The Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) requested that its design consultant for the “Park over the Highway” project, Crawford, Murphy & Tilly, Inc. (CMT) conduct a construction staging workshop at the 50-percent-plans design stage. The purpose of the workshop was to improve constructability, shorten the schedule, and reduce adverse impacts on local users and stakeholders during construction, as well as to help forge a large, diverse group of involved agencies into a unified project team.
Since there were no formal MoDOT guidelines for this type of workshop, CMT’s workshop facilitator em- ployed the value methodology for the workshop structure, organization and process. This paper explains how the value methodology was adapted into a construction staging workshop and the ensuing results. The success of the “Construction Staging Workshop” on this project utilizing the value methodology demon- strates that the value methodology is a useful tool that can be effectively employed in ways other than a traditional one-week value study.
 

 
Warren Knoles has over 40 years’ experience in the transportation/civil/site engineering industry. Mr. Knoles is currently Senior Consultant and Principal Value Specialist with Crawford, Murphy & Tilly, Inc. His responsibilities include senior project advisor, QC/ QA review, constructability review and value studies on highway, bridge, aviation and land development projects; client relations and business development. Professional affiliations include the American Society of Civil Engineers; Institute of Transportation Engineers; International Bridge, Tunnel and Turnpike Association; American Society for Quality Control and SAVE International.

Developing a Strategy Map with Value Analysis

by Stephen Holmes, P.Eng, CVS-Life

A strategy map is a diagram that is used to document the primary strategic goals being pursued by an organization. A strategy map is often used as part of a Balanced Scorecard. This presentation will demonstrate how value analysis and in particular function diagramming can be used to develop a balanced scorecard and in prioritization of resources.  The use of function diagraming establishes the how and why behind the strategy map. By using elements of the VA job plan, your team can agree upon, develop and prioritize your strategies and tactics.


 
Stephen Holmes, P.Eng, CVS-Life
 
Stephen Holmes is a Professional Engineer and a Certified Value Specialist with the Ontario the Ministry of Transportation with experience in the planning, design and construction of highway infrastructure. Stephen has coordinated the Ministry of Transportation’s VE program since 1999.  Stephen has also led the ministry in using the Value Methodologies in service delivery and organizational change. 
 
Stephen is a member of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) VE technical committee and is a director of the Canadian Society of Value Analysis (CSVA).  
 
Stephen is also a specialist in the use of risk analysis and risk based cost and schedule estimates and has led MTO in the development of risk tools and procedures for infrastructure projects. 

DFMA® … A Value Improvement Tool

By Chris Tsai

As we all know, Value Engineering and Value Analysis (VAVE) can be applied to products, processes, and services to improve the value to the purchaser, user, and/or the provider. This paper focuses on the development and production of products and equipment that are either sold to and used by customers (i.e. computer, digital camera, copier, etc.) or used within the context of a process or service provided to a customer (i.e. instrumentation, printing press, CNC machining center, etc.).
With value being defined as:
providers of products are often very focused on the denominator of the equation as the relationship between cost and price is gross margin. 
 
Price, in many cases, is controlled by the market in which the product is being sold. Cost, on the other hand, is very much in the control of the provider based on the decisions made during the design of the product. Those same decisions can also directly impact the numerator of the value equation and tend to be the primary focus of the development team (“form, fit, and function”). The concept of “concurrent product and process design” emphasizes the relationship between product design decisions and process design decisions and how together they directly impact the final cost of the project. Design for Manufacture and Assembly (DFMA®) is an analytical approach that brings “concurrent product and process design” from theory into practical application.
 
The primary focus of Design for Assembly (DFA) is to simplify the design of the product and therefore also simplify the production process. This is done with a heavy emphasis on the part count within any given design concept. Through part count reduction, the assembly process and factory operations are made more efficient and, typically, the unit manufacturing cost (UMC) of a product is greatly reduced while simultaneously improving the inherent quality and reliability of the product (the numerator of the value equation). However, there are instances where part count reduction can actually increase the UMC of the product due to increased complexity in the part manufacturing or fabrication process. Design for Manufacture (DFM) thus provides part cost information which, combined with the DFA data, yields an estimate of UMC. Together, DFMA® enables product development teams to quickly evaluate different product design concepts and make data-based decisions about the product design. If started early in the product development process, this can lead to dramatic improvements in cost, quality, and time to market.
 

Chris Tsai

Chris Tsai is the Director of DFMA Implementation Services at Boothroyd Dewhurst. He has over 25 years of engineering, change management, and leadership experience with the Eastman Kodak Company and the Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT). Most of that time was spent in the equipment product design and manufacturing portion of Kodak’s operations (i.e. digital cameras, scanners, printers, medical imaging devices, etc.). He has held positions in product & tooling design engineering, manufacturing engineering, project management, quality management, and globalization. Early in his career, he established himself as a corporate subject matter expert in Value Analysis/Value Engineering (VA/VE) and Design for Manufacture & Assembly (DFMA) and later expanded that expertise to Lean Six Sigma being certified as a Black Belt and becoming a corporate Lean Six Sigma instructor and mentor. He has developed and delivered corporate training and certification around the world and is a SAVE International certified Associate Value Specialist (AVS)
 
As Quality & Process Improvement Manager in Kodak’s Health Imaging Group, he led the establishment of a new Supplier Quality function driving an order of magnitude reduction in defects and scrap material costs in less than three years. As Globalization Manager, he led the Lean Six Sigma Manufacturing initiatives transforming Kodak Health Imaging’s Minnesota and Shanghai, China hardware manufacturing operations. As a DFMA sensei, he has helped teams identify over $100M in potential cost savings and avoidance.
 
Chris has a Bachelor’s Degree in Mechanical Engineering from Purdue University and a Master’s Degree in Manufacturing Engineering from the Rochester Institute of Technology.

Back to Top 

Earning Acceptance of Complicated Concepts in a Freeway Project Using a Modified VA Process

Brian Ruck, P. Eng., C.V.S. Life, Vice President Transportation Manager, Value Engineering, AECOM

AECOM and the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) conducted a Value Engineering (VE) Study for the I-25/U.S. 34 Interchange in Larimer County. The study looked at capital cost improvements, improved
constructability, and providing the basic functional requirements of the project. The study was completed in two workshops, separated by three months to provide time for a thorough evaluation of the alternatives developed in the initial workshop. 
 

Brian Ruck P. Eng., C.V.S. Life, Vice President Transportation Manager, Value Engineering, AECOM

Brian has over 32years of experience, virtually equally split between the public and private sectors.  He is a Professional Engineer and Certified Value Specialist - Life.  Presently he is the Vice President of Transportation and Manager Value Engineering for AECOM Canada, headquartered in Whitby ON.
 
