Abstracts and Bios


Gil Goyette

(See French page)


Valeur(s) & Management : des méthodes pour plus de valeur(s) dans le management

(see French page)

Value(s & Management : methods for a wider application of value(s) across the entreprise system


Olaf de HEMMER

19 specialists of improvement methods in all corporate performance domains have published in april 2013 a collective book presenting their approaches : blue ocean, BSC, CSR- sustainability, lean, management by processes, business analysis, customer perceived value, sol ution focus, … and value analysis. These have common 'value' and 'system' underlying concepts and intersting specificities. Powerful synergies may be built between tem, contributing to a vision of a company 'creating value(s) for each of its stakeholders'. A new step for 'value(s) management' ?


Comment mettre en valeur vos talents d’animateur en atelier ?

(See French Page)

Nicole Simard

(See French Page)


The Use of Design for Manufacturing and Assembly with Value Engineering to Optimize Customer Value

The integration of Value Engineering with Design for Manufacturing and Assembly (DFMA) is a powerful combination which many manufacturing organizations are using today to ensure the best value proposition is offered to the customer.   In fact the leading company producing DFMA software, Boothroyd and Dewhurst Incorporated, has just recently released a new version of their software which allows the user to classify all of the components in a bill of material (BOM) for a product into functions for easy identification and sorting.  The advantage of Value Engineering is, of course, ensuring that the right product which the customer needs and it willing to pay for, is actually offered to them at the lowest possible cost with the performance or function that the customer demands.  It really starts with truly understanding what your customer requirements are, knowing how to develop those requirements into function terms, assigning costs to those functions, and then ensuring that the product which is designed meets those customer requirements at the cost they are willing to pay for those required functions over the life cycle of the product.  Sounds easy, but without Value Engineering techniques to help manufacturing companies with this process, many organizations fail to deliver the right products to the customer.

After you are sure you know what the customer wants and have an initial concept in mind, DFMA can really help manufacturing organizations optimize the design with respect to manufacturing capabilities to ensure that the customer is obtaining a product which truly brings them the best value.  In order words, delivering only those functions that the customer wants and minimizing those functions which the customer doesn’t care about, or is not willing to pay for, or which don’t really give him any real value.  Many manufacturing organizations do a great job in developing Quality Function Deployment (QFD) charts or a Master House of Quality (MHOQ), as some organizations call them, but then they fail completely in delivering a product which gives the customer the best value proposition because they don’t’ understand the techniques that drive product optimization with respect to manufacturing capability. 


James D. Bolton, PE, CVS-Life, PVM, FSAVE

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.  


Value engineering in sustainable construction projects using Building Information Modeling (BIM)

Green and sustainable construction often equates to achieving the construction of sustainable infrastructures that have lesser carbon footprint and environmental impact over the entire lifecycle of the building.

Recent increasing trends towards sustainable design and design have also led to a fast growth in the adoption of Building Information Modeling – BIM. Initially a tool to design and document a project or a building, BIM has emerged to become a process to generate and manage the physical and functional characteristics of a construction project. Hence architects, engineers, contractors and owners can use BIM to design, plan, revise, visualize and predict the performance of a construction project before it breaks ground.

As adoption of BIM has risen from 17% in 2007 to 70% in 2013 across the construction industry in North America, this presentation will encompass the value engineering impacts for using BIM in sustainable construction projects.

A review of sustainable construction requirements and value engineering model will be introduced prior to relating the impacts and added value from using BIM to achieve green building standings in construction project management. One or two case studies will be used for validation.


Dr. Azzeddine Oudjehane

Dr. Oudjehane joined SAIT and the BSc Construction Project Management in 2012 with over 20 years of experience leading multi-disciplinary projects in R&D, business and market development and performance evaluation working with various stakeholders from government and industry. He is also Principal of AZZO Consulting in Vancouver BC

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


Value Engineering in New Product Development;

A Case Study from Tillsonburg, Ontario

Freudenberg-NOK Sealing Technologies (FNST) is part of a 2 Billion dollar global manufacturer of sealing and vibration control products and systems for the automotive and other industries.  FNST has a structured Product Development Process (PDP) which includes the use of Value Engineering in its early stages. This presentation will share a successful VE workshop from the Tillsonburg, ON facility on an aerospace product.  This workshop involved participants from three tiers of the product value stream from Canada, USA, and Europe.  Their collaborative approach following the VE job plan resulted in an innovative and improved value solution.


