The lean project management methodology in construction
Less is more - the value of reducing to the essentials
In today's project coordination practice, one of the biggest challenges is keeping an overview and managing projects effectively. Often, too much emphasis is placed on documentation for all kinds of processes, which becomes more of a burden than a support. But how much documentation is necessary to design processes efficiently without losing the overview? One of the most fundamental insights in project management is that less is more - even when it comes to documentation.
Many people are familiar with the concept of “the little black dress” from the fashion world: a simple, elegant dress that impresses with its purist style and functionality. The lean methodology works in a similar way in project coordination; processes and documentation are reduced to the essentials. The true value of a project lies not in the mass of documents, but in clear and targeted control.
Practical example: The flood of documentation in large infrastructure projects
Large infrastructure projects are a classic example of unnecessary documentation overload. Extensive project manuals are often created that not only cover the actual project management, but also historical data, extensive risks and forecasts that have no direct influence on day-to-day business. A manual of several hundred pages, which is rarely consulted in practice, not only costs time but also causes confusion.
In the projects we support, we reduce the project manuals to the necessary information - a clear structure that only contains instructions and the most important process descriptions. The result is a significantly increased utility value for the project team: new employees find access to relevant information more quickly and the number of queries is significantly reduced. The handbook becomes a practical reference work that is actually used instead of simply generating a flood of paper.
The art of reduction: reporting with value
In project coordination, reporting is an important basis for measuring progress and making decisions. However, the effort required for reporting is often excessive. Countless diagrams, confusing tables and hour-long meetings do not always lead to a better understanding, but to an overflow of information that confuses rather than enlightens.
Practical example: Reporting to the management/steering committee
A typical example of excessive reporting documentation can be seen in many large construction projects. Frequently, all details of the construction planning and even the most marginal changes are included in the reporting - often with little added value for the readers. The result: the steering committee is overloaded with information, but without clear instructions for action. The quality of the report suffers.
In our projects, reporting focuses on the agreed key points: the current status of the project in a nutshell, key deadlines, award status, current project results (cost overview), cash outflow plan, the most important risks and current decisions. The structure is simple, the information concise and reduced to what is important. This enables a solid overview and targeted decision-making.
Procurement process: The insidiousness of details
Procurement processes are another field in which documentation often gets out of hand. Particularly in large tenders, there is great pressure to document every decision and every step down to the last detail. This not only leads to an enormous administrative burden, but also leaves little room for pragmatic, swift decisions.
Practical example: Documentation in the awarding process
In our construction projects, for example, we simplify the usual process when selecting bidders: instead of a long list of criteria and endless evaluations and the preparation of multi-layered bidder comparison documents, we concentrate on the key performance characteristics of the bidders and set a clear, concise evaluation framework that is not just a snapshot. We rely on the bidders' experience in similar projects and the quality of their references. The result is faster decision-making without compromising the quality of the selection.
The right level of documentation in claims management
Claims management is a key control tool and the basis for the creation of provisions. Here is also a considerable amount of documentations often required, which in many cases does not necessarily lead to better results. While it is important to document claims and analyze their causes and effects, practice often requires less detailed reporting in order to remain capable of acting.
Controlling: More value through clarity instead of scope
Another area in which the documentation burden in project coordination often explodes are the documents for controlling. While precise and regularly updated financial documentation is essential for project coordination, this process is often hampered by excessive effort and unnecessary attention to detail on the part of the client. Due to increasingly complex company structures, stakeholder management is often necessary because, for example, the owner and user of the property are different. Differentiations between CapEx and OpEx per se and per stakeholder are also becoming more in demand. Another factor for more extensive controlling documents is savings by clients in the purchasing and controlling departments. This often leads to a project coordinator taking on a large part of the internal project controlling requirements. If this is unavoidable, the content should focus on the core issues, as well-maintained controlling enables us to always reliably forecast the expected outcome of the overall project.
Practical example: Complex controlling reports in a construction project
A central tool in project controlling is the cash outflow plan, which forecasts the future payments and cash flows of a project. In many projects, however, this plan is regularly - often monthly - updated with different scenarios: once without provisions, then with the already known provisions and finally with all provisions. Although the intention behind this is to depict different scenarios and thus create planning that is as precise as possible, practice shows that this effort often offers no real added value.
The reason: a cash outflow plan only ever represents a snapshot. Due to the many variables that flow into the planning (such as the actual invoicing of subcontractors or suppliers, which depend on construction site processing), it is almost impossible to forecast these payments precisely with monthly accuracy. There is always a certain degree of scheduling uncertainty, as the actual payments are often not due until much later than originally planned - even though the plans have been carefully calculated with all possible scenarios.
By reducing it to reasonable intervals, the project team was able to keep the cash flow plan as a useful control instrument without getting lost in constantly changing scenarios and detailed calculations that only had limited informative value. As with other areas of documentation, it is not the quantity of data that is important in controlling, but the clarity and relevance of the information. A controlling report that is too extensive offers no added value if it slows down the decision-making process rather than supporting it. The real challenge is to simplify complex financial relationships in accordance with the lean methodology so that they can be quickly understood and point out the right measures. Good controlling should not only reflect the figures, but above all provide the basis for well-founded decisions.
Conclusion: less is more - but not without risk
Of course, the reduction to the essentials must not lead to a loss of control or the necessary transparency. Finding the right balance between efficiency and documentation is one of the central challenges of modern lean project management. Too little documentation harbors risks, such as important information being lost or liability issues not being adequately clarified. However, documentation-heavy management leads to a flood of data that nobody can use sensibly in practice.
The solution lies in focusing on the essentials: Documentation must support the control process, not hinder it. Ultimately, it is the quality of control that makes the difference - not the extent of the documentation. However, it also requires confidence in your own processes and the courage not to record every step in thousands of pages.