Brian is responsible for major roadway preliminary and detail design projects and value engineering studies.  Prior to joining AECOM 16 years ago, Brian worked at the Ontario Ministry of Transportation where he held a variety of positions including Head, Planning and Design, Head, Geotechnical, and positions in construction and foundation engineering.  He was the Planning and Design representative on a Ministry task force that succeeded in introducing formal Value Engineering into the Ministry’s Capital Construction Program.  He has led many VE studies, primarily in transportation, for various clients including the Ontario Ministry of Transportation; several large Cities; the provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and New Brunswick; as well as the States of Minnesota, Texas, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, South Carolina, and Rhode Island.

Back to Top

Green Marketing and VE

by Isvan Tarjani

The challenge of our time is: how can we protect the environment for future generations? Perhaps the most important recognition of “green thinking” is that mankind cannot be detached from its natural medium. Ecologically conscious thinking also marks a kind of paradigm change, while the spreading of environmental attitudes and keeping sustainability systematically in mind will put things in another dimension.

Sustainable thinking has become significant in business models. The business advantage closely linked to sustainability is green marketing, which in fact is a covert marketing solution. Businesses market their environmental protection activities such as enhancing non-polluting manufacturing processes or the reuse of materials.

The above-listed elements of sustainability are all based on different functions. The value analysis methodology helps systematically find the best value combination of new ideas and goals closely linked to sustainability. The lecture gives an insight to the use of function analysis in achieving green solutions. Value Engineering is one of the most powerful thinking techniques that can help us take care of the environment for future generations in a conscientious way.


Istvan Tarjani CMC, CVS, PVM, TVM, SHVA President

Istvan Tarjani is president of the Society of Hungarian Value Analysts
SHVA, and manager-owner of Value Analysis firm,  FOKUSZ-2 Ltd. Istvan has been contributing to the growth of Value Analysis in Hungary, serving at the SHVA vice-president and president since 2001.

Istvan became a Value Engineering expert in 1992, earned his Certified Value Specialist (CVS) from SAVE International in  2004,  and earned his European Value Management designation in 2007.  He also has Canadian registered CMC management adviser qualification. He currently works as a VE expert in the development of the engineering and manufacturing processes of Hungarian and multinational companies. As a management consultant, he deals with improving strategies, marketing and manufacturing processes, combining both his VE skills and background in marketing and communications.

Istvan is a frequent presenter at VE conferences, speaking in Slovenia, the Canadian Society of Value Analysis and in Hungary. He is also member of the Value Management CEN standards development international team. He has taught university courses in value engineering, is an adviser for Module I. workshops, is the co-author of 3 books issued in Hungary and has received several management and Value Engineering project awards.

He is a graduate automotive engineer, certified technical teacher and has a graduate economic degree specializing in marketing and communications.

Back to Top

Hwy 11/17 Twinning, Avoiding Risk and Cost with Value Analysis

by Dan Preley, P.Eng., AVS, Senior Project Engineer, Ministry of Transportation Ontario

The Ministry of Transportation, Ontario (MTO) undertook a Value Analysis study for the proposed twining of the Trans-Canada Highway 11/17 east of Thunder Bay. The base case involved major electrical transmission line conflicts and challenging foundation conditions.  The Value Analysis study identified risks and mitigation measures along with providing costs for various alignment alternatives.  By involving the electrical utility as active participants during the workshop, both MTO and the utility were able to share their concerns and objectives, while working toward a solution that offered benefits to both parties.


Dan Preley, P.Eng., AVS, Senior Project Engineer, Ministry of Transportation Ontario

Dan Preley received his Bachelor’s of Civil Engineer degree from Lakehead University. He is a Professional Engineer and SAVE International certified Associate Value Specialist. His thirty-three career has focused on providing project management services during complex infrastructure projects in Northwestern Ontario.  He is currently involved with highway planning, preliminary design, and detail design projects.  Dan has been involved in Value Engineering highway studies for over twelve years.

Back to Top

Hwy 66, Virginiatown Relocation Study

by Manal Kasim, P.Eng., Area Manager, Highway Engineering, MTO

In August 2011 the Ontario Ministry of Transportation undertook a VE study of a proposed highway relocation of Highway 66 in Northern Ontario.  Highway 66 separates North Virginiatown from adjacent underground gold mines that are experiencing subsidence. This subsidence, caused by ongoing failures of mine tunnel supports, is placing the highway at risk.

A Preliminary Design study had been completed to determine the preferred alignment to relocate the highway away from the mine. During the Detail design the construction cost was estimated at $19.1 M. However risk factors such as rock quantities brought the potential cost to $24 M. Highway 66 is part of the Trans-Canada highway system and is an interprovincial link between Northern Quebec and Northern Ontario.

The VE study was conducted during the detail design and resulted in dramatic $7 M or 37% reduction in project cost and associated risks.


Manal Kasim, P.Eng., Area Manager, Highway Engineering, MTO

Manal Kasim is an Area Manager with the Ontario Ministry Transpiration in Northeastern Region out of North Bay. Manal holds a Master of Science degree from the Royal Military College in Kingston in Civil Engineering in 2001. Before joining the Ministry in 2001, Manal worked with a variety of private sector industries. Manal has been involved in Value Engineering since 2004 and functions as Value Engineering Coordinator for the Planning Design section and the Structural Section in NER.

Back to Top

Improving your Alternative Delivery Project from Cradle to Grave

by TBD

Alternative Delivery Projects including Design/Build (D/B), Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) and Construction Manager/General Contractor (CM/GC), have provided some unique opportunities and challenges for organizations now embracing these methodologies.
 
These new delivery methods require new approaches and changing existing approaches, often entrenched in our organizations.  We cannot just try and make these methodologies fit into the standard delivery method of design/bid/build.
This presentation/paper is geared towards helping the owner, consultant and contractor to better excel with these methodologies.  RHA has been working with these various methodologies over the past four years in several process approaches including scoping, value engineering and partnering. All of these process approaches should be embraced on every project to ensure overall program, project and team success.  The basis for this presentation is RHA’s past and current experiences and is geared to help others learn from the many successes and challenges that have been encountered.  Why reinvent the wheel!
 

 
TBD 
 
 
 
 
By Ted Lane P.Eng., AVS, MTO
 
Increasingly, public and private organizations are challenged to address growing demands to deliver products and services while human resources remain constant or are reduced.  Value Analysis is a proven methodology to identify creative alternative solutions to products, projects, processes and organizations. This presentation describes the application of Value Analysis to enable organizations to understand their business and goals in terms of Functions and Business Needs, independent of existing processes, systems and organizations and to identify new and creative opportunities to best meet these challenges within the constraints of available resources.
 