Drew M. Algase, CVS, FSAVE

Drew Algase is a Six-Sigma and Lean Systems Master Black Belt for Freudenberg-NOK Sealing Technologies, a leading supplier of sealing and vibration control systems to the automotive and general industry.  Drew directs the corporate 6-Sigma (DMAIC & DFSS) and Value Engineering processes, which complement Freudenberg-NOK's global lean systems program called Customer Value First (CVF).   Drew has over twenty-five years of engineering and manufacturing management experience with automotive, food processing and consulting industries and is a graduate of the University of Toledo with BSME/IE and MBA degrees.  He is a Certified Value Specialist (CVS) through SAVE International, a life member of the Institute of Industrial Engineers (IIE), and a Fellow of SAVE International.  He currently serves as the Vice President of Global Affairs for SAVE International.   


Applying VM/VA – Success Stories

(Past, Present & The Future)

We know well that the Value Methodology (VM) / Value Analysis (VA) was born of a need to solve supply chain problems during World War II.  It has matured from the start-up by Larry Miles.  It now incorporates sophisticated tools of logic, risk analysis and enhanced problem solving methods that have evolved in the intervening years since Larry's first steps into the matter.  We can now look back at the huge success that Larry had at General Electric during the war and, with a little imagination, we can see that we are in similar circumstances now - circumstances that demand close attention to the value received for funds expended.  Also similar to the World War II experience, we find ourselves having to make do with what is immediately at hand due to political and hostile actions which can cut off access, at short notice, to familiar resources.

This paper is intended to address the very positive aspects of the VM/VA when applied as project controls and problem solving tools.  The authors have the experience of hundreds of VM/VA workshops performed on a global basis.  These workshops have yielded a wide assortment of observations that will help today's practitioners avoid the pitfalls of yesterday (remember the cost cutting exercises in the name of VM/VA?), and identify fruitful areas for the application of VM/VA.  Within many government agencies the perspective on VM/VA changes significantly, from highly effective applications to openly eschewing the very idea of VM/VA. The reader will see that the effectiveness of the VM program is all in the attitude of the leadership.  Support must come from the top down.  There are obstacles to overcome but they are manageable.  As an example, Georgia DOT saved approximately $295 million on projects in one recent year.  The savings resulted from sound engineering changes and did not “cheapen” the projects or reduce safety factors for the finished highway and bridge projects.  Much of this freed-up money was shifted to badly needed smaller projects that focused on improving safety and raising the Level of Service at key points in the traffic system.  This success story harks back to the EPA experience with VM/VA in the 1970's.  EPA figured that for every ten wastewater plants VE'ed they got one new plant funded from the savings found in those ten studies.  These and many more successes will be detailed in this paper.  Further, funding and other obstacles that thwart such great efforts will be identified and a problem solving conversation will be opened with the participants at this conference presentation.


Mr. Charles McDuff, PE, CVS-Life, LEED (AP):

Mr. McDuff specializes in Value Engineering (VE); Construction Cost Claims, Estimating and Cost Trends; Cost and Life Cycle Cost Analyses requirements and Risk Management.  His Value Engineering experience has encompassed over 500 projects world-wide.   He is keenly familiar with PACES, MCACES, MII and Crystal Ball for Monte Carlo Simulations; and has served as VE team leader on over 300 projects.  He served three years active duty with USACE as Captain in Vietnam and a recipient of the Bronze Star Medal and the Army Commendation Medal for construction of jet fuel facilities under combat conditions in Vietnam.


Mr. Ramesh Kalvakaalva, PE, CVS

Mr. Kalvakaalva is the Vice President of Civil Services, Inc., out of the Atlanta Office and manages projects throughout the United States for various Districts of the USACE, State Governments and Local Governments.  The projects he has been involved in encompass a broad spectrum of Civil/Structural Engineering including Value Engineering, Infrastructure, Water Resources, Flood Protection and Control, and Transportation.  He has been involved in more than 50 Value Engineering Studies for the Georgia Department of Transportation as a Team Member and/or Team Leader and participated in Value Engineering Studies as a Team Member or Facilitator/Co-facilitator for the USACE, NAVFAC, State of Virginia Regional Jail Authority, Fairfax County, VA, Virginia Military Institute, The City of New York, OMB, and LA Metro.  He has presented papers at the SAVE Conference, AASHTO Conference, ACEC/Louisiana Engineering Conference, and Lectured on the subject to Undergraduate and Graduate Students at Georgia Institute of Technology and Westwood College in Atlanta, Georgia.



