An Analysis of CII's 10-10 Performance Assessment Program in Statnett
MetadataShow full item record
The Constructions Industry Institute has developed a system known as the 10-10 Performance Assessment Program to meet the growing demands for a comprehensive performance measurement system in the construction sector that promotes proactive project monitoring and improvement efforts. The system is based off of a report generated from anonymously surveying project team members throughout phases of the project. The report shows the overall health of a project through a combination of ten input and ten output measures covering both qualitative and quantitative elements of the project. As part of a larger research project to find ways to improve the performance of the construction industry in Norway, a selection of Norwegian companies carrying out construction projects were invited to test out the 10-10 system. This thesis is a detailed study of the usage as well as possible benefits to be gained from the system for one of the invited companies (Statnett). Statistical analysis was performed on reports generated from twenty-two Statnett projects which had been entered into the 10-10 system at the time the study took place. Based on this analysis as well as interviews with five Statnett project managers who had experience working on projects entered into the system, several key findings and recommendations have been made. Relationships between the survey questions and the input/output measures have been explored in more detail and key questions have been compiled based on these findings. A total of ten survey questions were identified as being the most important predictors of project success based on their relations with the input/output measures. One survey question in particular (Q50) which looked at whether the acquisition of land proceeded according to plan was particularly important being the only question with significant correlations with both a high number of input measures and any of the output measures. The Planning, Leading, and Organizing input measures were also identified as key measures based on being reflective of the project success factors outlined by the pms during the interviews as well as their average scores compared to the other input measures. From the interviews, some criticisms of various aspects of the 10-10 system also arose such as inconsistencies with the translation or ambiguous meanings behind some of the questions as well as the validity in how some of the output measures were being recorded due to a shifting baseline in calculating time delay and cost overrun. Lastly although the findings are based off strictly Statnett projects, much of the results can be applied to other companies planning on using the 10-10 system as well.