 
Ted Lane is a Professional Engineer, licensed in Ontario. Ted is a Value Analysis Consultant and a Director and Past-President of the Canadian Society of Value Analysis. Ted retired from the Ontario Ministry of Transportation in 2010, following a 35 year career focused on the planning, design, construction and management of highways and bridges. In 1996, Ted led the establishment of the MTO's Value Engineering program. In 2004, Ted received SAVE-International's Award of Merit in recognition of his contributions to Value Engineering in Government. From 2010 through 2013, Ted facilitated and co-facilitated a comprehensive, multi-phased Value Analysis study of the MTO’s Provincial Highway Management Division. That study was awarded the National Value Engineering Award from the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, AASHTO.
 
 
by Dr. A. P. Sukumar, MBA, PMP, PE/SE, P.Eng, Jacobs-Chemetics
 
Value Engineering has long been established as a mature methodology for enhancing financial value of projects and processes worldwide and Jacobs has an impressive record of practicing Jacobs Value Plus (JVP) that has benefitted many of their clients.  Jacobs Sustainability Plus (JSP) has also shown great results in demonstrating their commitment to Corporate Social Responsibility, practiced through sustainable initiatives in all engineering work they undertake.  Sustainability is not just a ‘buzz’ word anymore and there is an increased awareness all over the world to see how major corporations are incorporating sustainability principles in their practices. However, there are some concerns and uncertainties that exist amongst the professional community regarding the practical application of Value principles to their ‘already tight’ projects. Many consider the process as just ‘cost-cutting’ or a scope reduction exercise. Integrated JVP/ JSP – ‘Value by Design’ as practiced in Jacobs helps close this communication gap by demonstrating the fact that a ‘Value Study’ is not just about reducing life cycle financial costs of the project, but it is an integrated, holistic approach of improving social and environmental benefits as well. This is important for all initiatives and projects as whatever approaches are being pursued, they should reflect the strategic intent of the owner/client and the greater good of the society.
 
Integrated JVP & JSP –or Value by Design is a collaborative and systematic approach to a project or process design that draws out creativity and innovation of the people integrating their ideas to develop the most efficient and value enhanced solutions. Social and environmental aspects are well integrated along with the financial goals and final decisions regarding project alternatives are taken based on the owner/clients strategic intent and vision. At Jacobs, the integrated approach is being practiced in general and within the Mining and Minerals America Region, in particular.  Monthly global ‘Webex’ meetings are convened to compare project initiatives, progresses and successes of JVP/JSP initiatives and the reports generated are regularly featured in Jacob’s Annual Corporate reports. Some of the recent project initiatives will be demonstrated in this presentation as examples of successful application of the integrated approach of Jacobs Value Plus and Sustainability Plus by using the Value Methodology.
 

 
Dr. A. P. Sukumar, MBA, PMP, PE/SE, P.Eng, Jacobs-Chemetics, Vancouver. British Columbia, Canada
 
Dr. A. P. Sukumar, MBA, PE/SE, P.Eng, PMP, is the Chief Engineer and the Manager, CSA (Civil/Structural/Architectural) at Chemetics Inc. (a Jacobs® Company), based in Vancouver.  
Sukumar is a senior professional engineer/project manager with more than 25 years progressive experience in consulting, infrastructure, municipal, power and industrial sectors. He is a strategic thinker with business acumen, a communicator, negotiator and a professional committed to sustainability, value management and people development. He is a P.Eng., in BC & PE/SE in Washington State, USA; and a Project Management Professional (PMP). He has a PhD in Civil Engineering (Dalhousie) and an MBA in Strategy & Policy (Simon Fraser University).
 
Sukumar has published/presented technical papers widely and given keynote addresses in International Conferences. He has delivered professional development sessions at APEGBC’s Annual General Meetings and is a regular speaker at the Society of PM Professional’s PD Seminars since 2009. Dr. Sukumar is a recipient of several recognitions including the First Annual APEGBC Sustainability Award (GVRD, 2003), and the “Outstanding Accomplishment of the Year” award (2009) from the American Society of Value Engineers (SAVE) for the projects he managed. The VE procedure he developed for BC Hydro has generated a net financial value improvement of more than $100 million along with several environmental and social benefits. At Jacobs, he is the chairman of the Sustainability committee for Mining and Minerals America, where he is promoting “Value by Design” by integrating the concepts of Value Engineering and Sustainability principles, in alignment with the Jacobs’ Value Plus and Sustainability Plus initiatives.
 
Intentional Value Management - Prevention Versus Cure
by Scot McClintock, PE CVS-Life, PVM, FSAVE, Head of Value Management - Value Management Faithful + Gould and Tom Wiggins
 
The Value Methodology as applied in North America is usually limited to one or maybe two Value Studies, interrupting the design process as it seeks to “cure” a design by identifying better value in functionality, performance, capital and life cycle costs, etc. . While this has been very successful in many cases, the “cure” approach to design can lead to redesign cost and time implications, limited implementation, and a fear of VM on the next project. In the “prevention” model, VM should be used early and often in the design process to prevent ever needing a cure. A “prevention” approach integrates VM in the design process, encouraging and empowering the design team to use the VM process as a tool throughout design. This paradigm shift uses VM up front in the design to clarify project goals, objectives, and functions; define critical success factors and key performance indicators for the project; and get the Owner, stakeholders, and all design disciplines on the same road to success. Focused micro Value Studies are used throughout design as needed to maintain the right path; solve difficult design issues; mitigate risks, etc. Intervention Value Studies at key submissions may still be used as required to keep the project aligned with established goals, objectives and requirements.
 

 
 Scot McClintock, PE CVS-Life, PVM, FSAVE, Head of Value Management - Value Management Faithful + Gould
 
Scot McClintock is a well-qualified value practitioner with 32 years of VM/VA/VE experience. Scot has balanced cost and quality in over 340 VM project and 16 training workshops to identify value improvements of over $4 billion on projects totaling nearly $25 billion. He has used customized applications of VM tools to meet the needs of the client, from facilitation of public meetings through extended VM workshops. Scot has incorporated the use of Risk Management into his VM workshops, as well as leading edge consensus-building techniques such as Performance Criteria and Measures, Choosing by Advantages, and Functional Performance Specification. Scot was instrumental in helping MTO adapt Performance Criteria and Measures techniques to their VM program. He also introduced Risk Registers and Cumulative Cost FAST Diagrams to their workshops. Approved by SAVE International since 1994 to teach Module1 value training workshops, he has trained over 400 personnel for agencies and corporations in the U.S. and Canada. Inducted into the SAVE International College of Fellows in 2008, Scot has served the VM community as President of the Mid-NYS Chapter of SAVE and CVS Director for the SAVE Certification Board. He is currently a Director of the Canadian Society of Value Analysis, having formerly served as President.
 