How to use the science of group processes to help facilitate consensus and ensure productive meetings in your projects

There is a huge body of knowledge around the science of group processes.  This session will help you build and expand your competencies in meeting facilitation, consensus building and project conflict management.  The workshop will use a combination of instruction and hands-on skill building.  So roll up your sleeves, grab your sticky notes and flip charts and get ready to learn tips and techniques to help your teams and clients meet deadlines, stay on task, make the best decisions, ensure those decisions are sustainable and deal with the inevitable conflict and tensions that occur when groups of people work in tight deadlines / high stress environments.     

The International Association of Facilitators (IAF) is a professional association that sets internationally accepted industry standards, provides accreditation, supports a community of practice, advocates and educates on the power of facilitation and embraces the diversity of facilitators and methods of facilitation around the world.   Our vision is to see professional facilitation used throughout the world to address the challenges faced by people, organizations and groups. 



Kimberly Bain

Kimberly Bain is an IAF Certified Professional Facilitator, a certified mediator, is Chair of the International Association of Facilitators and holds the appointment of visiting scholar in facilitation at Queen’s University.  As a Professional Facilitator, Kimberly works with groups numbering 5 to 500, helping them reach consensus and achieve a sense of common purpose.  She was a facilitator at the International Sustainable Development in the Arctic Conference and facilitated at the United Nations sponsored Conference on Human Develop in Takayama, Japan.  Kimberly knows that groups of people have great wisdom and together are able to produce amazing results.  She is well known for her facilitative and consensus building style and enjoys helping individuals and groups do incredible things. 


Adjusting a Value Engineering Event to the Problem or Opportunity

The Value Methodology is employed to solve different kinds of problems of varying levels of difficulty, so the tools employed and the associated rigor should match the problem. The tools and rigor of the Value Methodology should fit the problem or opportunity. For example, a three-day VE event with cursory style tools may be perfect for conceptual design work whereas a set of multiple six-day VE events employing tools that demand rigor may be needed for addressing final design challenges. This presentation makes general recommendations about what tools in the value methodology to employ in specific circumstances.

Joseph F. Otero, Jr., CVS-Life, Save International Fellow

Joe Otero is the owner of AIVIR Value Consulting, LLC. In July of this year he retired from Pratt & Whitney Aircraft where he had served as Program Risk Management Advisor and Value Engineering Methods Specialist. He served as VP Education for SAVE International where he received their Rising Star Award and served on the Board of Directors for several years. He currently serves in the following volunteer capacities: Value-driven Design Program Committee of AIAA; member of Toastmasters International; leader and instructor at church. He is married, has four adult children and two grandchildren. He has a B.S. degree in engineering science from Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, and is working on an International MBA from Southern New Hampshire University.

Bay of Quinte Skyway Value Engineering Study

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

Ms. Dow is a Project Manager and Certified Value Specialist (CVS) with over 15 years of experience in highway preliminary design, transportation planning, traffic engineering and value engineering for both the private and public sectors. Over the last 8 years, 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. Ms. Dow received her Certified Value Specialist certification from SAVE International in 2011. 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 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. Ms. Dow has a National Charrette Institute (NCI) System Training Certificate as well as the NCI Charrette Management and Facilitation Certificate.


Stuart Sokoloff

Stuart Sokoloff is a licensed Engineer in Ontario and the US. He has participated as a team expert for geotechnical, foundation and structural engineering on approximately 150 formal VE Studies in the US and Canada. He was formerly the VP of Construction for SAVE and the Director of Value Engineering for DBIA (Design Build Institute of America). He is the President of Construction Engineering Technology Services, PC (CTS Group) whose clients include many of the largest contractors including Kiewit, Granite, Perini and Skanska.


Risk-based cost estimating for programs, projects, and VE studies.

