| dc.description.abstract | This executive summary presents an overview of each chapter and focuses on the most important findings and suggested improvements.
Chapter 2 offers an introduction presenting the background of this thesis. It is a thesis written in collaboration with Statoil, an international energy company with an ambition to “regain quality” and reach a “world class” level for project execution. This thesis is written with a motivation to contribute in this effort.
Chapter 4 focuses on Statoil’s process for Risk Based Quality monitoring as defined in FR05, WR2359 and WR2365. This study has found the Statoil model to be concurrent with that of the international standards presented in chapter 4.
Chapter 5 provides the reader with an introduction to the methodological approach for this study with regards to hypothesis and data gathering. This study has assumed three levels of performance for Risk Based Quality Monitoring in Statoil projects; as applied by QR managers in projects, as described by governing documents (can be thought of as the potential for performance) and as found in world class models. A gap analysis was planned to help generate suggestions for improvement to reach a world class level. Data gathering is presented in chapter 5 to include two research questions to ask a selection of QR managers; “How do you perform Risk Based Quality Monitoring” and “What is your evaluation of the performance of this process?”.
Chapter 6 presents a mapping of the process as applied based on interviews with QR managers focusing on their execution in relation to requirements of governing documents. The interviews discovered some important gaps based on these requirements; Establishment of context is underemphasised, there is a partial lack of risk basis for quality monitoring in some projects, projects in general do not have a structured approach to back-up planning, many projects have an ineffective response control with regards to follow-up on risk and action owners, and little or no trend analysis is performed in the projects.
Chapter 7 focuses on the QR managers’ evaluation of the process and what issues there are to improve. Issues is organised according to a Stop, Start, Continue list. The lone stop issue 0BExecutive summary 3mapped was to stop producing requirements in the management system. Several start issues are presented; the management system can benefit from being process modelled, training should be improved, procurement and framework agreements suffer from fragmentation of responsibility with regards to Risk Based Quality monitoring, contracts can be structured and improved, trend analysis lack a common approach and supporting tools, the non-conformance process should be improved, and overall authority in projects could be improved by showing leadership from top management on Quality and Risk management. The Continue issues are related to tools which in general are determined to be effective, the overall methodology with regards quality and risk integration is favoured, the QRM network supports best practice sharing and competence development and the governing documents are good with regards to content (however the presentation were heavily criticised).
The second part of chapter 7 uses the issues brainstormed by QR managers to compare Statoil’s models and execution of Risk Based Quality Monitoring to a selection of relevant key elements within the ISO 9004 self-assessment guide and attributes for enhanced Risk management in ISO 31000. Some major gaps are presented for quality management, specifically with regards to how results are monitored, how improvement priorities are decided, how learning occurs and how activities are organised in processes. These findings address the entire organisation, not only the QRM department. With regards to Risk management the gaps are smaller, but still significant and related to continual improvement, full accountability for risks, application of Risk management in all decision making, continual communications, and full integration in the organisation’s governance structure. This study believes that the most important reason for quality management having greater gaps with regards to a world class level is related to the lack of focus on quality on an organisational level.
Chapter 8 is a presentation of five suggested improvement measures based on the findings of this study. These are process modelling of governing documents and management system, improved training, establishment of a performance measurement system, improved experience transfer and organisation of procurement in clusters with QRM support.
Chapter 9 offers a conclusion on all tasks specified in the master thesis assignment. | nb_NO |