 
Tom Wiggins is Lead Value Manager at Faithful+Gould. He has over 35 years experience consulting in the design and construction industry focusing on value engineering, economic analyses, operational tools and procedures, and special research on industry systems and issues. He has completed over 100 value engineering studies and dozens of life cycle cost analyses. Tom was the founding Editor of International Construction Intelligence, a newsletter focused on international construction issues, procedures and costs. He prepared the semi-annual parity/index for over 30 countries and wrote much of the newsletter content for over 20 years. He has served the industry in various ways during his career including serving on ASTM Subcommittee E06.81 Building Economics and on Building Research Board committees for State of the Art in Construction Project Databases and Advanced Maintenance Management Concepts for Buildings. Tom serves as the AVS/VMP Director for the SAVE Certification Board and VP of Certification on the SAVE Board of Directors.
 
 
 
by Stuart Sokoloff P.E., CTS Group
 
One intrinsic element of a VE Study is an identification of costs for the various elements of the project. The very definition of Value is Function/Cost. It is common practice that the Owner and/or the Engineer will provide an in progress cost to the VE team for information along with other contract documents including drawings, specifications, reports, analyses, etc. The VE Team then bases its Study on these documents as a “Base Case” to which all idea & recommendations are compared. How the denominator “Cost” element is addressed will vary reflective of the Facilitator’s perspective. Are costs to be “reconciled”? Are “cost corrections” to be offered? Will the Engineer’s cost be “validated”? So the question is: To what extent has the VE Team (Facilitator AND Team Members) assumed liability for the costing of items and can they be held responsible for any cost errors/inaccuracies of some implemented project recommendation that negatively impacts the financial viability of the project?
 
This presentation will explore the extent of VE Team liabilities/responsibilities and the potential ramifications of the Team offering an idea is that not in the project’s best interest.
 

 
Stuart Sokoloff is the President of CTS Group, and is a PEng. in Ontario as well as a PE in the US. Stuart was previously the VP of Construction for SAVE and has participated on over 150 VE studies in the US and Canada for buildings, bridges, mass transit, tunnels, and waste water projects. Stuart provides construction engineering services to Contractors as well as Forensic Engineering/Expert Witness services to the Legal and Insurance communities having provided said services on over 800 cases in past decade.
by Matti Siemiatycki, University of Toronto
 
Around the world, public-private partnerships (PPPs) have been identified as a procurement method that drives value by providing improved public services at lower cost. Nevertheless, the merits of PPPs remain the source of heated debate. Against this backdrop, this talk discusses how PPPs can both create and hinder the creation of value, depending on how they are structured and executed.  PPPs create value when they drive innovative service delivery, spur lifecycle asset management, and appropriately spread project risks between the public and private sector partners. Conversely, PPPs weaken public value when they limit transparency and community engagement in decision-making, and limit government flexibility to make future plans. The talk concludes by highlighting strategies to manage these tensions and improve the value of future infrastructure projects.
 

Matti Siemiatycki, University of Toronto
 
Matti Siemiatycki is Associate Professor of geography and planning at the University of Toronto. His teaching and research focuses on infrastructure planning, financing and project delivery. His recent studies explore the merits of delivering infrastructure mega-projects through public-private partnerships, especially as they relate to value for money, risk transfer, and the meeting of public policy goals. His research draws on experiences from across Canada and around the world to provide insights into the global state of practice with public-private partnerships.

by Imran Motala, P.Eng., PMP – Program Manager, Water & Wastewater, Region of Peel and Aman Singh, M.Eng., P.Eng., PMP – GHD, Leader, Business Consulting, Canada
 
Growth projections indicate that the Regional Municipality of Peel (the Region) could be supplying over 2.5 million residential and commercial customers with a reliable and high quality supply of drinking water over the next twenty (20) years.  In response to this, and building on its commitment to provide sustainable and high levels of municipal services, the Region decided to undertake a risk assessment of its transmission and sub-transmission infrastructure to ensure it can continue to deliver drinking water services that meet its customer’s needs while balancing established levels of service, cost of service and risk.  The key objectives of this project consist of:
 
1. Establishing a risk profile for the Region’s 4,000+ transmission & sub transmission mains
2. Integrating risk results into the Region’s business processes / capital programming initiative to inform decision making related to timing of capital expenditure (i.e. to support optimized renewal planning) for specific projects
3. Development of a corporate risk threshold for water supply and infrastructure
4. Detailed mitigation plans for all ‘high’ risk pipes to achieve a reduce risk to an acceptable level in accordance with the Region’s corporately established risk threshold / appetite
 
 

 
Co-Presenter: Imran Motala, P.Eng., PMP – Program Manager, Water & Wastewater, Region of Peel
 
Imran is a Program Manager for the Region of Peel’s  Program Planning group in water division, The Region of Peel operates two water treatment facilities and two wastewater treatment facilities, as well as pumping stations, reservoirs, watermains and sanitary sewers. Imran focuses on asset management, master planning, capital planning and budgeting, risk management and hydraulic modeling for this significant water system.
 
Imran works on a broad range of asset management initiatives, including water and wastewater asset management strategies, organizational asset management, and risk management for the water system. His recent experience includes work on a risk program for a lake-based water supply for the Region of Peel.
 

 
Co-Presenter: Aman Singh, M.Eng., P.Eng., PMP – GHD, Leader, Business Consulting, Canada
 
Aman is an experienced management consultant with diverse consulting and project management experience. Aman’s key capabilities include strategic business planning, asset management, risk management, business process improvement, capital delivery, design, stakeholder management, and professional project management. Aman is a qualified professional engineer (P.Eng) and a certified project management professional (PMP). Aman is the Business Group Manager for GHD’s Business Consulting Canadian operations.
Back to Top
 
 
Hanlan Feedermain - Managing Tunnelling and Traffic Challenges to Deliver Critical Infrastructure with VE
by David Wilson, CVS, P.Eng., NCE Value Engineers Inc. Markham, ON
 
The $600M 15km Hanlan Feedermain project is Peel Region’s largest-ever infrastructure initiative. The new feedermain is intended to address aging infrastructure and unnecessary risk by introducing a greater measure of redundancy in the system for operational and maintenance purposes, and to provide additional capacity. A separate 1200mm watermain providing additional capacity to accommodate intensification of the Mississauga City Centre area was also included in the scope of the project.
 
Need aside, a key goal with the project was to manage the anticipated challenges of constructing the 2.4m HFM within narrow congested rights-of-way through the heart of the City of Mississauga. The Region’s approach? An innovative value engineering, risk, and constructability review program throughout the design process. The six-phase VE/CR program enabled the Region to foresee potential operational and constructability traps, refine the concept, test its design and specifications, and manage construction cost and schedule…all before awarding the first contract.
 
This presentation provides an overview of the value process and presents several key strategies using a case study approach to demonstrate how the value program was utilized to manage Peel’s largest infrastructure project.
 