The Number is Evil: An Exploration of Project Cost Estimating

This paper explores challenges associated with estimation of projects when limited scope definition exists and how costs evolve over a project’s lifecycle. As a solution this paper will discuss the use of risk-based cost estimating that incorporates facets of uncertainty that explain why a deterministic number can be evil in the sense that such estimates often deceive project owners and project development teams by setting false expectations. Alternatively, this paper integrates Value Engineering principles through the use of value-driven, function based estimating that improves Decision Analysis, Project Delivery, and provides innovative ways to incorporate risk-based range estimating into considerations of project costs throughout the delivery lifecycle. This particular estimating technique can also be applied directly to VE studies when developing alternative concepts and risk response strategies. The attendees of this presentation will learn benefits of risk-based range estimating and how such techniques can be used to effectively communicate with program and project stakeholders.


Gregory Brink, CVS, PMI-RMP, PMP, CCE/A

Gregory Brink is the Director of Risk Management and Decision Economics for Value Management Strategies, Inc. (VMS), a Value Engineering and management consulting firm based in Escondido, CA. Mr. Brink is a Certified Value Specialist, Risk Management Professional, Project Management Professional, and Certified Cost Estimator/Analyst with extensive experience performing risk analysis, risk management, financial and life-cycle costing analysis, forecasting, value analysis, and economic impact analysis on projects of all scale and scope.   Mr. Brink’s specializations through the use of Value Methodology include quantitative/qualitative risk and uncertainty modeling and analysis, risk management, and program/project management for both private sector and government organizations. Mr. Brink’s experience includes working on infrastructure and vertical construction projects of varying scale and scope, ranging from a million dollars to multibillion-dollar engagements.


Training Carrier-Ready Construction Management Graduates with Value Management Competencies: An Academic Perspective 

The competence of a construction program in the core area of construction project management is in imparting to its students the necessary expertise in order to practice professionally in the construction industry. The presentation briefly identifies the competencies for baccalaureate level construction education in Alberta, and goes further into the development of a Value Engineering course for proposed BTech Construction Management (BTech CM) program at NAIT, Alberta. Curriculum Excellence is an institutional commitment that informs a way of working, thinking and communicating. An institutional Curriculum Excellence goal is to ensure that quality measures and systematic processes are strategically and continuously applied at the program and course levels in pursuit of a higher standard. Program Outcomes are a defining feature of the BTech CM degree. Program outcomes were identified by an Industry Focus Group, consisting of construction industry professionals and professional association representatives.

For developing the Value Management course within BTech CM program, a very interactive and collaborative approached was adopted. Many professionals were directly involved in the development of curriculum project ranging from Chairs and members of Curriculum Committee to Subject Matter Experts, Learning Designer, Project Manager, Writer, the Copyright Officer as well as Multimedia Developers and technical support staff. At NAIT, curriculum development at the course level is divided into two major phases:  the Course Outline phase and the Course Development phase. As part of the curriculum development process, all subject matter experts attended a series of Curriculum Excellence Workshops. Each workshop had been designed as a working session with a group of peers. That equipped the subject matter experts with the tools to confidently complete a high quality NAIT standard learning design, working in a collaborative environment.

The presentation would be valuable for all academicians, professionals and researchers involved in the area of construction project management in general. 


Dr. Faisal M. Arain, Associate Dean, School of Sustainable Building and Environmental Management, NAIT

Dr. Faisal Arain is an Architect with a MS and Ph.D. in Construction Project Management. He has extensive experience of working at management and leadership positions in construction industry and academia in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Singapore and Canada.

 Dr. Arain has consulted, researched and published widely in the discipline of Construction Engineering and Management, Project Management, Architecture and Design Management. He has authored over 70 research publications, 2 book chapters, and 7 books (http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B0028ORPJK). He serves on editorial boards of several international research journals. He is the editor-in-chief of the International Journal of Construction Project Management published by Nova Science Publishers Inc., USA. He is one of the panel judges for professional awards conferred by PMI, USA, and also an expert member of the World Association for Sustainable Development, UK.

 Dr. Arain has worked as Chair, Construction Project Management with Southern Alberta Institute of Technology (SAIT), Calgary, Canada, for last five years (2007 - 2012). He is also involved with construction industry as a construction project management consultant (AR Management Global Inc. Canada/ UK).

 Dr. Arain is currently working as Associate Dean, School of Sustainable Building and Environmental Management with Northern Alberta Institute of Technology (NAIT), Edmonton, Canada. He can be reached at faisala@nait.ca .