 
David Wilson, P.Eng., CVS-Life, FSAVE, CPF, President, NCE Value Engineers Inc., Markham, ON
 
David Wilson, P.Eng., CVS-Life, FSAVE, CPF, is President of NCE, a value engineering firm specializing in infrastructure projects, located in Markham, ON, Canada. He is a civil engineer with 32 years of experience in both the public and private sectors. During his career, Mr. Wilson has led major infrastructure projects through the planning, design and/or construction phases, including several design/build projects. He has been involved in value management projects since 1995 and is a member of the Canadian Society of Value Analysis, SAVE International, and the Institute of Value Management. He served a four-year term as the President of SAVE International and was elected to the College of Fellows, the value industry’s most significant honour, in 2012.
 
Mr. Wilson has a Bachelor of Engineering Science (BESc) degree from the University of Western Ontario in London, ON, Canada, and is a licensed Professional Engineer in five jurisdictions. He is also a Certified Professional Facilitator.
 
 
 
by Rob Kivi, MMM Group Limited
 
The Garden City Skyway is one of the largest structures in MTO’s bridge inventory, with 48 spans and a total length of 2.2 km.  The structure is located on the Queen Elizabeth Way (QEW), a vital economic corridor carrying significant commercial and tourist traffic between the Greater Toronto Area (GTA), Niagara Region and the USA.   The existing bridge deck is nearing the end of is service life and it is anticipated to require replacement by 2025.  A preliminary design study was initiated to determine a long term strategy to address the structural, traffic, safety and operational needs of this important structure.  Integrated Value Engineering and Schedule/Cost Risk studies were undertaken to review the short listed preliminary design concepts and support decision making to select a preferred solution.  The studies engaged a wide range of design and construction expertise, as well as key project stakeholders to identify a best value solution based on 100 year risk-based life-cycle costs.
 

 
 
Mr. Rob Kivi, P.Eng., is Vice President, Transportation Engineering and a Partner in MMM Group. Mr. Kivi has over 27 years of experience in planning, preliminary design, detail design, contract administration and EA studies for a wide variety of road and highway projects throughout Ontario, as well as nationally and internationally. Rob has participated in numerous Value Engineering studies as a Highway Engineering specialist and/or study Project Manager. He has fulfilled a similar role in Schedule and Cost Risk Assessment workshops. In addition, he has been involved in developing and conducting training programs in the areas of highway design and traffic staging for clients and the general engineering community. Rob has also given expert testimony on roadway design and safety issues before the Ontario Municipal Board.
 
 
by Steve Taylor P.Eng., M.Eng., CVS-Life
A VE study was undertaken in 2014 for the Parliament Hill West Block project which showcased VE to the federal government as a successful management tool. The project dealt with an over budget project that required Treasury Board approval to proceed if it could not be delivered on budget. The VE methodology was used to refocus the design team, contractor and client user groups on their performance requirements. The success of the study resulted in a project that could meet the current budget and avoided schedule extensions to request additional funding. Mr. Taylor will describe the success story and the continued efforts to engage Treasury Board to adopt VE in their update of policies.
 

 
 
Steve Taylor is a practising value engineer whose career has spread a 30 year span that has included operating independent consulting firms in Ontario. Projects have been completed across Canada, the US and the Caribbean.
Projects have included major transportation projects, building projects such as Parliament Hill, industrial sites, design build delivery, water and waste water and risk workshops.   Notable achievements have included : managing MTO’s first VE study in Ontario (1996 Highway 69 VE study), leading a Canadian led value engineering  review that led to a successful Canadian (1 billion dollar) non- compliant bid for an 85 km design build submission of a toll freeway in Israel, AASHTO  . award of merit for State Road 7 VE Study (Fort Lauderdale Florida), and leading a VE study resulting in a patent application for an innovative safety clear zone design change proposal on the new Highway 416 freeway (Ottawa) resulting in saving lives by reducing fatalities for runoff the road errant vehicles.
 
Stimulating New Design Concepts with Value Analysis
by Makael Kakakhel, Senior Project Manager, MTO
 
It can be difficult to challenge tried and true design approaches and accepted wisdom with new ideas. A Value Analysis workshop provides a structured approach to problem identification and the development of alternative solutions. The VA process leverages creativity and can introduce new ideas that once accepted in a VE study can then be introduced on other projects. A Value Analysis and Risk Analysis (CRAVE) study of a proposed interchange upgrade to facilitate the planned rebuild of a nuclear plant complex resulted in new approach to the utilization of roundabouts at freeway ramp terminals. The new treatment for roundabouts was then considered for use on subsequent projects, leveraging the creativity from one project to other projects.
 

 
Makael Kakakhel, Senior Project Manager, MTO
 
Makael is a Senior Project Manager at Ministry of Transportation Ontario (MTO), involved in delivering both conventional and design build projects. Makael also supports the VA and Risk program for MTO’s Central Region office. He has coordinated a number of VA and Risk Analysis studies with both internal and external stakeholders. Before joining MTO, Makael worked for a number of engineering firms on high complexity/major infrastructure projects and for the contractor delivering the Ontario Power Generation Niagara Tunnel Project-Design Build.
 
 
by Shamsi Shishevan PMP, PMI-RMP, MIVMA, The Team Focus Group, Inc. and Martyn R. Phillips, CVS (L), CVM, FICE, FCIWEM, FHKIVM, P.Eng, PVM
 
It is generally recognized that managing a project ought to be conducted by a series of well-­‐established and defined processes. Despite application of project management systems, even with due consideration of managing risks, projects still go awry and value is lost. For example scope increases, cost overruns, schedule delays and general stakeholder dissatisfaction are indicative of lost value.
 
Typically value management (VM), is applied as an intervention for improvement or rescue of a project. Although it is a very powerful methodology to tackle every task, but it is most efficient when applied as an integral part of project initiation & continuing development.
 
Initiating the program/project with strategic function analysis and establishment of agreed value drivers (with performance measurement) establishes an appropriate guidance framework to attain optimum results. Integrating value management and risk management enables stakeholders to check the ongoing “health” of a project and it’s ability to adapt to internal and external factors, which may have adverse impact on projects’ outcomes.
 
In a nutshell, the VM approach is more effective when fully integrated with the project management life cycle such that:
(i) a combined value and risk approach for proactive application between specified milestones is incorporated within the original project plan
(ii) program/project functions and value metrics are established and referenced from the outset, for the duration of the project life
(iii) a higher level, value assurance approach is used to guide an organization's programs and projects from an executive perspective.

Shishevan_Phillips_Integrated_VM_Greater_Performance_Gains.pdf


Co-Presenter: Shamsi Shishevan MA, PMP, RMP The Team Focus Group, Inc.

Shamsi Shishevan is a project, risk and value management consultant with the Team Focus Group in Alberta, Canada. She has been involved in research, project planning, development, execution, controls and training internationally. Fields of practice include construction, manufacturing, petrochemicals and public service. She is experienced in organizational leadership, quality management systems and team building/coaching. Her particular interests lie in strategic, project, risk and value management, along with business process improvement.


Co-Presenter: Martyn R. Phillips, CVS (L), CVM, FICE, FCIWEM, FHKIVM, P.Eng, PVM

Martyn Phillips is a management consultant living in Alberta, Canada and he assists organizations achieve their business goals.  He is qualified as both an Engineer and a Value Specialist in Europe and in North America.  He conducts strategic, program and project alignment consulting assignments, as well as performance improvement training / coaching, for a broad range of clients and topics worldwide.   His leadership of group problem - solving situations and organizational effectiveness assignments has resulted in significant savings of time and cost, together with functionality enhancements, for a number of high profile projects and services for both the public and private sectors.

Back to Top

A Contractor's Perspective on Risk Transfer

by Chris Andrews, Senior VP EllisDon


Chris Andrews, Senior VP EllisDon

Back to Top

Defining User Requirements for IT Solutions using VA

by Laura Kingston, Ph.D., O.L.S., Land Information Coordinator, MTO

What requirements are needed for software affecting a broad spectrum of users across an organization? How do you keep most of the users happy most of the time and spend the budget on the most beneficial functionality? How do you educate users on the trade-offs that may need to be made to meet varying needs? How do you make an IT project successful?  How do you select what on-going enhancements should be made to the software.  Value analysis was used to help answer these questions for two software solutions with different business histories and challenges. This presentation will discuss how value analysis and it’s principles assisted in the development of the RFPs, lead toward successful IT solution implementation and supports decisions for on-going maintenance of the IT solution.


Laura Kingston, Ph.D., O.L.S., Land Information Coordinator, MTO

Laura Kingston has worked for the Ministry of Transportation Ontario since 1995 and is the Land Information Coordinator in the Geomatics Office. She is responsible for coordinating Geographic Information System services, cartographic services including the production of the Official Road Map of Ontario, MTO remote sensing services and linear referencing.
 
Laura received a Ph. D. in Geomatics from the University of Toronto in 1995. She has taught at the University of Toronto and Niagara College. Laura is also an Ontario Land Surveyor (OLS) and Ontario Land Information Professional (OLIP).
 

Back to Top

Establishing and Prioritizing Key Performance Indicators Across Business Lines

by Michael Pearsall, P.Eng, CVS, Manager, Maintenance Contracts, MTO and Tammy Dow, M.Sc.E., P.Eng., CVS

Many organizations face a long list of projects ahead without an effective way to make decisions on which projects should receive resources. This study shows how detailed function analysis through the effective use of functional performance specification techniques in a workshop can be used to help a multi-divisional team work across business lines.  The study established a number of key performance indicators that could be used to prioritize expenditure and workload resource decisions.


Michael Pearsall, P.Eng, CVS, Manager, Maintenance Contracts, MTO

Michael Pearsall graduated from Queen’s University at Kingston with a B.Sc.(hons.) in Civil Engineering in 1992.  He started working for the Ministry of Transportation Eastern Region as a student in 1989 first in the Geotechnical lab and later in Construction.  Mike has continued working for MTO for the 22 years since his graduation. His career has mainly been involved with the planning, design, construction and maintenance of highways.  Mike has held various positions at the Ministry of Transportation in two different Regions and Head Office.

Mike has been involved with Value Engineering with the ministry since December 1996; he is one of the few Certified Value Specialists in Canada and currently serves as the President of the Canadian Society of Value Analysis.  Due to his many student outreach volunteer activities PEO has made him a member of the Order of Honour and he has been named a Fellow of Engineers Canada.


Tammy Dow, M.Sc.E., P.Eng., CVS

Ms. Dow is a Project Manager and Certified Value Specialist (CVS) with over 16 years of experience in highway preliminary design, transportation planning, traffic engineering and value engineering for both the private and public sectors. Ms. Dow has served as the Project Manager and Assistant VE Team Leader on numerous Value Engineering and Functional Performance Specification (FPS) Studies. Several of these involved projects with construction value of $100M to $1.6 Billion. Many of these studies have involved the management and coordination of very large multi-disciplinary VE Teams (e.g. 20-40 VE Team members). Several of the VE Studies undertaken by Ms. Dow have also included a parallel cost and schedule risk assessment which she also managed and coordinated. She is a member of both SAVE International and the Canadian Society of Value Analysis (CSVA). She has served on the CSVA Board of Directors since 2007 and also served as the 2008 and 2014 CSVA Conference Chair. Since 2011, Ms. Dow has been a Professor of VE for Conestoga College’s Architecture and Facility Management Program. Ms. Dow received an award in recognition of her exceptional contribution to the advancement of Value Management and support of the CSVA at the 2012 CSVA conference. She has a National Charrette Institute (NCI) System Training Certificate as well as the NCI Charrette Management and Facilitation Certificate.

 

 

 

Back to Top

VA Success Supporting Decision Making and Involving Stakeholder Input on Regina Bypass

by Chris Gauer, P.Eng, AVS, Infrastructure Ontario

MMM undertook a VA study to review the TransCanada Highway Alignment in the vicinity of Tower Road east of Regina.  The base case design involved a tight horizontal curve on the TransCanada Highway, a complex interchange geometry and extensive property acquisition and the adjacent property owners (the City, the Rural Municipality, landowners, developers and adjacent businesses) were not in favor of the project as planned due to property and access concerns.  The VA assignment was undertaken to address the cost, road geometry access, property and safety concerns associated with the base case design.


Chris Gauer, P.Eng, AVS, Infrastructure Ontario

Chris Gauer is the Senior Vice President – Civil Infrastructure Delivery at Infrastructure Ontario. He has over 35 years’ experience working in the transportation field on major civil engineering projects.  At Infrastructure Ontario, Chris is responsible for the Highways portfolio including the Rt. Honourable Herb Gray Parkway (Windsor), the two Highway 407 East extensions and the IO Viva BRT assignment with Metrolinx and York Region.  
His experience includes roles on both the delivery and the owner’s side of major alternative delivery projects.  Chris played a major role in the delivery of P3 projects including the Fredericton to Moncton Highway in New Brunswick, the Highway 407 East and West Extensions for 407ETR near Toronto and the Southeast Anthony Henday Drive Edmonton Ring Road.  As an Owner’s Engineer, Chris has advised York Region on the first four Viva BRT projects and the Province of Manitoba on their Design Build assignment for the CentrePort Canada Way.
 
Chris has been involved in Value Management since 2001.  He has worked in almost every Province of Canada on Transportation VE assignments for contractors and government sector clients.  
Chris is a Professional Engineer in Ontario and is an Advance Value Specialist with SAVE International.