La connaissanse des besoins client: un facteur clé pour l'innovation

(See French Page)


Hieu Nguyen

(See French Page)



Value Applications: Case Studies in Forensic Engineering: Risks, Liabilities, Avoidance

The presentation will address a Forensic Evaluation of recent Construction Failures with a retrospective of how a Value/Risk review might have avoided the calamity which could result in property damage, injury or death. Numerous examples will be presented addressing: route cause of the event, how it might have been avoided, and liability for the occurrence.


Stuart Sokoloff

Stuart Sokoloff is a licensed Engineer in Ontario and the US. He has participated as a team expert for geotechnical, foundation and structural engineering on approximately 150 formal VE Studies in the US and Canada. He was formerly the VP of Construction for SAVE and the Director of Value Engineering for DBIA (Design Build Institute of America). He is the President of Construction Engineering Technology Services, PC (CTS Group) whose clients include many of the largest contractors including Kiewit, Granite, Perini and Skanska.


Integrating Road Safety Analysis and Value Analysis

This presentation will feature Road Safety Analysis tools, techniques and benefits that can be applied and integrated into VE studies based on a pilot study at Caltrans and on the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario Value Engineering Program’s experience. Topics to be covered in the presentation include:

·       Road Safety Analysis Activities within the VE Job Plan

·       How to integrate diverse levels of road safety analysis into VE studies

·       How to integrate road safety performance into project performance measurements

The presentation should appeal to wide audience, ranging from a novice to expert and to both VE facilitators and VE program managers in the transportation field interested in enhancing decision-making capabilities with the integration of Road Safety Analysis into VE studies. 

The paper will be seeded with the results from case studies. 


George Hunter

George is an experienced VE team leader and VE trainer with extensive experience in the design, construction, and management of transportation projects. He previously served as Value Analysis (VA) Program Manager for the Caltrans and was a standing member on the AASHTO Value Engineering Technical Committee for many years. He has led more than 300 studies of diverse construction projects and has assisted in the development of Value Management Programs in Latin America, Europe and Asia.

As a certified Project Management Professional (PMP), Certified Value Speciliast and Registered Engineer George- focuses on applying VE as a project management tool to improve and balance project scope, schedule, budget, risk and quality.


Geoff Millen

Geoff Millen is the Manager of Engineering Operations for McCormick Rankin’s office in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. He has 20 years of experience in road safety engineering, highway design, forensic investigations and collision reconstruction.  Geoff serves as the Senior Road Safety Engineering Specialist and Road Safety Auditor within McCormick Rankin’s road safety engineering practice and has provided Value Engineering studies in both Canada and the United States with valuable quantitative road safety analyses in support design decisions.




Fully Integrated VE/M for Greater Performance Gains

As to be expected, project management standards and methodologies have evolved over time to provide a great deal of guidance on how to manage projects.  Management of risk has long been incorporated within these formal approaches.  As a result, risk management tends to be incorporated within the project plan with less resistance, or oversight, than there is for value engineering / management (VE/M) which is often treated as something like an orphan. Further, value practitioners know well that the powerful VE/M approach would be even more effective if it were to be integrated properly in project management procedures, rather than being conducted as a sometime add-on (that is often treated as a "check-in-the-box" process).  An example of a commonly missed opportunity is not initiating the program/project with strategic function analysis and establishment of agreed value drivers (with performance measurement) to set the appropriate guidance framework.  It is little wonder that when we apply such effective techniques retroactively, part-way through project development, that VE/M can be viewed as being somewhat intrusive.


It is the authors' experience that the VE/M approach is more effective when fully integrated with project management procedures 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.


This paper addresses the above aspects from the combined perspectives of an internationally practicing Certified Value Specialist (CVS) & Professional Engineer (P.Eng) and a Project Management Professional (PMP) & Risk Management Professional  (PMI-RMP).



Authors:  Martyn R. Phillips, CVS (L), CVM, FICE, FCIWEM, FHKIVM, P.Eng, PVM and Shamsi B. Shishevan, MA, PMP,  PMI-RMP                                                                   


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.

Presenter:  Shamsi B. Shishevan

Shamsi Shishevan is a project, risk and value management consultant in Alberta, Canada who has been involved in research, project planning, development, execution, controls and training. Fields of practice have included construction, manufacturing, petrochemicals and public service.  She is experienced in the design and implementation of quality management systems for various manufacturing companies for sustainable process improvement programs.  Her particular interests lie in strategic, project, risk and value management, along with business process improvement.