Back to Top

Value analysis in green building construction

By Dr. Azzeddine Oudjehane

Most recent trends indicate an increased acceptance and implementation of green construction standards across the globe. It is hence anticipated that by 2015, over 50% of the firms involved in construction will be dedicated to over 60% in green projects. A recent study to be released by the CaGBC - Canadian Green Building Council also reflects the same trend og growth in green build construction across Canada, Ontario and BC in particular.

“Higher first costs” tops the list of obstacle and barrier to increasing green building investments. The issue of higher costs to build green may well be a perception; it remains the most common reason impeding faster growth for green build projects.

Value analysis has been applied to numerous construction projects over the past years and often considered as a cost-cutting or quality reducing exercise that imposes limits on the design team and the owner of any given construction projects. Value analysis is beyond just a process of identifying and solving problems. In construction it can be used as tool or process to optimize the functions of a project, and for example achieve a better built environment aligned with sustainable standards and principles.

Implementing and combining value analysis and value management for green building integrated design process is not a new concept. Indeed, in the early 2000s, BC has adapted for some pilot green building projects the Value analysis process adopted for provincially funded facilities projects.


Dr. Azzeddine Oudjehane

Dr. Oudjehane joined SAIT in 2012 to teach in the BSc Construction Project Management and develop applied and scholarly research opportunities meeting the needs of the construction industry in Alberta. With over 20 years of experience leading multi-disciplinary projects in R&D, business innovation and market development and performance evaluation, Dr Oudjehane working with various stakeholders from government and industry. He holds a PhD in Materials Science engineering from Blaise Pascal University in France and a Graduate Diploma in Business Administration from Simon Fraser University. With over 50 publications and presentations at international conferences, Dr. Oudjehane serves in various journal review committees and has chaired sessions at conferences. Azzeddine was recently to the Board of Directors of the Alberta Chapter of CaGBC-Canadian Green Building Council

Back to Top

 

Using VA to Improve the Safety of Highway Maintenance

by Michael Pearsall, P.Eng, CVS, Manager, Maintenance Contracts, MTO

Snow removal equipment often operates under the most adverse conditions when conspicuity is most important. Every effort is made by MTO and its contractors to keep highways safe and to provide efficient winter maintenance services.  Part of this effort of keeping the highways safe is continuous improvement in the equipment and methods used. This session will explain how MTO working with HDR used a Value Analysis workshop to improve the visibility of snow removal equipment.  MTO has a long history of success with the Value Analysis methodology mainly on highway design projects, but more recently they have moved into more process and business organization studies to harness more benefits from this tool. The study revealed that much of the “brand identity” that the public had associated with snow removal equipment in Ontario has been lost and whatever solution was to be selected had to re-establish a new brand identity.  The workshop results recommended that improved rear markings should be applied consistently to all snow removal equipment.  The workshop also was key in obtaining quick stakeholder buy-in to the revised design by actively involving the stakeholders in the process.


Michael Pearsall, P.Eng, CVS, Manager, Maintenance Contracts, MTO

Mike currently works for the Ontario Ministry of Transportation in their Northeastern Region out of North Bay. Mike graduated from Queen’s University at Kingston with a B.ASc. (hons.) in Civil Engineering in 1992. He started working for the Ministry of Transportation as a student in 1989 and has continued there for the 19 years since his graduation. His career has mainly been involved with the planning, design and construction of highways. Mike has been involved with Value Engineering with the ministry since December 1996 and functioned as the Value Engineering Coordinator for Northeastern Region for 10 years. Mike spends his spare time with his two sons or dreaming about antique cars.

Back to Top

Value for Money Analysis: Choosing the Best Project Delivery Method

by Ken Smith PE, CVS , HDR

Presentation Summary:
This session will present the essentials of what is a value for money analysis, the process to develop inputs and outputs in a value for money analysis, and how it is used in deciding whether to pursue design-build, P3 or traditional design-bid-build project delivery. It will focus attention on some typical differentiations made in VfM analysis between design-build and other delivery alternatives.
 
Program Abstract:
Value for money analysis is often heard of but little understood. However, it is increasingly used by public agencies as a critical tool to evaluate and select the procurement methodology for major transportation infrastructure projects.
For instance, some agencies require such analysis to support any application to pursue a privately financed project and it they use VfM to inform decisions on how best to procure and deliver large transportation projects.
 
Attendees will learn the basic elements and components of a value for money analysis, starting with the selection of potential procurement methodologies to analyze; preparation of risk-adjusted schedules and risk-adjusted design, construction, operations and maintenance cost estimates for each selected methodology using Monte Carlo simulation; build-up of estimated financing sources and costs of funds; and, finally, quantitative outputs of the analysis that can be compared across all selected options. VfM also includes qualitative assessment of non-quantified factors that will also be discussed.
 
DBB, DB and P3 delivery methods each have different implications regarding risks and the costs estimates for those risks. We will give attention to some of these important differences and how they typically are reflected in VfM analysis. The audience will learn how these differences can have significant impacts on the outcome of a VfM analysis.
 
It is rare for contractors and design-builders to see or participate in a VfM analysis; it occurs well before procurement is started or completed. But it can spell the difference between whether design-build or another project delivery method will be deployed. This presentation will give the industry a glimpse behind the scenes into one of the most important emerging tools for selecting the procurement methodology for transportation development projects.
 
Four major presentation points:
1. What is a value for money analysis and what is its objective? Why should design-builders care about this tool? 
2. What are the key principles and procedures to adhere to in preparing a good and valid VfM? 
3. What are typical differences in cost and schedule risks among DBB, DB and P3 delivery options that get reflected in a VfM analysis? 
4. What is a qualitative assessment in a VfM? Is it important compared to the quantitative results?
 

Ken Smith, PE, CVS, HDR

Ken L Smith, PE, CVS is a Vice President for HDR and is their National Director for Value engineering and Project Risk Management. For 28 years, Ken worked for the Washington State Department of Transportation in project management, design, and construction. Ken is an experienced facilitator and team leader and has led over 500 studies for both the owner and contractors. He has vast experience in facilitating both Risk Assessment and Value Engineering workshops on controversial complex infrastructure projects with extensive stakeholder involvement which includes transportation, transit and facilities. Ken is the risk manager for a number of different owners programs and provides consultation and training in how to manage risk and selecting the appropriate project delivery method for complex transportation projects.

Back to Top

Value for Money in Alternative Delivery Panel

 


Panellist: Matti Siemiatycki, U of T

Matti Siemiatycki is Associate Professor of geography and planning at the University of Toronto. His teaching and research focuses on infrastructure planning, financing and project delivery. His recent studies explore the merits of delivering infrastructure mega-projects through public-private partnerships, especially as they relate to value for money, risk transfer, and the meeting of public policy goals. His research draws on experiences from across Canada and around the world to provide insights into the global state of practice with public-private partnerships.