VA and Risk Management of Major Projects

Risk Management adds value to a project by ensuring that credible threats are mitigated or that significant opportunities are enhanced.

It is easy to find international standards, books and internet information describing how to perform Project and Technical Risk Management, including facilitation. This presentation is aimed at sharing ‘‘real life’’ lessons learned through projects which ranged from $500 K to $5 Billion in CAPEX.

Some guidelines and ‘’tricks of the trade’’ to optimize the impact of Risk Management will be presented while the different steps of Risk Management a described.

Understanding the context in which the project takes place is essential to Risk Management. It should always be part of the pre-workshop list of activities. The context will guide the risk manager during the workshop and help evaluate the project’s team state of mind.

Identifying significant and credible threats (or opportunities) is trickier than it seems. Possible events (risks) should be based on facts not on beliefs. Too often, causes are confused with threats / opportunities. The more specific the cause (trigger) of a risk is defined the easier it will be to identify meaningful mitigation measures.

Ranking severities has its own pitfalls. Workshop team members may overestimate or underestimate the impact and likelihood.  Bias may also come from ‘internal politics’. Ranking the risks severities must also be done with a multidisciplinary team.

It is strongly suggested that only participants to the workshop are named / appointed as responsible to implement (or to assure implementation) of identified risks.

Ensuring that there is efficient monitoring and accountability is the most difficult part of Risk Management, since many believe that once the Risk Register is completed the job is done.

In conclusion, Risk Management can be challenging but exciting endeavour.


Denis Dagenais P. Eng, AVS

Denis is an engineer with a combined 31 years experience in manufacturing and consulting engineering. He has technical expertise in the following metallurgical processes: aluminum extrusion, pack diffusion coating and heat treating of nickel super alloys, iron and steel powder manufacturing. In the last five years he has also acquired expertise in aluminum smelting, potash manufacturing processes and hydroelectric transmission lines projects.

Is your Risk Register Simply "A List of Issues"

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

Will moved to the United States in 2001and joined 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, The Society of American Value Engineers.  Will has over 36 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.  These positions included Senior Vice President and Head of Risk at Failthful&Gould, Head of Risk Management in Geotechnical and Tunnels at Parsons Brinkerhoff and Risk Manager for the Channel Tunnel High Speed Rail Link for Bechtel.  Will has worked in virtually every industry sector and has experience in Europe, Canada, USA, Middle East and Far East.


Doing more with Less in the Ontario Government with Value Analysis

The Ontario Ministry of Transportation is the leading government proponent for Value Analysis in Canada. The expanding use of and advocacy for Value Analysis by the Ontario Ministry of Transportation has occurred because Value Analysis meets 3 key business goals:

1.            Doing more with less

2.            Building a common understanding of business needs and an openness to change

3.            Stimulating Innovation

This paper will highlight how the use of value management at the Ontario Ministry of Transportation has lead to $1B in project cost avoidance, has improved the culture and openness to ideas and is an excellent process to get different stakeholder groups to agree upon project or product requirements.


Stephen Holmes, P. Eng, CVS

Stephen Holmes is a Professional Engineer with the Ontario the Ministry of Transportation with extensive experience in the planning, design and construction of highway infrastructure. Stephen has coordinated the Ministry of Transportation’s VE program since 1999. MTO’s VE program has achieved over $900 M in cost savings/avoidance over the past 15 years. Under Stephen’s leadership, Ontario’s VE program has won awards from the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, and the Canadian Society of Value Analysis. Stephen has also led the ministry in using the Value Methodologies in service delivery and organizational change.


VA Success supporting Decision Making and involving Stakeholder Input on the Regina Bypass Project

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

Chris Gauer is a Partner at MMM Group responsible for major P3 and Design Build projects for the company in Canada and the United States.  Chris graduated from the University of Toronto in 1978 and he spent much of the early portion of his career honing his expertise in highway planning, design and construction.  In 1998 Chris played a lead role in the Route 2 P3 Highway between Fredericton and Moncton in New Brunswick, followed by involvement in the Highway 407 expansion in Toronto and the Southeast Anthony Henday project in Edmonton.  More recently, Chris has acted as a Design-Build Advisor to the Manitoba Infrastructure and Transportation for CentrePort Canada Way and to the York Region Rapid Transit Corporation for the Viva Bus Rapid Transit project.  In between, Chris continues to lead or support Value Engineering/Analysis assignments on a wide variety of major projects across Canada.