Panellist: Ehren Cory, Executive Vice President and Group Head, Transaction Structuring, Risk and Commercial Projects, Infrastructure Ontario

Ehren Cory heads Infrastructure Ontario’s Transaction Structuring Risk and Commercial Projects division where he oversees Transaction Finance, Procurement, Program Management Office, Commercial Projects, and Communications, Stakeholder Relations, and Strategy Groups. In this role, Mr. Cory and his teams are responsible for ensuring that all transactions undertaken by IO are structured to optimize market participation and deliver maximum value for taxpayers, through a fair, open, and transparent procurement process.  
  
 
Prior to joining Infrastructure Ontario, Mr. Cory was a partner at McKinsey & Co., a global management consulting firm, where he was a leader in the Infrastructure and Public Sector practices. In this role, he worked extensively with governments, public sector agencies and private companies on issues of infrastructure development, capital project management, and economic growth. 
 
Mr. Cory holds an MBA (with honours) from INSEAD and a BA in Business Administration from the University of Western Ontario.
 

Panellist: John Jensen, Vice President, Rapid Transit - Capital Projects Group at Metrolinx

John Jensen is Vice President, Rapid Transit, Capital Projects Group at Metrolinx. He is currently responsible for the delivery of over $8B worth of Light Rail projects in Toronto Canada.
 
John has extensive experience in public transportation with the City of Ottawa and the City of Calgary. Prior to joining Metrolinx, John was Director of Rail Implementation for the City of Ottawa where he was responsible for leading the planning, design, procurement and delivery efforts for the successful selection of a Design Build Finance and Maintain consortium for the Confederation Line, a $2.1 billion Light Rail Transit project and a $200 million Build Finance expansion of Highway 417 in Ottawa, Canada.
 
John was also the transit agency lead for the previous Ottawa North-South Light Rail Project, one of 
the first successfully procured Design Build Maintain light rail projects in Canada.
 
John has a M.Sc. degree in Urban Transportation and Land Use from the University of Calgary 
and a Master’s Certificate in Operational Risk Management from the Sprott School of Business, 
Carlton University.
 

 

Back to Top

VE in the process industry, how to optimize your industrial processes for better results

By Lucie Parrot, Eng. M.Eng. CVS-Life

VE has been used plenty to develop and improve products, to improve infrastructures and construction projects, as well as to optimize business processes. But the industrial processes can also benefit from the VE advantage: why are these steps necessary? How are they achieved? What else can be done?... A short presentation will explain how to use the methodology in such a context of the Mining industry and transformation industry. A typical functional diagram will be presented. Then, a few heavy industry processes will be presented with before and after situations.


By Lucie Parrot, ing. M.ing. CVS-Life

Mrs. Parrot is an industrial engineer.  Since 1991, she is involved in optimization projects of products or processes, using the value engineering methods.  
As a Value Engineering consultant, Mrs. Parrot has helped numerous clients in increasing the value of their products, either by reducing the costs and/or increasing the performance and the needs satisfaction.  This approach has been used successfully at small and large companies.
 
Her vast experience in many sectors along with her talent for coaching, have made her an ideal person to train your work teams to the Value Engineering methods.
Mrs. Parrot has facilitated over 200 workshops. She is a certified value specialist from the Society of American Value Engineers (SAVE International) with Life recognition and is a member of the Canadian Society for Value Analysis, which gave her in 2003 an award for her outstanding contribution to the methodology. In 2007, she received life certification from SAVE International.
She also speaks frequently on this subject.

 Back to Top

VE in Transit, The Early Phases

by Laurie Dennis, P.E., CVS-Life, LEED AP, RHA Project Team Integration

Sound Transit is the transit agency overseeing the expansion of the transit systems, light rail and trains, in the Puget Sound region, including Seattle. VE studies are being conducted during the early planning stages of their projects including review of options for alignment and station locations. This presentation will discuss how this was applied to a couple of Sound Transit’s projects prior to finalizing the environmental document and evaluating project options. The discussion includes some of the benefits and challenges of doing VE early in the life of a project and lessons learned. 


Laurie Dennis, P.E., CVS-Life, LEED AP, RHA Project Team Integration

An industry professional since 1977, Laurie has provided civil engineering design, program management, and construction management services. As a registered professional civil engineer and Certified Value Specialist (CVS), she specializes in value analysis, technical interface management, project controls, and administration. Her experience in the design and construction arena continues to help our clients meet or exceed their study and project objectives.
Laurie has been leading value studies for over 25 years. She is an active leader in the value analysis (VA) community. Currently serving as the Executive Director for the SAVE Certification Board, Laurie is also a SAVE International past president.

Back to Top

VE, Lean and Six Sigma Synergy

by Dr. Michael Mladjenovic, P.Eng., Master Black Belt, Lean Sensei, The Sensei Group

In today’s rapidly changing, complex, and global environment, the ability to create value through innovative products and services, faster and more profitably than competitors is a matter of survival and sustained success. That goal and objective of sustainable value creation and retention can be achieved only by implementing simultaneously  Value Engineering, Lean and Six Sigma methodologies that share common scientific methodology based Structure.
 
This session will highlight key characteristics of development and implementation or Organizational Excellence architecture based on integration of Value Engineering, Lean and Six Sigma methodologies and tools.

 

 

Dr. Michael Mladjenovic, P.Eng., Master Black Belt, Lean Sensei, The Sensei Group

Dr. Michael Mladjenovic is the Master Black Belt, whose professional experience includes senior leadership positions in manufacturing, engineering, continuous improvement, and quality assurance for LifeLabs, Maple Leafs Food, Magna Int., Intier Interiors, General Electric, PPG, and SKF (IKL). In 1995 he received Six Sigma training and certification while participating in General Electric Six Sigma deployment.
 
Dr. Mladjenovic has published over 20 papers related to business improvement, strategic management, integrated risk management, and problem solving methodology. During his work in automotive, food, electronic, and health sectors Dr. Mladjenovic has lead a number of initiatives related to development of the Enterprise Business systems development and improvement Strategies and Quality Systems implementation. He has conducted trainings and workshops on Six Sigma, Design for Six Sigma, Business Process management, Project Management, Value Engineering, Lean Manufacturing, Theory of Constrains, Triz, TPM, Kanban, Kaizen, 5 S, and Value Stream Mapping.
 

 

Dr. Mladjenovic is an ASQ Certified Quality Auditor, Reliability and Quality Engineer, Registered Professional Engineer, and holds a B.S., a Master’s and Doctor’s Degree in Mechanical Engineering and Business.

 

Back to Top 

 

 

 



×